Erythraeus (Z.) budapestensis FAIN & RIPKA, 1998

Ain & Šundić, Miloje, 2015, New records of mites (Acari: Parasitengona: Erythraeidae, Microtrombidiidae, Trombidiidae) from Albania, Montenegro and Serbia, with notes on Erythraeus (Zaracarus) budapestensis FAIN & RIPKA, 1998, Linzer biologische Beiträge 47 (1), pp. 583-590 : 585

Erythraeus (Z.) budapestensis FAIN & RIPKA, 1998

E. (Z.) hamedanicus KHANJANI, MIROMAYEDI NAHAD & FAYAZ, 2010 – synonymization doubtful E. (Z.) preciosus GOLDARAZENA & ZHANG, 1998 ; syn. nov.

E. (Z.) ueckermanni SABOORI, NOWZARI & BAGHERI- ZENOUZ, 2004; syn. nov.

M a t e r i a l e x a m i n e d: Montenegro: Plavnica, 25 May, 2011, 25 larvae, Bosnia: Gračanica , 25 June 2011, 1 larva ; Albania 2 larvae, Skodra, 10 June 2013. First record from Albania .

When compared E. (Z.) budapestensis to other species known as larvae E. (Z.) preciosus and E. (Z.) ueckermnni have constituted the group of most similar taxa ( Table 1). E. (Z.) preciosus was described based on differences with E. (Z.) budapestensis basing oneself on number of normal setae on tibia I-III (15-15-16) in E. (Z) budapestensis and (14-15- 14) in E. (Z.) preciosus (GOLDARAZENAA & ZHANG 1998) . In key by SABOORI et al. (2004) and KHANJANI et al. (2010) is similarly (Ti I 15 vs. Ti I 14). Recently, differences in number of normal setae on tibiae II and III were used in key for Erythraeus (Erythraeu s) by MAHMOUDI et al. (2014). Moreover, in two papers were given metric differences. However, metric data in both species not differs (Table 2). E. (Z.) budapestensis was described based on a single specimen (FAIN & RIPKA 1998). So, range of variability of fn Ti I-III was unknown. Based on specimens from Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey (n =47) we found distinct variability in leg tibial formula. Most often were found specimens with fn Ti I-III 14-14-15, 14-14-14 and 15-14-14. Moreover, also we found specimens with fn Ti I-III 15-15-15, 14-15-15, 14-15-14 and 15-15-14. fn Ti I-III for E. (Z.) budapestensis is 15-15-16, for E. (Z.) preciosus 14-15-14 and E. (Z.) ueckermanni 14-15-15. We have four specimens from Mallorca (Balearic Islands) and one specimen from continental Spain ( E. (Z.) preciosus ). In all these specimens fn Ti I-III is 14-14-15. This being so leg tibial formula, for mentioned species have not diagnostic value. As a consequence E. (Z.) preciosus and E. (Z.) ueckermanni should be regarded as a synonyms of E. (Z.) budapestensis . Other species E. (Z.) hamedamicus was synonymized with E. (E.) ueckermanni by MAHMOUDI et al. (2011). They stated that all meristic characters and morphometric data as length of all segments of legs and length and wide of scutum show no significant differences and shape of scutum is completely similar in both materials. However, in original description scutum of E. (Z.) hamedamicus and E. (Z.) ueckermanni differ in anterior and posterior border (in E. (Z.) hamedamicus both margins are distinctly concave vs. in E. (Z.) ueckermanni anterior margin is straight and posterior margin is slightly concave. Moreover, in E. (Z.) hamedamicus fV = 16 vs. fV = 8-12. In our materials shape of scutum is variable. Most often there were scutum elliptical, oval with straight anterior margin, slightly rounded anterior margin, part of then with slightly concave posterior margin and only three specimens with distinctly concave both margins (as in E. (Z.) hamedamicus). Number of setae behind coxae III oscillated between 8-12 (as in E. (Z.) budapestensis , E. (Z.) preciosus and E. (Z.) ueckermani). It is the only feature differing E. (Z.) hamedamicus with the remaining species (three specimens in our collection bearing shape of scutum as in E. (Z.) hamedamicus have fV = 12). At present we not calling in question decision by MAHMOUDI et al. (2011) on the synoymization E. (Z.) hamedamicus with E. (Z.) ueckermanni (in result with E. (Z.) budapestensis ) to assignation number of fV for more number of specimens from Iran.