A new Diplura species from Georgia caves, Plusiocampa (Plusiocampa) imereti (Diplura, Campodeidae), with morphological and molecular data

A new dipluran species, Plusiocampa (Plusiocampa) imereti Sendra & Barjadze sp. nov., from the deep zone in three caves in the Imereti region, Georgia, is described. This new troglobitic Plusiocampa is an addition to four others known Diplura from around the Black Sea region, two Dydimocampa and two Plusiocampa s. str. The present study also provides the first CO1 sequences for the Plusiocampinae taxa and the first molecular data for cave-dwelling Plusiocampa species. Although bootstrap values were low, the maximum-likelihood phylogenetic tree grouped Plusiocampa (P.) imereti Sendra & Barjadze sp. nov. with two Plusiocampa s. str. species from Eastern Europe. Morphologically, P. (P.) imereti Sendra & Barjadze sp. nov. is closely related to two cave-dwelling species: Plusiocampa (Plusiocampa) glabra Condé, 1984 and Plusiocampa (P.) chiosensis Sendra & Gasparo, 2020. The new species can be distinguished by the presence of lateral anterior macrosetae on metanotum, more uneven claws, and the presence of 2+2 lateral anterior macrosetae on middle urotergites. The five species currently known for the Black Sea region inhabit caves located at low altitude but with no influence from former glacial or permafrost processes

On the cave spiders of Georgia with description of a new blind Centromerus (Arachnida: Araneae)

<p>A new species Centromerus georgicus sp. n. collected in a Georgian cave (Caucasus) is described based on male and female specimens, diagnosed, and illustrated. New records of some poorly known species (Tegenaria pontica Haritonov, 1947, Dysdera anatoliae Deeleman-Reinhold, 1988 and Leptonetela caucasica Dunin 1990), as well as the description of the unknown female of L. caucasica are also presented.</p&gt

Niphargus rachalechkhumensis Marin & Barjadze & Maghradze & Palatov 2023, sp. nov.

