Rediscovery of Forficula iberica Steinmann, 1981 (Dermaptera: Forficulidae)

Abstract

Forficula iberica Steinmann, 1981 was described from Spain (Province of Zaragoza), but since its description it has remained an unknown taxon, usually ignored or treated as a synonym of F. auricularia Linnaeus, 1758. Field work in central Spain allowed us to collect some specimens of Dermaptera that matched the original description of F. iberica. In addition, the collection of the Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (MNCN-CSIC, Spain) held some specimens assignable to F. iberica confused among other Iberian species. The main objective of this work is to validate the specific status of F. iberica, report its rediscovery in central Spain, and evaluate the diagnostic characters provided by Steinmann (1981). The original description provided by Steinmann is quite complete, and fits precisely the specimens located in the field or at the MNCN, which cannot be associated to any other species of Forficulidae. The comparison of Steinmann´s paratypes of F. iberica at the Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum (MTM, Budapest), with the specimens obtained in the field, confirms that they can be assigned to F. iberica. The shape of the tegmina of F. iberica is most similar to that of F. lesnei, but differs from that of G. pubescens (obliquely truncated posteriorly). Shape of the cerci of F. iberica is similar to that of G. pubescens and G. brignolii, but different from that of F. lesnei. The genus Guanchia Burr, 1911 was created based on the shape of tegmina (obliquely truncated), but this character is quite variable. In agreement with Vigna Taglianti (2011), we consider that a phylogenetic study of the subfamily Forficulinae is necessary to revise the generic status of the continental species of Forficula included in Guanchia by Steinmann (1993).

Systematics of the Sierra Nevada endemic earwig: Eulithinus analis (Forficulidae, Dermaptera)

“…Pygidium and male forceps morphology are traits widely used as diagnostic taxonomic characters, however these are characters with high intraspecific variability in earwigs (Dohrn 1867;Diajonov 1925;Ollason 1970;Simpson & Mayer 1990;Tomkins & Simmons 1996;García-París 2017;Kirstová et al 2020;Fontana et al 2021;García-París et al 2021;Jurado-Angulo et al 2021;Cuesta-Segura et al 2023). It has been recently demonstrated by morphological and molecular analyses (Fontana et al 2021;Jurado-Angulo et al 2021;Cuesta-Segura et al 2023), that the misinterpretation of the morphological variability of male cerci in Chelidura and Pseudochelidura led to errors in the determination of the geographic distribution of the species and in the delimitation of independent evolutionary units (e.g., species).…”

Taxonomy of the Iberian species of Pseudochelidura (Dermaptera: Forficulidae)

“…Intraspecific variability of male cerci in earwigs is well known (Dohrn 1867;Diajonov 1925;Ollason 1970;Srivastava 1970;Mourier 1986;Simpson & Mayer 1990;Fontana et al 2021b;García-París et al 2021;Jurado-Angulo et al 2021); however, the levels of variability found in males of Pseudochelidura (Figs 2-3) are probably among the highest. It is thus somewhat counterintuitive that morphological differences in cerci shape between Pyrenean and Cantabrian populations (Figs 2-3) are relatively small and more limited than intrapopulational variability, but this is a situation relatively similar to that described for the French Massif Central and Pyrenean populations of Chelidura (Jurado-Angulo et al…”

“…During a recent revision of the Iberian Dermaptera De Geer, 1773 (García-París 2017;González-Miguéns et al 2020;García-París et al 2021;Jurado-Angulo et al 2021), we had the opportunity of collecting and examining live specimens of Pseudochelidura from all the areas where the genus was reported in the Pyrenees and the Cantabrian Mountains. In addition, we had the opportunity to examine large series of Iberian specimens held at the Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (MNCN, CSIC) (Madrid, Spain).…”