Spatial and temporal distribution of aquatic insects in the Dicle (Tigris)

1
Spatial and temporal distribution of aquatic insects in the Dicle (Tigris) River
2
Basin, Turkey with new records
3
4
Fatma ÇETİNKAYA and Aysel BEKLEYEN*
5
6
Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Dicle University, 21280 Diyarbakır, Turkey
7
*Corresponding Author: Aysel BEKLEYEN, e-mail: [email protected]
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1
1
Abstract
2
We investigated insects of the Dicle (Tigris) River Basin in terms of their composition
3
and spatio-temporal distribution. Larvae, pupae, pupal exuviae and nymphs of insects
4
were obtained from samples collected by a plankton net monthly during a one-year
5
period in 2008–2009 at seven different sites of the Dicle (Tigris) River Basin. A total of
6
35 taxa from orders Trichoptera (1 taxon), Ephemeroptera (3 taxa) and Diptera (31 taxa)
7
were identified. Chironomidae (Diptera) was the most diverse group and was
8
represented by three major subfamilies namely Tanypodinae (2 taxa), Orthocladiinae
9
(19 taxa) and Chironominae (7 taxa). Among these species, Nanocladius (Nanocladius)
10
spiniplenus Saether, 1977 is a new record for Turkey as well as for western Asia. In
11
addition, the Psychomyia larvae found for the first time in the Dicle (Tigris) River Basin
12
(Turkey) were described. Both taxa have been illustrated to warrant validation. Taxa
13
number varied spatially from 6 to 14, and temporally from 2 to 12 during the sampling
14
period. Along the river, Cricotopus bicinctus and Orthocladius (S.) holsatus was the
15
most common taxa.
16
17
Key words: Diptera, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Insecta, Dicle (Tigris) River.
18
19
1. Introduction
20
Aquatic macroinvertebrates are critical to ecosystem functioning through their
21
regulation of many essential top-down and bottom-up ecosystem processes such as
22
energy translocation, nutrient flow, and detrital decomposition (Hellmann et al., 2015).
23
Aquatic insects are among the important components of the aquatic communities in
24
terms of taxa richness and their role in the food web. They have been used as
2
1
bioindicators of pollution and water quality in environmental studies (e.g., Rae, 1989;
2
Zamora-Muñoz and Alba-Tercedor, 1996; Kazancı and Dügel, 2000; Türkmen and
3
Kazancı, 2008; Kalyoncu and Gülboy, 2009; Girgin et al., 2010).
4
Due to the strategic geographic position of Turkey, which is a transcontinental
5
Eurasian country, it is important to conduct species inventories to fill gaps in the known
6
distributions of many species in Eurasia, particularly for the Turkish insects. Aquatic
7
insects have been generally well documented from a wide variety of inland aquatic
8
biotopes in Turkey (e.g., Geldiay, 1949; Şahin, 1984; Balık et al., 1999; Tanatmış,
9
1995; Narin and Tanatmış, 2004; Kazancı, 1984, 2009; Ustaoğlu et al., 2005, 2008;
10
Taşdemir and Ustaoğlu, 2005; Ahiska, 2005; Dik et al., 2006; Sipahiler, 2006, 2008;
11
Özkan and Çamur-Elipek, 2006; Duran et al., 2007; Taşdemir et al., 2008, 2009;
12
Gültutan and Kazancı, 2010; Özkan, 2010; Özkan et al., 2010; Türkmen and Kazancı,
13
2011; Özyurt and Tanatmış, 2011; Kazancı and Türkmen, 2012; Zeybek et al., 2012).
14
However, our knowledge on aquatic insects of the Southeastern Anatolia Region
15
(Mesopotamian Turkey) is still incomplete (Koch, 1985; Şahin, 1984; Kazancı, 2009).
16
The Dicle (Tigris) River is an important water source for the Southeastern
17
Anatolia Region of Turkey, and it serves mainly for irrigation, fishing, recreation and
18
receiving wastewater. Moreover, the dam reservoirs on the river and its tributaries are
19
used for irrigationand fishing, in addition to their function asa source of drinking water
20
supply. However, the Dicle (Tigris) Basin is particularly affected by a variety of
21
anthropogenic
22
hydromorphological alterations (e.g., gravel and sand extraction), to various types of
23
pollutions (Varol et al., 2012). Alhough the Dicle (Tigris) is one of the most important
24
transboundary rivers in Turkey; the information on invertebrate communities of the
influences,
from
damming,
impoundments,
and
other
3
1
main stretch of the river is still incomplete. Moreover, as part of the Southeastern
2
Anatolia Project, when the construction of the Ilısu Dam is completed, a large part of
3
the Dicle (Tigris) will lose the river property. Therefore, we investigated the actuel
4
insects of the Dicle (Tigris) River basin with special reference to the composition and
5
distribution of the taxocoenosis and biogeographically interesting elements through
6
regular monitoring of the river during a period of one year at seven different sites spread
7
over a stretch of the river of approximately 500 km.
8
9
10
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study area
11
The portion of the Dicle (Tigris) River flowing through Southeastern Anatolia
12
represents one of the largest rivers in Turkey with a catchment area of approximately
13
57,614 km2 (Akbulut et al., 2009). The river originates in the Toros Mountains of
14
Turkey and follows a southeastern route in Turkey to Cizre, where it forms the border
15
between Turkey and Syria for 32 km before entering Iraq. The total length of the river is
16
approximately 1900 km, 523 km of which is within Turkey. The Batman Stream is one
17
ofthe major tributaries of the river. Diyarbakir, Bismil, Hasankeyf and Cizre are the four
18
major urban settlements on the banks of the river, which serves as a major source of the
19
domestic water supply of the city of Diyarbakir (population of approximately 851,000)
20
as well as directly receiving the partially treated domestic wastewater from Diyarbakir;
21
the untreated domestic wastewater from the Bismil, Hasankeyf and Cizre townships;
22
and effluents from several industries along its course. The maximum flows in the river
23
occur from February through April, whereas the minimum flows occur from August
24
through October (Varol et al., 2012). The river discharge varies considerably at different
4
1
locations, showing an increasing trend towards its downstream stretches due to inputs
2
from its tributaries. The continental climate of the Dicle (Tigris) Basin is referred to as a
3
subtropical plateau climate. The continental climate features of the basin are most
4
similar to those of the Mediterranean Region. The summer season is hot and dry, and
5
the winter season is not as cold as the climate observed in the Eastern Anatolia Region.