Niphargus rachalechkhumensis sp. nov. Figs 2–5, 10 a, b, 11 e Material examined. Holotype: ³ (bl. 14.5 mm), ZMMU Mb-1245— SW Caucasus, Western Georgia, Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti, Sakishore Cave, 42°26’31.8”N 43°09’34.4”E, 1189 m a.s.l., in subterranean stream, 12 xi.2020, coll. E. Maghradze & Sh. Barjadze. Paratypes: 1 ³, ZMMU Mb-1246, and 1³ (bl. 10 mm), 1♀ (bl. 13 mm), IZISU,— Sakishore Cave, 42°26’31.8”N 43°09’34.4”E, 1189 m a.s.l., in subterranean stream, 14 viii.2019, collected by international expedition. Additional material: SW Caucasus, Western Georgia, Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti: 2³³, 4♀♀, LEMMI — Dolabistavi Cave, 42°27’03.9”N 43°10’39.5”E, 1187 m a.s.l., in subterranean stream, 14 viii.2019, collected by international expedition; 2♀♀, LEMMI — Tsageri Municipality, on the slope of the Rioni river near Tvishi village, Verdzistava II Cave, 42°31’44.23”N 42°47’38.79”E, about 400 m a.s.l., subterranean stream in dark zone, 10 vi.2021, coll. E. Maghradze, Sh. Barjadze, M. Gogshelidze & N. Modebadze. Etymology. The species is named after the Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti, Western Georgia, where it was discovered in several caves. Diagnosis. Urosomite II with 3 stout dorsoposterior spine-like setae on each side. Epimeral plates I and II subangular, with rounded posteroventral corner, epimeral plate III with bluntly produced posteroventral corner. Gnathopods I–II moderate, almost similar in size, palm almost rectangular, with straight distal margin, dactylus with a row of several setae along outer margin. Dactyli of pereopods III–VII with 1 spine or seta near basis of nail. Pleopods with 6 – 7 hooks in retinacules, without additional setae. Uropod III elongated, article 2 of outer ramus long, article 1 (distal) about 5 times shorter than article 2 in females, and almost equal to article 2 in males. Telson relatively stout, deeply incised, each lobe with 4–5 long distal spines and 2 outer marginal spines, facial spines absent. Description. Body medium in size, moderately slender. Head without rostrum, with subrounded lateral cephalic lobes and excavated anteroventral sinus; eyes or pigmented spots absent (Fig. 10 b). Epimeral plates I and II subangular, with rounded posteroventral corner, epimeral plate III with bluntly produced posteroventral corner; ventral margin of epimeral plates II and III armed with 4–5 small simple spines (Fig. 5 a–c). Urosomite I armed with 2 slender dorsoposterior setae on each side; urosomite II with 3 stout dorsoposterior spine-like setae on each side; urosomite III unarmed (Fig. 10 a). Coxal gills ovoid, of moderate size, reaching and overreaching distal tip of article 2 of ambulatory pereopods. Antenna I (Fig. 2 a) slender, long; peduncular articles moderately slender, ratio 1:0.83:0.45; flagellum consisting of about 29 articles, most of them with 2 short aesthetascs each; accessory flagellum (Fig. 2 b) short, 2-articulated. Antenna II (Fig. 2 c) with peduncular article 3 almost equal to article 2, about 5 times as long as wide, with separate rare tufts of long setae along distoventral margin; article 2 about 4.5 times as long as wide; article 1 about as long as wide; flagellum relatively short, consisting of about 15 articles bearing relatively short setae. Mouthparts. Labium (Fig. 3 a) entire, with convex dorsal margin, covered with tiny setae. Labrum (Fig. 3 b) entire, slightly broader than long, with entire outer lobes and developed inner lobes exceeding half of outer lobes. Mandibles (Fig. 3 c–f) with mandibular palp (Figs 3c, e; 10 f) consisting of 3 articles: article 1 about 1.5 times as long as wide, smooth; article 2 about 2.5 times as long as wide, with numerous setae, article 3 subfalciform, about 3.5 times as long as wide, slightly shorter than article 2, with group of 7 A-setae; 3 groups of B-setae; 24 D-setae and 6 E-setae. Maxilla I (Fig. 3 g) with: inner plate with relatively short 2–3 long distal simple setae, outer plate with 7 robust spines armed with 1small lateral teeth each, the lowest spine with several tiny teeth (Fig. 3 h); palp 2-articulated, distal article with a tuft of long simple setae distally. Maxilla II (Fig. 3 i) with smooth well-developed lobes armed with numerous distolateral setae, distal margins with long simple setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 3 j) with short inner plate armed with 3 distal simple strong spines; outer plate reaching half of palp article 2, with row of inner strong lateral spines; palp 4-articulated, distal article with large spine. Gnathopods moderate, similar in size, with article 6 slightly smaller than corresponding coxae (Fig. 2 d, f). Gnathopod I (Fig. 2 d) with basis robust, about 3 times as long as wide, with long simple setae along posterior and posterodistal margins; ischium almost quadrate, as long as wide, similar to merus; merus quadrate, about as long as wide, with row of long setae along posterior margin; carpus mostly rectangular in shape, about 1.5 times as long as wide; propodus large, nearly as long as broad, trapezoid, with several (9–10) groups of ventral marginal setae; propodus (chela) with palmar margin poorly convex, almost straight, with medium simple setae, defined on outer face by one strong large corner spine accompanied laterally by 3 stout distally serrated robust spine spines (Fig. 2 e); dactylus strong and sharp, reaching posterior margin of propodus, with a row of small numerous setae along dorsal margin. Gnathopod II (Fig. 2 f) with basis relatively slender, about 4 times as long as wide, with long simple setae along posterior and posterodistal margins; ischium almost about as long as wide, similar to merus; merus subquadrate, about 1.5 times as long as wide, with row of long setae along posterior margin; carpus trapezoid in shape, about 2 times as long as wide; propodus (chela) large, nearly as long as broad, trapezoid, with numerous groups of ventral marginal setae; propodus (chela) with palmar margin poorly convex, almost straight, with medium simple setae, defined on outer face by one strong large corner spine accompanied laterally by 3 stout distally serrated robust spine spines (Fig. 2 g); dactylus strong and sharp, reaching posterior margin of propodus, with a row of small numerus setae along dorsal margin. Pereopods