Free Access
Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim.
Volume 54, 2018
Article Number 31
Number of page(s) 10
Published online 24 October 2018

© EDP Sciences, 2018

1 Introduction

Due to increasing anthropogenic pressures (e.g. acidification, pollution, hydrological and morphological alterations, drinking water extraction, electricity generation), lotic habitats are among the most threatened habitats worldwide (Malmqvist and Rundle, 2002; Hering et al., 2006). In order to monitor and potentially mitigate these impacts, many groups of aquatic macroinvertebrates have been recognized and are widely used as bioindicators freshwater ecosystem quality. So as to successfully conduct such environmental quality assessments, it is crucial to obtain detailed knowledge of lotic communities of a particular region, i.e. their composition and structure, habitat and environmental preferences, and life histories (e.g. Moog, 2002; Hering et al., 2006).

Contributing approximately 25% of the total benthic macroinvertebrate production, mayflies represent a very large proportion of the aquatic ecosystems biomass (Elliott et al., 1988). Highly sensitive, confronted with habitat alterations, many mayfly species are among the first to disappear, which is why they have been recognized as a particularly valuable taxonomic group for biomonitoring programmes (e.g. Lenat, 1988; Lenat and Penrose, 1996; Bauernfeind and Moog, 2000; Ferro and Sites, 2007). Due to changes in physical and chemical habitat conditions along the longitudinal gradient in running waters, each mayfly species has a specific river zonation preference (Bauernfeind and Humpesch, 2001; Buffagni et al., 2018). The highest species richness has been recognized in the upper reaches (metarhithral and hyporhithral sections) of fast flowing streams and rivers, but also in the lower reaches of ecologically intact large lowland (potamal) rivers. On the other hand, springs (crenal sections) and lentic habitats are generally less diverse (Bauernfeind and Moog, 2000; Bauernfeind and Soldán, 2012). Regarding feeding habits, most mayfly species are grazers and scrapers that consume epilithic algae and fine particulate organic matter (Bauernfeind and Soldán, 2012; Buffagni et al., 2018).

Long-term research in Northern and Central European freshwater habitats has resulted in broad knowledge of the mayfly fauna, their distribution and ecology in these regions (Sartori and Landolt, 1998; Bauernfeind and Moog, 2000; Bauernfeind and Humpesch, 2001; Bauernfeind and Soldán, 2012). On the contrary, despite recent increases in the number of mayfly studies in South-East Europe (Vilenica et al., 2014; 2016a, b; 2017a, b; Petrović et al., 2015), the knowledge of their assemblages and species distribution is still scarce throughout most of this region (e.g. Petrović et al., 2015; Vilenica et al., 2015). Moreover, while the mayflies of Croatian freshwater habitats were extensively investigated in the Dinaric Western Balkan ecoregion (ER 5; Illies, 1978), Pannonian lowland assemblages remained rather neglected (ER 11, Vilenica et al., 2015). Therefore, rare, new and taxonomically interesting findings are expected.

Symbiocladius Kieffer, 1925 is a widely distributed chironomid genus, including six species that live as exclusive ectoparasites on mayfly nymphs (summarized by Giłka et al., 2007). Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Zavrel, 1924) is the only species of the genus known in the Palaearctic Region (Giłka et al., 2007; Brabec et al., 2018), and has been recorded in much of Central and Eastern Europe (Brabec et al., 2018). It was also recently reported in Bulgaria (Antonov Dashinov and Nikolova Vidinova, 2018). The chironomid larvae attach to the first instar mayfly nymphs to feed on their haemolymph and associated tissues, preventing their moulting to the subimago stage (e.g. Codreanu, 1939; Soldán, 1979; Jacobsen, 1995). If the chironomid pupates while attached to younger mayfly nymphs, it can cause sterility or even death of the individual (Soldán, 1979; Jacobsen, 1995). The species was recorded to prefer heptageniid hosts, especially Rhithrogena species of the group semicolorata (Giłka et al., 2007; Schiffels, 2009; Antonov Dashinov and Nikolova Vidinova, 2018). S. rhithrogenae preferably inhabits the upper reaches (epithithral to hyporhithral sections) of fast flowing cold mountainous streams (Janecek et al., 2002; Giłka et al., 2007; Moller-Pillot, 2013; Antonov Dashinov and Nikolova Vidinova, 2018).

