Bioerosion of siliceous rocks driven by rock-boring freshwater insects

Macrobioerosion of mineral substrates in fresh water is a little-known geological process. Two examples of rock-boring bivalve molluscs were recently described from freshwater environments. To the best of our knowledge, rock-boring freshwater insects were previously unknown. Here, we report on the discovery of insect larvae boring into submerged siltstone (aleurolite) rocks in tropical Asia. These larvae belong to a new mayfly species and perform their borings using enlarged mandibles. Their traces represent a horizontally oriented, tunnel-like macroboring with two apertures. To date, only three rock-boring animals are known to occur in fresh water globally: a mayfly, a piddock, and a shipworm. All the three species originated within primarily wood-boring clades, indicating a simplified evolutionary shift from wood to hardground substrate based on a set of morphological and anatomical preadaptations evolved in wood borers (e.g., massive larval mandibular tusks in mayflies and specific body, shell, and muscle structure in bivalves)

Macrobenthic communities in water bodies and streams of Svalbard, Norway

Diversity of macrobenthic communities was studied from water bodies and streams of Spitsbergen, Svalbard archipelago, Norway. In total 162 quantitative samples from different regions of Spitsbergen were analysed in relation to environmental variables. Macrobenthic communities were found on all kinds of substrates (except for the periglacial zone), representing a wide range of biological communities: solid-bottom, soft-bottom, macrophytes and small brook associated. However, taxonomical structure is very simplified, with particular dominance of the Chironomidae family. Chironomid larvae dominated highly in diversity, abundance and biomass. Overall macrobenthic communities were characteristic, with remarkable dominance of one species and general omnipresent taxonomical scarcity (averagem 2.8 species per sample). In total we found 30 taxa. We distinguished 16 types of macrobenthis communities, with characteristic dominance of different taxa: chironomids (11 types), oligochaete Enchytraeidae family (3), caddisfly Apatania zonella (1) and gammarid amphipod Gammarus setosus (1). Regarding environmental variables, temperature and pH had the most significant influence on the abundance of macrobenthic organisms. It is hypothesized that the structural convergence of different types of communities is their common response to extreme high Arctic living conditions. On the other hand, different chironomids may dominate in the same habitats and water bodies. This gives the effect of lower average similarity of communities and high β- diversity. Macrobenthos Chironomidae Svalbard Arctic environmental factorsacceptedVersio

Victoriopisa cangio Marin & Palatov 2022, sp. nov.