III–IV (Fig. 4 a, c) almost similar in size and shape; basis about 5 times as long as wide, with margins armed with long setae; ischium short, about as long as wide; merus about 3.5 times as long as wide, with simple setae along dorsal and ventral margins; carpus shorter than propodus, about 3–3.5 times as long as wide; propodus about 6 times as long as wide, with small simple spines along ventral margin; dactylus (Fig. 4 b, d) relatively slender, curved, sharp distally, with small ventral median spine. Pereopods V–VI (Fig. 4 e, g) with basis almost subrectangular, about 2 times as long as wide, slightly widening proximally, without posteroventral lobe, anterior margin of basis slightly convex, with a row of slender marginal setae that slightly longer than posterior; ischium small, subquadrate, as long as wide; merus about 4 times as long as wide, with short setae along dorsal and ventral margins; carpus robust, about 4–4.5 times as long as wide, almost equal to merus; propodus relatively slender, about 6–6.5 times as long as wide, armed with short simple spines; dactylus slender, curved, sharp distally, with additional ventral median spine (Fig. 4 f, h). Pereopod VII (Fig. 4 i) moderately slender, with basis narrowly rectangular, about 2.5 times as long as broad, anterior and posterior margins slightly convex; ischium small and short, as long as wide; merus about 2.5 times as long as wide, with short spines along dorsal and ventral margins; carpus about 4–4.5 times as long as wide, shorter than propodus, armed with simple setae; propodus slender, about 7 times as long as wide, armed with small single setae along margins; dactylus slender, curved, sharp distally, with additional ventral median spine, sometimes with the second additional spine in the middle of main (basal) part (Fig. 4 j). Pleopods with 6–7 hooks in retinacules, without additional setae (Figs 5 g, 11 e). Uropod I (Fig. 5 h, i) with protopodite (peduncle) about 4 times as long as wide, slightly longer than rami, with a dorsoexternal row of slender simple spines; rami about 5 times as long as wide, equal in length, armed with armed with lateral and distal relatively robust simple spines. Uropod II (Fig. 5 j, k) with protopodite (peduncle) about 3–3.5 times as long as wide, equal to rami; rami almost equal in size, with lateral and distal slender spines. Uropod III (Fig. 5 l, m) different in males and females. Uropod III in females (Fig. 5 l) with protopodite about 1.5 times as long as wide, rami unequal, inner ramus short, about 6–6.5 times shorter than outer one, bearing several small distal and lateral spines; outer ramus long, proximal article about 6–6.5 times as long as wide, distal article about 5 times shorter than previous article, about 3.5–4 times as long as wide, with several small distal simple setae. Uropod III in males (Fig. 5 m) with protopodite about 1.5 times as long as wide, rami unequal, inner ramus short, about 10–10.5 times shorter than outer one, bearing several small distal and lateral spines; outer ramus long, proximal article about 11 times as long as wide, distal article about 1.2 times shorter than previous article, about 12–13 times as long as wide, with several small distal simple setae. Telson (Fig. 5 d, e) about 1.3 times longer than broad, ca. 85% incised, lobes obtuse and sloping distally. Armature of telson is variable, bearing 4–6 long distal spines, and 2 outer marginal spine-like setae on each side; distal and marginal spines relatively long and slender, reaching about 0.5 of length of telson. Body size. The largest collected female has bl. 12.5 mm; the largest male has bl. 14.5 mm. GenBank accession number. MW014293–MW014296. Taxonomic remarks. From mostly related N. borutzkyi, the new species can be separated by (1) the presence of 3 stout dorsoposterior spine-like setae on urosomite II (Fig. 10 a) vs. always 4 slender spine-like setae (Marin 2020: Fig. 8 b); (2) significantly shorter distal segment of uropod III in females, which is more than 5 times shorter than the previous segment (Fig. 5 l) vs. about 4 times as long as wide (Marin 2020: Fig. 7 e); (3) bluntly produced posteroventral angle of epimeral plate III (Fig. 5 c) vs. non produced, mostly rectangular angle (Birštein 1933: Abb. 7). From N. amirani, the new species can be clearly separated by (1) 3 stouter and shorter dorsoposterior spine-like setae on urosomite II (Fig. 10 d) vs. always 3 significantly slender spine-like setae (Marin 2020: Fig. 8 b); (2) shorter distal segment of uropod III in females, which is more than 5 times shorter than the previous segment (Fig. 5 m) vs. about 3 times as long as wide (Marin 2020: Fig. 7 e). Ecology and distribution. Niphargus rachalechkhumensis sp. nov. is presently known from two neighboring Rachian (Sakishore and Dolabistavi) and one Lechkhumian (Verdzistava II) caves; probably, these caves are connected by a single underground water stream, since the same stygobiotic species inhabits them all (e.g., Marin & Turbanov 2021). The eleven invertebrate species are known from the Sakishore Cave, of which only five species are troglomorphic: Dina ratschaensis Kobakhidze 1958 (leech), Leucogeorgia longipes Verhoeff, 1930 (millipede), Inotrechus injaevae Dolzhanskij et Ljovuschkin, 1989 (beetle), Nemaspela femorecurvata Martens, 2006 (harvestman), and Sitnikovia ratschuli Chertoprud, Palatov, Vinarski, 2020 (mollusk) (Barjadze et al. 2019a, b; Antić & Reip 2020; Chertoprud et al. 2020). Seven invertebrates with three troglomorphic species, namely Hausdorfenia pseudohauffenia Grego & Mumladze, 2020 (mollusk), Leucogeorgia longipes Verhoeff, 1930 (millipede) and Neobisium sp. (pseudoscorpion), have been recorded from the Dolabistavi Cave (Barjadze et al. 2019a, b; Grego et al. 2020). Only stygobiotic shrimp Xiphocaridinella lechkhumensis Marin & Barjadze, 2022 is know from the Verdzistava II Cave (Marin & Barjadze 2022).Published as part of Marin, Ivan, Barjadze, Shalva, Maghradze, Eter & Palatov, Dmitry, 2023, Diversity, taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships of the " Niphargus borutzkyi " ingroup (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) in Western Georgia, SW Caucasus, pp. 477-500 in Zootaxa 5352 (4) on pages 481-483, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5352.4.2, http://zenodo.org/record/842640