6
The highest annual total rainfall value was recorded as 611.1 mm, in Maden town
7
(upstream region of the river), and the lowest annual total rainfall value was found to be
8
294.1 mm, in Cizre town (downstream region of the river). The mean annual air
9
temperature ranged between 14.6°C (Maden) and 21.8°C (Cizre) (Varol et al., 2012).
10
The Dicle (Tigris) River has the highest water temperature of all of the Eastern
11
Anatolian rivers (Akbulut et al., 2009).
12
The locations of the selected sampling sites in the Tigris River are shown in Fig.
13
1. In the present study, a total of seven sites, specifically, Maden "Site–1", Hantepe
14
"Site–2", Diyarbakır "Site–3", Bismil "Site–4", Batman "Site–5", Hasankeyf "Site–6"
15
and Cizre "Site–7" were selected on the Dicle (Tigris) River as part of a river
16
monitoring network. Two of these sites, Hantepe (Site-2) and Batman (Site-5) are
17
situated downstream of the Dicle and Batman dam reservoirs, respectively. Some
18
features of the sampling sites are given in Table 1.
19
20
Figure 1 and Table 1
2.2. Collection and identification of samples
21
All specimens were obtained from collections of a limnological research project
22
funded by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK,
23
project no. 107Y216). In that research project, plankton samples were collected by a
24
standard plankton net (25 cm in radius, 50 cm in length, 55 μm in pore size) within the
5
1
period from February 2008 to January 2009 from different habitats of the study sites
2
spreaded over a river stretch of approximately 500 km. The material collected mainly
3
from stagnant or slow-running and vegetation-rich areas at the shores throughout the
4
length of the river was preserved in 70% ethanol until laboratory processing. The larvae,
5
pupae, pupal exuviae and nymphs selected from these samples were then transferred to
6
alcohol-glycerine solution (1:1), and mounted in glycerine (50% glycerol and water) on
7
microscope slides. Specimens were examined and identified under an Olympus-B51
8
compound microscope at 40-1000x magnifications. Images were collected with
9
Olympus DP71 digital camera (12.5 megapixels) using Image Analysis Pro 5.0 software
10
(Olympus Soft Imaging Solutions GmbH, Germany). The following references were
11
used to identify the larvae, pupae, pupal exuviae and nymphs at the lowest possible
12
taxonomic level: Macan, 1950, 1955; Usinger, 1956; Flint, 1964; Hickin, 1967;
13
Hilsenhoff, 1975; Utrio, 1976; Pankratova, 1978; Şahin, 1984; Tomka and Zurwerra,
14
1985; Contreras-Lichtenberg, 1986; Schmid, 1986; Smith, 1989; Soponis, 1990;
15
Harrison, 1992; Epler, 1995, 1999, 2001; Pescador et al., 1996; Langton andVisser,
16
2003; Sæther, 2003, 2004, 2005; Bouchard, 2004, 2009; Wiedenbrug and Ospina-
17
Torres, 2005; Jacobsen, 2008; Sealock and Ferrington, 2008; Madden, 2010; Andersen
18
et al., 2013; Waringer and Graf, 2013.
19
20
3. Results and Discussion
21
A total of 35 taxa from three order of Insecta were identified in the Dicle (Tigris)
22
River Basin during the studied period (Table 2). Although the orders Trichoptera and
23
Ephemeroptera were represented by only one taxon (Psychomyia sp.) and three taxa
24
(Baetis sp., Caenis macrura, Rhithrogena sp.), respectively, order Diptera was the most
6
1
diverse group including 31 taxa. Among Diptera families, Chironomidae was the
2
dominant group represented by three subfamilies, which are Tanypodinae (2 taxa),
3
Orthocladiinae (19 taxa) and Chironominae (7 taxa). It seems that orthoclad midges are
4
the most advantaged group in terms of species richness in the Dicle (Tigris) River
5
Basin, consisting in 74.2 % of species composition.
6
Table 2
7
From Trichoptera, Psychomyia larvae could not be identified to the species level,
8
because some characteristics of larvae were not typical for described species of this
9
genus. So far three species of genus Psychomyia have been recorded from Turkey: Psychomyia
10
dadayensis Sipahiler found in the Northern and Southeastern Turkey, and P. mengensis
11
Sipahiler found in certain streams and rivers in the western, northwestern and southwestern
12
parts of Turkey, and P. pusilla (Fabricius) widely distributed in the rivers and streams of Turkey
13
(Sipahiler, 2006, 2008). As mentioned above, two species are found in the Southeastern Turkey,
14
of which the larval stages of P. dadayensis have not been identified yet. Our larva looks like the
15
larva of second species, P. pusilla in Hickin (1967) from which it differ in the shape of
16
mandibles and anal claw. Likely, our specimens may be larvae of P. dadayensis, and deserve
17
further detailed study. Therefore, we need to describe Psychomyia larvae of Dicle (Tigris)
18
River. The larvae of this genus are easily separated from all the other known
19
Psychomyiinae by the presence of well-developed ventral teeth on the anal claw (Flint,
20
1964), and Turkish larvae fit general description of genus Psychomyia (Pescador et al.,
21
1996).
22
Psychomyia larva from Dicle (Tigris) River Basin can be distinguished from
23
other species of the genus by the following combination of characters: head about 1.5
24
times longer than wide; only pronotum sclerotized, mesonotum and metanotum entirely
25
membranous; anterior margin of frontoclypeus more straight; labrum round; paired
7
1
submental sclerites on ventral surface of labium longer than width (Figure 2a); the
2
labium, with the opening of the a spinneret extending beyond the anterior margin of the
3
head; mandibles with four broad ventral teeth and two broad dorsal teeth, and only left
4
mandible with brush of long hairs on inner face; the tarsal claws with two spine;
5
trochantin of prothoracic leg broad and hatchet-shaped (Figure 2b); anal claw strongly
6
curved with two seta dorsally and 4 or 5 conspicuous teeth along ventral, concave
7
margin (Figure 2c); abdominal gills absent. Four larvae of Psychomyia were only found
8
in July 2008 and at Site–5 (the Batman Stream). Temperature: 23.5 °C; dissolved
9
oxygen: 6.6 ppm; pH: 8.1; conductivity (EC): 301 (Gökot, 2009).
