Oribatid mites of Georgian (Caucasus) caves including the description of a new species of Ghilarovus Krivolutsky, 1966 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLEpage/terms-and-conditions

This article was downloaded by: [Maka Murvanidze]On: 18 August 2014, At: 21:52Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of AcarologyPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/taca20

Oribatid mites of Georgian (Caucasus) cavesincluding the description of a new species ofGhilarovus Krivolutsky, 1966Maka Murvanidzeab

a Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgiab Institute of Entomology, Agricultural University of Georgia, Tbilisi, GeorgiaPublished online: 14 Aug 2014.

To cite this article: Maka Murvanidze (2014): Oribatid mites of Georgian (Caucasus) caves including the description of anew species of Ghilarovus Krivolutsky, 1966, International Journal of Acarology, DOI: 10.1080/01647954.2014.950604

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2014.950604

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose ofthe Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shallnot be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Oribatid mites of Georgian (Caucasus) caves including the description of a new speciesof Ghilarovus Krivolutsky, 1966

Maka Murvanidze

Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia; Institute of Entomology, Agricultural University of Georgia, Tbilisi, Georgia(email: [email protected])

(Received 21 March 2014; accepted 27 July 2014)

The checklist of 67 oribatid mite species found in 21 limestone caves of Georgia is provided. A new species Ghilarovuskvavadzei sp. nov. is described, the first record of Ghilarovus species in the Caucasus area. A table of characters of allknown species of Ghilarovus Krivolutsky, 1966 is given. Taxonomic remarks on Phauloppia pilosa (CL Koch, 1841) areprovided. Miracarus hurkai Kunst, 1959 is new to the Caucasian fauna with Epidamaeus pinguis Kulijev, 1967 andDissorhina signata (Schwalbe, 1989) new records to the Georgian fauna.

Keywords: caves; Georgia; Ghilarovus; Phauloppia pilosa; Epidamaeus pinguis; Dissorhina signata

Introduction

Caves represent important ecosystem types having greatecological and evolutionary interest. The internationalimportance of subterranean habitats is outlined in theRamsar list of wetlands, where caves are listed indepen-dently (The Ramsar Handbooks 2011). Most caves areformed by the dissolution of limestone in the presence ofwater, but sandstone, lava, glacier and tectonic caves alsooccur. Most caves are related to a drainage system thatnow or in the past carried water (White and Culver 2012).

As habitats, caves have several distinct properties. Theyrepresent isolated entities with cave species having restricteddistribution and low dispersal abilities. The restricted distri-bution of cave-specific animals makes these habitats uniqueand of high conservation importance. Nearly 1000 speciesand subspecies are described from caves and subterraneanhabitats of the US (Christman and Culver 2002).Invertebrates, especially arthropods, constitute the majorityof cave organisms. Terrestrial, cave-limited species areusually known as troglobites. Many troglobite species areadapted in some way to living in a totally dark environment.Animals entering beyond the daylight zone of a cave inten-tionally and generally spending part of their life in the under-ground environment are known as troglophiles and thosewho enter a cave on occasions but do not use the cave eitherfor temporary or permanent residence are known as troglox-enes (Culver and Sket 2000; The Ramsar Handbooks 2011).

Oribatid mites are mostly soil dwellers. They areknown to inhabit a large variety of habitats (moss, litter,barks of the trees, etc.) (Maraun et al. 2007; Norton andBehan-Pelletier 2009) including caves, from where theyhave been reported for more than 130 years ago (Bruckner1995). The cave fauna remains as an object of interest formany acarologists (Bruckner 1995; Borges et al. 2004;Ducarme et al. 2004a, 2004b; Ivan and Vasiliu 2010,

etc.); however, Caucasian limestone caves are very muchunderstudied.

Within the Caucasus area limestone outcrops lie alongthe southern slope of the Great Caucasus Range(Klimchuk 2004) and extend for 325 km from the PsouRiver to the Ertso Lake area. The limestone rock outcropsamount to about 4475 km2, or 6.4% of the total area ofGeorgia. Currently, there are 1306 known caves inGeorgia, of which 480 are horizontal caves and 826 areshafts and chasms. Their total length is 240 km andcumulative depth about 61 km (Tsikarishvili et al. 2010).Speleobiological research in Georgian caves commencedearly in the twentieth century. By the beginning of the1980s, speleofauna from 71 caves had been investigated(Djanashvili 1984) and after 1990 the investigations ofcave habitats were stopped. Until the present investigation,the oribatid fauna of Georgian caves were poorly studied.Sporadic scientific expeditions were held in the 1970s; 12species of oribatid mites were identified from eight cavesof Western Georgia, and one new species Lucoppia nicoraDjaparidze, 1986 was described from Nikortsminda cave(Djaparidze 1986; Djaparidze and Gomelauri 1986).

Currently, an invertebrate biodiversity research projectis ongoing in Georgian limestone caves. Along with othergroups of invertebrates, oribatid mite fauna is also beingstudied. This investigation provides a list of oribatid mitesfound in limestone caves including associated locality andhabitat data. The description of a new species belongingGhilarovus Krivolutsky, 1966 is also provided.

Material and methods

Site description

Material was sampled in 21 limestone caves located inImereti–Samegrelo regions of Georgia (Figure 1).

International Journal of Acarology, 2014http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2014.950604

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

Description of site locations is provided indicating GPScoordinates for each cave, sampling date, sampled habitat(soil, guano) and whether the cave is dry or wet, the latterdue to the presence of a stream of water:

(1) Mikava cave. 42°38ʹ09ʺN 42°07ʹ11.0ʺE. Datum:02.12.2013. Dry.