Diversity, taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships of the "Niphargus borutzkyi" ingroup (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) in Western Georgia, SW Caucasus

Marin, Ivan, Barjadze, Shalva, Maghradze, Eter, Palatov, Dmitry (2023): Diversity, taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships of the "Niphargus borutzkyi" ingroup (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) in Western Georgia, SW Caucasus. Zootaxa 5352 (4): 477-500, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5352.4.2, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5352.4.

Study of the Invertebrate diversity in Prometheus Show Cave (Georgia, Caucasus)

Prometheus Cave is one of the largest caves in Georgia among the local six show caves. Before opening the cave as a tourist attraction, no research was conducted on the cave to study the invertebrate community living there, despite the cave's status as a natural monument. Before our study, only 22 species of invertebrates were known from Prometheus Cave, while none of the invertebrate species have been reported from adjacent non-touristic Datvi and Melouri caves.Cave invertebrate fauna was monitored monthly from 2018 to 2021 in the Prometheus cave and adjacent non-touristic Datvi and Melouri caves. The sampling was conducted on at least ten sites per cave each month. The abundance and incidence of the invertebrates were recorded on each site during field surveys. We ordinated the invertebrate diversity of the studied caves using Principal Component Analysis (PCA). After intensive investigations for three years, the number of species in Prometheus Cave increased from 22 to 47. Besides, ten species in Datvi and 11 species in Melouri caves were found for the first time. Our results suggest the existence of a significant difference in the diversity of the cave invertebrate fauna between the touristic part of Prometheus show Cave and its non-touristic part - Alpinist's hall, Datvi, and Melouri caves. The primary factor differentiating Prometheus show Cave from the others is the lower abundance of the species. Hurlbert's PIE and rarefaction analysis of the diversity explains that the diversity is also most unevenly distributed in this cave

Two new species of the genus Deuteraphorura Absolon, 1901 (Hexapoda, Collembola, Onychiuridae) from Georgian caves with remarks on the subterranean biodiversity of the Caucasus Mountains

Specimens of Deuteraphorura collected in 11 Georgian caves were analysed morphologically and molecularly based on the COI gene barcode region. Two molecular delimitation methods revealed four species (MOTUs); however, only two of them were distinguished morphologically and are described in this paper as new to science. Both new species, D. colchisi sp. nov. and D. kozmani sp. nov., belong to the group with a pseudocellus on the first thoracic tergum; the differential diagnosis table to this species group is provided. The potential of the Caucasus as a hotspot region of subterranean biodiversity and evolution centre of subterranean animals is discussed

Niphargus tvishiensis Marin & Barjadze & Maghradze & Palatov 2023, sp. nov.