10
Figure 2
11
From Diptera, a chironomid, Nanocladius (Nanocladius) spiniplenus Saether,
12
1977 is a new record for the Turkish fauna and also for Western Asia. Previously, this
13
species was known only from Nearctic, but was later reported from Italy as a new
14
record from Holoarctic by Rossaro (1988). This species was also reported from Norway
15
(Sæther and Spies, 2013). Now the present paper reports its third record from Holarctic
16
that extends its distribution to the Asian portion of Turkey. The general morphology of
17
our pupal exuviae (Fig. 3) is in agreement with Saether’s (1977) description, such as
18
frontal setae long; thoracic horn elongate, digitiform with prominent apical spines (Fig.
19
3b); pedes spurii B well developed (Fig. 3a); pedes spurii A present on sternites IV-VII;
20
row of hooklets on TII on distinct protuberance; TIV—VI with median patches of
21
spines; caudal spines on TVI short; TVII without caudal spines; segment VI with 1
22
filamentous L-seta; L-setae of segments VII and VIII all filamentous; 5 L-setae on VIII.
23
Two male pupae were only found in May 2008 and at Site–3 (Diyarbakır).
24
Figure 3
8
1
In Dicle (Tigris) River, Diptera was the order showing the highest richness,
2
composing 88.5% of the fauna. The dipteran families Ceratopogonidae, Culicidae and
3
Ephydridae were each represented by only one taxon at Site–2 and Site–3, and members
4
of these families were observed once or twice during the sampling period (Table 2).
5
However, other family, Chironomidae had the highest taxa richness, especially
6
Subfamily Orthocladiinae. Similarly, Caspers and Reiss (1989) recorded 64 taxa of
7
Chironomidae (Podonominae, Diamesinae, Prodiamesinae and Orthocladiinae) from
8
Dicle (Tigris) River Basin (provinces Siirt and Hakkari), 56 of which were orthoclad
9
taxa. Compared with that study, we did not encounter with members of subfamilies
10
Podonominae, Diamesinae and Prodiamesinae, which could stem from the limited
11
collecting efforts in the region. However, we also determined the same taxa from Dicle
12
(Tigris) River Basin, such as Cricotopus bicinctus, C. vierriensis, Eukiefferiella
13
coerulescens, Eukiefferiella fuldensis, Euryhapsis sp., Orthocladius (E.) rivicola, O.
14
(E.) thienemanni, and Tvetenia calvescens. Additionally, Şahin (1984) reported 55 taxa
15
of larval chironomids (13 Tanypodinae, 18 Orthocladiinae, 24 Chironominae and 1
16
Diamesinae) from Dicle (Tigris) River, of which Larsia curticalcar, Thienemannimyia
17
sp., Cardiocladius capucinus, Cricotopus bicinctus, C. triannulatus, C. vierriensis,
18
Eukiefferiella sp., Orthocladius (E.) thienemanni, Psectrocladius sp., Thienemanniella
19
sp., Chironomus gr. plumosus, Cladotanytarsus sp., Paratanytarsus sp., Polypedilum
20
sp. Rheotanytarsus sp. and Tanytarsus sp. were also detected at species or genus-level
21
in our study.
22
During the sampling period, some chironomids in temporal distribution,
23
Cladotanytarsus sp., Polypedilum sp., Euryhapsis sp., Orthocladius (O.) oblidens,
24
Parakiefferiella sp., Psectrocladius sordidellus, Tvetenia calvescens, Thienemannimyia
9
1
sp., Larsia curticalcar and Scatella sp. were only observed once, whereas Cricotopus
2
bicinctus was the most common taxon (Table 2). It is also a fact that most of taxa
3
recorded from Dicle (Tigris) River Basin were uncommon and were found sporadically
4
except for Dicrotendipes sp., Rheotanytarsus sp. and Tanytarsus sp. from Chironominae
5
which were only observed in summer months.
6
As in many other studies of temperate lotic habitats (e.g., Coffman, 1973;
7
Boerger, 1981; Drake, 1982; Singh and Harrison, 1984; Rempel and Harrison, 1987;
8
Berg and Hellenthal, 1992), the Orthocladiinae in the present study were also the
9
dominant subfamily. In contrast to lotic temperate habitats, this subfamily is generally
10
less diverse in lentic and low latitude habitats (e.g., Freeman, 1955; MacDonald, 1956;
11
Iovino and Miner, 1970; Petr, 1970; Lehmann, 1979; Ferrington et al., 1993; Coffman
12
and de la Rosa, 1998). Many orthoclads are considered to be cool-water adapted (Berg
13
and Hellenthal, 1992; Ferrington, 2000) and are, therefore, expected to be richer during
14
periods of low water temperature in the lotic temperate habitats. Accordingly, in the
15
present study, Insecta fauna in March (temperature<10ºC) was only represented by two
16
taxa, Orthocladius (E.) rivicola and Orthocladius (E.) thienemanni from Orthocladiinae,
17
which later disappeared until November and December. However, richness of
18
Orthocladiinae began to increase in April, with the maximum occurring in early summer
19
(9 taxa) when water temperatures exceeded 20ºC. But there were no representatives of
20
Orthocladiinae in July. A conspicuous decrease in taxa richness began in September,
21
continuing until December.