(2) Mapheli cave. 42°37ʹ17.13ʺN 42°12ʹ4.58ʺE.Datum: 02.12.2013. Water stream.

(3) Leskhulukhe cave. 42°30ʹ44.14ʺN 42°20ʹ14.25ʺE. Datum: 20.06.2013. Dry.

(4) Sakajia cave. 42°16ʹ7.95ʺN 42°45ʹ43.5ʺE.Datum: 02.12.2013. Dry.

(5) River Chishura source cave. 42°15ʹ13.3ʺN 42°49ʹ9.29ʺE. Datum: 02.12.2013. Water stream.

(6) Nagarevi grotto. 42°14ʹ9.27ʺN 42°48ʹ25.3ʺE.Datum: 02.12.2013. Dry.

(7) Chishura cave. 42°15ʹ20.4ʺN 42°50ʹ00.5ʺE.Datum: 02.12.2013. Dry.

(8) Tsutskhvati cave system (# 2, 7, 8, 11). 42°16ʹ23.0ʺN 42°51ʹ18.7ʺE. Datum: 28.02.2013.Dry.

(9) Navenakhevi cave. 42°15ʹ6.06ʺN 42°52ʹ11.67ʺE.Datum: 28.02.2013. Water stream.

(10) Kakhidze cave. 42°30ʹ9.63ʺN 42°54ʹ6.80ʺE.Datum: 23.09.2013. Dry.

(11) Tsakhi cave. 42°32ʹ33.2ʺN 42°54ʹ5.96ʺE. Datum:23.09.2013. Dry.

(12) Motena cave. 42°41ʹ26ʺN 42°52ʹ47.4ʺE. Datum:20.06.2013. Water stream.

(13) Kidobana cave. 42°26ʹ17.8ʺN 43°08ʹ9.51ʺE.Datum: 23.09.2013. Water stream.

(14) Dzudzuana cave. 42°18ʹ44.64ʺN 43°19ʹ7.788ʺE.Datum: 10.01.2011. Water stream.

(15) Samele cave. 42°20ʹ42ʺN 43°20ʹ41.892ʺE.Datum: 16.03.2011. Water stream.

(16) Tsivtskala cave. 42°05ʹ13.61ʺN 42°21ʹ12.38ʺE.Datum:23.09.2013. Water stream.

(17) Shareula cave. 42°29ʹ33.72ʺN 42°59ʹ10.62ʺE.Datum: 23.09.2013. Water stream.

(18) Nikortsminda cave. 42°27ʹ30.77ʺN 43°05ʹ25.87ʺE. Datum: 23.09.2013. Dry.

Note: Tsutskhvati cave systems are located close to eachother; therefore, GPS coordinates are the same for all ofthem and, hence, on the map, they are indicated by onelocation point.

Sampling and extraction

Each cave was visited only once. Samples were taken fromthree zones: entrance, twilight and dark zones. In each zone,three soil and guano (guano sampling was available only inthe Navenakhevi cave) samples were taken. The volume ofeach sample was 10 cm3. Depth of the sample varied from 7to 1 cm depending on the soil/guano depth. The depth of thesample was limited by the limestone substrate. Soil wassampled using soil corers and trowel (when soil depth wasless than 5 cm).

Sampled material was placed in plastic bags andlabelled before delivery to the laboratory for further treat-ment. Extraction was made using modified Berlese–Tullgren apparatus equipped with 40 W light bulbs.Extraction lasted for 144 hours and extracted mites werepreserved in 70% alcohol. Temporary slides were madeusing cavity slides with specimens immersed in fullstrength lactic acid for 24 hours at room temperatureprior to examination.

Identification and description of the new species

Identifications were made using keys of Weigmann (2006)and Ghilarov and Krivolutsky (1975). The author has fol-lowed the systematic system of Schatz et al. (2011). Genusand species names are in accordance withWeigmann (2006).

Identification and description was made using a Microslight microscope (Micros light microscope Pink MC50)equipped with drawing tube. For description of new spe-cies, body length was measured in dorsal view from the tipof the rostrum to the posterior point of the notogaster.Body width refers to the widest part of the notogaster.

Results and discussion

After investigating 21 caves listed, a total of 67 oribatidspecies were determined.

Family: Hypochthoniidae Berlese, 1910Species: Hypochthonius rufulus CL Koch, 1835Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – entrance, two

individuals.

Family: Phthiracaridae Perty, 1841Species: Hoplophthiracarus illinoisensis (Ewing, 1909)

Figure 1. Map of the investigated caves. Points indicate cavelocations. Cave descriptions are given in “Material and methods”section.

2 M. Murvanidze

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

Material examined: Mapheli cave – entrance, threeindividuals; Samele cave – entrance, four individuals;Nikortsminda cave – entrance, one individual.

Species: Phthiracarus ferrugineus (CL Koch, 1841)Material examined: Mapheli cave – entrance, two indi-

viduals; Navenakhevi cave – entrance, two individuals;Samele cave – entrance, two individuals.

Species: Phthiracarus globosus (CL Koch, 1841)Material examined: Nagarevi grotto – entrance, two

individuals.

Species: Steganacarus (Atropacarus) striculus (CLKoch, 1835)

Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, twoindividuals.

Species: Steganacarus (Steganacarus) spinosus(Sellnick, 1920)

Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – entrance, threeindividuals; Kidobana cave – entrance, seven individuals.

Species: Steganacarus (Tropacarus) patruelisNiedbala, 1983

Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, threeindividuals.

