Plecoptera

Bojková, Jindřiška, Soldán, Tomáš & Cr, Biology Centre As, 2013, Stoneflies (Plecoptera) of the Czech Republic: species checklist, distribution and protection status, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 53 (2), pp. 443-484 : 450-454

List of Plecoptera of the Czech Republic

Altogether, 95 species of 22 genera and seven families of the order Plecoptera have been recorded in the Czech Republic ( Table 2). This list is substantially different from the previous check-list by RAUŠER (1977). He listed 89 species known in the Czech Republic, including seven species expected or doubtful which were marked by a question mark. Agnetina elegantula Klapálek, 1907 recorded by KLAPÁLEK (1905) and Protonemura brevistyla (Ris, 1902) recorded by KŘELINOVÁ (1962) were omitted from Raušer’s check-list. Since then, 11 species have been newly recorded: Capnopsis schilleri (Rostock, 1892) ( ŠPAČEK et al. 1999) , Leuctra dalmoni Vinçon & Murányi, 2006 ( VINÇON & MURÁNYI 2006), Isoperla buresi Raušer, 1962 , Nemoura fusca Kis, 1963 , N. carpathica Illies, 1963 , Protonemura aestiva Kis, 1965 , Leuctra geniculata Stephens, 1836 , L. quadrimaculata Kis, 1963 ( BOJKOVÁ & ŠPAČEK 2006), and Brachyptera starmachi Sowa, 1966 , Leuctra cingulata Kempny, 1899 , L. pusilla Krno, 1985 (BOJKOVÁ 2009). Three species, Taeniopteryx auberti Kis & Sowa, 1964 , Chloroperla susemicheli Zwick, 1967 and Leuctra bronislawi Sowa, 1970 , expected in the Czech Republic by RAUŠER (1977) were confirmed by BOJKOVÁ (2009), KROČA (2010b) and BOJKOVÁ et al. (2011). In contrast, four species ( Isoperla pawlowskii Wojtas, 1961 , Taeniopteryx araneoides Klapálek, 1902 , Oemopteryx loewii (Albarda, 1889) , and Capnioneura mitis (Despax, 1932)) expected by RAUŠER (1977) have been confirmed neither by literature nor by new material (see p. 464).

Six species included in Raušer’s checklist have not been sufficiently documented. Perla bipunctata Pictet, 1833 , Taeniopteryx kuehtreiberi Aubert, 1950 , Brachyptera trifasciata (Pictet, 1832) and Leuctra leptogaster Aubert, 1949 have been recorded only in larval stage (see p. 464 for details). This is definitely not sufficient in the case of these species because they are not easily distinguishable and only the last instars can be reliably identified. Generally, early spring species of the genera Taeniopteryx and Brachyptera have usually been recorded based on small instar larvae from autumn samples in majority of hydrobiological studies, which has led to misidentifications (BOJKOVÁ et al. 2011). Likewise, young larvae of L. leptogaster have often been confused with those of L. pseudocingulata Mendl, 1968 or L. pseudosignifera Aubert, 1954 . The larva of Perla bipunctata is not sufficiently known due to recent substantial changes and many uncertainties in the taxonomy of Perla species (see SIVEC & STARK 2002). Therefore, these species cannot be included in the check-list without confirmation by imagines. The remaining two species, Leuctra handlirschi Kempny, 1898 and L. teriolensis Kempny, 1900 , have often been recorded based on larval material as well. Identification of larvae of Leuctra inermis species-group is very complicated and not reliable at all (cf. ZWICK 2004). A large series of imagines collected by J. Raušer and E. Křelinová was revised (BOJKOVÁ 2009) and compared to imagines of Leuctra handlirschi and L. teriolensis

Table 2. List of species recorded in the Czech Republic, and their distribution and frequency.Presence of a species in a river basin based only on larval material, which was not confirmed by imagines, is marked by a number of a reference: 1 – LOSOS & MARVAN (1957); 2 – ŠVEC (1960); 3 – SEDLÁK (1969); 4 – KUBÍČEK et al. (1971); 5 – SUKOP (1976, 2008, 2010), SUKOP et al. (2010); 6 – ADÁMEK & RAUŠER (1977); 7 – ZELINKA et al. (1977); 8 – WINKLER (1979); 9 – HELEŠIC & SEDLÁK (1995); 10 – SOLDÁN (1996); 11 – KUBÍČEK et al. (1999); 12 – SOLDÁN & HELEŠIC (1999); 13 – ŠPAČEK (1999, 2001); 14 – SUKOP & KOCOUR (2000); 15 – STEHNO (2000); 16 – PREISLER & ŠPAČEK (2001); 17 – SOLDÁN et al. (2001); 18 – HORECKÝ et al. (2002); 19 – JEZBEROVÁ (2003). Records based only on historical unrevised material of imagines are marked by a question mark with a number of reference:?1 – KOLENATI (1859);?2 – DALLA- TORRE (1878);?3 – KLAPÁLEK (1905);?4 – ŠÁMAL (1920a);?5 – ŠÁMAL (1920b). Other remarks: * – recorded only on the Bohemian part of the basin. Species frequency:1 – rare species (occurs at ≤ 5 % of the localities), 2 – medium frequent species (6–15 %), 3 – frequent species (16–30 %), 4 – common species (31–50 %), 5 – widespread species (> 51 %).

collected in the Alps and Jura Massif. All specimens previously identified as L. teriolensis were in fact L. rauscheri and all the material of L. handlirschi turned out to be either L. inermis or L. pusilla . Based on this revision, we suppose that also unrevised literature records of Leuctra handlirschi and L. teriolensis (see Bibliography of Plecoptera of the Czech Republic below) in fact refer to L. pusilla and L. rauscheri .

Five species ( Chloroperla kisi Zwick, 1967 , Rhabdiopteryx acuminata Klapálek, 1905 , Rhabdiopteryx neglecta (Albarda, 1889) , Nemoura obtusa Ris, 1902 and Perlodes jurassicus Aubert, 1946 ), recorded in some hydrobiological studies (see Bibliography), are not included in the check-list because they have been recorded only at larval stage, and their identification is not reliable. Furthermore, Perlodes jurassicus is considered to live in the Jura Massif in Switzerland and France only ( KNISPEL et al. 2002), and the Rhabdiopteryx neglecta speciesgroup was recently revised ( VINÇON & MURÁNYI 2009), and larvae of their species were not redescribed.

Siphonoperla cf. burmeisteri is included in the check-list; however, the material from the Czech Republic is morphologically different from Siphonoperla burmeisteri distributed mainly in Fennoscandia and Baltics, with the area extension at least to Germany (lectotype from Halle; ZWICK 1971, P. ZWICK, in litt. 2012). Detailed revision of the material is needed. Siphonoperla cf. burmeisteri was collected in large lowland rivers by F. Klapálek at the turn of the 20th century and by E. Křelinová in the 1950s. However, the species has not been collected at these sites since then and it is therefore regionally extinct in the Czech Republic.