22
According to Varol et al. (2012), four sites (sites 1, 2, 5 and 6) were located in
23
areas of low river pollution in Dicle (Tigris) River Basin, and two sites (sites 3 and 4) in
24
regions of high river pollution, and one site (Site-7) in an area of moderate river
10
1
pollution. In the present study, throughout the length of the river, the highest taxa
2
richness was recorded at Site-5 downstream of Batman Dam Lake with 14 taxa,
3
followed by Site-6 (Hasankeyf) with 13 taxa, while the lowest taxa richness was
4
recorded at Site-4 (Bismil) and Site-7 (Cizre) (Table). The members of Subfamily
5
Chironominae were found at all sites, except for sites 1 (Maden, upstream) and 7 (Cizre,
6
downstream) where the lowest and the highest values (2.2 and 27.9 oC) of water
7
temperature were measured by Varol et al. (2012), respectively. In addition the faunal
8
composition of Site-1 (Maden, upstream) was different from that of Site-7 (Cizre,
9
downstream), except Cricotopus vierriensis which was found at both sites. Two taxa
10
from subfamily Tanypodinae, Thienemannimyia sp. and Larsia curticalcar were only
11
observed in Site-1 (Maden, upstream). Temperature and pollution seems to be the
12
important factors that limit the distribution of aquatic insects in Dicle (Tigris) River
13
Basin. However from Orthocladiinae Cricotopus bicinctus and Orthocladius (S.)
14
holsatus were the most common taxa along the river course despite unfavourable
15
environmental conditions.
16
According to Kazancı (2009), the Ephemeroptera fauna of Turkey includes 124
17
species, eighty-five of which are known from Eastern Anatolia Region of Turkey. Taxa
18
recorded in the present study, which are commonly known taxa in Turkey, were found
19
at sites 1, 3, 5, 6 along the river course. Caenis macrura was observed between May
20
and September, whereas other taxa were found only once or twice (Table 2).
21
In comparison with other streams and rivers in Turkey, we can say that the Dicle
22
(Tigris) River is rich in respect to chironomid taxa but is poor in respect to
23
Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera taxa. For example, Tanatmış (1995) reported 24 species
24
of Ephemeroptera in Sakarya River. Narin and Tanatmış (2004) recorded 22 taxa from
11
1
Ephemeroptera in Gönen ve Biga Streams. Ustaoğlu et al. (2005) reported 10
2
chironomid taxa in Gümüldür Stream. Taşdemir and Ustaoğlu (2005) determined 17
3
chironomid taxa in Lake District Inland Waters. Özkan and Çamur-Elipek (2006)
4
determined 65 chironomid taxa in Meriç River. Duran et al. (2007) determined 7 taxa
5
from Ephemeroptera, 10 from Trichoptera and 25 from Diptera in Gökpınar Stream.
6
Ustaoğlu et al. (2008) reported 9 taxa from Ephemeroptera and 14 from Diptera in the
7
glacier lakes and rivers on Uludağ (Bursa) Mountain. Türkmen and Kazancı (2008)
8
determined 27 taxa from Ephemeroptera and 47 from Trichoptera in some running
9
waters in the province of Bolu. Taşdemir et al. (2009) determined 22 chironomid taxa in
10
Gediz Delta. Kalyoncu and Gülboy (2009) determined 19 taxa from Ephemeroptera, 18
11
from Trichoptera and 16 from Diptera in Darıören and Isparta Streams. Gültutan and
12
Kazancı (2010) reported 24 species of Chironomidae in some running waters in Eastern
13
Black Sea Region. Özkan et al. (2010) determined 60 chironomid taxa in the Ergene
14
River Basin. Türkmen and Kazancı (2011) determined 10 taxa from Ephemeroptera, 4
15
from Trichoptera and 13 from Diptera in Kelkit Stream and its tributaries. Zeybek et al.
16
(2012) determined 26 taxa from Ephemeroptera, 23 from Trichoptera and 11 from
17
Diptera in Köprüçay Stream.
18
Many studies previously conducted for the determination of chironomid fauna of
19
lotic habitats in Turkey have been based on larval material for a long time and pupal
20
exuviae have somehow been overlooked. In this study, drifting larvae and pupal exuviae
21
collected with plankton net were used for the evaluation of Insecta fauna found in the
22
Dicle (Tigris) River Basin. Actually, most benthic sampling methods use nets
23
with mesh size fine enough to collect small larvae (Storey and Pinder, 1985; Hudson
24
and Adams, 1998). On the other hand, many studies have used surface floating pupal
12
1
exuviae method or chironomid pupal exuvial techniqueto effectively assess the
2
biological condition of aquatic habitat using community metrics (e.g., richness,
3
composition, diversity indices, biotic indices) to assess the condition of lotic habitats
4
(e.g., Cranston et al., 1997; Bitušik and Hamerlik, 2001; Hayfordand Ferrington, 2005;
5
Rieradevall, 2007; Raunio et al., 2011), resulting in a higher number of taxa. In the
6
Dicle (Tigris) River Basin, drifting material contained numerous pupal exuviae from
7
Chironominae and Orthocladiinae, and we identified ten taxa using pupal exuviae
8
material exclusively. Additionally, thirteen taxa were identified by using both larval and
9
pupal material (Table 2).
10
To sum up, the findings of this study have indicated that a comprehensive
11
picture of chironomid composition can be achieved by sampling not only larvae but also
12
pupal exuviae. Additionally, this study confirmed the presence of 20 taxa listed by
13
previous authors (Caspers and Reiss, 1989; Şahin, 1984). But, it is expected that when
14
the construction of the Ilısu Dam is completed, a large part of the Dicle (Tigris) will
15
lose the river property, and hence the lives of these animals will be endangered if
16
measures are not taken. This study is the latest investigation performed on insects of
17
Dicle (Tigris) River, and therefore, provides an important data for insects living in the
18
present conditions of the river.
19
20
Acknowledgements
21
The material of this study was obtained from collections of a research project
22
conducted by the second author and funded by The Scientific and Technological
23
Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK, project no. 107Y216). We would like to thank
24
Dr. Bülent Gökot and Dr. Memet Varol for their assistance in collecting material and
13
1
Dr. Nilüfer Bekleyen for improving the English of this manuscript. The authors are also
2
grateful to Dr. O. Soriano for help with the identification and to two anonymous
3
referees for their valuable comments.
4
5
References
6
Ahiska S (2005). A study on benthic fauna of Kesikköprü Dam Lake (Ankara). Türk
7
Sucul Yaşam Dergisi 3: 122–125 (in Turkish with abstract in English).