With the aim of filling the current gap in the knowledge of the South-East European mayflies, the main goal of this study was to determine the diversity, composition and structure (in terms of longitudinal zonal associations and functional feeding groups) of mayfly assemblages and species occurrence on Mt. Papuk, a mountain in the Pannonian lowland in Croatia. An additional aim was to present the first record of S. rhithrogenae for Croatia.

2 Material and methods

2.1 Study area

Papuk Mountain is an integral part of the Slavonian Mountains, located in eastern Croatia, within the agriculturally dominant Pannonian lowland ecoregion (ER 11; Illies, 1978) (Fig. 1). The mountain's highest peak is also called Papuk (953 m) (Petrović et al., 2013).

Mt. Papuk was formed over a period of 350 million years, between the Palaeozoic and Cenozoic eras, and is characterized by high geological diversity. Igneous rock (basalt, andesite, and granite), metamorphic rock (schist, quartzite, and sandstone), and limestones are recognized as the main sedimentary rock types (Pamić et al., 2003).

Due to the particularly high geological and biological diversity (e.g. Jamičić, 2003; Mrakovčić et al., 2008, Jalžić and Lajtner, 2011; Šerić Jelaska et al., 2011; Previšić et al., 2013) and the variety of pristine freshwater habitats (e.g. Kuhta and Brkić, 2003), the area has been under national protection since 1999 in the category of a nature park. Moreover, it was enlisted as part of the European and UNESCO Global Geopark Network ( in 2007. The mountain is largely forested, predominantly with beech, sessile oak and fir (Pandža, 2010).

The park area is influenced by a temperate humid climate with warm summer (Köppen climate classification; Cfb; Šegota and Filipčić, 2003). The mean annual air temperature is between 8.0 and 9.0 °C, and the annual rainfall is between 700 and 1000 mm (Zaninović et al., 2008).

thumbnail Fig. 1

Geographical position of the Papuk Mountain in Croatia, and study area together with locations of the study sites.

2.2 Sampling protocol

Mayfly nymphs were sampled at 15 streams on Mt. Papuk (Tab. 1, Fig. 1) during two sampling events: late spring (26–28 May, 2017) and mid-summer (31 July–2 August, 2017). Within each stream, ten replicates were collected proportionate to the available microhabitat presence, using a benthos handnet (25 × 25 cm; mesh size = 500 µm) and pooled into a single composite sample (sampling strategy as in Vilenica et al., 2016c). At all study sites, the main substrates (accounting for ≥5% of the stream area) were composed mostly of stones, gravel, sand, silt, dead wood, leaf litter and mosses (inorganic substrates were defined based on the Wentworth (1922) scale). Samples were stored in 99% alcohol, sorted and analysed in the laboratory with a stereomicroscope and microscope. Collected individuals were identified using keys of Müller-Liebenau (1969), Haybach (1999) and Bauernfeind and Humpesch (2001). Nomenclature follows Bauernfeind and Soldán (2012). S. rhithrogenae pupae were identified using Langton (1991). All voucher specimens are deposited at the Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Zagreb, Croatia.

The majority of the studied streams are located within the borders of Papuk Nature Park. Moreover, most streams are pristine, without significant anthropogenic pressures. The exception is the Vetovka stream, which is strongly impacted by numerous threats (see Tab. 1).

According to physical and chemical analyses conducted by Mrakovčić et al. (2008) and Previšić et al. (2013), water temperature in the streams of Mt. Papuk ranges from 8.9 to 15.0 °C, oxygen content from 9.25 to 11.30 mg L−1, pH from 7.56 to 8.60, and conductivity from 103.8 to 451.0 μS cm−1.

