TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Zootaxa 3140: 1–14 (2011) www.mapress.com / zootaxa/ Copyright © 2011 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) Article ZOOTAXA ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Taxonomic review of freshwater Gammarus (Crustacea: Amphipoda) from Iran MEHRDAD ZAMANPOORE1,2, MICHAL GRABOWSKI3, MANFRED POECKL1& FRIEDRICH SCHIEMER1 1 Department of Limnology, Institute of Ecology, University of Vienna, Austria. E-mail:mzamanpoore@gmail.com, manfred.poeckl@noel.gv.at, and friedrich.schiemer@univie.ac.at 2 Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Biology, Fars Research Center for Agriculture and Natural Resources, Shiraz, Iran 3 Department of Invertebrate Zoology & Hydrobiology, University of Lodz, Poland. E-mail: michalg@biol.uni.lodz.pl Abstract The paper summarizes current knowledge upon taxonomy and distribution of the freshwater Gammarus Fabricius, 1775 in Iran. Based on the literature data, 24 species were recorded so far from the fresh waters in the country. Revision of previously published materials including type collections, and analysis of new materials, revealed presence of 18 valid freshwater Gammarus species in Iran (G. anodon, G. bakhteyaricus, G. baloutchi, G. crinicaudatus, G. hegmatanensis, G. komareki, G. lacustris, G. lobifer, G. loeffleri, G. lordeganensis, G. paricrenatus, G. parthicus, G. pretzmanni, G. pseudosyriacus, G. sepidannus, G. shirazinus, G. sirvannus and G. zagrosensis). Among the remaining six species, three (G. arduus, G. laticoxalis, G. syriacus) were reported as a result of misidentification and further three (G. miae, G. plumipes, G. projectus) appeared to be junior synonyms of other already described species. Distribution ranges of most of the species are restricted usually to only few localities in the mountainous terrain, so they may be treated as Iranian endemics. The only exceptions are: G. lacustris (widely distributed in Holarctic, with only few populations in Iran), G. komareki (widely distributed in the Balkan Peninsula and Asia Minor, in Iran recorded from the entire Alborz region) and G. pseudosyriacus (widely distributed in Asia Minor, in Iran found in the entire Zagros region). A brief remark on taxonomy of each species is presented, with emphasis on misidentifications, synonymies and similar species, supplemented by distribution data, and ecological details if available. An identification key for the freshwater Gammarus of Iran is provided. Key words: Amphipoda, Gammarus, biogeography, distribution, Middle East, Zagros, Alborz, identification key Introduction Gammarus Fabricius, 1775 is the largest genus of the amphipod family Gammaridae Leach, 1813 and widespread in inland waters of the Northern Hemisphere. It includes more than 200 already described species with the highest diversity in Palearctic; particularly in the mountains of Mediterranean area and Near East (Väinölä et al. 2008). The first record of Iranian freshwater gammarids goes back to Stanko Karaman (1934), who described Gammarus pulex persicus Karaman, 1934 (junior syn. of G. komareki Schaeferna, 1922) from Northwestern Iran. Löffler (1956), in “Some limnological observations on Iranian inland waters”, provided a thorough morphological description and a few drawings of Gammarus species, proposed to be G. pulex Linnaeus, 1758, from Kurush Gol in northwestern Iran. As Löffler (1956) emphasized, it possessed clear morphological deviations from the description of G. pulex persicus provided by S. Karaman (1934), including less setose antenna 2, pereopod 5–7 and uropod 3. Later, Mateus and Mateus (1990) published a paper based on materials collected by G. Pretzmann and deposited in the Natural History Museum of Vienna. This largely overlooked publication included description of three species (G. pretzmanni, G. miae, G. plumipes) and records of further three species (G. arduus, G. laticoxalis, G. syriacus), which extended the knowledge upon distribution of freshwater gammarids in the central and southern parts of the country. Materials from both fresh and brackish waters collected by an Iranian team in 1990s appeared in paper by Stock et al. (1998) with descriptions of six new species (G. paricrenatus, G. anodon, G. projectus, G. parthicus, G. crinicaudatus, and G. lobifer) and records of further four species (G. aequicauda Martinov, 1931, G. komareki Schäferna, 1922, G. lacustris Sars, 1863, and G. inberbus Karaman and Pinkster, 1977) from inland waters throughAccepted by G. Karaman: 25 Oct. 2011; published: 22 Dec. 2011 1 TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. out the country, with focus on northern regions. Descriptions of further new species appeared also in more recent works including: Khalaji-Pirbalouty and Sari, 2004 (G. bakhteyaricus, G. lordeganesis) as well as Khalaji-Pirbalouty and Sari, 2006 (G. balutchi) from central Zagros region, Zamanpoore et al., 2009 (G. zagrosensis and G. sepidannus) , Zamanpoore et al., 2010a (G. shirazinus and G. loeffleri) from Southern Zagros region, and Hekmatara et al., 2011 (G. hegmatanensis and G. sirvannus) from Western Zagros region. Accumulation of the data enables us to draw a clearer image of the taxonomic diversity and distribution patterns of Gammarus in Iranian inland waters. The aim of the present work is to critically revise all available collections and published data upon diversity and distribution of freshwater Gammarus species from Iran, with remarks on synonymy, misidentifications made by earlier authors, and diagnostic features of morphologically similar species. Also, the identification key for all described Iranian freshwater species is provided. Material and methods Material for the present study included both, all the previously published literature concerning the taxonomy and distribution of Gammarus in Iran, and institutional collections of freshwater gammarids from this country. The latter comprised type and non-type materials used in the above mentioned publications as well as previously unpublished materials. New materials were collected by the first author, particularly from locations lacking data or where the data were in question. Materials deposited in Zoological Museum of Amsterdam were loaned, while examination of other materials took place by visiting Natural History Museum of Vienna, Austria, Department of Invertebrate Zoology and Hydrobiology, University of Lodz, Poland, and Department of Zoology, University of Tehran, Iran. Data on sampling localities and collection storage are provided for each species in the material examined section. Unless another country is mentioned in the text, all the examined material was collected in Iran. The material was studied by the first, and partially by the second, author of the paper. In a few cases, where the authors did not have an access to original material, the published drawings of the original paper were used for examination. As this paper is focused on freshwater Gammarus, species living in the brackish waters (i.e. Caspian Sea) are not included. Such a case is G. aequicauda Martinov, 1931 collected mostly from the Caspian inshore waters and reported from channels as far as 1 km from the seashore (Stock et al., 1998). To make the taxonomic picture simple, we avoid in this paper the classification of species into artificial groups, proposed by Stock (1967) who distinguished G. locusta-group, Karaman and Pinkster (1977) defining G. roeseli-, G. balcanicus- and G. pulex-group and by Stock et al. (1998) mentioning G. duebeni-group. Definitions of the above groups were once based on superficial similarities of only few morphological traits, and they do not reflect well the already known diversity within the genus. Abbreviations. The