8
Akbulut N, Bayarı S, Akbulut A, Şahin Y (2009). Rivers of Turkey. In: Tockner K,
9
Robinson CT, Uehlinger U, editors. Rivers of Europa. Elsevier, Academic Press:
10
New York, pp. 643–772.
11
Andersen T, Sæther OA, Cranston PS, Epler JH (2013).The larvae of Orthocladiinae
12
(Diptera: Chironomidae) of the Holarctic Region — Keys and diagnoses. In:
13
Andersen T, Cranston PS, Epler JH, editors. The larvae of Holarctic
14
Chironomidae (Diptera) of the Holarctic Region — Keys and diagnoses. Insect
15
Syst Evol 66: 189–386.
16
17
18
19
Balık S, Ustaoğlu MR, Sarı HM (1999). Kuzey Ege Bölgesi‘ndeki akarsuların faunası
üzerine ilk gözlemler. E.Ü. Su Ürünleri Fak Der 16: 289–299 (in Turkish).
Berg MB, Hellenthal RA (1991). Secondary production of Chironomidae (Diptera) in a
north temperate stream. Freshwater Biol 25: 497–505.
20
Bitušík P, Hamerlík L (2001). Chironomids (Diptera: Chironomidae) of the two streams
21
in the Poloniny National Park (West-Carpathians, Slovakia). Acta Univ Carol Biol
22
45: 15–18.
14
1
Boerger H (1981). Species composition, abundance and emergence phenology of
2
midges (Diptera: Chironomidae) in a brown-water stream of West-Central
3
Alberta, Canada. Hydrobiologia 80: 7–30.
4
5
Bouchard RW (2004). Guide to Aquatic Macroinvertebrates of the Upper Midwest,
Water Resources Centre, University Of Minnesota, St. Paul, Mn., 208 p.
6
Bouchard RW (2009). Guide to aquatic invertebrate families of Mongolia identification,
7
manual for students, citizen monitors, and aquatic resource professionals,
8
Chironomidae Research Group, University Of Minnesota, St. Paul, Mn 55108.
9
Caspers N, Reiss F (1989). Die Chironomidae der Türkei. Teil 1: Podonominae,
10
Diamesinae,
11
Chironomidae). Entomofauna 10: 105–160.
Prodiamesinae,
Orthocladiinae
(Diptera,
Nematocera.
12
Coffman WP (1973). Energy flow in a woodland stream ecosystem. II. The taxonomic
13
composition and phenology of the Chironomidae as determined by the collection
14
of pupal exuviae. Arch Hydrobiol 71: 281–322.
15
Coffman WP, de la Rosa CL (1998). Taxonomic composition and temporal organization
16
of tropical and temperate species assemblages of lotic Chironomidae. J Kans
17
Entomol Soc 71: 388–406.
18
Contreras-Lichtenberg R (1986). Revision der in der Westpaläarktis verbreiteten Arten
19
des Genus Dicrotendipes KIEFFER, 1913 (Diptera, Nematocera, Chironomidae).
20
Ann Naturhist Mus Wien 88/89: 663–726.
21
Cranston PS, Cooper PD, Hardwick RA, Humphrey CL, Dostine PL (1997). Tropical
22
acid streams- the chironomid (Diptera) response in northern Australia. Freshwater
23
Biol 37: 473–483.
15
1
Dik B, Karatepe M., Karatepe B, Yağcı Ş (2006). Culicoides Latr, 1809 (Diptera:
2
Ceratopogonidae) Species in the Niğde Province. Türkiye Parazitol Derg 30: 121–
3
124 (in Turkish with abstract in English).
4
5
Drake CM (1982). Seasonal dynamics of Chironomidae (Diptera) on the Bulrush
Schoenoplectus lacustris in a chalk stream. Freshwater Biol 12: 225–240.
6
Duran M, Akyıldız GK, Özdemir A (2007). Determining macroinvertebrate fauna and
7
the water quality of Gokpınar Stream. Türk Sucul Yaşam Dergisi 5–8: 577–583
8
(in Turkish with abstract in English).
9
10
Epler JH (1995). Identification manual for the larvae Chironomidae (Diptera) of
Florida. FL Dept Environ Protection, Tallahassee, Florida.
11
Epler JH (1999). An introduction to the taxonomy and identification of larval
12
Chironomidae. Workbook for the 1999 North American Benthological Society
13
Technical Workshop on Larval Midge Taxonomy, Duluth, MN.
14
Epler JH (2001). Identification manual for the larval Chironomidae (Diptera) of North
15
and South Carolina. A guide to the taxonomy of the midges of the southeastern
16
United States, including Florida. Special Publication SJ2001-SP13. North
17
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC, and St.
18
Johns River Water Management District, Palatka, FL.
19
Ferrington LC (2000). Hibernal emergence patterns of Chironomidae in lotic habitats of
20
Kansas versus ambient air and water temperatures. In: Hoffrichter O, editor. Late
21
20th Century Research on Chironomidae. Shaker Verlag, Aachen, Germany, pp.
22
375–382.
16
1
Ferrington LC, Buzby KM, Masteller EC (1993). Composition and temporal abundance
2
of Chironomidae emergence from a tropical rainforest stream at El Verde, Puerto
3
Rico. J Kans Entomol Soc 66: 167–180.
4
5
6
7
8
9
Flint OS (1964). Notes on some Neartic Psychomyiidae with special reference to their
larvae (Trichoptera). Proc U S Nat Mus 115(3491): 467–481.
Freeman P (1955). A study of the Chironomidae (Diptera) of Africa south of the Sahara,
Part I. Bull Br Mus (Nat Hist) Entomol 4: 1–67.
Geldiay R (1949). Çubuk Barajı ve Eymir Gölü'nün makro ve mikro faunasının
mukayeseli olarak incelenmesi. Ank Üniv Fen Fak Mec 2: 146–252 (in Turkish).
10
Girgin S, Kazanci N, Dügel M (2010). Relationship between aquatic insects and heavy
11
metals in an urban stream using multivariate Techniques. Int J Environ Sci Te 7:
12
653–664.