Family: Euphthiracaridae Jacot, 1930Species: Rhysotritia ardua (CL Koch, 1841)Material examined: Mikava cave – entrance, one indi-

vidual; Leskhulukhe cave – entrance, two individuals;Tsutskhvati cave # 2 – entrance, one individual;Dzudzuana cave – twilight zone, one individual.

Family: Aleurodamaeidae Paschoal & Johnston, 1984Species: Aleurodamaeus setosus (Berlese, 1883)Material examined: Sakajia cave – entrance, one indi-

vidual; Mikava cave – entrance, one individual;Dzudzuana cave – twilight zone, one individual.

Family: Damaeidae Berlese, 1896Species: Belba dubinini Bulanova-Zachvatkina, 1962Material examined: Navenakhevi cave – entrance, one

individual and dark zone, one individual.

Species: Epidamaeus pinguis Kulijev, 1967Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, 30

individuals; Shareula cave – entrance, one individual.

Note: E. pinguis is new for Georgian fauna, but Kulijev(1967) noted it as being numerous in litter of shady forestsin the Great Caucasus. Up to now, it was known only fromDaghestan part of Russia and Azerbaijan in Zakataly, Shekiand Talysh regions (Shtanchaeva and Subias 2010).

Species: Metabelba pseudoitalica Bulanova-Zachvatkina, 1965

Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – dark zone, fourindividuals.

Species: M. flagelliseta Bulanova-Zachvatkina, 1965Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, one

individual.

Species: M. papillipes (Nicolet, 1855)Material examined: Tsivtskala cave – entrance, one

individual.

Species: Metabelbella macerochaeta Bulanova-Zachvatkina, 1967

Material examined: Sakajia cave – entrance, oneindividual.

Species: Porobelba spinosa (Sellnick, 1920)Material examined: Motena cave – entrance, one

individual.

Family: Microzetidae Grandjean, 1936Species: Microzetes caucasicus (Krivolutsky, 1967)Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – entrance, one

individual.

Species: Miracarus hurkai Kunst, 1959Material examined: Tsivtskala cave – entrance, one

individual.

Note: The species is a new record for Caucasian fauna. Itwas described from Bulgaria (Kunst 1959) and is knownfrom Central Europe (Subias 2004, electronically updatedin 2014).

Family: Zetorchestidae Michael, 1898Species: Zetorchestes falzonii Coggi, 1898Material examined: Kakhidze cave – entrance, one

individual.

Family: Gustaviidae Oudemans, 1900Species: Gustavia microcephala (Nicolet, 1855)Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – entrance, one

individual.

Family: Liacaridae Sellnick, 1928Species: Dorycranosus splendens (Coggi, 1898)Material examined: Nikortsminda cave – dark zone,

one individual.

Species: Xenillus tegeocranus (Hermann, 1804)Material examined: Tsutskhvati cave #11 – entrance,

two individuals.

Family: Peloppiidae Balogh, 1943Species: Ceratoppia quadridentata (Haller, 1882)Material examined: Sakajia cave – entrance,

one individual; Kidobana cave – entrance, sixindividuals.

International Journal of Acarology 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

Family: Autognetidae Grandjean, 1960Species: Autogneta longilamellata (Michael, 1885)Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, one

individual.

Species: Conchogneta delacarlica (Forsslund, 1947)Material examined: Navenakhevi cave – dark

zone, guano, two individuals; Dzudzuana cave – twilightzone, one individual; Tsakhi cave – dark zone, twoindividuals.

Family: Machuellidae Balogh, 1983Species: Machuella draconis Hammer, 1961Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – dark zone, one

individual.

Family: Oppiidae Grandjean, 1951Species: Berniniella silvatica (Vasiliu & Calugar,

1976)Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – entrance, one

individual.

Species: Dissorhina ornata (Oudemans, 1900)Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – twilight zone,

two individuals.

Species: Dissorhina signata Schwalbe, 1989Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – dark zone,

seven individuals.

Note: The species is a new record for Georgian fauna.It was described from the coniferous forest litter inOsterzgebirge (Germany) (Schwalbe 1989) and wasfound in Germany and Slovakia (Weigmann 2006). InCaucasus, it is reported only from Cheget (Shtanchaevaand Subias 2010).

Species: Oppia nitens CLKoch, 1836Material examined: Sakajia cave – entrance, one indi-

vidual; Nagarevi grotto – twilight zone, three individuals;Dzudzuana cave – entrance, one individual and and darkzone, one individual.

Species: Oppiella (Oppiella) nova (Oudemans, 1902)Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – dark zone, one

individual.

Species: Oppiella (Rhinoppia) fallax (Paoli, 1908)Material examined: Chishura cave – twilight

zone, 10 individuals; Mapheli cave – entrance, oneindividual.

Species: Oppiella (Rhinoppia) subpectinata(Oudemans, 1900)

Material examined: Mapheli cave – entrance, two indi-viduals; Leskhulukhe cave – entrance, one individual;Dzudzuana cave – dark zone, two individuals.

Species: Oxyoppioides decipiens (Paoli, 1908)Material examined: Tsutskhvati cave #7 – dark zone,

one individual; Navenakhevi cave – dark zone, guano, fiveindividuals; Nikortsminda cave – twilight zone, five indi-viduals; Tsakhi cave – twilight, one individual and darkzone, 15 individuals.

Species: Ramusella clavipectinata (Michael, 1885)Material examined: Mikava cave – entrance, three

individuals; Nagarevi grotto – entrance, three individuals;cave at the source of Chishura River – entrance, twoindividuals and twilight zone, three individuals; Chishuracave – twilight zone, 49 individuals; Leskhulukhe cave –entrance, two individuals and twilight zone – two indivi-duals; Motena cave – entrance, three individuals;Kidobana cave – entrance, one individual.