Niphargus tvishiensis sp. nov. Figs 6–9, 10 c–f, 11 f Material examined. Holotype: ³ (bl. 15.0 mm), ZMMU Mb-1247— SW Caucasus, Western Georgia, Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti region, Tsageri Municipality, the slope of the Rioni river in the vicinity of Tvishi village, Verdzistava I Cave, 42°31’34.6”N 42°47’34.0”E, 437 m a.s.l., in the subterranean syphon, 10 v.2020, coll. E. Maghradze & Sh. Barjadze. Paratypes: 1♀ (bl. 12 mm), IZISU,—same locality and date as for holotype. Additional material: 2♀♀ (partially broken, mostly used for SEM and DNA analysis), LEMMI,—same locality and date as for holotype. Etymology. The species is named after the Tvishi village Tsageri Municipality, Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti region, Georgia, near which the Verdzistava I Cave is located, where a new species was discovered. Diagnosis. Urosomite II with 4 slender dorsoposterior spine-like setae on each side. Epimeral plates I-III subangular, with rounded posteroventral corner. Gnathopods I–II moderate, almost similar in size, palm almost rectangular, with straight distal margin, dactylus with a row of several setae along outer margin. Dactyli of pereopods III–VII with 1 spine or seta near basis of nail. Pleopods with 7 – 10 hooks in retinacules, without additional setae. Uropod III elongated, article 2 of outer ramus long, article 1 (distal) about 5 times shorter than article 2 in females, and 2.5 times shorter than article 2 in males. Telson relatively stout, deeply incised, each lobe with 4–5 long distal spines and 2 outer marginal spines, facial spines absent. Description. Body medium in size, moderately slender. Head without rostrum, with subrounded lateral cephalic lobes and excavated anteroventral sinus; eyes or pigmented spots absent (Fig. 10 e). Epimeral plates I–III subangular, with rounded posteroventral corner, ventral margin of epimeral plates II and III armed with 4 small simple spines (Fig. 9 a–c). Urosomite I armed with 2 slender dorsoposterior setae on each side; urosomite II with 4 slender dorsoposterior spine-like setae on each side; urosomite III unarmed (Fig. 10 c). Coxal gills ovoid, of moderate size, reaching and overreaching distal tip of article 2 of ambulatory pereopods. Antenna I (Fig. 6 a) slender, long; peduncular articles moderately slender, ratio 1:0.90:0.47; flagellum consisting of about 21 articles, most of them with 2 short aesthetascs each; accessory flagellum short, 2-articulated. Antenna II (Fig. 6 b, c) with peduncular article 3 almost equal to article 2, about 4.5 times as long as wide, with separate rare tufts of long setae along distoventral margin; article 2 about 3.5 times as long as wide; article 1 about as long as wide; flagellum relatively short, consisting of about 15 articles bearing relatively short setae. Mouthparts. Labium (Fig. 7 a) entire, with convex dorsal margin, covered with tiny setae. Labrum (Fig. 7 b) entire, slightly broader than long, with entire outer lobes and developed inner lobes exceeding half of outer lobes. Mandibles (Fig. 7 c–f) with mandibular palp (Fig. 7c, e) consisting of 3 articles: article 1 about 1.5 times as long as wide, smooth; article 2 about 3 times as long as wide, with numerous setae, article 3 subfalciform, about 3.5 times as long as wide, slightly shorter than article 2, with group of 7–8 A-setae; 2 groups of B-setae; 26 D-setae and 6 Esetae. Maxilla I (Fig. 7 g) with: inner plate with relatively short 2 long distal simple setae, outer plate with 7 robust spines armed with 1 small lateral tooth each, the lowest spine with several tiny ventral teeth (Fig. 7 h); palp 2-articulated, distal article with a tuft of long simple setae distally. Maxilla II (Fig. 7 i) with smooth well-developed lobes armed with numerous distolateral setae, distal margins with long simple setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 7 j) with short inner plate armed with 3 distal simple strong spines; outer plate reaching half of palpal article 2, with row of inner strong lateral spines; palp 4-articulated, distal article with large spine. Gnathopods moderate, similar in size, with article 6 slightly smaller than corresponding coxae (Fig. 6 d, f). Gnathopod I (Fig. 6 d) with basis robust, about 2.5 times as long as wide, with long simple setae along posterior and posterodistal margins; ischium almost quadrate, as long as wide, similar to article 4; merus quadrate, about as long as wide, with row of long setae along posterior margin; carpus mostly rectangular in shape, about 1.5 times as long as wide; article 6 (propodus) large, slightly broader than longer, with several groups of ventral marginal setae; propodus (chela) with palmar margin poorly convex, almost straight, with medium simple setae, defined on outer face by one strong large corner spine accompanied laterally by 3 stout distally serrated robust spine spines (Fig. 6 e); dactylus strong and sharp, reaching posterior margin of article 6, with a row of small numerous setae along dorsal margin. Gnathopod II (Fig. 6 f) with basis relatively slender, about 4 times as long as wide, with long simple setae along posterior and postero-distal margins; ischium almost about as long as wide, similar to article 4; merus subquadrate, about 1.5 times as long as wide, with row of long setae along posterior margin; carpus trapezoid in shape, about 2 times as long as wide; article 6 (propodus) large, slightly broader than longer, with numerous groups of ventral marginal setae; propodus (chela) with palmar margin poorly convex, almost straight, with medium simple setae, defined on outer face by one strong large corner spine accompanied laterally by 3 stout distally serrated robust spine spines (Fig. 6 g); dactylus strong and sharp, reaching posterior margin of article 6, with a row of small numerus setae along dorsal margin. Pereopods III–IV (Fig. 8 a, c) almost similar in size and shape; basis about 5 times as long as wide, with margins armed with long setae; ischium short, about as long as wide; merus about 3.5 times as long as wide, with simple setae along dorsal and ventral margins; carpus shorter than article 6, about 3–3.5 times as