taxonID	type	description	language	source
241C87DE2D29B05EFF10FF7FC17CFC97.taxon	description	New records: L. 81 — Comblain-au-Pont cave (12.11.2000, MD; 18.8.2011, MD; 14.9.2011, MD); L. 142 — Chartreuse, mine gallery (17.12.2002, MD & JMH). This small species, collected by Leruth, was described by Schellenberg (1934). It was considered as an endemic species of the Lyell’s cave (before called “ Grande Caverne d’Engihoul ”) for a long time, but later the species was reported also from Luxembourg (Hoffmann 1963), Germany (Spangenberg 1973) and British Isles (reviewed by Knight & Gledhill 2010). In Belgium, it was previously reported from five localities and considered as extinct by Martin et al. (2009). We found the species on two additional localities. The species is distributed only in north-eastern part of Wallonia, where it is known from caves, one artificial gallery, wells in surroundings of Liège and mine gallery near Chartreuse (Fig. 2). This is one of the smallest niphargid species that regularly co-occurs with other Niphargus species (Schellenberg 1934, Knight & Gledhill 2010, App. 1). Preliminary molecular studies suggest that continental populations are genetically different from populations on British Isles (Moškrič, unpublished). The taxonomic status of Belgian populations, however, should remain unchanged given that they include the type population. However, the taxonomic revision may reveal that the size of the species range is smaller, which can affect species conservation status.	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D29B059FF10F9C1C147FBDD.taxon	description	New records: L. 27 — Fayt cave (2.12.2000, GR); L. 34 — Netinne cave (31.3.2001, MD); L. 93 — La Reid, brooks and springs, station B 1 (18.3.2002, MD); L. 110 — Ru de Targnon, brook (6.11.2002, MD, JMH).	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D2EB058FF10FB8CC56AFE38.taxon	description	New records: L. 72 — Fontaine de Rivîre cave (17.8.2000, MD, JMH); L. 84 — Remouchamps cave (24.03 - 10.0 4.2000, MD & JMH); L. 107 — Beaumont cave (4.5.2002, GR); L. 111 — Houx castle, well (7.3.2007, SM); L. 112 — Sainte Anne cave (13.4.2006, MD); L. 142 — Chartreuse, mine gallery (16.2.2001, MD, JMH; 30.11.2002, GR; 18.10.2003, MD); L. 148 — Rhieux, underground brook (8.3.2002; MD & JMH); L. 150 — Argenteau, draining gallery (23.10.2003, MD). The species was originally described as a subspecies of N. kochianus, based on strong sexual dimorphism in gnathopods (Stock & Gledhill 1977). It is distributed in the Netherlands and Belgium (Stock & Gledhill 1 977), and early records of N. kochianus from Belgium may in fact refer to this species (Schellenberg 1934, Leruth 1939 b). According to the available data the species was broadly found throughout Wallonia, albeit we found the species only in the eastern part of the country (Fig. 3). Following Leruth (1934 a, b, 1939 b), the species distribution is linked to the watershed of the Meuse River. Phylogenetic analyses suggested a close relationship with N. kochianus (Trontelj et al. 2009; Esmaeili et al. 2015), and a close phylogenetic relatedness to fauna from the British Isles. Martin et al. (2009) reported the nominal subspecies N. k. kochianus for Belgium as well. This finding is difficult to explain as the species is distributed in Great Britain only. Its presence in Belgium suggests that is should be able to maintain geneflow across the sea, and for this reason we consider the presence of N. k. kochianus doubtful.	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D2FB05BFF10FB20C52DFF19.taxon	description	Also this species was described from Great Britain, but later on reported from the entire Europe: Austria (Priesel-Dichtl 1959), Belgium (Leruth, 1939 b), France (Ginet 1996; McInnerney et al. 2014); Germany (Trontelj et al. 2009), Switzerland (Fišer et al. 2017). In Belgium it was found at 15 localities, caves, wells and springs (Fig. 3, App. 1). We did not recollect this species in any of the samples in our study. According to published information from all parts of its range, the species seem to inhabit preferentially interstitial habitats (Fišer et al. 2017). Molecular analyses suggested “ N. fontanus ” is a polyphyletic complex; at least populations from upper Danube and Rhine Basins are not closely related to the name-bearing British populations (Trontelj et al. 2009; Fišer et al. 2017). The populations from Belgium belong to the lineage, which is distributed also in Britain and is only weakly differentiated from another lineage endemic to southern Britain (McInnerney et al. 2014). More detailed analyses are needed to clarify i) whether the two lineages can be treated as separate species and ii) which of the two lineages comprises nominal N. fontanus and which lineage deserves a separate species status.	