following abbreviations are used for museums and collections in this paper: FAIC, Fars Research Centre for Agriculture and Natural Resources, Aquatic Invertebrate Collection (Shiraz, Iran); NHMW, Natural History Museum of Vienna (Austria); ZMA, Zoological Museum of Amsterdam (The Netherlands); ZUTC, Zoological Museum of the University of Tehran (Tehran, Iran). Results and discussion Presence of 24 species of Gammarus was mentioned so far from the Iranian fresh waters (Karaman 1934, Löffler 1956, Mateus and Mateus 1990, Stock et al. 1998, Khalaji-Pirbalouty and Sari 2004, 2006, Zamanpoore et al., 2009, 2010a, Hekmatara et al., 2011, Alizade-Eghtedar and Sari 2007, Karaman and Pinkster 1987, Ebrahimnezhad et al., 2005). However, critical revision of previously published materials including type collections, and analysis of new materials, revealed presence of only 18 valid species of Gammarus in Iranian fresh waters. They are: Gammarus anodon, G. bakhteyaricus, G. baloutchi, G. crinicaudatus, G. hegmatanensis, G. komareki, G. lacustris, G. lobifer, G. loeffleri, G. lordeganensis, G. paricrenatus, G. parthicus, G. pretzmanni, G. pseudosyriacus, G. sepidannus, G. shirazinus, G. sirvannus and G. zagrosensis. Among the remaining six species, three (G. arduus, G. laticoxalis, G. syriacus) were reported as a result of misidentification, and further three (G. miae, G. plumipes, G. projectus) appeared to be junior synonyms of other already described species. 2 · Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press ZAMANPOORE ET AL. TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. According to the literature, several species of Iranian amphipod fauna are regarded as endemics. Taking into account the vast geographical area covered by faunistic studies upon freshwater Gammarus and large set of data analyzed, we will use the term for these species which are known so far only from one or a very few localities in remote areas. In fact that applies to most of the Gammarus species recorded from Iran. The only exceptions are G. lacustris (widely distributed in Holarctic, with only few populations in Iran), G. komareki (widely distributed in the Balkan Peninsula and Asia Minor, in Iran recorded from the entire Alborz region) and G. pseudosyriacus (widely distributed in Asia Minor, in Iran found in the entire Zagros region). In case of G. pulex we decided to exclude it from the species checklist and key, as the description and illustrations of morphological features provided by Loeffler (1956) did not allow us to prove his identification of the species. We were neither able to find and examine the Loeffler's original material nor collect or locate any other individuals of G. pulex from Iran. Systematics Gammarus Fabricius, 1775 Gammarus Fabricius, 1775: 418; G. Karaman, 1982: 229; Barnard & Barnard, 1983: 463. Rivulogammarus S. Karaman, 1931: 60. Carinogammarus S. Karaman, 1931: 60. Gammarus (Fluviogammarus) S. & G. Karaman, 1959: 206. Lagunogammarus Sket, 1971a: 6 (typus generis: Gammarus zaddachi Sexton, 1912). Typus generis: Cancer pulex Linnaeus, 1758 (selected by Latreille, 1810). Body laterally compressed. Coxal plates moderately large with rounded margins; coxal plate 4 posteriorly excavated. Head with small rostrum in many species; lateral lobes rounded or truncated. Eyes variable in size and shape: from small and rounded to large elongate and reniform. First antennae usually elongated, with a developed accessory flagellum; calceoli present or absent on second antennae. Medial margin of inner plate in maxilla 1 and 2 densely setose. Gnathopods 1 and 2 subchelate; subequal or gnathopod 2 larger than 1. Pereopods with spines, with or without setae. Rami of uropod 3 often spinose and totally or partially setose, with various degree of plumosity. Telson cleft, lobes with lateral and apical spines, with or without lateral and apical setae. Urosome segments 1–3 with groups of tiny dorsal spines, intermixed with short setae or not. Postero-distal corner of epimeral plates 2–3 rounded, quadrate or acute. Gammarus anodon Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998 Gammarus anodon Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998: 184–189, Figs. 6–9. Locus typicus. Hasheelan wetland, Kermanshah Province, (34º28'N, 47º00'E). Material examined. Paratypes from locus typicus, (ZMA Crust. Amph. 201928). Distribution. Endemic species, restricted to the type locality in Kermanshah province, north-west Zagros (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. No information available. Taxonomic remarks. The special structure of urosomites 1 and 2, which are strongly elevated and compressed on mid-dorsal (Stock et al., 1998, Fig. 6b), makes it very easy to distinguish this species among other Iranian Gammarids. In addition, setae on posterior margin of carpus and merus in pereopod 3 (ibid., Figs. 8a,c) are much shorter than in other species. Gammarus bakhteyaricus Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004 Gammarus bakhteyaricus Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004: 2435–2440, Figs. 5–7; Ebrahimnezhad, Hosseini & Sari, 2005: 225, Fig. 5. REVIEW OF FRESHWATER GAMMARUS FROM IRAN Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 3 TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Locus typicus. Chaghakhor, Chaharmahal Va Bakhtyari Province, (31º55'N, 50º55'E). Material examined. Holotype, 6 August 2000 ( ZUTC Amph. 2030). Paratypes, Bizhgerd spring, Chaharmahal Va Bakhtyari Province (31º47'N, 51º10'E) (ZUTC Amph. 2032). Distribution. Endemic, restricted to localities in central Zagros: Chaharmahal Va Bakhtyari Province (KhalajiPirbalouty & Sari, 2004) and Esfahan (Ebrahimnezhad et al., 2005) provinces (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. Habitats in high altitudes (2300 m asl) with slow water current are inhabited by this species. Taxonomic remarks. This species is characterized by presence of 2–3 tiny spines (or “short robust setae”) on distal-ventral corner of first peduncle segment of antenna 1 (Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004, Fig. 5). Similar feature can only be observed in G. shirazinus, although only 1–2 spines are present in this species (Zamanpoore et al., 2010a, Fig. 2). Apart of that, the two species have many differentiating features; most important of them is very long setation of antenna 2 and pereopod 5–7 in G. shirazinus if compared to the former species (ibid., Figs. 2, 4). Gammarus bakhteyaricus may also be confused with G. pseudosyriacus and G. lacustris, however in the latter two species, there are no spines on distal-ventral corner of first peduncle segment of antenna 1. Gammarus baloutchi Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2006 Gammarus baloutchi Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2006: 91–99, Figs. 1–4. Locus typicus. Atashgahe Lordegan fall, Chaharmahal Va Bakhteyari Province (31º14'N, 51º00'E). Material examined. Holotype, 8 August 2001 (ZUTC Amph. 2070); paratypes, (ZMA Crust. Amph. 204658). Distribution. Endemic species with the only known record from a waterfall in central Zagros (Fig. 1). Ecologic notes. The species lives in high mountains of ca. 2100 m asl. It was found under aquatic vegetation and in a gravel bed (Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2006). Taxonomic remarks. Among Iranian Gammarus species, the short endopodite of uropod 3 can only be observed in G. baloutchi, G. lobifer, and G. sepidannus. The first species can be distinguished from G. lobifer by the lack of the sub-angular setae on basis of pereopod 7 (Khalaji-Pirbalouty and Sari, 2006, Fig. 3), shorter antennal gland cone, and longer setation of peduncle segments of antenna 2 (ibid. Fig. 1). From G. sepidannus it differs by