long as wide; propodus about 6 times as long as wide, with small simple spines along ventral margin; dactylus (Fig. 4 b, d) relatively slender, curved, sharp distally, with small ventral median spine. Pereopods V–VI (Fig. 8 e, g) with basis almost subrectangular, about 2 times as long as wide, slightly widening proximally, without posteroventral lobe, anterior margin of article 2 slightly convex, with a row of slender marginal setae that slightly longer than posterior; ischium small, subquadrate, as long as wide; carpus about 4 times as long as wide, with short setae along dorsal and ventral margins; merus robust, about 4–4.5 times as long as wide, almost equal to article 4; propodus relatively slender, about 6–6.5 times as long as wide, armed with short simple spines; dactylus slender, curved, sharp distally, with additional ventral median spine (Fig. 8 f, h). Pereopod VII (Fig. 8 i) moderately slender, with basis narrowly rectangular, about 2.5 times as long as broad, anterior and posterior margins slightly convex; ischium small and short, as long as wide; merus about 2.5 times as long as wide, with short spines along dorsal and ventral margins; carpus about 4–4.5 times as long as wide, shorter than article 6, armed with simple setae; propodus slender, about 7 times as long as wide, armed with small single setae along margins; dactylus slender, curved, sharp distally, with additional ventral median spine, sometimes with the second additional spine in the middle of main (basal) part (Fig. 8 j). Pleopods normal, without specific features, with 7–10 hooks in retinacules, without additional setae (Figs 9 g, 11 f). Uropod I (Fig. 9 h, i) with protopodite (peduncle) about 4 times as long as wide, slightly longer than rami, with a dorso-external row of slender simple spines; rami about 5 times as long as wide, equal in length, armed with armed with lateral and distal relatively robust simple spines. Uropod II (Fig. 9 j, k) with protopodite (peduncle) about 3–3.5 times as long as wide, equal to rami; rami almost equal in size, with lateral and distal slender spines. Uropod III (Fig. 9 l, m) different in males and females. Uropod III in females (Fig. 9 l) with protopodite about 1.5 times as long as wide, rami unequal, inner ramus short, about 6–6.5 times shorter than outer one, bearing several small distal and lateral spines; outer ramus long, proximal article about 6–6.5 times as long as wide, distal article about 5 times shorter than previous article, about 3.5–4 times as long as wide, with several small distal simple setae. Uropod III in males (Fig. 9 m) with protopodite about 1.5 times as long as wide, rami unequal, inner ramus short, about 10 times shorter than outer one, bearing several small distal and lateral spines; outer ramus long, proximal article about 11 times as long as wide, distal article about 1.2 times shorter than previous article, about 12–13 times as long as wide, with several small distal simple setae. Telson (Fig. 9 d, e) about 1.3 times longer than broad, ca. 85% incised, lobes obtuse and sloping distally. Armature of telson is variable, bearing 4–6 long distal spines, and 2 outer marginal spines on each side; distal and marginal spines relatively long and slender, reaching about 0.5 of length of telson. Body size. The largest collected ♀ has bl. 12 mm; the largest ³ has bl. 15 mm. GenBank accession number. MW014293–MW014296. Taxonomic remarks. From mostly related N. borutzkyi, the new species can be separated by (1) shorter distal segment of uropod III in females, which is more than 5 times shorter than the previous segment (Fig. 5 l) vs. about 4 times as long as wide (Marin 2020: Fig. 7 e); (2) shorter distal segment of uropod III in males, which is more than 2 times shorter than the previous segment (Fig. 9 l) vs. equal (Yuzbashyan 1942: Fig. 3); and (3) 4 small spines along ventral margins of epimeral plates II–III (Fig. 9 b, c) vs. 5 spines (Birštein 1933: Abb. 7). From N. amirani, the new species can be clearly separated by (1) 4 stouter and shorter dorsoposterior spine-like setae on urosomite II (Fig. 10 d) vs. 3 slender spine-like setae (Marin 2020: Fig. 8 a); (2) shorter distal segment of uropod III in females, which is more than 5 times shorter than the previous segment (Fig. 9 m) vs. about 3 times as long as wide (Marin 2020: Fig. 7 e); and (3) shorter distal segment of uropod III in males, which is more than 2 times shorter than the previous segment (Fig. 9 l) vs. equal (Marin 2020: Fig. 7 f). From Niphargus rachalechkhumensis sp. nov., described above, the new species can be easily separated by (1) epimeral plate III with non-produced posteroventral angle, almost rectangular (Fig. 9 c) vs. distinctly bluntly produced posteroventral angle (Fig. 5 c); (2) urosomite II with 4 slender spine-like setae (Fig. 10 d) vs. with 3 stout spine-like setae (Fig. 10 a); (3) main (basal) part of dactyli of pereiopod VI–VII not more than 2.5–3 times longer wide (Fig. 8) vs. about 4 times longer wide (Fig. 4); (4) distal segment of uropod III more than 2 times shorter than previous one in males (Fig. 9 l) vs. about 1.5 times shorter than previous one (Fig. 5 m); and (5) the presence of 7–10 hooks in retinacules of pleopods vs. 6–7 hooks. Ecology and distribution. Niphargus tvishiensis sp. nov. is presently known from only the type locality, the Verdzistava I Cave. Lekhumian Tvishi Cave mentioned in Djanashvili & Barjadze (2011) and Djanashvili et al. (2014) should be also named as Verdzistava I Cave, from where two springtail species are known: Argonychiurus multiocellatus Djanashvili, Barjadze, Jordana et Burkhardt, 2014 (Onychiuridae) (troglobiont) and Plutomurus birsteini Djanashvili et Barjadze, 2011 (Tomoceridae) (troglophile).Published as part of Marin, Ivan, Barjadze, Shalva, Maghradze, Eter & Palatov, Dmitry, 2023, Diversity, taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships of the " Niphargus borutzkyi " ingroup (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) in Western Georgia, SW Caucasus, pp. 477-500 in Zootaxa 5352 (4) on pages 488-496, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5352.4.2, http://zenodo.org/record/842640