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D2CB05BFF10FECFC22AFB53.taxon	description	New records: L. 110 — Ru de Targnon, brook (23.8.2000, MD; 6.11.2002, MD & JMH); L. 113 — Spring close to Monceau cave (04.06.2001, MD & JMH; 06 - 12.06.2002, MD); L. 123 — Blanc Gravier, brook, G 2 station (29.4.2003, MD); L. 141 — Petites Soeurs des Pauvres, draining gallery (23.3.2002, MD & JMH; 5.12.2003, MD & JMH); L. 148 — Rhieux, underground brook (23.3.2006, MD & JMH); L. 150 — Argenteau, draining gallery (15.6.2006, MD). The species was described as N. kochianus pachypus from France (Schellenberg 1933). The taxon is distributed in France, Belgium, Luxembourg and Netherlands (Stock & Gledhill 1977). In Belgium, it is restricted to karst areas, where it was collected along rivers. In newly collected material we found the species only in the localities around Liège in Eastern part of the country (Fig. 4). We collected the species mainly in springs, but also caves (often in “ gours ” — little pools in the calcite reservoirs; see the list, App. 1). The species seems to be generally bound to small pore habitats (Stock & Gledhill 1977). Already Stock & Gledhill (1977) erected N. k. pachypus from subspecies to species level, and subsequent molecular analyses suggest that the species is not related to N. kochianus s. str. (McInnerney et al. 2014). Unlike previous species, this species shows relatedness towards niphargids from continental Europe. Phylogeography and population structure of this species was never studied, but indirect evidence from N. virei and N. schellenbergi, derived from similar distributional patterns (see below), suggests that some phylogeographic structure and perhaps cryptic species cannot be ruled out.	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D2CB05AFF10F885C28EFE1D.taxon	description	The species was discovered in a peat-bog, near the Baraque Fraiture, between Laroche-en-Ardenne and Vielsalm (Leloup & Jacquemart 1963; Fig. 4; App. 1). The species is otherwise distributed in Upper Rhine and Upper Danube valleys (Fišer et al. 2017). As we could not study the material from Belgium, we cannot give any conclusions on species true identity. In any case, the finding is rather interesting from ecological point of view. The locality is at an elevation of 600 m, in a forest brook draining a peat bog of type Vagineto-Sphagnetum. Specimens were collected in the root net of Molinia obstructed by sand and in very acid water. It may inhabit the water sheet between the peat and the bedrock and was washed in the brook by a flood. Only a few Niphargus species inhabit such shallow subterranean habitats (Fišer et al. 2006, 2010; 2015 b; Copilaş-Ciocianu et al. 2017), and the specimens from Belgium would be the northern most record of this kind of species.	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D2DB055FF10FDCCC437F880.taxon	description	New records: L. 5 — Tunnel Gouy-Godarville, undergroud canal (19.5.2002, JD; 18 - 4 - 2004, MD); L. 6 — Tournai, well (18.2.2009, MD); L. 28 — Ciergnon, spring (15.10.2004, MD); L. 31 — Rostène cave (01.02.2002, GR; Jan-Feb 2007, GR; 1.11.2007, GR; 15.0 8.2008, GR; 17.0 5.2008, GR; 14.0 6.2008, GR; 15.10.2008, GR; 1.2.2010, GR); L. 32 — Mouchenne cave (16.3.2000, MD); L. 51 — Trou de l'Eglise cave (26.08.2000, GR; 11.0 1.2003, GR); L. 52 — Dellieux-Wéron cave (12.1.2002, GR); L. 53 — Trou Bernard cave (22.07.2000, GR); L. 61 — Trou d'Haquin cave (24.5.2008, MD; Nov. 2013, MD); L. 66 — Alexandre cave (6.1.2001, GR); L. 68 — Floreffe, quarry gallery (31.6.2001, GR); L. 70 — Grands Malades & Charrues, underground quarry (15.6.2005, GR); L. 71 — Fouron Saint Pierre, spring (13.7.2002, MD & JMH); L. 78 — Carrière du Grand Banc (06 - 12.06.2002, MD, RV); L. 81 — Comblain-au-Pont cave (12.11.2000; JS); L. 84 — Remouchamps cave (24.11.1999, MD; 24.3.2000 MD & JMH; 24.03 - 10.04.2000, MD & JMH; 12 - 26.04.2001, MD & RV); L. 86 — Florzé, quarry gallery (8.2.1997, JMH; 9.12.2000, MD & JMH); L. 3 — Hantes-Wihéries, spring (5.1.2013, JD & JFG); L. 91 — La Reid, brooks and springs (25.7.2002, MD); L. 92 — La Reid, brooks and springs, station A 2 (3.12.2002, RC); L. 94 — La Reid, brooks and springs, station Sce 1 (12. - 14.11.2002, RC); L. 95 — La Reid, brooks and springs, station Sce 8 (3.8.2002, RC); L. 105 — Noû Bleu cave (15.12.2013, AD; 21.2.2014, AD, 6.4.2014, AD); L. 