Otiorhynchus hungaricus Germar, 1824

Przybycień, Maja, Lachowska-Cierlik, Dorota, Wacławik, Beniamin, Sprick, Peter & Knutelski, Stanisław, 2021, The species status of the Otiorhynchus clavipes (Bonsdorff, 1785) species group (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): an integrative approach using molecular, morphological, ecological, and biogeographical data, Bonn zoological Bulletin 70 (1), pp. 115-139 : 135

Otiorhynchus hungaricus Germar, 1824

Synonyms after Casalini & Colonnelli (2019):

= Otiorhynchus hungaricus Germar, 1823: 351 :

= Otiorrhynchus hungaricus var. hospitellensis Hustache, 1923: 54

The third species of the O. clavipes group is O. hungaricus , which was not main study object of this paper, but it is included in the revision of the distribution, here.

According to Alonso-Zarazaga et al. (2017) the range of O. hungaricus was reported as follows: Bosnia-Hercegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Russia: Central European Territory, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, and Ukraine. As there are no data for Germany, this often repeated record has to be deleted from the list until an introduction may have been proven.

The following records from isolated sites, which are given by different authors via https://www.gbif.org, have to be assessed in future, as to whether they are native or based on introduction: Estonia (Tallinn-Lasnamäe, limestone grassland, several specimens) by Roosileht (2015), Poland (Góry Stołowe, Sudetes Mts.,> 800 m a.s.l.) by Wanat (2017), and Czech Republic (Třinec, around 300 m, surrounding area up to over 900 m a.s.l.) by Langeveld et al. (2020). The Estonian records are so far north of the core area (> 1000 km) that an introduction seems probable, even if the species inhabits limestone grassland in this northern exclave. The record from Poland is from a rather high area, untypical for this species. The presence in France is limited to the extreme Southeast (region of Digne and Alpes-Maritimes; Hoffmann 1950), but there is no information about habitats, indicating that its status remains unresolved, probably this is a historical introduction of an Eastern European species. In western Ukraine O. hungaricus inhabits mainly the low mountain Carpathians foothill zone, but the upper altitudinal limit is unknown. The Russian territory is situated also rather far from the core area of this species, and introduction cannot be excluded. The presence in Moldova confirms the preference of lower foothill sites, as the highest mountain of this country achieves only 428 m a.s.l. Apparently very little is known about host plants (polyphagous, preference for Rosaceae , according to Mazur 2002) and altitudinal limit. The determination of the right biogeographical character and especially in the northern sites the status as native or introduced species have to be regarded as provisional. Benedikt et al. (2010) listed this species only from one site in Slovakia (Matranské Pannonikum region) and characterized it as forest species of steppe regions. Thus, we regard it preliminarily as Southeastern European forest steppe species that prefers lower altitudes.

In summary it can be stated that there are well-developed characters of aedeagus and on abdominal sternites of males ( Fig. 8 ) and very subtle differences, sometimes easy to overlook, between certain parts of the body of O. fagi and O. clavipes , such as the presence or absence of elytral spots ( Table 5, Figs 7–8 ), and that there are significant genetic differences between O. fagi and O. clavipes ( Tables 3–4, Figs 1–2 ) and separate geographical ranges in Central Europe between all three studied species.

Figures

Fig. 8. Shape principal component analysis (PCA) for exploring males’ variation within Otiorhynchus fagi (□) and Otiorhynchus clavipes (⌂) using all variables, the variance explained by each shape principal (PC) is given in parentheses. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences.

Fig. 7. Shape principal component analysis (PCA) for exploring females’ variation within Otiorhynchus fagi (□) and Otiorhynchus clavipes (⌂) using all variables, the variance explained by each shape principal (PC) is given in parentheses. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences.

Fig. 1. Bayesian approach consensus tree for COI data. Numbers at nodes indicate Bayesian posterior probability: LSB = Lower Saxony: Bad Zwischenahn, LSH = Lower Saxony: Hannover; SHB = Schleswig-Holstein: Bullenkuhlen; SHP = Schleswig-Holstein: Pinneberg; NRW = North Rhine Westphalia; BWH = Baden-Wuerttemberg: Heilbronn (GERMANY); CZB = Carpathians: Zywiec Beskid Mts.; CGM = Carpathians: Gorce Mts.; CTM = Carpathians: Tatra Mts.; SSM = Sudetes: Stolowe Mts.; SKM = Sudetes: Karkonosze Mts. (POLAND);AKM =Alps: Karawank Mts. (SLOVENIA). Sequences from O. ovatus, O. coecus, O. sulcatus, O. carinatopunctatus, O. rugosostriatus downloaded from GenBank.

Fig. 2. Maximum-likelihood tree for COI data. Numbers at nodes indicate bootstrap values: LSB = Lower Saxony: Bad Zwischenahn, LSH = Lower Saxony: Hannover; SHB = Schleswig-Holstein: Bullenkuhlen; SHP = Schleswig-Holstein: Pinneberg; NRW = North Rhine Westphalia; BWH = Baden-Wuerttemberg: Heilbronn (GERMANY); CZB = Carpathians: Zywiec Beskid Mts.; CGM = Carpathians: Gorce Mts.; CTM = Carpathians:Tatra Mts.; SSM = Sudetes: Stolowe Mts.; SKM = Sudetes: Karkonosze Mts. (PO- LAND); AKM = Alps: Karawank Mts. (SLOVENIA). Sequences from O. ovatus, O. coecus, O. sulcatus, O. carinatopunctatus, O. rugosostriatus downloaded from GenBank.