having a long eye, less setose flagellum of antenna 2, and shorter antennal gland cone (ibid. Fig. 1). Gammarus crinicaudatus Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998 Gammarus crinicaudatus Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998: 189–195, Figs. 10–12. Locus typicus. S. E. Shiraz (29º35'N, 52º42'E), Zagros Region, Fars Province. Material examined. Holotype, female allotype, paratypes (ZMA Crust. Amph. 201937). Additional non-type specimens (new material): Sarab Bahram spring, 6 km SE Nurabad, (30º01', 51º33') (FAIC 111028); Cheshme Chenar, Bakan, SE Eghlid, (30º24', 52º24') (FAIC 111039); Ghadamgahe Ali spring, Shahrak, (30º 11', 52º 30') (FAIC 111041); Saadat Abad spring, Saadat Abad, (30º 08', 52º 38') (FAIC 111042); Kondazi spring, 70 km N Marvdasht, (30º 15', 52º 42') (FAIC 111044); Drain, 5 km Bande Amir, 83 km NE Shiraz, (29º 43', 52º 52') (FAIC 111046); Sarasiab spring, Seyyedan, 30 km N Marvdasht, (29º 56', 53º 03') (FAIC 111048); Pachenar spring, Seyyedan, 30 km N Marvdasht, (30º 00', 53º 00') (FAIC 111049); Cheshme Abolmahdi, N Marvdasht, 90 N Shiraz, (30º 03', 53º 02') (FAIC 111051); Malesjan-Jariabad spring, 60 km N Shiraz, (29º 53', 52º 29') (FAIC 111059); Shah Bonzar spring, Dadine Bala, 48 km S Kazerun, (29º 17', 51º 50') (FAIC 111069); Ghale Narenji spring, Famur, 35 km E Kazerun, (29º 25', 51º 57') (FAIC 111071). Many specimens misidentified as G. komareki, Amanabad, Mash'had (36˚10′N, 59˚40′E), (FAIC 111288). Distribution. Found in several localities of southern Zagros regions, in the midlands of Fars Province (Fig. 1). Stock et al. (1998) reported a sample from Mashhad, north east of Iran, identified as G. crinicaudatus. We could not examine this material, however, a recent sample collected in the very same locality and identified by the first author in the very same locality revealed the population to be G. komareki. This finding, together with the very long distance between this locality and the region inhabited by G. crinicaudatus, supports our conclusion that the Mash'had sample of Stock et al., (1998) was in fact G. komareki. 4 · Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press ZAMANPOORE ET AL. TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Ecological notes. The species inhabits springs, brooks and small streams in headwaters with slow current in altitudes ranging from 712 m to 2247 m asl (Mean = 1581 m, SD = 457, n = 14). Water temperature was up to 22ºC (Mean = 16.2 ºC, SD = 5.6, n = 14), however in few localities the species was collected in winter at only 1ºC. Ionic concentration in these waters was variable among localities – the electric conductivity ranged from 150 to 810 μS/ cm (Mean = 312 μS/cm, SD = 206). Taxonomic remarks. Examination of material mentioned above (including the type material) showed that this species has a longer setation on flagellum and peduncle of second antenna than in the original description. Other sources of ambiguity were found in the length of antennal gland cone (variable in size) and in variation in having or lacking the postero-distal corner setae of pereopod 7 basis in different populations. At first glance, the species may be confused with several other species according to some of the above features. However, from G. komareki it differs by having less dense setae on antenna 2 which are not curved distally (Stock et al., 1998, Fig 10c), as well as less setose uropod 3 and pereopod 4 (ibid., Figs. 11, 12). From G. parthicus it may be distinguished by less dense setation of antenna 2, longer setae on pereopod 4 and lack of tiny spines on postero-distal corner of pereopod 7 basis (ibid., Fig. 12e). From G. sepidannus it differs by having longer endopodite of uropod 3 and setose anterior margin of pereopod 5–7. Compared to G. loeffleri it has apparently less numerous and shorter setae on anterior margin of pereopod 7. Gammarus hegmatanensis Hekmatara, Sari & Heidari Baladehi, 2011 Gammarus hegmatanensis Hekmatara, Sari & Heidari Baladehi, 2011: 40–49, Figs. 2–7. Locus typicus. Gardaneh Asadabad spring (N 34º 49′, E 48º 04′), W of Hamadan city, Hamadan Province, Iran. Material examined. Paratypes. (ZUTC Amph. 2238), September 2008, leg. M. Hekmatara. Distribution. The species was found in a small area of northern Zagros, west and north-west from the city of Hamadan. Ecological notes. Although no ecological data were recorded, the region lying in altitudes of 1677–2109 m asl, has relatively cold and harsh climate. Taxonomic remarks. Sharply pointed and extended posterior corner of epimeral plate 3 with a distinctly lobate anterior corner make G. hegmatanensis easy to distinguish from all other species. Only G. lordeganensis Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004 has similar features, however it differs from G. hegmatanensis by having much less setose antenna 2 and lobate posterodistal corner of pereopods 6–7. Gammarus hegmatanensis is also similar to G. shirazinus and G. loeffleri in having highly setose antenna 2. However, both latter species display dense setation in pereopod 3–7, in contrast to lack of such setation in G. hegmatanensis. Gammarus komareki Schäferna, 1922 Gammarus komareki Schäferna, 1922: 18–21, Figs. 8–9; G. pulex persicus S. Karaman, 1934: 129, Fig. 2 (Locus typicus Viladereb, Ardebil, East Azarbaijan); G. komareki komareki, G.S. Karaman, 1969: 33–43, Figs. 1–20; Karaman & Pinkster, 1977: 81–83, Fig. 33; Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998: 205–206; Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004: 2428; Ebrahimnezhad, Hosseini & Sari, 2005: 224, Fig. 4. Gammarus crinicaudatus (Stock et al., 1998: 189–195, Figs. 10–12), misidentified. Locus typicus. Village Belovo near Pazardzhik (Pazardzhik province), Bulgaria. Material examined. Many Specimens, Shahrestanak (36º08'N, 51º20'E), Tehran Province, 1995, (ZMA Crust. Amph. #?); many specimens, Gardane ye Cheri, May 2001 (32º10'N, 50º14'E) (ZUTC Amph. 2080); new material: three specimens, Hablerood river, Firuzkuh, September 2000 (35º45'N, 52º46'E) (FAIC 111289); many specimens, Amanabad, Mash'had (36˚10′N, 59˚40′E) (FAIC 111288). Distribution. This species is widely distributed in fresh running waters in Iran, most frequently along a northwest-northeast axis in northern skirts of Alborz (Elburz) Mountains (Stock et al., 1998; Alizade-Eghtedar & Sari, 2007). Some populations are reaching southwards to the northern margins of Zagros (Stock et al., 1998; Ebrahimnezhad et al., 2005; Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2006) (Fig. 1). REVIEW OF FRESHWATER GAMMARUS FROM IRAN Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 5 TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Ecological notes. The species lives in habitats with slow water current and dense aquatic vegetation (Karaman & Pinkster, 1977) having cold water (ca. 12ºC), at higher elevations (above 2200 m asl) (Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004). Population from Amanabad inhabits a spring with water temperatures from 8 to 18ºC. Taxonomic remarks. Long setae on antenna 2 can be a source of confusion in differentiating of G. komareki from few Iranian species. In G. komareki the setation is more dense and distally curved (Karaman & Pinkster, 1977, Fig. 33D) if compared to G. crinicaudatus. In the latter species pereopod 4 and uropod 3 (ibid. Figs. 33O, K) are more setose than in G. komareki. Setation of antennae 2 in G. pretzmanni is dense and highly curled (Mateus & Mateus, 1990, Fig. 2C), but the species has very short setae (shorter than the spines) on anterior margin of pereopod 7. In G. parthicus anterior margin of pereopod 7 is bare as well (Stock et al., 1998, Fig. 15c). Gammarus loeffleri, in contrast, has much longer setae on anterior