Agabus turcmenus Guignot, 1957

Fery, Hans, 2011, Agabus (Acatodes) puetzi sp. n., a new species of the confinis-group from the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau (Coleoptera, Dytiscidae, Agabini), Zootaxa 3050, pp. 37-54 : 46-48

Agabus turcmenus Guignot, 1957

Agabus (Gaurodytes) turcmenus Guignot, 1957: 93 .

Agabus turcmenus Guignot ; Nilsson 1990: 152, 1995: 60. – Hua 2002: 35. – Brancucci & Hendrich 2008: 52. – Fery & Šťastný 2010: 1019.

Agabus (Acatodes) turcmenus Guignot ; Nilsson 2000: 23.

Type locality. Kyrgyzstan, "Naryn kol." Notes: The word "kol" (also "kul") means "lake" in the Middle Asian Turk languages ("gölü" in Turkish); "Naryn kol" most probably refers to the Issyk-kul which means "hot lake" (personal communication by O. Merkl, curator in the HNHM). The Issyk-kul has co-ordinates of ca. 42N 76E, the city Naryn is situated about 100 km SE of that lake (ca. 41.4N 76.0E) .

Lectotype (by present designation): ♂, "Turkestan, Almásy 1906" [printed], "Naryn kol." ["Naryn" printed, "kol." hw Almásy?], " Holotypus 1957 ♂, Agabus (Gaurodytes) turcmenus Guignot " [white label with red margin, hw? (not hw Guignot!); unauthorised curatorial designation of holotype], "Type" [red, printed], "F. Guignot det. 1956, Agabus (Gaurodytes) turcmenus n. sp., Type ♂ " [hw Guignot in large part], " Lectotype, Agabus turcmenus Guignot, 1957 , Fery des. 2011" [red, printed] ( HNHM). Notes: The lectotype lacks the left mesotarsus. It is a rather immature specimen which I have, nevertheless, designated as lectotype because (1) it fits best the description in Guignot (1957) and because (2) a label in Guignot's handwriting is mounted at the pin. Notes: In Guignot (1957: 94) is given "Turkestan: Naryn kol. (Almanj, 1906)"; "Almanj" must be correctly "Almásy" which is the name of the collector. Paralectotypes: 2 ♂♂, 2 ♀♀, each with three labels, first two same as in the lectotype, third label " Paratypus 1957, Agabus turcmenus Guignot " [white label with red margin, hw? (not hw Guignot!); unauthorised curatorial designation of paratypes]; all paralectotypes with the respective red label ( HNHM). Notes: The author of this taxon did not determined a holotype in the original description. It is even not clear whether he has studied only a single male or more specimens (the given range of total length suggests more than one specimen). This is why I assume that the specimens stored in the HNHM must be treated as syntypes and that a lectotype can be designated (cf. Recommendation 73E in ICZN 1999: 80). The curator of the HNHM (O. Merkl) advised me to cross through all red margined type labels and turn them with their upper side downwards.

Descriptive notes. Guignot's description (1957: 93) is not very helpful because the author uses only a few of those characters which are seen as essential today. The author tells us that the species belongs to the congener - group and that it can be "recognised at first sight by its general shape and the colour of the elytra" [my translation]. One important hint is that the species has a bifid median lobe. Furthermore is stated that the pronotum is black, but narrowly brownish bordered all around, and the TL is given as 9.5–10 mm. Study of the lecto- and paralectotypes reveals, however, that the range of the TL is 8.4–8.9 mm (lectotype 8.9 mm; MW: 4.2–4.4 mm) and that the lectotype and three paralectotypes are immature. The latter fact explains that the pronotum of these specimens is rather broadly yellowish margined. The single mature specimen (a male; see Fig. 11) has the yellow border of the pronotum rather narrow but distinct laterally, at anterior margin still narrower, and at the hind margin more or less perceptible only before the scutellum. I want to add that the discontinuity in outline between the pronotum and elytra is rather distinct and that the last abdominal ventrite is provided with rather strong rugae. A. turcmenus is rather similar to A. thomsoni , but deviates chiefly by the reddish brown border of the pronotum, stronger rugae on last abdominal ventrite ( Fig. 13), and the shape of the median lobe which is figured here for the first time ( Figs 12 and 37). The left paramere is given in Fig. 14. A more detailed description of this species shall be postponed until more material from Kyrgyzstan has been studied.

Distribution. So far known only from Kyrgyzstan and China (Xinjiang; see Nilsson 1995: 60).