Table 1

Characteristics of the 15 studied streams along the Papuk Mountain, Croatia.

2.3 Data analysis

Mayfly faunistic diversity at each stream studied was calculated using the Shannon diversity index. To estimate similarities and differences in mayfly assemblages among streams, the Bray–Curtis similarity index was used. Prior to analysis, the data were log transformed. The results of hierarchical cluster analysis were superimposed on non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination to determine the similarity percentage among study sites. Analyses were performed using the PRIMER v6 software package (Clarke and Gorley, 2006).

The composition of mayfly assemblages in terms of longitudinal zonal associations and the trophic structure at each studied stream was based on the classification given by Buffagni et al. (2009, 2018). The longitudinal zonal association and functional feeding group of each individual species are presented as a proportion within the assemblage. Most taxa do not occur exclusively in one biocoenotic region and do not exclusively feed on a single food resource. Therefore, the assignment of taxa to a particular category is based on the ten-point assignment scale (Schmidt-Kloiber and Hering, 2015). Using the given points and percentage of each species within the assemblage, the longitudinal zonation preferences and functional feeding group composition of mayfly assemblages at each study site were calculated.

3 Results

3.1 Mayfly assemblages

A total of 18 mayfly taxa were recorded in the streams of Mt. Papuk (Tab. 2). The most widespread species were Ephemera danica Müller, 1764 and Baetis rhodani (Pictet, 1843), recorded at 15 and 12 localities, respectively. On the other hand, Baetis vernus Curtis, 1834 was recorded only in the Vetovka stream, and Torleya major (Klapalek, 1905) only in the Radetina rijeka stream (Tab. 2).

Taxa richness ranged from three species recorded at the Pušine and Kutjevački potok streams to nine species recorded at the Jankovac and Djedovica streams. The Shannon diversity index ranged from 0.92 at the Pušine stream to 2.12 at the Djedovica stream (Tab. 2).

All study sites shared 30% similarity between their mayfly assemblages. In NMDS analysis (Fig. 2), four streams (Vetovka, Kutjevački potok, Pušine, Javornik) separated from the rest of the study sites, had a mutual similarity of 45%. Within this cluster, Vetovka separated from the other three sites. All other study sites were mutually 40% similar. Within this second cluster, three additional sub-clusters can be distinguished, each with 60% similarity of the mayfly assemblages: Brzaja, Radetina rijeka and Bistra; Veličanka and Jankovac; and finally, Marin potok, Dubočanka, Kovačica and Vranovo streams.

All study sites are characterized by the domination of rhithral elements. The Ćeralinica, Djedovica, Radetina rijeka and Vetovka streams have a higher proportion of potamal and littoral elements than the other study sites (Fig. 3a). The majority of study sites had similar shares of grazers/scrapers and detritivores (gatherers/collectors and filter feeders). However, Kovačica, Radetina rijeka and Marin potok streams had a higher proportion of grazers/scrapers compared to detritivores, while the opposite was recorded for Ćeralinica, Kutjevački potok and Javornik streams, where detritivores were more numerous (Fig. 3b).

Table 2

Mayfly taxa recorded in lotic habitats of the Papuk Mountain, Croatia. Study sites: 1–Jankovac stream, 2–Pušine stream, 3–Veličanka stream, 4–Bistra stream, 5–Vetovka stream, 6–Ćeralinica stream, 7–Djedovica stream, 8–Kutjevački potok stream, 9–Javornik stream, 10–Brzaja stream, 11–Kovačica stream, 12–Radetina rijeka stream, 13–Marin potok stream, 14–Dubočanka stream, 15–Vranovo stream.

thumbnail Fig. 2

Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination of mayfly assemblages based on Bray–Curtis similarity coefficient (group average linking) and their log transformed abundances in 15 streams along the Papuk Mountain, Croatia.

thumbnail Fig. 3

Structure of mayfly assemblages in 15 studied streams along the Papuk Mountain, Croatia, in terms of: (a) longitudinal zonal associations and (b) trophic structure (functional feeding groups) of recorded species.