13
14
Gökot B (2009). Dicle Nehri’nde zooplanktonun mevsimsel değişimleri üzerine bir
çalışma. Doktora tezi, Dicle Üniversitesi, Diyarbakır (in Turkish).
15
Gültutan Y, Kazancı N (2010). Identification key to the larvae of Chironomidae
16
(Insecta, Diptera) species found in some running waters in Eastern Black Sea
17
Region (Turkey). Review of Hydrobiology 3: 145–164.
18
Harrison AD (1992). Chironomidae from Ethiopia, Part 2. Orthocladiinae with two new
19
species and a key to Thienemanniella Kieffer (Insecta, Diptera). Spixiana 15:
20
149–195.
21
Hayford BL, Ferrington LC (2005). Biological assessment of Cannon Creek, Missouri
22
by use of emerging Chironomidae (Insecta: Diptera). J Kans Entomol Soc 78: 89–
23
99.
17
1
Hellmann JK, Erikson JS, Queenborough SA (2015). Evaluating macroinvertebrate
2
community shifts in the confluence of freestone and limestone streams. J Limnol
3
74: 64–74.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Hickin NE (1967). Caddis larvae: larvae of the British Trichoptera. London,
Hutchinson, 476 pp.
Hilsenhoff WL (1975). Aquatic insects of Wisconsin (Technical Bulletin no: 89).
Department of Natural Resources Madison, Wisconsin.
Hudson PL, Adams JV (1998). Sieve efficiency in benthic sampling as related to
chironomid head capsule width. J Kans Entomol Soc 71: 456–468.
Iovino AJ, Miner FD (1970). Seasonal abundance and emergence of Chironomidae of
Beaver Reservoir, Arkansas. J Kans Entomol Soc 43: 197–216.
12
Jacobsen RE (2008). A Key to the pupal exuviae of the midges (Diptera: Chironomidae)
13
of Everglades National Park, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific
14
Investigations Report no: 5082.
15
Kalyoncu H, Gülboy H (2009). Benthic macroinvertebrates from Darıören and Isparta
16
streams (Isparta/Turkey) – Biotic indices and multivariate analysis. J Appl Biol
17
Sci 3: 85–92.
18
19
20
21
22
23
Kazancı N (1984). New Ephemeroptera (Insecta) records from Turkey. Aquat Insect 6:
235–258.
Kazancı N (2009). Ephemeroptera (Insecta) fauna of Turkey: Records from Eastern
Anatolia (Turkey). Review of Hydrobiology 2: 187–195.
Kazancı N, Türkmen G (2012). The checklist of Ephemeroptera (Insecta) species of
Turkey. Review of Hydrobiology 5: 143–156.
18
1
Kazancı N, Dügel M (2000). An evaluation of the water quality of Yuvarlakçay Stream,
2
in the Köycegiz-Dalyan protected area, SW Turkey. Turk J Zool 24: 69–80.
3
Koch, S. (1985). Eintagsfliegen aus der Turkei und Beschreibung einer neuen Baetis-
4
Art: B. macrospinosus n. sp. (Insecta: Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Senckenb Biol
5
66: 105–110.
6
Langton PH, Visser H (2003). Chironomidae exuviae. A key to pupal exuviae of the
7
West Palaearctic Region. World Biodiv. Datab. ETI, Amsterdam. CD-ROM
8
Series.
9
10
11
12
13
14
Lehmann J (1979). Chironomidae (Diptera) aus Fließgewässern Zentralafrikas Tiel I:
Kivu-Gebiet, Ostzaire. Spixiana Supplement 3: 1–144.
Macan TT (1950). Descriptions of some nymphs of the British species of the genus
Baetis (Ephem.). Trans Soc Br Entomol 10: 144–164.
Macan TT (1955). A Key to the nymphs of the British species of the family Caenidae
(Ephemeroptera). Entomologist’s Gazette 6: 127–142
15
MacDonald WW (1956). Observations on the biology of chaoborids and chironomids in
16
Lake Victoria and on the feeding habits of the elephant-snout fish (Mormyrus
17
kannume Forsk.). J Anim Ecol 25: 36–53.
18
19
Madden CP (2010). Key to genera of larvae of Australian Chironomidae (Diptera).
Museum Victoria Science Reports, 12: 1–31.
20
Narin ÖN, Tanatmış M (2004). Ephemeroptera (Insecta) limnofauna of the Gönen
21
(Balıkesir) and Biga streams (Çanakkale). Balıkesir Üniv Fen Bil Ens Derg6: 16–
22
25 (in Turkish with abstract in English).
23
24
Özkan N (2010). Chironomidae (Diptera) Larvae from the Thrace Region of Turkey.
Trakya Univ J Sci 11: 7–13 (in Turkish with abstract in English).
19
1
2
Özkan N, Çamur-Elipek B (2006). The dynamics of Chironomidae larvae (Diptera) and
the water quality in Meriç River (Edirne/ Turkey). Tiscia 35: 49–54.
3
Özkan N, Moubayed-Breil J, Çamur-Elipek B (2010). Ecological analysis of
4
chironomid larvae (Diptera, Chironomidae) in Ergene River Basin (Turkish
5
Thrace). Turk J Fish Aquat Sc 10: 93–99.
6
Özyurt İ and Tanatmış M (2011). Ephemeroptera (Insecta) limnofauna of the Basin of
7
Akşehir (Konya-Afyon) and Eber (Afyon) lakes. Afyon Kocatepe Univ Fen Bil
8
Derg 8: 29–39 (in Turkish with abstract in English).
9
Pankratova VY (1978). The family of chironomids or midges - Chironomidae. Keys to
10
larvae and pupae [Translation from: Guide to the freshwater invertebrates of the
11
European area of the USSR (Plankton and benthos) (Kutikova LA and
12
Starobogatov
13
1977]. Windermere, UK, Freshwater Biological Association, (FBA Translations,
14
New Series, no: 116).
YI,
editors).
pp.
371–431.
Leningrad,
Gidrometeoizdat,
15
Pescador ML, Rasmussen AK, Harris SC (1996). Identification manual for the caddisfly
16
(Trichoptera) larvae of Florida. Florida Dept. Environ. Protection, Tallahassee,
17
Florida.