On the taxonomic status of Dina ratschaensis Kobakhidze, 1958 with a description of two new species - Dina imeretiensis sp. nov. and D. samegreloensis sp. nov. (Annelida, Hirudinida: Erpobdellidae)

Grosser, Clemens, Barjadze, Shalva, Maghradze, Eter, Shavadze, Lado, Pešić, Vladimir, Faille, Arnaud (2023): On the taxonomic status of Dina ratschaensis Kobakhidze, 1958 with a description of two new species - Dina imeretiensis sp. nov. and D. samegreloensis sp. nov. (Annelida, Hirudinida: Erpobdellidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 891: 110-127, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2023.891.2275, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2275/979

Fig. 4 in On the taxonomic status of Dina ratschaensis Kobakhidze, 1958 with a description of two new species - Dina imeretiensis sp. nov. and D. samegreloensis sp. nov. (Annelida, Hirudinida: Erpobdellidae)

Fig. 4. Dina samegreloensis Grosser, Barjadze & Shavadze sp. nov., holotype (IZISU: AL-T-00004), external morphology. A. Dorsal view. B. Ventral view. C. Lateral view. D. Caudal sucker. E. Oral sucker. F. Annulation of five midbody somites. G. Position of genital pores and annulation in the clitellar region. Abbreviations: a2, b1, b2, b5, b6 = annuli of somites; f = female genital pore; m = male genital pore.Published as part of Grosser, Clemens, Barjadze, Shalva, Maghradze, Eter, Shavadze, Lado, Pešić, Vladimir & Faille, Arnaud, 2023, On the taxonomic status of Dina ratschaensis Kobakhidze, 1958 with a description of two new species - Dina imeretiensis sp. nov. and D. samegreloensis sp. nov. (Annelida, Hirudinida: Erpobdellidae), pp. 110-127 in European Journal of Taxonomy 891 on page 117, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2023.891.2275, http://zenodo.org/record/836791

Dina samegreloensis Grosser, Barjadze & Shavadze 2023, sp. nov.