of pereopod 7 (Zamanpoore et al., 2010a, Fig. 9C) than G. komareki. Gammarus lacustris G.O. Sars, 1863 Gammarus lacustris G. O. Sars, 1863: 207; Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998: 206. Locus typicus. Selsvand, Vage, Norway (based on the assumption made by Karaman & Pinkster, 1977). Material examined. Karaman & Pinkster, 1977: 32–34, Fig. 12A–D, drawn upon new material from Loch Loyal, Scotland. Additional specimens (new material), Ne'ur Lake (38º 02', 48º 36'), Ardebil Province, (FAIC #?). Distribution. Distribution of this species in Iran is restricted to the far north west of the country, a very big population in Ne'ur Lake, and several populations in the west Alborz (Stock et al., 1998; Alizade-Eghtedar & Sari, 2007) (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. Although inhabiting running waters in some occasions, this species is generally found in stagnant waters and lakes (e.g. mountain and glacier) with temperatures lower than 20ºC (detailed ecological characteristics in Karaman & Pinkster 1977, p. 34). Taxonomic remarks. Among Iranian gammarids, G. lacustris is most similar to G. pseudosyriacus. However, the latter has an elevated dorsal surface of urosome, compared to not elevated urosome in G. lacustris (Karaman & Pinkster 1977, Fig. 12H). G. bakhteyaricus shows similarities to G. lacustris, from which it differs with the urosome elevation, slender basis of pereopod 7 and, most important, having 2–3 tiny spines on ventral-distal corner of the first peduncle segment in antenna 1. G. lacustris is also similar to G. lordeganensis in having non-setose pereopods 5–7 and antenna 2. However, there are characters well enough for allowing to recognise these species. These include, in the latter species, the acuminate postero-inferior of epimeral plates 2 and 3, non-plumose setae on outer margin of exopodite in uropod 3, and shorter antennal gland cone. Gammarus lobifer Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998 Gammarus lobifer Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998: 210–215, Figs. 24–27. Locus typicus. Yasooj, (30º40'N, 51º30'E), Zagros Region, Kohgiluye Va Buierahmad Province. Material examined. Specimens from Sheshpeer spring, (30º15'N, 52º03'E ) (ZMA Crust. Amph. 202031). Distribution. This species seems to be endemic to a limited area in lower central Zagros, in three locations including locus typicus and two other in north-west and south-east of it (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. The original description lacks any ecological data. However, the locality lies in a mountainous region with hundreds of cold springs. Taxonomic remarks. Individuals from the Sheshpeer spring possess all the described features of the typus except for the postero-distal corner setae on pereopod 7 basis. Among Iranian gammarids this species is most close to G. baloutchi and G. sepidannus, however G. lobifer bears short setae in peduncle segments 4 and 5 of antenna 2 (Stock et al., 1998, Fig. 24d), versus long setae in the two other species. Dorsal surface of urosomites in G. lobifer is slightly elevated (ibid., Fig. 24i) compared to flat urosome surface in both G. baloutchi and G. sepidannus. In addition, antennal gland cone is long in G. lobifer, while it is short in G. baloutchi. 6 · Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press ZAMANPOORE ET AL. TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Gammarus loeffleri Zamanpoore, Grabowski, Poeckl & Schiemer, 2010 Gammarus loeffleri Zamanpoore, Grabowski, Poeckl & Schiemer, 2010: 31–51, Figs. 7–10. Locus typicus. Cheshme Golabi spring, Darab, Fars Province, (28°47'N, 54°22'E). Material examined. Holotype, Cheshme Golabi spring, 23 km W of Darab, Fars Province (28˚47′ N, 54˚22′ E) (ZMA, Amph. 206055), paratypes (FAIC 111094). Additional specimens: Aab Do-man-nim spring, 12 km S of Kherame (28˚42′N, 54˚27′E) (FAIC 111077); Aab Vohli spring, 22 km S of Kherame (29˚10′N, 53˚27′E) (FAIC 111078); Atashkade spring, 13 km N of Firooz Abad (28˚53′N, 52˚32′E) (FAIC 111213); Bahadoran river, 15 km W of Darab (28˚42′N, 54˚27′E) (FAIC 111097); Bande Amir road, 41 km E of Shiraz (29˚33′N, 52˚58′E) (FAIC 111272); Fasa river, 5 km N of Fasa (29˚01′N, 53˚38′E) (FAIC 111102); Ghare Aghaj river, 53 km S of Shiraz (29˚11′N, 52˚38′E) (FAIC 111236); Nowbandegan, 20 km SE of Fasa (28˚50′N, 53˚49′E) (FAIC 111130); Oghlanghez spring, 30 km NW of Darab (28˚50′N, 54˚24′E) (FAIC 111095); Pa-Naal spring, 10 km NW of Fasa (29˚07′N, 53˚37′E) (FAIC 111103); Sarve Nokhodi, 105 km SE of Shiraz (29˚11′N, 53˚06′E) (FAIC 111076); Tang Aab spring, 29 km N of Firooz Abad (29˚02′N, 52˚34′E) (FAIC 111101). Distribution. A wide area along west-east axis from SE of Shiraz to the far east end of Fars province is occupied by this species. No populations of this or any other Gammarus species can be found north- and southwards from that region due to presence of an arid desert in the north, and high salinities and temperatures of inland waters in the south (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. This species inhabits springs and occasionally first order small streams at altitudes from 1100 m to 1800 m asl (Mean = 1383 m, SD = 266), which are lower if compared to most other Zagros species. Water temperature in these places ranged from 12 to 24ºC (Mean = 20.3 ºC, SD = 2.8). Waters had also higher salinities – the electric conductivity measured from 180 to as much as 1000 μS/cm (Mean = 471 μS/cm, SD = 133). Taxonomic remarks. The special shape of the basis of pereopod 7, having absolutely no protruding lobe on postero-distal corner (Zamanpoore et al., 2010a, Fig. 9C), could be a good identification feature for G. loeffleri, but some variation of this character was observed – in a few populations the individuals possessed a small lobe in this position. Regarding this and the type of setation on antenna 2 and on pereopods, the species might be confused at first glance with G. crinicaudatus. However, in G. loeffleri, the length and number of setae, especially on pereopods (ibid., Figs. 9A–C) are much higher than in the latter species. Another species, close in both morphological and geographical terms is G. shirazinus, although presence of two tiny spines on the ventral-distal corner of first peduncle of antenna 1 distinguishes it from G. loeffleri. Finally, G. loeffleri differs from G. komareki by having non-curled setae on antenna 2, presence of calceoli, highly setose pereopod 4 (ibid., Fig. 8D), and much longer setae on many appendages, including pereopods 5–7, uropod 3, telson, and posterior dorsal margin of urosomites (ibid., Figs. 9A– c, 9F, 7J, 9D). Gammarus lordeganensis Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004 Gammarus lordeganensis Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004: 2430–2435, Figs. 2–4. Locus typicus. Barme-Lordegan Spring (31˚30′N, 50˚49′E), Lordegan, Chaharmahal Va Bakhtyari province. Material examined. Holotype and paratypes, Aug. 2000 (ZUTC amph. 2060). Distribution. Apparently an endemic species, reported so far from only two springs (31˚34′N, 51˚13′E) in central Zagros (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. This species is found exclusively in mountain springs at ca. 1600 m asl with temperatures of ca. 12ºC. Taxonomic remarks. There are several similarities between this species and G. pseudosyriacus, especially in setation of all body parts, but with presence of the flat dorsal surface of urosomites one can distinguish G. lordeganensis from the latter species. G. lordeganensis is also very similar to G. lacustris, however it differs from the latter with first coxal plate in gnathopod 1 extended antero-distally (Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004, Fig. 3 GN1) and with