18
19
20
21
Petr T (1970). Chironomidae (Diptera) from light catches on the man-made Volta Lake
in Ghana. Hydrobiologia 35: 449–468.
Rae JG (1989). Chironomid midges as indicators of organic pollution in the Scioto
River Basin, Ohio. Ohio J Sci 89: 5–9.
22
Raunio J, Heino J, Paasivirta L (2011). Non-biting midges in biodiversity conservation
23
and environmental assessment: Findings from boreal freshwater ecosystems. Ecol
24
Indic 11: 1057–1064.
20
1
Rieradevall M, Chaves ML, Prat N (2007). High altitude Chironomidae (Diptera) of
2
Serra da Estrela (portugal): additions to the portuguese and Iberian peninsula
3
fauna. Graellsia 63: 273–278.
4
Rempel RS, Harrison AD (1987). Structural and functional composition of the
5
community of Chironomidae (Diptera) in a Canadian Shield stream. Can J Zoolog
6
65: 2545–2554.
7
8
9
Rossaro B (1988). A contribution to the knowledge of chironomids in Italy (Diptera:
Chironomidae). Spixiana supplement 14: 191–200.
Saether
OA
(1977).
Taxonomic
studies
on
Chironomidae:
Nanocladius,
10
Pseudochironomus and the Harnischia complex. B Fish Res Board Can 196:
11
1‒143.
12
13
14
15
Saether OA (2003). Review of Orthocladius subgen. Symposiocladius Cranston
(Diptera: Chironomidae). Aquat Insect 25: 281–317.
Saether OA (2004). Three new species of Orthocladius subgenus Eudactylocladius
(Diptera: Chironomidae) from Norway. Zootaxa 508: 1–12.
16
Saether OA (2005). A new subgenus and new species of Orthocladius van der Wulp,
17
with a phylogenetic evaluation of the validity of the subgenera of the genus
18
(Diptera: Chironomidae). Zootaxa 974: 1–56
19
Sæther OA and Spies M (2013). Fauna Europaea: Chironomidae in: Beuk P and Pape T,
20
editors. Fauna Europaea: Diptera Nematocera. Fauna Europaea version
21
2.6. Internet database, online since April 2013.
22
23
Schmid PE (1986). The larvae of chironomids: the composition of species in the
mountain brook "Oberer Seebach". Jber. Biol. Stn Lunz 9: 66–241.
21
1
Sealock AW, Ferrington LC (2008). Key and descriptions of the Chironomidae pupal
2
exuviae of Hardwood Creek, near Hugo, Minnesota. Chironomid Research Group,
3
University of Minnesota, St. Paul, USA.
4
Singh MP, Harrison AD (1984). The chironomid community (Diptera: Chironomidae)
5
in a Southern Ontario stream and the annual emergence patterns of common
6
species. Arch Hydrobiol 99: 221–253.
7
8
9
10
Sipahiler F (2006). Revision of the genus Psychomyia Latreille, 1829 in Turkey
(Trichoptera, Psychomyiidae). Aquat Insect 28: 47–55.
Sipahiler F (2008). Zoogeographical characteristics of the Trichoptera fauna of Turkey.
Ferrantia 55: 93–109.
11
Smith KGV (1989). An introduction to the immature stages of British flies. Diptera
12
larvae, with notes on eggs, puparia and pupae. In: Dolling WR, Askew RR,
13
editors. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects. Royal Entomological
14
Society of London, London.
15
16
17
18
Soponis AR (1990). A revision of the Holarctic species of Orthocladius
(Euorthocladius) (Diptera: Chironomidae). Spixiana Supplement 13: 1–56.
Storey AW, Pinder LCV (1985). Mesh-size and efficiency of sampling of larval
Chironomidae. Hydrobiologia 124: 193–197.
19
Şahin Y (1984). Doğu ve Güneydoğu Anadolu Bölgeleri akarsu ve göllerindeki
20
Chironomidae (Diptera) larvalarının teşhisi ve dağılışları. Anadolu Üniv. Yay.
21
No: 57, Fen-Ed. Fak. Yay. No: 2, Eskişehir (in Turkish).
22
23
Tanatmış M (1995). Sakarya Nehir sistemi Ephemeroptera limnofaunasının belirlenmesi
üzerinde araştırmalar. Türk Entomol Derg19: 287–298 (in Turkish).
22
1
Taşdemir A, Ustaoğlu MR (2005). Taxonomical investigation of Lake District inland
2
waters Chironomidae and Chaoboridae (Diptera) fauna. EÜ Su Ürünleri Dergisi
3
22: 377–384 (in Turkish with abstract in English).
4
Taşdemir A, Ustaoğlu MR, Balık S (2009). Contributions to the knowledge of
5
Chironomidae (Diptera) fauna of the Gediz Delta (Menemen-İzmir-Turkey). J
6
FisheriesSciences.com 3: 32–39 (in Turkish with abstract in English).
7
Taşdemir A, Ustaoğlu MR, Balık S, Hasan MS (2008). Diptera and Ephemeroptera
8
fauna
9
FisheriesSciences.com 2: 252–260 (in Turkish with abstract in English).
of
some
lakes
in
Western
Black
Sea
Region
(Turkey).
J
10
Tomka I, Zurwerra A (1985). Key to genera of Heptageniidae (Ephemeroptera) of the
11
Holarctic, Oriental and Ethiopian regions. Entomol Ber Luzern 14: 113–126.
12
Türkmen G, Kazancı N (2008). Water quality evaluation of reference sites by using
13
saprobic index in some running waters in the province of Bolu. Review of
14
Hydrobiology 2: 93–118.
15
Türkmen G, Kazancı N (2011). Assessment of benthic macroinvertebrate communities
16
of some sites at Kelkit Stream and its tributaries (Yeşilırmak River Basin, Turkey)
17
with the application of cluster analysis. Review of Hydrobiology 4: 29–45.
18
19
Usinger RL (1956). Aquatic insects of California. University of California Press,
Berkeley and Los Angeles, California.