Dina samegreloensis Grosser, Barjadze & Shavadze sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 4E387A11-FFF9-4ACF-99BA-2F1EC712BE79 Figs 4–5 Diagnosis Small-sized erpobdellids with a Dina -like heteronomous annulation.The midbody somites are subdivided into annuli b1, b2, a2, b5 and the broadened annulus b6 (Fig. 4F). The male genital pore is situated in furrow b2/a2 and the female one in furrow b6/b1. The genital pores are separated by three annuli (Fig. 4G). Preserved leeches show numerous small and inconspicuous papillae on the dorsal and ventral sides. The cornua of the genital atrium are short, straight and directed slightly laterally (Fig. 5B–C). The vasa deferentia are very slightly curled up to the third ganglion behind the female genital pore. The ovisacs extend to the end of the second or the beginning of the third somite behind the female gonopore. They are unwinded to the end of the first somite and then coiled to the end (Fig. 5A). Etymology Dina samegreloensis sp. nov. is named after the region of Georgia from which the holotype was collected. Type material Holotype GEORGIA • body length 32 mm, width 6 mm, caudal sucker width 4 mm; Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti region, Martvili Municipality, village Pirveli Balda, Motena Cave; 42°28′35.73″ N, 42°23′28.25″ E; altitude 492 m; 7 Oct. 2021; Sh. Barjadze, L. Shavadze and E. Maghradze leg.; IZISU: AL-T - 00004. Description HABITUS. Small-sized erpobdellid. Preserved and contracted individuals reach a body length up to 32 mm and a width up to 6 mm (holotype, Fig. 4A–B). The body dorso-ventrally flattened in the posterior part, the first third (preclitellar and clitellar regions) cylindrical (Fig. 4C). The mouth opening is wide and the upper lip barely noticeably elongated (Fig. 4E). The caudal sucker is slightly wider than half of maximum body width (Fig. 4D). Small papillae numerous on dorsal and ventral surface. ANNULATION. The annulation is typical of the genus Dina. The midbody somites are quinqueannulate and heteronomousely subdivided by clear furrows into annuli b1, b2, a2, b5 and the clearly broadened annulus b6. Annulus b1 is sometimes also slightly broadened, especially in the posterior part of the body (Fig. 4F). A tendency to split into further annuli is not visible. The male genital pore is situated in furrow b2/a2 and the female one in furrow b6/b1. The genital pores are separated by three annuli (Fig. 4G). The dorsal and ventral sides are roughened by numerouse papillae. The papillae are very small and inconspicuous. COLOURATION. The colouration of living specimen is pale pink. Preserved specimens are unicolored greyish without any dark patterns (Fig. 4A–C). EYES. No eyes are visible. SEXUAL ORGANS. The body of the genital atrium is large. The cornua are short, strong, straight and directed slightly laterally (Fig. 5B–C). The vasa deferentia are clearly offset from the cornua. They run relatively straight and only very slightly curled up to the third ganglion behind the female genital pore, then more coiled up to the end of the fifth somite behind the female genital pore (Fig. 5A). The ovisacs run straight and unwinded to the end of the first somite behind the female genital pore. The right ovisac is strongly coiled and reaches the end of the second somite behind the female gonopore. The left ovisac has a slightly coiled end and reaches the annulus b2 of the third somite behind the female gonopore (Fig. 5A). Variability Information on variability is not yet possible. Only the holotype is known. Habitat The single individual of this new leech species was found under a stone in the subterranean water stream in the dark zone of Motena Cave. Distribution The new species is only known from the type location. Differential diagnoses Dina absoloni, a southeastern European cave leech was reported from Georgia by Lukin (1976). This species was not really found in Georgia but was confused with other cave leeches (with D. ratschaensis or an other similar species of Dina, undescribed or here described; see also Discussion). Dina absoloni differs from species of Dina living in Georgian karst caves by the position of the gonopores (the male genital pore is situated in furrow b1/b2 and the female one in furrow b5/b6) and differences in the reproductive system (ovisacs long, reach up to the eight ganglion behind the female gonopore; from the third ganglion onward, the ovisacs extend strong coiled alongside the nervous system to the caudal end; Fig. 7C). The cave dwelling leech Erpobdella borisi Cichocka & Bielecki, 2015, a species originally described from the Sahoolan Cave in northern Iran (West Azerbaijan Province) shows a similar gonopore position and also a Dina -like annulation with ring b6 divided into c11, c12. Therefore, the female gonopore is located in furrow b5/c11 (Cichocka et al. 2015: fig. 4a–b). However, in Dina spp. from the Georgian karst caves, the pore of the male genital organ is located in furrow b2/a2, and the female one in b6/b1. Further diffences are found in the shape of the reproductive system. The ovisacs of E. borisi are long and extend to the seventh ganglion behind the female gonopore (Cichocka et al. 2015: fig. 5a), while in Dina spp. from Georgian karst caves they are short and extends at most to the third somite behind the female genital pore. However, with regard to the shape of the vasa deferentia and ovisacs (Figs 3A, 5A, 7A) both new species show the greatest similarity with D. ratschaensis. The vasa deferentia of D. samegreloensis sp. nov. are only very slightly curled up to the third ganglion behind the female genital pore. The vasa deferentia of D. imeretiensis sp. nov. and D. ratschaensis are strongly curled along their entire course. The ovisacs of D. imeretiensis and D. ratschaensis are strongly winded along their entire caudal course (Figs 3A, 7A). In contrast, the ovisacs of D. samegreloensis are only winded in their posterior half (Fig. 5A). Dina imeretiensis sp. nov. and D. ratschaensis can be clearly separated by the shape of the genital atrium. The cornua of the atrium in D. imeretiensis are nearly parallel and curved ventrally with straight ends (Fig. 3B–C). In D. ratschaensis the cornua are curved first laterally and then sharply to median and only slightly ventrally. The ends of the cornua are strongly kinked ventrally and not clearly offset from the vasa deferentia (Fig. 7A). Further differences occur in the length of the ovisacs. The ovisacs of D. imeretiensis extend up to the second ganglion behind the female genital pore (Fig. 3A). The ovisacs of D. ratschaensis are longer and extend up to the end of the second somite or up to the beginning of the third somite (on annulus b1) behind the female gonopore (Fig. 7A). The colouring of living specimens differs as well. The head, preclitellar region and caudal sucker of D. ratschaensis are whitish, the clitellar and postclitellar regions are light brownish (Fig. 6). Dina imeretiensis shows a dark bluish postclitellar region, the caudal sucker is whitish and the other body regions are flesh coloured (Fig. 1).Published as part of Grosser, Clemens, Barjadze, Shalva, Maghradze, Eter, Shavadze, Lado, Pešić, Vladimir & Faille, Arnaud, 2023, On the taxonomic status of Dina ratschaensis Kobakhidze, 1958 with a description of two new species - Dina imeretiensis sp. nov. and D. samegreloensis sp. nov. (Annelida, Hirudinida: Erpobdellidae), pp. 110-127 in European Journal of Taxonomy 891 on pages 116-121, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2023.891.2275, http://zenodo.org/record/836791