Identification of Mature Larvae of Hydaticus cinctipennis and H. Bimarginatus (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae) Based on Morphology and Breeding Seasons

Abstract

The cosmopolitan genus Hydaticus is repre sented in the southeastern United States by only 2 species, H. (Hydaticus) cinctipennis Aube and H. (Guignotites) bimarginatus (Say). Southeastern records for H. (H.) cinctipennis are from Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, and Tennessee. The U.S.A. range of H. (G.) bimar ginatus includes the states of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains with additional records from Arkansas (Roughley & Pengelly 1981). Young (1954) tentatively included H. rimosus in the Flor ida fauna based on 3 specimens taken in Broward County; however, Roughley & Pengelly (1981) concluded that the range of this species does not extend into Florida and that its distribution is the Caribbean Islands, the Bahamas, and Mexico. Larvae of Hydaticus are superficially similar to those of Dytiscus. The taxa are distinguished by the (1) smaller size of specimens of Hydaticus and (2) presence of 2 or 3 lobes on the distal margin of the prementum (labium) of Hydaticus (Fig. 1). These lobes are not present on the smooth and convex premental margin of Dytiscus (e.g., Mer ritt & Cummins 1996; Epler 1996). Dettner (1984) described the prementum of second and third instars of Guignotites as trilobite and that of Hydaticus s. str. as bilobed. Although the premen tum of an immature larva of a South American species of Guignotites is bilobed (Michat and Torres 2006), Jackson et al. (2008) confirmed the presence of 3 lobes on the prementum of the ma ture larva H. (G.) bimarginatus. Because distri bution records (Roughley & Pengelly 1981; Turn bow & Smith 1983) indicate that there are only 2 species of Hydaticus, H. (H.) cinctipennis and H. (G.) bimarginatus, in Georgia and the presence of 2 premental lobes, second and third instars col lected from a lower Piedmont marsh habitat in Talboton County, Georgia, U.S.A., were identified as H. (H.) cinctipennis. Jackson et al. (2007) noted that the median lobe of H. (G) bimarginatus was often small and difficult to observe on some specimens, requiring removal of the prementum and a careful exami nation of its dorsal surface in order to confirm the presence (or absence) of a third lobe. Conse quently, if the number of lobes is used as an exclu sive diagnostic character, larvae ofH. (G) bimar ginatus may be misidentified as H. (H.) cinctipen nis. A comparison of labial anatomy of both spe cies indicated that a more obvious, convenient, and reliable character is available for identifica tion of at least mature larvae of the 2 species in the southeast. The proximal labial palpomere of H. cinctipennis had a mean length of 0.29 mm (n = 4) that is less than the distance between outside width (x =0.43 mm, n = 4) of the prementum at the origins of the palpomeres (Fig. 1A; line a). In contrast, the proximal palpomeres of H. bimar ginatus are longer (x = 0.51 mm; Jackson et al. 2007) than the width (x = 0.41 mm, n = 9) of the prementum at the same location (Fig. IB). An ex amination of second instars of H. bimarginatus (n = 4) and H. cinctipennis (n = 2 exuviae) indicated that this character may be used to identify these larvae as well. Thus, if an examination of dytisci nine third or second instars reveals the presence of lobes on or near the anterior margin of the la bial prementum, an analysis of the length of the proximal palpomere relative to the width of the prementum at the origin of the palpomeres will permit identification of mature Hydaticus larvae as either H. cinctipennis (shorter palpomere) or H. bimarginatus (longer palpomere). First in stars of H. cinctipennis were not available for examination. Differences in the breeding seasons also may aide in the identification of H. bimarginatus and H. cinctipennis. Second and third instars of H. cinctipennis were collected 19 and 23 III 1997 from a lower Piedmont marsh in Talboton County,