Species: Ramusella insculpta (Paoli, 1908)Material examined: Navenakhevi cave – dark

zone, guano, four individuals; Dzudzuana cave –entrance, one individual; Tsakhi cave – entrance, oneindividual.

Family: Quadroppiidae Balogh, 1983Species: Quadroppia (Coronoquadroppia) media

Gordeeva, 1983Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – entrance, one

individual.

Family: Thyrisomidae Grandjean, 1953Species: Oribella pectinata (Michael, 1885)Material examined: Nagarevi grotto – twilight zone,

one individual.

Species: Pantelozetes alpestris (Willmann, 1929)Material examined: Navenakhevi cave – dark zone,

guano, 53 individuals.

Family: Suctobelbidae Grandjean, 1953Species: Suctobelba atomaria Moritz, 1970Material examined: Mapheili cave – entrance, one

individual.

Family: Tectocepheidae Oudemans, 1900Species: Tectocepheus velatus velatus (Michael, 1880)Material examined: Motena cave – entrance, one indi-

vidual; Navenakhevi cave – entrance, one individual;Dzudzuana cave – twilight zone, four individuals;Tsivtskala cave – entrance, two individuals; Kakhidzecave – entrance, one individual.

Family: Phenopelopidae Petrunkevich, 1955Species: Eupelops acromios (Hermann, 1804)Material examined: Cave at the source of Chishura

River – entrance, one individual; Navenakhevi cave –twilight zone, one individual; Kidobana cave – entrance,one individual.

4 M. Murvanidze

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

Species: Eupelops torulosus (CL Koch, 1839)Material examined: Kakhidze cave – entrance, one

individual.

Family: Achipteriidae Thor, 1929Species: Achipteria longisetosa Murvanidze &

Weigmann, 2003Material examined: Sakajia cave – entrance, three

individuals; Navenakhevi cave – entrance, 43 individuals;Dzudzuana cave – twilight zone, one individual.

Species: Parachipteria fanzagoi (Jacot, 1929)Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, one

individual.

Species: Parachipteria punctata (Nicolet, 1855)Material examined: Mapheli cave – entrance, three

individuals.

Family: Oribatellidae Jacot, 1925Species: Oribatella berlesei (Michael, 1898)Material examined: Sakajia cave – entrance, five

individuals.

Family: Oribatulidae Thor, 1929Species: Oribatula tibialis (Nicolet, 1855)Material examined: Nagarevi grotto – entrance, three

individuals; Sakajia cave – entrance, one individual.

Species: Phauloppia lucorum (CL Koch, 1841)Material examined: Navenakhevi cave – dark zone,

one individual; Nikortsminda cave – entrance, oneindividual.

Species: Phauloppia pilosa (CL Koch, 1841)Material examined: Sakajia cave – entrance.

Note: I found only one female individual of P.pilosa at the cave entrance. The specimen differs fromthe descriptions indicated in Perez-Iñigo (1993) andWeigmann (2006) by larger body size (510 µm vsreported 375–485 µm) and narrow, prolonged areaeporosae Aa (37 µm against reported small and roundones). Length of all ng setae is about 157 µm. I thinkthat this finding could be described as a new subspecies,but because of lack of material and broken legs II andIII, I hesitate to do this unless additional materialbecomes available. For the Caucasian fauna, the distri-bution of P. pilosa is indicated in Sochi and Musera(Karppinen et al. 1987; Shtanchaeva and Subias 2010).These citations from the Caucasus region could be thereferred to the proposed subspecies rather than to theEuropean nominal species.

Species: Zygoribatula cognata (Oudemans, 1902)Material examined: Samele cave – entrance, one

individual.

Species: Zygoribatula frisiae (Oudemans, 1900)Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, soil, 15

individuals; Nikortsminda cave – twilight zone, oneindividual.

Species: Protoribates capucinus Berlese, 1908Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – dark zone, three

individuals.

Family: Scheloribatidae Grandjean, 1933Species: Scheloribates laevigatus (CL Koch, 1835)Material examined: Tsutskhvati cave # 2 – twilight

zone, three individuals; Tsutskhvati cave #7 – entrance,one individual; Tsutskhvati cave #11 – entrance, threeindividuals.

Species: Scheloribates latipes (CL Koch, 1844)Material examined: Tsutskhvati cave #2 – entrance,

one individual; Dzudzuana cave – entrance, twoindividuals; Samele cave – twilight zone, twoindividuals.

Family: Zetomotrichidae Grandjean, 1934Species: Ghilarovus kvavadzei sp. nov.Material examined: Tsakhi cave – entrance, one indi-

vidual; Tsutskhvati cave #2 – entrance, two individuals,Tsutskhvati cave #11 – entrance, one individual (descrip-tion see below).

Family: Ceratozetidae Thor, 1929Species: Ceratozetes gracilis (Michael, 1884)Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, four

individuals.

Species: Sphaerozetes tricuspidatus Willmann, 1923Material examined: Chishura cave – twilight zone, two

individuals; Mapheli cave – entrance, nine individuals;Motena cave – entrance, one individual; Navenakhevicave – entrance, seven individuals; Kidobana cave –entrance, 43 individuals.

Family: Chamobatidae Grandjean, 1954Species: Chamobates cuspidatus (Michael, 1884)Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance,

three individuals; Tsakhi cave – dark zone, oneindividual.