Victoriopisa cangio sp. nov. Figs 2–4, 12 b Material examined. Holotype, ovigerous ♀ (bl. 7.5 mm), ZMMU Mb- 1219— VI ỆT NAM, Ho Chi Minh District, Cần Gi ớ Mangrove Biosphere Reserve, 10°27’19.1”N 106°53’32.9”E, soft muddy bottom, along the banks of canals deep in mangroves, coll. I. Marin & S. Sinelnikov, 25 April 2020. Etymology. The new species is named after the Cần Giớ Mangrove Biosphere Reserve, where it was discovered. Description. Based on holotype female (ZMMU Mb-1219). Body (Fig. 2 с): body length 7.5 mm, with few small separate setae on dorsal surface of pereonites and urosomites, urosomites free. Head: slightly wider than first pereonite, anteroventral margin entire, without anteroventral sinus; eyes present (Fig. 8 c). Antenna 1 (Fig. 8 a): about as long as body length; length ratio of peduncular articles 1–3 close to 1.0:1.1:0.3, article 1 with tuft of long simple setae distodorsally, article 2 with 5 groups of long setae distodorsally; article 3 with single setae distodorsally; primary flagellum at least with 14 articles, each with distal setae, aesthetascs present on articles 6–14; accessory flagellum 2-articulated (Fig. 8 b), about as long as article 1 of primary flagellum, with 3 long distal simple setae. Antenna 2 (Fig. 8 c): about 1/3 of the length of antenna I; with ratio of lengths of peduncular articles 3–5 close to 1:1.9:2.0; flagellum short, consists of 2 fused long articles and 3 short articles, reaching 0.70 times as long as peduncular article 5, with setae along the margins. Upper lip (Fig. 9 a): oval, bearing fine setae dorsally. Lower lip (Fig. 9 b): inner lobes well developed, with fine setae; outer lobes with small dense apical setae. Mandible (Fig. 9 c–f): left incisor (Fig. 9 c) with 5 teeth; lacinia mobilis with 4 teeth; accessory setal row consisting of 6 serrated setae and several fine setae (Fig. 9 d); molar columnar; palp with 3 articles in length ratio of 1.0:4.1:4.3, article 3 equal to article 2, armed with 4 long simple D-setae and 7 long distal E-setae, article 2 with 1 seta on medial margin (Fig. 9 c). Right mandible (Fig. 9 e): incisor and lacinia mobilis with 3 teeth; accessory setal row composed of 7 serrated setae (Fig. 9 f); molar with a longer seta; general proportions similar to the left mandible. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 9 g): inner plate with 10 plumose setae and a simple seta; outer plate with 9 serrated apical spines (Fig. 9 h); palp 2-articulated, article 2 with 3 stout spines distinctly, 5 stiff setae, 1 large distal and 1 subdistal setae. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 9 i): inner plate with 11 plumose setae in oblique row and simple setae on apical margin; outer plate with 8 slender simple setae and a few fine setae on apical margin. Maxilliped (Fig. 9 j): inner plate with 3 stout apical spines, 12 plumose setae, 3 stiff setae on apical margin; outer plate about twice longer than inner plate, with number of simple setae on apical and lateral margin; palp 4-articulated, article 2 with convex inner margin covered with numerous simple setae, article 3 subovate, with several groups of facial setae, article 4 rather claw-like with 1 seta on outer margin and 2 small simple setae on inner margin. Coxal gills: present on gnathopod 2 and pereopods 3–6; gills of gnathopod 2 (Fig. 8 f) and pereopods 3–5 longer than basis of corresponding pereopods (Fig. 10 a, c, e), gill 6 much shorter than basis of pereopod 6 (Fig. 10 g). Oostegite (Figs 8 f, 10 a, c, e): present on gnathopod 2 and pereopods 3–5, slender, longer than width, with numerous long simple setae on margins. Gnathopod I (Fig. 8 d): subchelate, significantly smaller than gnathopods 2; coxal plate subrectangular with straight ventral margin, posteroventral corner notch absent; basis expanding distally, about 3.5 times as long as distal width, with 5 groups of double setae, several short and long simple setae on posterodistal corner; ischium as long as wide, smooth; merus slightly longer than wide, without anterodistal swelling, with 5 large subdistal setae; carpus about 2.7 times as long as wide, with 5 double-rows of long simple setae along posterior margin; propodus (palm) with significantly projected distoventral corner and anterior margin, with 5 spines on posterodistal corner, 3 simple setae along medial side, and 9 short spines along palmar margin; dactylus curved, robust, with 1 simple seta on posterior margin. Gnathopod 2 (Fig. 8 f, g) subchelate; coxal plate ovoid, wider than length, with 3 small thin setae on anterodistal corner, with convex ventral margin, posteroventral corner notch absent; basis longer than ischium, merus and carpus, expanding distally, about 3.0 times as long as distal width, with straight median lateral margins, with 8 simple setae on posterior margin and 4 long simple setae on posterodistal corner; ischium as long as wide, smooth; merus subquadrate slightly longer than wide, posterior median surface slightly convex and smooth; carpus triangular, lobed, about as long as wide, with 5 rows of long simple setae along posterior margin; propodus (palm) (Figs 3 g, 7 e) elongated, teardrop-shaped, about 1.6 times as long as maximal width, anterodistal corner convex, slightly setose; palmar margin composed of 1 lobe, 2 excavations and 2 large medial robust setae, lobe with small lateral robust spine-like setae (Fig. 12 b); dactylus stout, strongly curved, ventral margin with deep median excavation and proximal lobe (protrusion), with straight sharp tip. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 10 a): slender; coxal plate subrectangular, about twice wider than length; basis linear, with straight median margins, about 3.5 times as distal width, with smooth anterior margin, 10 long setae on posterior margin and 2 long simple setae on posterodistal corner; ischium as long as wide, smooth; merus about 2.3 times as long as maximal width, with anterior margin protruding forward, armed with 2 anterodistal setae, with 3 setae on distal part of posterior margin; carpus elongated, about 2.9 times as long as wide, with 3–4 simple setae on anterior margin and 7 separate and grouped long setae on posterior margin; propodus about 5.8 times as long as wide, linear with straight margins, with 4 long simple setae on anterior margin, with 4 small spines accompanied by groups of setae along posterior margin and 1 spine on posterodistal corner; dactylus (Fig. 10 b) long, slender and curved, about 6 times as long as the width, with a penicillate seta on anteroproximal margin and 1 fine seta subdistally. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 10 c): almost similar to pereopod 3; coxal plate subrectangular, about twice wider than length; basis linear, with straight median margins, about 3.5 times as distal width, with smooth anterior margin, 10 long setae on posterior margin and 2 long simple setae on posterodistal corner; ischium as long as wide, with 1 long seta on posterodistal corner; merus about 2.3 times as long as maximal width, with anterior margin protruding forward, armed with 2 anterior setae, 2 anterodistal setae, and with 2 double setae on posterior margin; carpus elongated, about 2.7 times as long as wide, with 3 setae anterior margin and 2 setae on anterodistal corner, with 4 double setae on posterior margin; propodus about 6 times as long as wide, linear with straight margins, with 3 long spines on anterior margin, with 4 long thin spines accompanied by groups of setae along posterior margin and 1 spine on posterodistal corner; dactylus (Fig. 10 d) long, slender and curved, about 7.5 times as long as wide, with a penicillate seta on anteroproximal margin and 1 fine seta subdistally. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 10 e): stout; coxal plate bilobate, about 2.6 times as long as wide, anterior lobe with 3 small setae on ventral margin; basis linear oblong, about 2.1 times as long as wide, with 4 and 7 small setae on anterior and posterior margins, respectively, and 2 long setae on anterodistal corner; ischium as long as wide, with 2 long setae on anterodistal corner; merus about 2.2 times as long as wide, posterior margin just slightly protruding forward, with 2 spines on posterior margin, 1 large spine-like seta accompanied by several small setae on posterodistal corner, with 3 groups of long setae on anterior margin and 2 large spine-like setae accompanied by several small setae on anterodistal corner; carpus shorter than merus, about 2.8 times as long as wide, linear, with straight lateral margins, without long setae on posterior margin and 3 long double setae on anterodistal corner, with 4 large spine-like setae on posterodistal corner; propodus linear, slender, about 4.4 times as long as wide, with straight lateral margins, with 2 small spines accompanied by long setae on anterior margin and 1 spine accompanied by some setae on anterodistal corner, posterior margin smooth, unarmed, with 4 long strong spine and several small seta on posterodistal corner; dactylus (Fig. 10 f) slender, curved, about 5.5 times as long as wide, about twice shorter than the longest spines on posterodistal corner of propodus, with 1 penicillate seta on posteroproximal margin and 1 seta subdistally. Pereopod 6 (Fig. 10 g): longer than pereopod 5; longer than pereopod 5; coxal plate shallow, bilobate, anterior lobe with 3 small setae on ventral margin; basis dilated, expanded in proximal part, about 1.7 times as long as maximal width, with 5 setae on anterior and 1 long simple setae accompanied with several small setae on anterodistal corner, with 6 small setae on posterior and 1 long simple submarginal seta on posterodistal corner; ischium as long as wide, with 2 long setae on anterodistal corner; merus about 2.5 times as long as wide, posterior margin just slightly expanded and protruding forward, with 2 spine-like setae on anterior margin, 1 large spine-like seta on anterodistal corner, with 2 spine-like setae on posterior margin and 1 strong spine on posterodistal corner; carpus shorter than merus, about 3.9 times as long as wide, linear, with straight lateral margins, with 2 groups of long simple setae on anterior margin and 4 long simple setae on anterodistal corner, without setae on posterior margin and 3 large setae on posterodistal corner; propodus linear, slender, about 6.5 times as long as wide, with straight lateral margins, with 2 double long spine on anterior margin and 2 spines accompanied by some setae on anterodistal corner, posterior margin smooth, unarmed, with 3 long and several small seta on posterodistal corner; dactylus slender, curved, about 7 times as long as wide, about twice shorter than the longest spines on posterodistal corner of propodus, with 1 penicillate seta on posteroproximal margin and 1 seta subdistally. Pereopod 7 (Fig. 10 h): coxal plate small, suboval, about 2.2 times as long as maximal width, with 1 seta on posterodistal corner; basis expanded posteriorly, progressively wider towards posterodistal, about 1.3 times as long as wide, with 5 and 14 small spines on anterior and posterior margins, respectively, with 3 long setae on anterodistal corner; ischium slightly wider than long; merus expanded posteriorly, with 2 small spines accompanied with long setae and 1 simple seta on anterior margin and 2 long spine-like setae on anterodistal corner, with 4 strong spines on posterior margin and 1 strong spine on posterodistal corner; carpus shorter than merus, linear, about 3.6 times as long as wide, with straight lateral margins, with 2 groups of long simple setae on anterior margin and 3 long simple setae on anterodistal corner; posterior margin smooth, with 1 small seta and 2 strong spine-like setae on posterodistal corner; propodus linear, slender, about 4.2 times as long as wide, with straight lateral