3.2 The occurrence of the parasitic chironomid, Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Zavrel, 1924)

S. rhithrogenae was recorded from three streams: Kovačica, Marin potok and Vranovo (Fig. 1). At each of these streams, a single collected Rhithrogena gr. semicolorata individual was infested with S. rhithrogenae. All three chironomid individuals collected from the mayfly nymphs were in the pupa stage (Fig. 4).

thumbnail Fig. 4

(a) Kovačica stream, an example of the habitat of Symbiocladius rhithrogenae in the area of the Papuk Mountain, Croatia; (b) Rhithrogena gr. semicolorata nymph infested with S. rhithrogenae; (c) Pupa of S. rhithrogenae, ventral view.

4 Discussion

4.1 Mayfly assemblages

As this study recorded 22% of the overall Croatian mayfly fauna (Vilenica et al., 2015, 2016c; Dekić et al., 2016), mayfly species richness in the streams of Mt. Papuk, a Pannonian lowland mountain can be considered high (e.g. Vilenica et al., 2015, 2016a, c, 2017a). Such high species richness is likely the result of suitable habitat conditions, such as a high number of anthropogenically unimpacted streams with diverse microhabitats, and consequently diverse food resources. These results corroborate previous studies that showed that mayfly species richness is generally high in the upper reach sections of streams and rivers (e.g. Lang and Raymond, 1993; Breitenmoser-Würsten and Sartori, 1995; Bauernfeind and Moog, 2000; Vilenica et al., 2015).

Mayfly assemblages were mainly composed of species that occur across a wide range of altitudes (e.g. B. rhodani, S. ignita, and E. danica), as well as submontane and montane altitude preferring species (e.g. E. mucronata, E. assimilis, and Rh. gr. semicolorata) (Buffagni et al., 2018). Analysis of the assemblage structure revealed the dominance of rhithral elements, which is not surprising as the majority of the study sites were located in the upper reaches of fast flowing mountain streams. Potamal and littoral elements within the assemblage structure are reflected in the presence of E. danica, which, together with the eurytopic B rhodani, was the most widely distributed species in the study area. Moreover, the assemblages were mainly composed of rheophile (e.g. B. melanonyx, B. rhodani, and Rh. gr. semicolorata) and rheo to limnophile species (e.g. A. muticus, E. mucronata, and E. danica), as well as species preferring cold and moderate water temperatures (e.g. B. lutheri, B. melanonyx, E. assimilis, and E. danica) (Buffagni et al., 2018). Mrakovčić et al. (2008) and Previšić et al. (2013) showed that many streams within the study area are characterized by a water velocity and temperature corresponding to the mountain stream type, i.e. with a rather fast current and cold water. A variety of longitudinal zonal elements at each study site also reflects the variety of microhabitats that provide refuge and food resources for diverse mayfly species, e.g. B. lutheri, a microhabitat specialist in the mesolithal, A. muticus for macrophytes and E. assimilis for lithal in current areas (Hering et al., 2004; Buffagni et al., 2018). Study sites located at lower altitudes had a somewhat higher proportion of detritivores due to the higher accumulation of organic matter, while grazers/scrapers had more food resources at higher altitude sites due to the higher proportion of lithal overgrown with periphyton (Bauernfeind and Soldán, 2012; Špoljar et al., 2012; Buffagni et al., 2018; Vilenica et al., 2018). Moreover, the differences in the longitudinal zonal associations and trophic structure could also be related to habitat quality, as many previous studies already showed that anthropogenic alterations result in a modified composition and structure of biological communities and their reduced diversity (Vollenweider and Kerekes, 1982; Brittain and Saltveit, 1989; Céréghino et al., 2002; Poff and Zimmermann, 2010), which merits further study.