Species: Chamobates interpositus Pschorn-Walcher,1953

Material examined: Tsutskhvati cave #2 – entrance,one individual and twilight zone, three individuals;Samele cave – entrance, six individuals.

Species: Chamobates spinosus Sellnick, 1928Material examined: Leskhulukhe cave – entrance, two

individuals.

International Journal of Acarology 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

Species: Chamobates voigtsi (Oudemans, 1902)Material examined: Leskhulukhe cave – entrance, two

individuals; Motena cave – entrance, one individual;Tsutskhvati cave #8 – entrance, one individual;Tsutskhvati cave #11 – entrance, one individual;Navenakhevi grotto – entrance, one individual;Dzudzuana cave – dark zone, 16 individuals; Samelecave – entrance, two individuals; Kidobana cave –entrance, 37 individuals; Tsakhi cave – entrance, oneindividual and dark zone, one individual; Shareula cave– entrance, one individual.

Family: Mycobatidae Grandjean, 1954Species: Minunthozetes pseudofusiger (Schweizer,

1922)Material examined: Cave at the source of Chishura

River – entrance, three individuals; Nagarevi grotto –entrance, 48 individuals; Sakajia cave – entrance, twoindividuals; Mapheli cave – entrance, 800 individuals;Mikava cave – entrance, four individuals; Navenakhevicave – entrance, 45 individuals; Dzudzuana cave –entrance, five individuals; twilight, two individuals anddark zone, one individual; Kidobana cave – entrance,four individuals.

Species: Punctoribates punctum (CL Koch, 1839)Material examined: Mapheli cave – entrance, one indi-

vidual; Leskhulukhe cave – twilight zone, two individuals;Dzudzuana cave – twilight zone, eight individuals anddark zone, six individuals.

Family: Galumnidae Jacot, 1925Species: Acrogalumna longipluma adjarica

Murvanidze & Weigmann, 2003Material examined: Mapheli cave – entrance, one

individual.

Species: Galumna alata (Hermann, 1804)Material examined: Dzudzuana cave – twilight zone,

one individual.

Species: Pilogalumna tenuiclava Berlese, 1914Material examined: Kidobana cave – entrance, one

individual.

Conclusion

The highest number of species was found at the caveentrances, decreasing towards the twilight and darkzones. A cave entrance is characterized by the presenceof some vegetation (usually mosses) and deeper soil thatcreates more shelter and available food resources for ori-batid mites compared to the twilight and dark zones,where soil depth is lower (5–1 cm) and no vegetation isdeveloped. Chamobates voigtsi and Minunthozetes pseu-dofusiger were most frequently found in investigatedcaves, both species abundant at cave entrances with rarepresence in twilight and dark zones.

Guano samples were available only in the dark zone ofNavenakhevi cave. Four species were found here, withPantelozetes alpestris (Willmann, 1929) most abundant(represented by 53 individuals). This species is knownfrom Georgian caves from previous findings as well(Djaparidze 1986). It was initially described as a newspecies Amazoppia caucasica Djaparidze, 1986, but isnow regarded as a synonym of P. alpestris (Subias 2004,electronically updated in 2014). Only three species fromthe list – Hoplophthiracarus illinoisensis (Ewing, 1909),P. alpestris and Oribatula tibialis (Nicolet, 1855) – werefound during previous investigations (Djaparidze 1986;Djaparidze and Gomelauri 1986).

Family: Zetomotrichidae Grandjean, 1934Genus: Ghilarovus Krivolutsky, 1966

Twelve species (excluding the new species) and one sub-species of the genus have been described worldwide(Subías 2004, electronically updated in 2014) mostlyfrom Asian parts of the world (Krivolutsky 1966, 1974;Wen 1990; Krivolutsky and Smelyansky 1997; Aoki andHirauchi 2000; Yamamoto and Aoki et al. 2000; Fujikawa2005; Bayartogtokh and Smelyansky 2006). As for non-Asian species, G. hispanicus hispanicus Subias & Perez-Iñigo, 1977 and G. hispanicus guadarramicus Subias,1977 are reported from Spain (Subias 1977; Subias andPerez-Iñigo 1977) and G. elegans Mahunka, 1983 fromMexico (Mahunka 1983).

Ghilarovus kvavadzei sp. nov.(Figures 2–5)

Etymology

The species is named after my supervisor and colleague,lumbricologist, Professor Eristo Kvavadze.

Material examined

Holotype (female) was collected from the entrance of theTsakhi cave on 24 September 2013 by Dr Shalva Barjadze.It is stored as a permanent slide in the museum of theAgricultural University of Georgia.

Three paratypes (all females) collected from theentrances of Tsutskhvati caves #2 and #11 on 28February 2013. Two of them are stored in 70% alcoholand one in permanent slide in the museum of theAgricultural University of Georgia.

Diagnosis (adult female)

Medium-sized, light coloured mite. Rostrum with 12 teeth.Sensilli setiform, with small setulae; lamellar and interla-mellar setae relatively long, situated on small apophyses;humeral sac not developed; pyriform organ present; seta c2is situated on acute projection; posterior part of notogaster

6 M. Murvanidze

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

Figure 2. Ghilarovus kvavadzei sp. nov. – (A) dorsal aspect; (B)shape of the rostrum; (C) sensillus and notogastral projectionbearing seta c2.

Figure 3. Ghilarovus kvavadzei sp. nov. – ventral aspect.

Figure 4. Ghilarovus kvavadzei sp. nov. – (A) Leg I; (B) Leg II.