20
Ustaoğlu MR, Balık S, Sarı HM, Özdemir-Mis D, Aygen C, Özbek M, İlhan A,
21
Taşdemir A, Yıldız S, Topkara ET (2008). A faunal study of the glacier lakes and
22
rivers on Uludağ (Bursa) Mountain. E.Ü. Su Ürünleri Dergisi 25: 295–299 (in
23
Turkish with abstract in English).
23
1
2
3
4
Ustaoğlu MR, Balık S, Taşdemir A (2005). Chironomidae fauna (Diptera-Insecta) of
Gümüldür Stream (İzmir). Turk J Zool 29: 269–274.
Utrio P (1976). Identification key to Finnish mosquito larvae (Diptera, Culicidae). Ann
Agric Fenn 15: 128–136.
5
Varol M, Gökot B, Bekleyen A, Şen B (2012). Water quality assessment and
6
apportionment of pollution sources of Tigris River (Turkey) using multivariate
7
statistical techniques—a case study. River Res Applic 28: 1428–1438.
8
9
10
11
Waringer J, Graf W (2013). Key and bibliography of the genera of European
Trichoptera larvae. Zootaxa 3640: 101–151.
Wiedenbrug S, Ospina-Torres R (2005). A key of pupal exuviae of Neotropical
Tanytarsini (Diptera: Chironomidae). Amazoniana 18: 317–371.
12
Zamora-Muñoz C. and Alba-Tercedor J (1996). Bioassessment of organically polluted
13
Spanish rivers, using a biotic index and multivariate methods. J N Am Benthol
14
Soc 15: 332–352.
15
16
Zeybek M, Kalyoncu H, Ertan ÖO, Çiçek NL (2012). Köprüçay Irmağı (Antalya) bentik
omurgasız faunası. S.D.Ü. Fen Bil Ens Derg 16: 146–153 (in Turkish).
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
24
1
Table 1. Locations, geographical coordinates, altitudes (m), widths (~m) and substrates
2
of the sampling sites in the Tigris River Basin.
Site no
3
Location
Coordinates
Altitude (m)
Width (~m)
Substrate
Site 1
Maden
38° 20' N – 39° 41' E
860
7
Gravel
Site 2*
Hantepe
38° 06' N – 40° 08' E
616
35
Stones
Site 3
Diyarbakır
37° 53' N – 40° 13' E
576
80
Sand, mud
Site 4
Bismil
37° 50' N – 40° 39' E
538
90
Sand, mud
Site 5*
Batman
37° 54' N – 41° 05' E
540
65
Gravel, sand
Site 6
Hasankeyf
37° 42' N – 41° 24' E
471
80
Gravel, sand
Site 7
Cizre
37° 19' N – 42° 11' E
371
97
Sand, mud
*: Sites situated downstream of the dam reservoirs.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
25
1
Table 2. Spatial and temporal distribution of insects found at seven sites of the Dicle
2
(Tigris) River Basin (Turkey). Stages; L: Larva, P: Pupa, Pe: Pupal exuviae, N: Nymph.
2008
Taxa
Months
2009
Sites
Stage
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
J
5
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
L
6
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
-
-
N
Caenis macrura
1, 3, 5, 6
-
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
N
Rhithrogena sp.
5
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N
2
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
3, 5
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
L, Pe
Cladotanytarsus sp.
2
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
Dicrotendipes sp.
6
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
Paratanytarsus sp.
3, 4, 6
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
L,Pe
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
L
2, 3, 5
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
L,Pe
3, 6
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
6
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L
1, 5
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L,Pe
3, 4, 5, 6, 7
-
-
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
L,Pe
5, 6
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
L,Pe
5
-
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
Order: TRICHOPTERA
Psychomyia sp.
Order: EPHEMEROPTERA
Baetis macrospinosus
Order: DIPTERA
Fam.: Ceratopogonidae
Culicoides sp.
Fam.: Chironomidae
Subfam.: Chironominae
Chironomus plumosus
Polypedilum sp.
Rheotanytarsus sp.
Tanytarsus sp.
Subfam.: Orthocladiinae
Cardiocladius capucinus
Cricotopus sp.
Cricotopus bicinctus
Cricotopus triannulatus
Cricotopus trifascia
26
Table continued
Cricotopus vierriensis
1, 3, 6, 7
-
-
-
-
+
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
Pe
4
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L,Pe
2, 4, 5
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
Euryhapsis sp.
7
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
Nanocladius spiniplenus
3
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L,Pe
Orthocladius (E.) rivicola
5, 7
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
L,Pe
O. (E.) thienemanni
2, 5, 7
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
L,Pe
Orthocladius (O.) sp.
1, 5, 6
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
L,Pe
Orthocladius (O.) oblidens
2
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
Orthocladius (S.) holsatus
1, 2, 3,4,5,6
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
L,Pe
Parakiefferiella sp.
6
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L
Psectrocladius sordidellus
2
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
Thienemanniella sp.
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
+
-
L,Pe
Tvetenia calvescens
7
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
Thienemannimyia sp.
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
L
Larsia curticalcar
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
L
2
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
L
6
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
Eukiefferiella coerulescens
Eukiefferiella fuldensis
Subfam.: Tanypodinae
Fam.: Culicidae
Ochlerotatus (Rusticoidus)
cf. rusticus
Fam.: Ephydridae
Scatella sp.
1
+: Present, -: absent
2
3
4
5
6
27
1
Figure Legends
2
Figure 1. The locations of the selected sampling sites in the Tigris River Basin.
3
Figure 2. Psychomyia sp. larva; a. head, b. trochantin, c. anal claws.
4
Figure 3. Nanocladius spiniplenus, pupa; a. TII–IX, b. thoracic horn, c. precorneal setae
5
d. anal lobe with three macrosetae.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
28
1
2
Figure 1. The locations of the sampling sites selected in the Dicle (Tigris) River Basin.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
29
1
2
3
Figure 2. Psychomyia sp. larva; a. head, b. trochantin, c. anal claws.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
30
b
c
d
a
Figure 3. Nanocladius spiniplenus, pupa;
a. TII–IX, b. thoracic horn, c. precorneal
setae, d. anal lobe with three macrosetae.
1
2
3
4
5
6
31