more dense setation of uropod 3 (ibid., Fig. 2 U3). REVIEW OF FRESHWATER GAMMARUS FROM IRAN Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 7 TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Gammarus paricrenatus Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998 Gammarus paricrenatus Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998: 206–210, Figs. 21–23. Locus typicus. Ghoree-Gol wetland (37˚26′N, 46˚40′E), Tabriz, East Azarbaijan Province. Material examined. Six female paratypes (ZMA Crust. Amph. 201952). Distribution. An endemic species found in only one locality – Goree-Gol wetlands in west Alborz (Fig. 1) (Stock et al., 1998; Alizade-Eghtedar & Sari, 2007). Ecological notes. No ecological data available. Taxonomic remarks. Described based on only female holotype and paratypes, this species is clearly recognizable from other Iranian gammarids, especially upon the crenulate and setose postero-dorsal margin of its pleosomites (Stock et al. 1998, Fig. 21b), unique pattern of antenna 2 setation (scarce but long setae on peduncle segments 4 and 5 – longer than the width of the segments, short setae on the flagellum), and long antennal gland cone – longer than the length of the third peduncle segment (ibid., Fig. 21D). Gammarus parthicus Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998 Gammarus parthicus Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998: 194–201, Figs. 13–16. Locus typicus. Sarabe Abbasabad (33˚55′N, 49˚30′E), Shahzand, Markazi Province. Material examined. Holotype and 22 paratypes (ZMA Crust. Amph. 201373); new material: many specimens Dimeh, Esfahan (32˚30′N, 50˚13′E) (FAIC 111290); many specimens Sudejan, Esfahan (32˚32′N, 50˚21′E) (FAIC 111291); many specimens Guzdak, Meshkinshahr, Ardebil (FAIC 111293); many specimens, Aluch, Meshkinshahr, Ardebil (FAIC 111294). Distribution. First record (locus typicus) of this species was from the central Iranian basin, in northern Central Zagros, but recent sampling done by the first author revealed its presence also in the far eastern Alborz localities (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. Sample from Meshkinshahr was collected in a spring with water temperature of 13ºC and pH of 7. Taxonomic remarks. The most conspicuous feature of this species – dense long setae on peduncles and flagellum of antenna 2 (much longer than what is drawn in the original description), makes it close to G. pretzmanni and G. komareki. However, presence of 1–2 tiny spines in postero-distal corner of basis in pereopod 7 (Stock et al. 1998, Fig. 15c) makes it easy to distinguish G. parthicus from G. komareki (such spines are present also in G. pretzmanni). In addition, anterior margins of carpal and meral segments of pereopods are bare in G. parthicus (ibid.), vs. having setae in G. komareki. Setae of both peduncles and flagellum on antenna 2 are highly curled in G. pretzmanni, while in G. parthicus they are slightly curved distally only on the flagellum (ibid., Fig. 13e), such setation pattern can also be seen on pereopod 3 (ibid., Fig. 14e). Moreover, dorsal side of antenna 2 peduncle is almost free of setae in G. parthicus (ibid., Fig. 13e), while in G. pretzmanni the setae are present in dense groups also on the dorsal surface. Gammarus pretzmanni Mateus & Mateus, 1990 Gammarus pretzmanni Mateus & Mateus, 1990: 286–289, Figs. 2–2a; G. projectus Stock, Mirzajani, Vonk, Naderi & Kiabi, 1998: 201–205, Figs. 17–20; Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004: 2428– 2429; Ebrahimnezhad, Hosseini & Sari, 2005: 223, Fig. 3, new synonym. Locus typicus. 43 km W of Arak (34˚02′N, 49˚22′E), Markazi Province. Material examined. Holotype and paratypes, Markazi Province (34˚02′N, 49˚22′E) (NHMW Amphipoda 4871). Holotype and paratypes of G. projectus Sarabe Abbasabad, Shahzand, Markazi Province (33˚55′N, 49˚30′E) (ZMA Crust. Amph. 201376). 8 · Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press ZAMANPOORE ET AL. TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Distribution. This species was reported from the inside and from eastern outskirts of upper and central Zagros mountains, in different localities (Mateus & Mateus, 1990; Stock et al., 1998; Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004; Ebrahimnezhad et al., 2005) (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. No ecological data is available. Taxonomic remarks. Originally described by Mateus and Mateus (1990), this taxon was overlooked by most amphipod researchers, even the publication itself was not mentioned in any of the subsequent studies upon gammarids. Examined type material of this species was absolutely identical to that of G. projectus. Thus, Gammarus projectus is a junior synonym of G. pretzmanni. Loci typici of both species are localities on the same river, very close to each other, what makes our statement even more obvious. This species is very close to G. komareki and G. parthicus, but the state of highly curled setae on dorsal and ventral of antenna 2 (Mateus & Mateus, 1990, Fig. 2c) characterizes it among other species. See also Taxonomic remarks on G. parthicus and G. komareki. Gammarus pseudosyriacus Karaman & Pinkster, 1977 Gammarus syriacus (part.) Chevreux, 1895: 160–164, Figs. 6, 8, 9. G. pseudosyriacus Karaman & Pinkster, 1977: 56–58, Fig. 22; Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004: 2429–2430; Ebrahimnezhad, Hosseini & Sari, 2005: 222, Fig. 2. G. arduus (Mateus & Mateus, 1990: 277, no figures), misidentified. G. laticoxalis (Mateus & Mateus, 1990: 278), misidentified. G. miae Mateus & Mateus, 1990: 293–298, Figs. 4–4a, new synonym. G. plumipes Mateus & Mateus, 1990: 298–301, Fig. 5, new synonym. G. syriacus (Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004: 2429), misidentified. Locus typicus. Small pools around Damascus, Syria. Material examined. Many specimens from Rahimi river, 13 km W Izadkhast (52°05'N, 31°25'E) (FAIC 111001); Bavanat river, 35 km SE Bavanat (30°20'N, 54°00'E) (FAIC 111012); Kooshkezar spring, 5 km S Shahremian (30°49'N, 52°20'E) (FAIC 111021); Dashte Arjan spring, 60 km W Shiraz (29°39'N, 51°58'E) (FAIC 111100); Kuhmare Sorkhi, 39 km W Shiraz (29°25'N, 52°10'E) (FAIC 111275); Atashkade, 5 km N Firuzabad (28°53'N, 52°15'E) (FAIC 111276-1); Garme, 110 km N Shiraz (30°30'N, 52°30'E) (FAIC 111286); Komehr spring, 25 km N Sepidan (30°27'N, 51°51'E), (FAIC 111287). Three specimens misidentified as G. arduus, 90 km S Abadeh (31°09'N, 52°39'E), Fars Province, leg. Pretzmann 1970, det. Mateus & Mateus (NHMW Amphipoda 4859). Six specimens misidentified as G. laticoxalis, 68 km S Yazd (coordination is not given), Yazd Province, leg. Pretzmann 1970, det. Mateus & Mateus (NHMW Amphipoda 4861). Holotype of G. miae, 67 km NW Abadeh, Fars Province, leg. Pretzmann 1970, det. Mateus & Mateus (NHMW Amphipoda 4873); paratypes, 50 km W Shiraz, Fars Province, leg. Pretzmann 1970, det. Mateus & Mateus (NHMW Amphipoda 4876); paratypes, 67 km NW Abadeh, Fars Province, leg. Pretzmann 1970, det. Mateus & Mateus (NHMW Amphipoda 4908); paratypes, 90 km S Abadeh, Fars Province, leg. Pretzmann 1970, det. Mateus & Mateus (NHMW Amphipoda 4875). Holotype G. plumipes, 56 km W Shiraz (29°36'N 52°32'E), Fars Province, leg. Pretzmann 1970, det. Mateus & Mateus (NHMW Amphipoda 4877); one paratype, 56 km W Shiraz (29°36'N 52°32'E), Fars Province, leg. Pretzmann 1970, det. Mateus & Mateus (NHMW Amphipoda 4907). Misidentified as G. syriacus. Five specimens, Beedak spring (31°47'N, 51°06'E), Chaharmahal va Bakhtyari Province (ZUTC amph. #?), many specimens, Bizhgerd spring (31°43'N, 51°10'E), Chaharmahal va Bakhtyari Province (ZUTC amph. 2040). Distribution. Distribution range of this species in Iran was reported up to this time to be a vast area of the