Hydroporus narentinus ZIMMERMANN 1915
Creators: name: Fery, Hans
name: Bouzid, Slimane
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2016
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Dytiscidae
Hydroporus
Hydroporus narentinus

description: Hydroporus narentinus ZIMMERMANN, 1915   
 Hydroporus narentinus ZIMMERMANN, 1915: 220.   
 Graptodytes bilineatus var. narentinus (ZIMMERMANN); ZIMMERMANN 1919: 182, 1920: 110; LUIGIONI 1929:157; FRANCISCOLO 1979: 411.   
 Graptodytes bilineatus narentinus (ZIMMERMANN); J.[G.] MÜLLER 1926: 290; DEPOLI 1930: 83.   
 Graptodytes bilineatus var. dalmatinus ZIMMERMANN, 1932: 81 (lapsus for narentinus).   
 Graptodytes bilineatus (STURM, 1835); GUÉORGUIEV 1971: 13; NILSSON 2001: 151, 2016: 157; NILSSON & FERY 2006: 65 (sub dalmatinus).   
T y p e l o c a l i t y: Croatia,Metcovic,ca.60kmNWDubrovnik.  
T y p e m a t e r i a l: Lectotype (present designation): 3, "Dalmatia [printed], Metkovic [hw Zimmermann]", "Type" [round light blue label, hw Zimmermann], "Samml. A. Zimmermann" [printed], "Typus" [red label, printed; unauthorised curatorial designation], " Lectotype, Hydroporus narentinus Zimmermann, 1915, Fery & Bouzid des. 2016" [red, printed] (ZSM); scans of the labels are given in Fig. 29. 1 ♀, same labels as the lectotype, but " Paratypus " [red label, printed; unauthorised curatorial designation] and " Paralectotype, Hydroporus narentinus Zimmermann, 1915, Fery & Bouzid 2016" [red, printed] (ZSM). 1 ex., same labels as the female paralectotype; the abdomen and most appendages are missing (ZSM). The lectotype and the two paralectotypes were originally glued onto points (small triangular cards); we have glued them onto new bigger rectangular cards to protect them against further mechanical damage. Next by these three specimens we have found a single aedeagus which was glued onto a point mounted at a separate pin. This pin had labels "Penis, G. narentinus " [hw Zimmermann] and "Samml. A. Zimmermann" [printed]. We are convinced that this aedeagus belongs to the paralectotype without abdomen and have glued the aedeagus onto the new rectangular card behind that specimen and mounted the two labels at the same pin below the other four labels. The apices of the median lobe and of both parameres are strongly damaged.  
The habitus of the lectotype is given in Fig. 28. It has a total length of 2.5 mm and a maximum width of 1.2 mm; nine right antennomeres, all tarsomeres of the left fore-leg and the fifth tarsomere of the right hind-leg are missing; the apex of the median lobe is slightly and the right paramere strongly damaged.  
 ZIMMERMANN (1919: 182) himself stated that narentinus should be treated only as a variety of G. bilineatus. Except J.[G.] MÜLLER (1926) and DEPOLI (1930) this taxon was and is still treated as a variety or as a junior subjective synonym of G. bilineatus. We are not fully convinced that narentinus is conspecific with G. bilineatus. The lectotype (Fig. 28) and the two paralectotypes are unusually small and slender (compared with central European G. bilineatus). More topotypical material should be collected and eventually sequenced for molecular studies. At present, we refrain from changing the status of this taxon as a junior subjective synonym of G. bilineatus. However, we designate the lectotype as a first step of future studies of a possible complex of species around G. bilineatus, which probably comprises also Graptodytes snizeki HENDRICH, 1993. We want to mention also specimens from north-eastern Turkey (near Tortum, Erzurum province; preliminarily determined as G. bilineatus; in CHF) which are also unusually small and slender and, additionally, have the yellow pattern strongly reduced. Another specimen from Pester, Serbia, has a similar habitus, but the dorsal surface is almost totally black (CHF).   
 Graptodytes dalmatinus ZIMMERMANN, 1932 is another taxon which is usually treated as a junior subjective synonym of G. bilineatus. Strange enough, no syntypes could be found in the ZSM. A careful comparison of the descriptions of H. dalmatinus and G. narentinus shows that the text of both is identical in part. Additionally, the description of dalmatinus includes no hint on the collecting site and that it is a new taxon. This is why we are convinced that the name dalmatinus is nothing else than a lapsus, an incorrect subsequent spelling of narentinus. Thus, according to article 33.3 of the ICZN (1999) dalmatinus "is not an available name and... it does not enter into homonymy and cannot be used as a substitute name..."
description: Published as part of Fery, Hans & Bouzid, Slimane, 2016, Notes on Graptodytes SEIDLITZ, 1887, re-instatement of G. laeticulus (SHARP, 1882) as valid species and description of Tassilodytes nov. gen. from Algeria (Coleoptera, Dytiscidae, Hydroporinae, Siettitiina), pp. 451-481 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 48 (1) on pages 464-466, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13146895