Figure 5. Ghilarovus kvavadzei sp. nov. – (A) Leg III; (B)Leg IV.

International Journal of Acarology 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

pointed; polygonal sculpture is present around the genitalplates; posterior tectum not overlapping.

Description

Measurements: Body length of the Holotype 370 µm;width – 220 µm; Paratypes: body length 360–365 µm;width 210–220 µm.

Colour: Yellowish.

Integument. Dorsal cuticle with few light granules. On theventral side, polygonal sculpture is present around thegenital plates.

Prodorsum. Rostrum rounded and dentate, with 12 teeth(more or less visible in all specimens), shortening towardsthe margins. (The teeth are arranged into groups; centralgroup separated from lateral groups.) The central group isdivided from laterals by an “excavation”. Only medialteeth are well visible from the dorsal side, unequal insize and shape (Figure 2A, B). Rostral (ro) setae situatedat rostrum edges, barbed, 40 µm long; interlamellar (in)setae almost as long as rostral setae – 45 µm, lamellar (le)setae considerably longer than rostral setae – 70 µm. Both,setae in and le strong, erect, barbed, situated on smallapophyses (Figure 2A). Bothridium cup-shaped; exobo-thridial setae (ex) fine, situated laterally to bothridium;insertion pore of seta ex not visible in dorsal view(Figure 2C). Sensillus (ss) setiform, unilaterally barbedwith fine setulae, 53 µm in length (Figure 2A, C).

Notogaster. Dorsosejugal line medially broken. Ten pairs ofnotogastral setae present. Seta c2 sword-shaped and strong,but weakly barbed, 40 µm long; situated on the acutenotogastral projection that is protruding over rounded hum-eral projection (Figure 2A, C). Other nine pairs of notogas-tral setae much shorter than seta c2 – about 10 µm long,weak, fine. Lyrifissure im long and aligned transversally.Other lyrifissures hard to see. Humeral sac is absent.Pyriform organ situated close to lyrifissure im. Posteriorend of the notogaster is narrowed and pointed. A fewlight granules present on notogastral surface (Figure 2A).

Ventral side. Gnathosoma. Morphology of subcapitulum,palps and chelicerae do not show any peculiarities. Setae hand m well developed, setiform, barbed. Seta h (50 µm) istwice as long as seta m (20 µm) and three times longerthan seta a (15 µm).

Epimeral region. Epimeral setae setiform, with small setu-lae. Epimeral setation – 3-1-3-3.

Anogenital region. Anogenital setation 4-1-2-2. Genitalsetae are well visible. Setae ag, an and ad vestigial.Lyrifissure iad well visible, placed at the anterior marginof anal plate. Anal plate is 78 µm in length, larger than thegenital plate (50 µm). Sides of the posterior tectum do notoverlap (Figure 3). T

able

1.Table

ofcharacters

ofGhilarovusspecies.

Species

Size(µm)

Pyriform

organ

Hum

eral

sac

Num

berof

rostralteeth

Notog

astral

projectio

nwith

c 2seta

Shape

ofno

togaster

Num

berof

adsetae

G.kvavad

zeisp.nov.

360–37

0×21

0–23

0Present

Absent

12Sharp,acute

Pointed

2G.chan

glingensisWen

1990

352–43

0×23

0–24

4Absent

Absent

Unk

nown

Rou

nded

Pointed

3G.da

liensisYam

amoto&

Aok

i,20

0031

2–36

8×18

0–23

6Present

Absent

10Rou

nded

Pointed

2G.elegan

sMahun

ka19

8341

0–51

0×28

1–36

8Present

Present

Unk

nown

Rou

nded

Narrowed,roun

ded

3G.h

ispa

nicushispan

icus

Sub

ias&

Perez-Iñigo

,197

735

0–41

0×24

5–25

5Absent

Absent

13Acute

Pointed

3G.hispan

icus

guad

arramicus

Sub

ias,19

7739

5–43

0×25

0–28

0Absent

Absent

13Acute

Pointed

3G.hu

meridensKrivo

lutsky

1966

482×30

0Absent

Absent

13Acute

Rou

nded

3G.khentiicusBayartogtok

h&

Smelyansky,20

0634

8–39

6×22

0–24

4Absent

Present

16Rou

nded

Narrowed

2G.krivolutskyi

Bayartogtok

h&

Smelyansky,20

0633

2–37

2×24

4–26

2Present

Present

18–2

2Rou

nded

Rou

nded

3G.mon

golicus

Bayartogtok

h&

Smelyansky,20

0639

3–21

9×27

5–311

Absent

Present

20Rou

nded

Narrowed

3G.sanu

kiensisFujikaw

a,20

0530

0–33

5×18

5–21

4Absent

Present

12–1

5Acute

Pointed

2G.saxicola

Aok

i&

Hirauchi,20

0032

0–37

2×20

3–24

8Absent

Present

23Rou

nded

Narrowed

2G.stipatus

Krivo

lutsky

&Smelyansky,19

97un

know

nAbsent

Absent

Unk

nown

Rou

nded

Pointed

3G.turkmenicus

Krivo

lutsky,19

7437

0Absent

Absent

11–1

3Rou

nded

Rou

nded

3

8 M. Murvanidze

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

Legs. Length of the legs: I – 175 µm, II – 170 µm, III –175 µm, IV – 200 µm. All legs tridactylous. Median clawshorter and thicker than lateral ones. Tibiae I, II and IIIhave large projections bearing solenidia φ1 and φ (Figure4A, B; Figure 5A). Tibia IV without such projection(Figure 5B). Leg chaetotaxy excluding solenidia butincluding famulus: I (1-5-2-4-20); II (1-5-2-4-16); III (2-3-1-3-15); IV (1-2-2–3-12); formula of solenidia (genu totarsus): I (1-2-2); II (1-1-2); III (1-1-0); IV (0-1-0). Lengthof solenidia φ and σ: Leg I φ – 65 µm, φ1 – 23 µm; σ –45 µm; Leg II φ – 45 µm, σ – 30 µm.