northern, central, and southern Zagros and its eastern outskirts facing the Great Central Basin (Mateus & Mateus, 1990; Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004; Ebrahimnezhad et al., 2005). Unpublished data suggest their presence also in the province of Kerman in the far endings of southern Zagros Mountains. As revealed from our analysis of the literature data and own collections, G. pseudosyriacus is one of the two most widely distributed gammarid species in Iran (Fig. 1). REVIEW OF FRESHWATER GAMMARUS FROM IRAN Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 9 TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Ecological notes. Having a wide range of tolerance to temperature (usually 5–21ºC) (Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2004), the species is often found in “desert-like” regions with water temperatures occasionally up to 34ºC (Karaman & Pinkster, 1977). Data from recent sampling done by the first author in Fars province showed a variation of water temperature from 11 to 25 ºC (Mean = 15 ºC, SD = 3). Springs with populations of the species were found at altitudes ranging from 905 to 2600 m asl (Mean = 2165 m, SD = 252). Electric conductivity in these waters ranged from 120 μS/cm to 1015 μS/cm (Mean = 362 μS/cm, SD = 169). Taxonomic remarks. The species can be confused with G. lacustris and G. lordeganensis, but the elevated postero-dorsal surface of urosomites 1–3 (Karaman & Pinkster, 1977, Fig. 22J) helps to distinguish it from the two latter species. G. pseudosyriacus shares also several features with G. bakhteyaricus, the latter being different with the 2–3 tiny spines on ventral-distal corner of first peduncle segment of antenna 1. Another similar species is G. paricrenatus, differing from G. pseudosyriacus by long setation on ventral side of peduncle segments 4 and 5 in antenna 2, and by the crenulate setose postero-dorsal margin of pereosomites. Misidentifications of this species might have arisen primarily from its wide distribution in the Zagros region and a relatively high level of intra-specific morphological variation. Among the variable features are degree of sharpness in postero-distal corner of the third epimeral plate, height of dorsal surface elevation in urosomites 1–3 (eg. case of confusion with G. syriacus), degree of forward extension in antero-distal region of the first coxal plate (eg. case of confusion with G. laticoxalis). Misidentifications. Gammarus arduus. Our examination of the material in NHMW revealed that it was misidentified and that in reality the individuals in question belong to G. pseudosyriacus. Besides, G. arduus is a species with distribution restricted only to the Balkan Peninsula with no records in Asia Minor. Gammarus laticoxalis. Based on our examination of the material, record of the species from Iran is a case of misidentification. Most possible explanation is that the degree of forward extension in antero-distal region of the first coxal plate in G. pseudosyriacus is variable to some extent, which might lead some authors to confuse it with G. laticoxalis. However, all other morphological characters are absolutely consistent with G. pseudosyriacus. Gammarus miae. Type material shows no morphological differences from the type material of G. pseudosyriacus. It is quite apparent to us that this is another case of misidentification, and that the species is a junior synonym of G. pseudosyriacus. Gammarus plumipes. The species was described based on a unique feature of having plumose setae on both anterior and posterior margin of all segments of pereopod 3. However, our examination of the holotype did not prove existence of such structure. Instead, numerous setae were covered by minute debris particles that made impression of plumosity. Thus the examined material was evidently identical with G. pseudosyriacus. In conclusion we propose G. plumipes as a junior synonym of G. pseudosyriacus. Gammarus syriacus. There are three different samples from Iran misidentified as G. syriacus; after revision they were reclassified to G. pseudosyriacus, G. shirazinus, and G. zagrosensis. Different degree of sharpness in postero-distal pointed corner of epimeral plate 3, and different level of elevation in the dorsal surface of urosomites 1– 3 might have caused incorrect misidentification of the above three species with G. syriacus. Moreover, presence of the species was also denied in Turkey (Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 2006). Gammarus sepidannus Zamanpoore, Poeckl, Grabowski & Schiemer, 2009 Gammarus sepidannus Zamanpoore, Poeckl, Grabowski & Schiemer, 2009: 31–38, Figs. 7–10. Locus typicus. Vezge Morad spring (30°13´N, 51°58´E), S of Sepidan, Fars Province. Material examined. Holotype (ZMA, Amph. 206056). Paratypes: Khani Varg spring, 4 km S of Sepidan (30°12´N, 51°59´E) (FAIC 111053); Cheshme Owsip, 3 km NW of Sepidan (30°16´N, 51°57´E) (FAIC 111052); Sheshpeer (spring brook), 10 km SE of Sepidan (30°15´N, 52°03´E) (FAIC 111105). Distribution. It is an endemic species restricted to only a small area, being the upper part of the Zohre River catchment in south of the Central Zagros (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. Habitats of this species include small mountain springs on altitudes from 2053 m to 2350 m asl (Mean = 2210 m, SD = 80). Water in these springs is cold (8 – 13 ºC, Mean = 12.2 ºC, SD = 1.4), ionic content is low, as conductivity ranges from 180 to 410 μS/cm (Mean = 258 μS/cm, SD = 61). Spring margins are covered with snow or ice during the winter and some time in autumn and spring. 10 · Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press ZAMANPOORE ET AL. TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Taxonomic remarks. Gammarus sepidannus has a shorter endopodite in uropod 3 (Zamanpoore et al., 2009, Fig. 9F), if compared to other Gammarus species in the region. Apart of this feature the species resemble somewhat G. lobifer and G. baloutchi. However, both latter species possess long eyes vs. short eye in G. sepidannus (ibid., Fig. 7A). All peduncle segments and flagellum of antenna 2 in G. sepidannus have long setae (ibid., Fig. 7C), while the seate are short on peduncle and flagellum in G. lobifer (Stock et al., 1998, Fig. 24d), and on flagellum in G. baloutchi (Khalaji-Pirbalouty & Sari, 2006, Fig. 1A2). Gammarus shirazinus Zamanpoore, Grabowski, Poeckl & Schiemer, 2010a Gammarus shirazinus Zamanpoore, Grabowski, Poeckl & Schiemer, 2010a: 31–51, Figs. 2–3. Zamanpoore, Grabowski, Poeckl & Schiemer, 2010b, Fig. 4. Gammarus syriacus (Mateus & Mateus, 1990: 280), misidentified. Locus typicus. Pole-Berenji spring (29°27´N, 52°31´E), S of Shiraz, Fars Province. Material examined. Holotype (ZMA Crust. Amph. 206057). Paratypes: Barme-Delak spring, 18 km SE of Shiraz (29°33´N, 52°42´E) (FAIC 111066); Barme-shur spring, 17 km S of Shiraz (29°28´N, 52°41´E) (FAIC 111273); Barme-Tarkoshte spring, 17 km SE of Shiraz (29°34´N, 52°40´E) (FAIC 111065); Kaftarak, 16 km SE of Shiraz (29°35´N, 52°39´E) (FAIC 111280); Neiriz, 200 km SE of Shiraz (29°12´N, 54°20´E) (FAIC 111278); Pire Bano spring, 11 km SW of Shiraz (29°31´N, 52°27´E) (FAIC 111281); Pire Gheibi spring, 12 km SW of Shiraz (29°31´N, 52°27´E) (FAIC 111283); Se Barm spring, 14 km E of Shiraz (29°35´N, 52°40´E) (FAIC 111274). Misidentified as G. syriacus. Two specimens 16 km SW Shiraz (29°36'54''N 52°32'18''E), Fars Province, (NHMW Amphipoda 4867). Distribution. An endemic species, found almost exclusively in Maharlu Lake catchments area in southern Zagros (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. This part of the country lies in lowlands, with rivers flowing from springs originating on elevations 1460 –1600 m asl (Mean = 1487 m, SD = 33. Water temperatures