margins, with 2 pairs of spinelike setae on anterior margin and 2 long spines accompanied by several small setae on anterodistal corner, posterior margin smooth, unarmed, with 1 small seta and 2 long and 1 medium spine-like setae on posterodistal corner; dactylus (Fig. 10 h) slender, curved, about 5.2 times as long as wide, with 1 penicillate seta on posteroproximal margin and 1 seta subdistally. Epimeral plates: plate 1 (Fig. 11 a) bare, with 2 small setae on posterior margin, posteroventral corner without projection; plate 2 (Fig. 11 b) with 8 long setae on ventral margin and 3 small setae along posterior margin, posteroventral corner without projection; plate 3 (Fig. 11 c) with 2 submarginal setae on ventral margin, and 2 small setae on posterior margin, posteroventral slightly projected posteriorly. Pleopods 1–3 (Fig. 11 e, g): peduncles nearly quadrate, with 2 coupling hooks in retinacula on inner margins (Fig. 11 f), outer margins with 7 plumose setae in pleopod 1 (Fig. 6 e), 5 plumose setae in pleopod 2, and without plumose setae in pleopod 3 (Fig. 6 g); inner and outer rami fringed with plumose setae. Uropod 1 (Fig. 11 h): peduncle stout, about 4.0 times as long as wide, slightly longer than rami, with 1 large submarginal ventroproximal spine, 3 spines on outer and inner margin, 1 large and 1 small spines on both outer and inner distal corners, respectively; outer ramus as long as inner ramus, about 10 times as long as wide, with 4 long simple spines on outer margin and 4 terminal spines distally, inner margin unarmed; inner ramus about 8.4 times as long as wide, with 3 spines on outer margins and without spines on inner margins, 3 large and 1 small terminal spine distally. Uropod 2 (Fig. 11 i): about 0.5 times as long as uropod I; peduncle relatively stout, about twice as long as wide, with 2 spines on outer margin and 2 spines on outer distal corner; outer ramus about as long as peduncle, equal to inner ramus, with 1 spine on outer margin and 2 spines on inner margin, with 4 stout terminal spines; inner ramus with 2 spines on outer margin and 2 submarginal spine on inner margin, with 4 stout terminal spines. Uropod 3 (Fig. 11 j): much enlarged, about 2.2–3 times longer than other uropods; peduncle about 1.9 times as long as wide, about 0.4 of the length of proximal article of outer ramus, with 2 pairs of small spines on outer margin and 1 submarginal pair on inner margin, 3 spines accompanied by small setae on outer distal corner, and 5 spines on inner distal corner; inner ramus small, scale-like, about 0.08 times as long as outer ramus, and twice smaller than peduncle, with 2 small spines distally; proximal article of outer ramus with 5 small spine-like setae on outer margin, 6 groups and 2 separate spines on inner margin, 2 groups of spines on facial surface, 3 spines and several long setae on outer distal corner, and 4 spines and several long setae on inner distal corner, terminal article of outer ramus sub-oval, about 5.3 times as long as wide, slightly shorter than proximal article, with 3 small spine-like setae on outer margin, 5 small spines accompanied by setae on inner margin, 1 group of submarginal facial setae and 16 long slender terminal setae apically. Telson (Fig. 11 d): about 0.9 as long as wide, cleft almost reaching base; lobe subovate, with 1 large subdistal spine-like setae, accompanied with 1 small setae and 2 pairs of long penicillate setae on dorsal surface. Coloration. Body coloration of alive animals varies from completely white to light yellow (see Fig. 2 c). Body size. The largest collected female has bl. 7.5 mm. Habitat and ecology. The single specimen of the new species was collected when washing a heavily silted substrate from a small pond fenced off from a channel overgrown with mangroves. Distribution. Presently known only from the type locality, the Cần Giớ Mangrove Biosphere Reserve, Soài Rạp River delta, South Việt Nam (Fig. 1). Taxonomic remarks. The new species, similar to Victoriopisa nhatrangensis sp. nov., is characterized by the presence of a weakly but developed eyes and deep excavation on dactylus of gnathopod 2, which also present only in V. chilkensis and V. bruneiensis (see above). Among them, V. bruneiensis is characterized by the absence of a tuft of setae on distodorsal margin of article 2 of antenna I and significantly expanded distoventral margin of gnathopod I, which is also characteristic to Victoriopisa cangio sp. nov., showing that these species is obviously closely related. At the same time, it can be separated by longer accessory flagellum of antenna 1 reaching the distal margin of article 1 of the main flagellum (vs. not reaching in V. cangio sp. nov.), the presence of a dense facial setation of merus of gnathopod 1, which is absent in V. cangio sp. nov., different armature of ventral margin of propodus (palm) and deeply developed excavation on the dactylus of gnathopod 2, different proportions of pereopod 3–7, especially slender merus of pereopod 5 and less expanded basis of pereopod 7, stouter uropod 2 and less expanded proximal part of telson. Victoriopisa nhatrangensis sp. nov. can be clearly separated from Victoriopisa cangio sp. nov. by the absence of a tuft of setae on distodorsal margin of article 2 of antenna 1, the presence of a dense facial setation of merus and not anteriorly expanded distoventral margin of propodus (palm) of gnathopod 1, different shape and armature epimeral plates and telson, proportion and armature of uropods 2–3.Published as part of Marin, Ivan N. & Palatov, Dmitry M., 2022, Two new species of the genus Victoriopisa Karaman & Barnard, 1979 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Eriopisidae) from mangrove communities of Vietnam with a review of previous records, pp. 129-152 in Zootaxa 5094 (1) on pages 142-149, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5094.1.5, http://zenodo.org/record/596494