Discussion. Up to now no representative of Ghilarovuswas known from Caucasus (see Shtanchaeva and Subias2010).

Ghilarovus kvavadzei sp. nov. has a well-developed pyri-form organ and lacks a humeral sac. OnlyGhilarovus dalien-sis Yamamoto & Aoki, 2000 shares these characters(Yamamoto and Aoki et al. 2000). Other similarities of G.kvavadzei sp. nov. and G. daliensis include pointed notoga-ster, thin notogastral setae and two pairs of vestigial ad setae.However, the two species differ in several characters: (1)setae in and le of G. kvavadzei sp. nov. are situated onsmall apophyses and the same setae in G. daliensis aresituated directly on the prodorsal surface; (2) G. kvavadzeisp. nov. has 12 rostral teeth in contrast to 10 teeth of G.daliensis; (3) pyriform organ ofG. kvavadzei sp. nov. is wellvisible, situated close to lyrifissure im, but is differentlyshaped than in G. daliensis; (4) seta c2 of G. kvavadzei sp.nov. is situated on the sharp notogastral projection protrund-ing over humeral projection, whereas the notogastral projec-tion of G. daliensis is rounded and smaller and is situatedposterior to humeral projection.

Differences between G. kvavadzei sp. nov. and theother species of the genus are shown in Table 1.

AcknowledgementsI would like to thank to Dr Shalva Barjadze and Dr Tea Arabulifor sampling of the material, Dr Levan Mumladze for mapping,technical assistant Mary Salakaia for help during mite extractionand to the anonymous referees for revising and commenting themanuscript. My special thanks to Dr Frank Monson, for checkingthe language and giving many useful comments and suggestions.

FundingThe research was financed by a grant of the Shota RustaveliNational Scientific Foundation “Biodiversity of invertebrates ofGeorgian caves”.

ReferencesAoki J, Hirauchi Y. 2000. Two species of the family

Zetomotrichidae (Acari: Oribatida) from Japan. SpeciesDiversity 5:351–359.

Bayartogtokh B, Smelyansky I. 2006. Oribatid mites of the genusGhilarovus (Acari: Oribatida: Zetomotrichidae) from Russiaand Mongolia with remarks on ecology and biogeography ofknown species. Acarologia XLVII:79–97.

Borges AV, Pereira F, Constância JP. 2004. Indicators of conserva-tion value of Azorean caves based on its arthropod fauna. In:Espinasa-Pereňa R, Pint J, editors. Proceedings of the X, XI andXII international symposia on vulcanospeleology. Mexico:Tepoztlán; p. 109–113.

Bruckner A. 1995. Cave dwelling oribatid mites (Acarina,Cryptostigmata) from East Austria. Verhandlungen derZoologischer-Botanischer Gesselschaft Österreich 132:81–107.

Christman MC, Culver DC. 2002. The relationship between cavebiodiversity and available habitat. Journal of Biogeography28:367–380. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2699.2001.00549.x

Culver DC, Sket B. 2000. Hotspots in subterranean biodiversity incaves and wells. Journal of Cave and Karst Studies 62:11–17.

Djanashvili R. 1984. Cave fauna. Georgian Soviet Encyclopedia7:237.

Djaparidze NI. 1986. Pantsirnie kleshchi roda Amazoppia Balogh etMahunka, 1969 v Gruzii [Oribatid mites of the genusAmazoppia Balogh et Mahunka, 1969 in Georgia]. Bulletin ofthe Academic Science of GSSR 121:629–632 (In Russian).

Djaparidze NI, Gomelauri LA. 1986. Pantsirnie (Oribatei) igamazovie (Gamasoidea) kleshchi v pescherakh Gruzii[Oribatid (Oribatei) and gamasid (Gamasoidea) mites inGeorgian caves]. Bulletin of the Academic Science ofGSSR 124:613–616 (In Russian).

Ducarme X, André HM, Wauthy G, Lebrun P. 2004a.Comparison of endogeic and cave communities: microarthro-pod density and mite species richness. European Journal ofSoil Biology 40:129–138. doi:10.1016/j.ejsobi.2004.10.003

Ducarme X, Wauthy G, André HM, Lebrun P. 2004b. Survey ofmites in caves and deep soil and evolution of mites in thesehabitats. Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:841–850.doi:10.1139/z04-053

Fujikawa T. 2005. A new species of Zetomotrichidae fromShikoku island in Nippon (Acari: Oribatida). AcarologiaXLVI:341–347.

Ghilarov MS, Krivolutsky DA. 1975. Opredelitel obitayushchikhv pochve kleshchei [Identification keys of soil inhabitingmites] – Sarcoptiformes. Moscow: Nauka (In Russian).

Ivan O, Vasiliu NA. 2010. Fauna of oribatid mites (Acari,Oribatida) from Movile cave area. Institute of Speleology“Émile Racovitsa” XLIX:29–40.

Karppinen E, Krivolutsky DA, Tarba ZM, Shtanchaeva U,Gordeeva EW. 1987. List of oribatid mites (Acarina,Oribatei) of northern palaearctic region. IV. Caucasus andCrimea. Annales Entomologici Fennici 53:119–137.