110 — Ru de Targnon, brook (8.4.2000, MD; 23.8.2000, MD; 6.11.2002, MD); L. 112 — Sainte Anne cave (8.7.2000, GR; 30.11.2003, GR); L. 113 — Spring close to Monceau cave (4.6.2001, MD & JMH); L. 120 — Ramioul cave (20.5.1999, JMH; 23.10.2004, MD); L. 124 — Nicole cave (24.4.2003, JMH); L. 133 — Puits Keller, artificial well (Sep. 2012, MD); L. 134 — Station S 2 at the mouth of the brook Sordeye (2.9.2004, MD); L. 141 — Petites Soeurs des Pauvres, draining gallery (8.3.2002, MD & JMH; 23.3.2002, MD & JMH; 5.12.2003, MD & JMH; 15.5.2005, MD); L. 142 — Chartreuse, mine gallery (16.2.2001, MD & JMH; 5.4.2001, MD & JMH; 17.12.2002, MD & JMH; 18.102003, MD); L. 148 — Rhieux, underground brook (23.3.2006, MD & JMH); L. 150 — Argenteau, draining gallery (23.10.2003, MD); L. 161 — Trotti-aux-Fosses cave (29.07 - 01.08.1999, LA); L. 163 — Hotton cave (31.10.2001, MD & JMH; 29.9.2002, MD); L. 164 — Vielsalm spring (28.4.1974, JMH). This species was described from Germany and is broadly distributed throughout Germany (Zaenker & Nagel 1999), France (Ginet 1996), Luxembourg (Hartke et al. 2011), Netherlands (Stock 1961; Cuppen, 1978 a, b) and Belgium (Fig. 5, App. 1). All studies (e. g. Martin et al. 2009), including ours, suggest this is the most widespread species in Belgium, and indeed, it was present in 65 % localities (Fig. 5; list and App. 1). The species seems to be found in all habitats, from running waters, caves to springs. Our results are concordant with data from neighboring South Limburg (Netherlands, Stock 1961; Cuppen 1978 a, b). Some authors considered it as subspecies of N. aquilex (e. g. Zaenker & Nagel 1999), but molecular phylogenetic studies clearly rejected its subspecies status (Fišer et al. 2008). Genetically it is only modestly differentiated, although cryptic species within the complex cannot be ruled out (Hartke et al. 2011, McInnerney et al. 2014). Noteworthy, the samples from Belgium turned to be rather heterogeneous morphologically. One of the diagnostic characters (inner ramus of uropod I shorter than outer) turned to be polymorphic, i. e. inner ramus as long as or even slightly longer than outer ramus. We suggest that other characters, like elevated number of retinacles in pleopods, are more reliable for identification of Belgian populations of this species.	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D23B057FF10F978C2FEFF18.taxon	description	Specimens from two localities (Fig. 6) exhibit a peculiar morphology and differ from all other known species. The specimens are rather large (> 15 mm), extremely slender, with relatively large gnathopods, narrow bases of pereopods V – VII, two retinacles on the pleopods and a setose telson (Fig. 7). Particularly distinct is the setal pattern of telson, strongly setose but completely lacking robust setae. Abundant thin setae were observed also in the telson of some populations of N. schellenbergi (see Karaman 1934), but the putative new species differs from the latter in the lower number of hooks in the retinacles. Despite its morphological distinctness, its separate status needs to be confirmed also with molecular delimitation methods. Sequencing in our analyses failed, and additional specimens need to be collected for formal description.	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D23B054FF10FCBDC246F9F0.taxon	description	New records: L. 84 — Remouchamps cave (24.03 - 10.04.2000, MD & JMH; 12 - 26.04.2001, MD & RV; 24.4.2001, MD); L. 150 — Argenteau, draining gallery (23.10.2003, MD); L. 161 — Trotti-aux-Fosses cave (29.07 - 01.08.1999, LA).	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
241C87DE2D20B057FF10FB50C4B4F9F5.taxon	description	New records: L. 83 — Collemboles cave (12.7.2004, AB); L. 125 — Bruta, spring (9.2.2005, MD); L. 142 — Chartreuse, mine gallery (17.12.2002, MD & JMH); L. 148 — Rhieux, underground brook (18.3.2002, MD & JMH). Leruth (1934 a) mentions a finding of Niphargus sp. in Namur, and an unknown subspecies of N. kochianus subsp. from the other two localities. As this subspecies could not be attributed to species level, we rather consider such records as Niphargus sp. Specimens in new material were either to small for identification, or did not exhibit enough specific characters for unambiguous species determination (for distribution see Fig. 6).	en	Fišer, Cene, Zagmajster, Maja, Dethier, Michel (2018): Overview of Niphargidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Belgium: distribution, taxonomic notes and conservation issues. Zootaxa 4387 (1): 47-74, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4387.1.2