A new micropterous winter species of Leuctra (Plecoptera: Leuctridae) and little known endemic stoneflies from the Greater Caucasus

Teslenko, Valentina A., Palatov, Dmitry M. (2019): A new micropterous winter species of Leuctra (Plecoptera: Leuctridae) and little known endemic stoneflies from the Greater Caucasus. Zootaxa 4613 (2): 342-354, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4613.2.

Two new species of the genus Victoriopisa Karaman & Barnard, 1979 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Eriopisidae) from mangrove communities of Vietnam with a review of previous records

Marin, Ivan N., Palatov, Dmitry M. (2022): Two new species of the genus Victoriopisa Karaman & Barnard, 1979 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Eriopisidae) from mangrove communities of Vietnam with a review of previous records. Zootaxa 5094 (1): 129-152, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5094.1.

FIGURES 16–17 in A new micropterous winter species of Leuctra (Plecoptera: Leuctridae) and little known endemic stoneflies from the Greater Caucasus

FIGURES 16–17. Leuctra simplex, habitus, male, dorsal. 16. Adult. 17. Larva

The Tribe Hyrtanellini Allen, 1980 (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae) of Western and Central Asia with Description of a New Species

A new species, Serratella leonidi Martynov & Palatov, sp. nov., is described from Tajikistan based on immature stage. Based on larval material from Iran including the topotypes, Serratella elissa Jacobus, Zhou & McCafferty, 2009 is complementary described, and its generic placement is clarified. The delimitation of three genera that are members of the tribe Hyrtanellini Allen, 1980, namely Serratella Edmunds, 1959, Torleya Lestage, 1917 and Quatica Jacobus & McCafferty, 2008 is briefly discussed. The phylogenetic reconstruction of Hyrtanellini based on the COI gene showed the relations of representatives of these genera on the one hand, and distinct delimitation of Serratella leonidi sp. nov. and S. elissa on the other. A list of species from Western and Central Asia attributed to Hyrtanellini, their currently known distribution and a key for the determination of the larvae are proposed