Klimchuk A. 2004. Caucasus, Georgia. In Gunn J, editor.Encyclopedia of caves and karst science. New York andLondon: Taylor & Francis Books; p. 200–203.

Krivolutsky DA. 1966. O pantsirnikh kleshchakh (Oribatei,Acariformes) pochv srednei Azii [On armored mites(Oribatei, Acariformes) of soils of central Asia].Zoologicheskii Zhurnal 45:1628–1638 (In Russian).

Krivolutsky DA. 1974. Novie pantsirnie kleshchi SSSR [Neworibatid mites of USSR]. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal 53:1880–1885 (In Russian).

Krivolutsky DA, Smelyansky IE. 1997. Novoe dlya Rossiisemeistvo pantsirnikh kleshchei Zetomotrichidae s yuzhnogoUrala [New family of oribatid mites for RussiaZetomotrichidae from southern Ural]. Doklady AkademiiNauk 355:571–574 (In Russian).

Kulijev KA. 1967. Novie vidi semeistva Damaeidae Berl. [Newspecies of the family Damaeidae Berl.]. Doklady AkademiiNauk SSSR XXIII:63–70 (In Russian).

Kunst M. 1959. Bulgarische Oribatiden (Acarina) III. [Bulgarianoribatids (Acarina) III]. Acta Universitatis CarolinaeBiologica 1:51–74 (In German).

Mahunka S. 1983. Neue und interessante Milben aus dem GenferMuseum XIV. Oribatida Americana 6: Mexico II (Acari).[New and interesting mites from Genfer Museum XIV.

International Journal of Acarology 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

Oribatida Americana 6: Mexico II (Acari)]. Revue suisse DeZoologie 90:269–298 (In German).

Maraun M, Schatz H, Scheu S. 2007. Awesome or ordinary?Global diversity patterns of oribatid mites. Ecography30:209–216. doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2007.04994.x

Norton RA, Behan-Pelletier VM. 2009. Suborder Oribatida. In:Kranz GW, Walter DE, editors. A manual of acarology. 3rded. Lubbock: Texas Technical University Press; p. 430–564.

Perez-Iñigo C. 1993. Acari. Oribatei, Poronota. In: Fauna Iberica.Vol. 3. Madrid: Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales.

The Ramsar Handbooks. 2011. Handbook 11. Managing ground-water. 4th ed., pp. 43. Switzerland: Ramsar ConventionSecretariat. Available from: http://www.ramsar.org/pdf/lib/hbk4-11.pdf.

Schatz H, Behan-Pelletier VM, OConnor BM, Norton RA. 2011.Suborder Oribatida van der Hammen, 1968. In: Zhang ZQ,editor. Animal biodiversity: an outline of higher-level classifica-tion and survey of taxonomic richness. Zootaxa 3148:141–148.

Schwalbe T. 1989. Oppiella signata eine neue Art der FamilieOppiidae aus dem Osterzgebirge [Oppiella signata the newspecies of the family Oppiidae from Osterzgebirge]. DeutscheEntomologische Zeitschrift. 31:99–101 (In German).

Shtanchaeva U, Subias LS. 2010. Katalog pantsirnikh KleshcheiKavkaza [Catalogue of oribatid mites of Caucasus].Makhachkala: Russian Academy of Sciences (In Russian).

Subias LS. 1977. Taxonomia y ecologia de los Oribatidos sax-icolas y arboricolas de la Sierra del Guadarrama (Acarida,Oribatida) [Taxonomy and ecology of the saxicolous andarboricolar oribatid mites from Guadarrama mountains].Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

Subías LS. 2004. Listado sistematico, sinonimico y biogeograficode los oribatidas (Acariformes, Oribatida) del mundo (1758–2002). Graelsia 60 (numero extraordinario):577pp [Internet].[cited 2014 Feb]. Available from: http://www.ucm.es/info/zoo/Artropodos/Catalogo.pdf.

Subias LS, Perez-Inigo C. 1977. Notes sur les oribatesD’Espagne I. Description de Ghilarovus hispanicus sp.nov.et quelques considerations sur les Zetomotrichidae (Acari,Oribatei) [Notes on the oribatid mites of Spain. Descriptionof Ghilarovus hispanicus sp.nov. and considerations forZetomotrichidae (Acari, Oribatei)]. Acarologia XVIII:729–739 (In Spain).

Tsikarishvili K, Barjadze S, Kvavadze E, Bolashvili N,Djanashvili R, Martkoplishvili I. 2010. Speleology ofGeorgia: aspects to its current situation and perspectives.Cave and Karst Science 37:73–78.

Weigmann G. 2006. Hornmilben (Oribatida). Die TierweltDeutschlands. 76 Teil. (In German). Keltern: Goecke &Evers.

Wen Z. 1990. Description of new and unrecorded oribatid mitesfrom Jilin Province, China. Journal of Northeast NormalUniversity 1:125–131.

White WB, Culver DC. 2012. Cave, definition of. In: White WB,Culver DC, editors. Encyclopedia of caves. 2nd ed. Oxford:Elsevier; p. 103–107.

Yamamoto Y, Aoki J. 2000. Six new species of oribatid mites fromMt. Jizushan and MT. Xuerefeng, Yunnan Province in China(Acari, Oribatida). In: Aoki J, et al., editors. Taxonomicalstudies on the soil fauna of Yunnan Province in SouthwestChina; Tokyo: Tokai University Press. p. 13–22.

10 M. Murvanidze

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mak

a M

urva

nidz

e] a

t 21:

52 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4