range from 18 to 25 ºC (Mean = 21 ºC, SD = 1.6), coupled with an extraordinary high conductivities of 150 – 1800 μS/cm (Mean = 1175 μS/cm, SD = 607). Taxonomic remarks. This species can be confused at first glance with G. loeffleri. It may be differentiated from the latter by longer setation of antenna 2 (Zamanpoore et al., 2010a, Fig. 2C) and pereopod 5–7 (Zamanpoore et al., 2010b, Figs. 4A–C), presence of 2 tiny spines on ventro-distal corner of first peduncle in antenna 1 (ibid., Fig. 2B) makes it easy to recognize this species from the other one. This feature is common with G. bakhteyaricus, whose most other morphological characters are different. In a same way, it can be easily shown for G. syriacus. The only possible similarity of both species is longer setation on pereopods 5–7 if compared to other Gammarus species in Iran. Misidentifications. See relevant section under G. pseudosyriacus. Gammarus sirvannus Hekmatara, Sari & Heidari Baladehi, 2011 Gammarus sirvannus Hekmatara, Sari & Heidari Baladehi, 2011: 49–56, Figs. 8–13. Locus typicus. Sirvan River-Paveh branch (N 35º 07′, E 46º 15′), 25 Km west of Paveh city, Kermanshah province, Iran. Material examined. Paratypes, September 2008, leg. M. Hekmatara (ZUTC amph. 2251). Distribution. This species was found only in locus typicus in north-west of the Zagros, in western Iran. Ecological notes. This cold mountainous region lies at an altitude of ca. 700 m asl. Taxonomic remarks. Long setation of antenna 2 makes G. sirvannus resembling a few other species present in the same region. However, in G. komareki, such setae are slightly curled, it has small eyes, lacks the distinctly projecting postero-distal corner lobe in bases of pereopods 6–7, and has few short setae on pereopod 5–7. Elongated eyes and setation of antenna 2 make G. sirvannus similar to G. loeffleri and to G. shirazinus, but the latter differ with highly setose pereopod 3–7. G. parthicus may be obviously told apart from G. sirvannus by the small eyes and lack of distinct projection in postero-distal corner of pereopod 6–7 bases in the former species. In a detailed exam- REVIEW OF FRESHWATER GAMMARUS FROM IRAN Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 11 TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. ination, presence of a single long seta on the first article of mandible palp is a deciding criterion to differentiate G. sirvannus from all the other similar species. FIGURE 1. Distribution map of freshwater Gammarus species in Iran (grey regions indicate high mountainous areas). Gammarus zagrosensis Zamanpoore, Poeckl, Grabowski & Schiemer, 2009 Gammarus zagrosensis Zamanpoore, Poeckl, Grabowski & Schiemer, 2009: 23–31, Figs. 2–5. Gammarus syriacus (Stock et al., 1998: 206), misidentified. Locus typicus. Vezge-Morad spring (30°13´N, 51°58´E), S of Sepidan, Fars Province. Material examined. Holotype (ZMA Crust. Amph. 206052). Paratypes: Khani Varg spring, 4 km S of Sepidan (30°12´N, 51°59´E) (FAIC 111053-1); Baraghan spring, 5 km SE of Sepidan (30°15´N, 51°59´E) (FAIC 111238, FAIC 111239); Sheshpeer (spring brook), 10 km SE of Sepidan (30°15´N, 52°03´E) (FAIC 111105-1). Misidentified as G. syriacus. Non-type specimens, Borghan (Baraghan) spring, (30°15´N, 51°59´E) (ZMA Crust. Amph. #?). 12 · Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press ZAMANPOORE ET AL. TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. Distribution. An endemic species, inhabiting almost the same geographic area in the lower Central Zagros as G. sepidannus (Fig. 1). Ecological notes. Gammarus zagrosensis is sympatric with G. sepidannus, so ecological features of their habitats are mostly similar. In the montane (1991 – 2350 m asl, Mean = 2196 m, SD = 85) and cold region of lower Central Zagros, the water temperature measured from 10 to 13ºC over the year (Mean = 12 ºC, SD = 0.8), with electric conductivities of 180 – 410 µS/cm (Mean = 249 µS/cm, SD = 61). Taxonomic remarks. With the relatively short setation of pereopod 5–7, the species might seem similar to G. syriacus, but features quite clearly separating it from the latter species include: long setae on inferior margin of epimeral plates 1–3 (Zamanpoore et al., 2009, Fig. 4E), slightly pointed epimeral plates 2 and 3 (ibid.), long setae in postero-distal corner of pereopod 6 and 7 (ibid., Figs. 4A–C), longer antennal gland cone (ibid., Fig. 2C). Misidentifications. See relevant section under G. pseudosyriacus. Identification Key to the Freshwater Gammarus Species of Iran 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. - Very few short setae on anterior margin of pereopod 3; rounded mid-dorsal keel on urosomites 1–3 . . . . . . . . . . . . .G. anodon Numerous setae on anterior margin of pereopod 3; without mid-dorsal keel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Endopodite of uropod 3 shorter than 2/3 of exopodite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Endopodite of uropod 3 equal to, or longer than, 2/3 of exopodite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Peduncle segments 4 and 5 of antenna 2 with short setae. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. lobifer Peduncle segments 4 and 5 of antenna 2 with long setae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Flagellum of antenna 2 with short setae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. baloutchi Flagellum of antenna 2 with long setae. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .G. sepidannus Anterior margin of merus and carpus of pereopod 7 having none, or very few short, setae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Anterior margin of merus and/or carpus of pereopod 7 having long setae, as long as or longer than the width of segments on which they are based . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Peduncle segments and flagellum of antenna 2 with short setae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Peduncle segments 4 and 5 of antenna 2 with setae longer than the width of the related segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Peduncle segment 1 of antenna 1 with two or three tiny spines on ventral-distal margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. bakhteyaricus Peduncle segments of antenna 1 without spines on ventral-distal margin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Posterior distal corner of epimeral plate 3 sharply acuminated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. lordeganensis Posterior distal corner of epimeral plate 3 not sharply acuminated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Posterior dorsal surface of all urosomites flat. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. lacustris Posterior dorsal surface of urosomites elevated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. pseudosyriacus Peduncle of antenna 2 sparsely setose; antennal gland-cone as long as or longer than the length of the third peduncle segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. paricrenatus Peduncle of antenna 2 densely setose; antennal gland-cone shorter than the length of the third peduncle segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Peduncle of antenna 2 with dense and highly curled setae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. pretzmanni Peduncle of antenna 2 with less dense and not, or only slightly, curled setae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Postero-distal corner of epimeral plate 3 very sharply pointed and extended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. hegmatanensis Postero-distal corner of epimeral plate 3 not sharply pointed or extended. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 External margins of uropod 3 exopod highly setose, postero-distal corner of pereopod 7 basis with a tiny spine . . G. parthicus External margins of uropod 3 exopodite poorly setose, postero-distal corner of pereopod 7 basis without setae or spines . . . 14 First article of mandible palp with one long seta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. sirvannus First article of mandible palp without seta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. komareki Antenna 2 with setae shorter or slightly longer than the width of the related segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. zagrosensis Peduncle and flagellum of antenna 2 with very long setae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 First article of antenna 1 peduncle with two tiny spines on ventral-distal margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. shirazinus First segment of antenna 1 peduncle without spines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Anterior margin of pereopod 7 merus and carpus having few setae slightly longer than the width of the related segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .G. crinicaudatus Anterior margin of pereopod 7 merus and carpus having numerous setae twice as long as the width of the related segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. loeffleri Acknowledgements We gratefully appreciate Dr. Dirk Platvoet, curator of crustacean collection in Zoological Museum Amsterdam and Dr. Peter Dworschak, curator of crustacean collection in Natural History Museum of Vienna for loaning the material, Dr. Alireza Sari, University of Tehran, and Mrs. M. Hekmatara, researcher of the National Institute of OceanREVIEW OF FRESHWATER GAMMARUS FROM IRAN Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press · 13 TERMS OF USE This pdf is provided by Magnolia Press for private/research use. Commercial sale or deposition in a public library or website is prohibited. ography-Chabahar for permitting the examination of material from their collections. Special thanks go to the anonymous reviewers and to Prof. G.S. Karaman for their valuable comments on the content of the manuscript. This work was started and completed as a self-funded project by the first author. However, some unpublished data were collected during a provincial project (79/0710214000/01) funded by the Agricultural Research and Training Organization, Iranian Ministry of Agriculture. Part of this work was also supported by grant no. N N303 579 439 (Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education), and by the internal funds from the University of Lodz. References Alizade-Eghtedar, H. & Sari, A.R. (2007) Dojurpayan e Ponto-Caspian va goruhe guneii e Gammarus pulex (Crustacea: Amphipoda) dar Azarbaijan e Iran. Majalle ye Olum e Daneshgahe Tehran, 33(4), 35–47. Barnard, J.R. & Barnard, C.M. (1983) Freshwater Amphipoda of the World. I: Evolutionary Pattern. II: Handbook and Bibliography. Hayfield Associates, Mt. Vernon, Virginia, 1–830. Chevreux, E. (1895) Amphipodes terrestres et d'eau douce. (provenant du voyage en Syrie du Docteur T. Barrois). Revue boil. N. Fr., 7(4/5), 154–164. Ebrahimnezhad, M., Hosseini, L. & Sari, A. (2005) Collecting and identification of Gammarus species of the Zayandeh-rood River. Majalle ye Zistshenasi-e Iran, 18(3), 218–227. Fabricius, J.C. (1775) Systema Entomologiae, sistens insectorum classes, ordines, genera, species, adiectis synonymis, locis, descriptionibus, observationibus. Officina Libraria Kortii, Flensburgi et Lipsiae. [xxx] + 832 pp. Hekmatara, M., Sari, A. & Heidari Baladehi, M-H. (2011) Two new Gammarus species (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Gammaridae) from Zagros Mountains, Iran. Zootaxa, 2894, 39–57. Karaman, G.S. (1974) Gammarus species from Asia Minor (fam. Gammaridae). 56. Contribution to the knowledge of the Amphipoda. Bollettino del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona. 1, 311–343. Karaman, G.S. & Pinkster, S. (1977) Fresh water Gammarus species from Europe, North Africa and adjacent regions of Asia (Crustacea, Amphipoda), part 1. Gammarus pulex-group and related species. Bijdragen Tot De Dierkunde, 47(1), 1–97. Karaman, G. (1982) Fam. Gammaridae, in: Ruffo, S. edit.: The Amphipoda of the Mediterranean, part 1. Gammaridea (Acanthonotozomatidae to Gammaridae). Mem. Inst. Ocean. Fondation Albert Ier, prince de Monaco, 13, 1–364 (Gammaridae, 254–364). Karaman, S. (1931). III. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Amphipoden Jugoslaviens, sowie einiger Arten aus Griechenland. Prirodoslovne Razprave, Ljubljana, 1, 31–66. Karaman, S. (1934) Über asiatische Süsswassergammariden. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 106 (5/6), 127–134. Karaman, S. & Karaman, G. 1959. Gammarus (Fluviogammarus) triacanthus Schaeferna, argaeus Vavra, und roeselii Gervais am Balkan. Izdanija, Zavod za Ribarstvo na Makedonija, Skopje, 2(9), 183–211. Khalaji-Pirbalouty, V. & Sari, A. (2004) Biogeography of amphipods (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Gammaridae) from the central Zagros Mountains, Iran, with descriptions of two new species. Journal of Natural History, 38, 2425–2445. Khalaji-Pirbalouty, V. & Sari, A. (2006) A Description of Gammarus baloutchi n. sp. (Amphipoda: Gammaridae) from Iran, based on light and electron microscopy. Zoologische Mededelingen (Leiden), 80 1(6), 91–100. Linnaeus, C. (1758) Systema Naturae, 10th ed., 1, 824 pp. Laurentii Salvii: Holmiae [Stockholm, Sweden]. Löffler, H. (1956) Limnologische Beobachtungen an Iranischen Binnengewässern. II. Teil: systematische Beschreibung der Rotatorien und Crustaceen aus den untersuchten Gewässern. Hydrobiologia, 8(3–4), 239–278. Mateus, P.A. & Mateus, E. (1990) Etude d'une collection d'amphipodes specialement du sud-ouest asiatique-du Museum d'Histiore Naturelle de Vienne (Autriche). Annalen des Naturhistorisches Museums in Wien, 91(B), 273–331. Özbek, M. & Ustaoğlu, M.R. (2006) Check-list of Malacostraca (Crustacea) Species of Turkish Inland Waters. E.U. Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences, 23(1–2), 229–234. Sars, G.O. (1863) Beretning om en i Sommeren 1862 foretagen zoologisk Reise i Christianias og Trondhjems Stifter. Nyt. Mag. Naturvidensk., 12, 193–340. Schäferna, K. (1922) Amphipoda balcanica. Vëstnik Kral. C. Spoleinosti Nauk Ti-ida mat.-prir. Praha, 2, 1–110. Sket, B. (1971) Zur Systematik und Phylogenie der Gammarini (Amphipoda). Bulletin Scientifique, sec. A, 16(1–2), 6. Stebbing, T.R.R. (1906) Amphipoda, I. Gammaridea. Tierreich, 21, XXXIX, 1–806. Stock, J.H. (1967) A revision of the European species of the Gammarus locusta-group (Crustacea, Amphipoda). Zoologische verhandelingen, 90, 3–56. Stock, J.H., Mirzajani, A.R., Vonk, R., Naderi, S. & Kiabi, B.H. (1998) Limnic and brackish water Amphipoda (Crustacea) from Iran. Beaufortia, 48(9), 173–234. Väinölä, R., Witt, J.D.S., Grabowski, M., Bradbury, J.H., Jazdzewski, K. & Sket, B. (2008) Global diversity of amphipods (Amphipoda; Crustacea) in freshwater. Hydrobiologia, 595, 241–255. Zamanpoore, M., Poeckl M., Grabowski M. & Schiemer F. (2009) Two new sympatric species of freshwater Gammarus (Crustacea: Amphipoda) from Southern Zagros Region, Iran. Zootaxa, 2136, 21–39. Zamanpoore, M., Grabowski, M., Poeckl, M., & Schiemer, F. (2010a) Two new Gammarus species (Crustacea, Amphipoda) from warm springs in the south-east pre-alpine area of the Zagros, Iran: habitats with physiological challenges. Zootaxa, 2546, 31–51. Zamanpoore, M., Grabowski M., Poeckl M., Schiemer F. (2010b) Erratum: Two new Gammarus species (Crustacea, Amphipoda) from warm springs in the south-east pre-alpine area of the Zagros, Iran: Habitats with physiological challenges. Zootaxa, 2666, 68. 14 · Zootaxa 3140 © 2011 Magnolia Press View publication stats ZAMANPOORE ET AL.