Leuctridae Klapalek 1905

Leuctridae Klapalek, 1905 <p> <b> <i>Leuctra fusca</i> (Linnaeus, 1758)</b> </p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> 1♂. Macropterous. Georgia. Adjaria. Kintrishi River, 16 km upstream from Kobuleti town and 4 km upstream from Tchakhati village, 41°47.192 N 41°57.390 E, 0 6.02.2017, coll. D. Palatov (FSC EATB FEB RAS).</p> <p> The emerging period of <i>L. fusca</i> lasts on the Caucasus from August to December (Zhiltzova 2003). This species was collected in February for the first time. Unfortunately, the single <i>L. fusca</i> specimen cannot be assigned to a subspecific identity; the specimen was damaged during slide mounting.</p>Published as part of <i>Teslenko, Valentina A., Palatov, Dmitry M. & Semenchenko, Alexander A., 2019, Description of new apterous winter species of Leuctra (Plecoptera: Leuctridae) based morphology and DNA barcoding and further records to stonefly fauna of the Caucasus, Georgia, pp. 546-560 in Zootaxa 4585 (3)</i> on page 557, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4585.3.9, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/2640279">http://zenodo.org/record/2640279</a&gt

Gyraulus elenae sp. n. — a new Planorbid snail from Eastern Turkey (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Planorbidae)

Vinarski, Maxim V., Glöer, Peter, Palatov, Dmitry M. (2013): Gyraulus elenae sp. n. — a new Planorbid snail from Eastern Turkey (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Planorbidae). Zootaxa 3664 (1): 95-98, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3664.1.

Pontohoratia smyri Vinarski & Palatov & Glöer 2014, sp. nov.

Pontohoratia smyri sp. nov. (Figure 5B; 7D) Type locality Anatolia Lake in the Novoafonskaya Cave, Abkhazia (see Table 1). Type series ZIN, accession number 1 (the holotype), and 2 (seven paratypes). 25 paratypes in the collection of the Museum of Siberian Aquatic Mollusks (Omsk State Pedagogical University), accession number 07-033. The snails from the type series were collected in 2009. Other material studied 39 specimens sampled in 2010 in the collection of Dmitry Palatov (Moscow). Holotype shell dimensions at 3.25 whorls (in mm) SH 1.2; SW 1.4; SpH 0.6; BWH 0.9; AH 0.7; AW 0.6. Morphological description Shell very small (up to 1.4 mm), almost planispiral, yellowish-white or corneous, with very wide body whorl and relatively low spire. Shell walls moderately thick. Umbilicus wide and deep, opened. Whorls number up to 3.50. Whorls convex, separated by deep suture. Aperture angular, visibly deflected. Penis simple, without a lobe (see Figure 5B). Etymology The species is named after Givi Smyr, a speleologist, who discovered the Novoafonskaya Cave in 1961. Differential diagnosis Pontohoratia smyri differs from P. birsteini by much lower spire and much wider body whorl (see Figure 7). SW is 1.15–1.45 times more than SH, whereas in P. birsteini this ratio is around 1.00 (see Table 3). Whorls number in P. smyri is lower than in P. birsteini. The honeycomb-like pits on the protoconch surface of the new species are somewhat wider than those of P. birsteini (see Figure 4). Distribution and ecology Pontohoratia smyri is known from the type locality and the closest vicinities of the Novoafonskaya Cave (floodplain of the Psyrtskha River). Perhaps, the original habitat of P. smyri is an underground brook inflowing to the lake Anatolia and the shells were carried out by its flow. The same is true also for empty shells of this species found in several springs in the floodplain of the Psyrtskha River. Empty shells of two other gastropod species were collected along with P. smyri: Paladilhiopsis shadini Starobogatov, 1962 and Belgrandiella (?) abchasica Starobogatov, 1962. The invertebrate community of this cave is very specific and includes some crustacean taxa: amphipods Niphargus spp. (Niphargidae) and Anopogammarus sp. (Typhlogammaridae), and decapod Troglocaris (Xiphocaridinella) fagei Birstein, 1939.Published as part of Vinarski, Maxim V., Palatov, Dmitry M. & Glöer, Peter, 2014, Revision of ' Horatia' snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Hydrobiidae sensu lato) from South Caucasus with description of two new genera, pp. 2237-2253 in Journal of Natural History (J. Nat. Hist.) (J. Nat. Hist.) 48 (37 - 38) on pages 2247-2248, DOI: 10.1080/00222933.2014.917210, http://zenodo.org/record/519424