NMDS analysis distinguished two clusters, where the separation of streams was most influenced by sampling period, i.e. study sites sampled in spring had markedly higher diversity than those sampled in summer. Mayflies spend the majority of their life in the nymphal stage in aquatic habitats, while after emergence, they continue their short adult life as terrestrial forms (Brittain and Sartori, 2003; Bauernfeind and Soldán, 2012). Therefore, the three streams sampled in summer could have lower species richness as they were sampled after the emergence period of certain mayfly species that could potentially be expected there (e.g. P. pennulatum, B. fuscatus, E. macani, and S. ignita), and nymphs present at the time of the sampling were possibly too juvenile to be collected. The Vetovka stream clustered together with these sites due to its lower species richness, likely due to the intensive anthropogenic pressures affecting this habitat and its species. Many studies have shown that many mayfly species are highly sensitive to alterations of their habitat and are often the among first aquatic insects to disappear (e.g., Brittain and Saltveit, 1989; Brittain and Sartori, 2003; Di Giovanni et al., 2001; Monaghan et al., 2005; Vilenica et al., 2016b). Furthermore, within the “spring cluster”, three additional sub-clusters shared 60% of mayfly assemblages, likely due to the similar habitat characteristics, such as substrate composition. Additional analyses should be conducted to determine whether their similarity was also influenced by similarities in physical and chemical water properties.

Rhithrogena Eaton, 1881 (Ephemeroptera, Heptageniidae) is one of the most diverse mayfly genera in Europe but also one of the three most speciose mayfly genera worldwide (Vuataz et al., 2011). Nymphs can usually be found in riffle zones of well oxygenated, fast-flowing streams and rivers. As they generally have a rather low tolerance for organic pollution, most Rhithrogena taxa are very good indicators of water quality (Vuataz et al., 2011; Bauernfeind and Soldán, 2012). Despite the relatively high number of Rhithrogena nymphs from the semicolorata group collected, we were not able to accurately identify them, as the taxonomic status of many European Rhithrogena species remains unclear. Nymphal and adult morphological characteristics enable an easy “species group” identification, while identification at the species level is often challenging as the same species population can have rather variable morphological features (Vuataz et al., 2011; Vilenica et al., 2016a).

As the systematic research on Croatian mayflies started rather recently (Vilenica et al., 2015), our knowledge is still growing with each study conducted. Therefore, the current study represents an important contribution to our knowledge of Croatian mayflies, presenting new distributional data for the recorded species, together with some records of rare species. Alainites muticus and B. melanonyx were recorded in the Pannonian lowland ecoregion (ER11) in Croatia for the first time (Vilenica et al., 2015). The Red List of Croatian mayflies has not yet been prepared, and no species are currently protected by law. Nevertheless, some of the recorded species are listed as rare and endangered in European Red Lists (e.g. B. lutheri, B. melanonyx, P. pennulatum, E. mucronata, T. major, E. macani, E. ujhelyii, O. rhenana; e.g. Sartori and Landolt, 1998; Zabric, 2001; Głowaciński et al., 2002). The majority of these species were previously recorded in both ecoregions (ER5 and ER 11), with the exception of B. melanonyx (only in ER 5) and O. rhenana (only in ER 11). Additionally, all these species were previously recorded at other mainly fast flowing lotic habitats in these ecoregions; B. lutheri at springs and rivers, B. melanonyx at springs, streams and rivers, P. pennulatum at rivers and tufa barriers, E. mucronata at streams and rivers, T. major at streams, rivers and tufa barriers, E. macani and O. rhenana at rivers. Electrogena ujhelyii was reported to inhabit springs and slower flowing forest streams (Vilenica et al., 2015, 2016c). Therefore, none of them have been documented at a critically low number of localities, except O. rhenana, which was previously reported from just two fast flowing rivers in the Banovina region (Vilenica et al., 2015). It is important to reinforce the point that prior to designation of the precise conservation status and threats for each of these species, continued studies are essential, with the investigation of mayfly assemblages at many more lotic and lentic freshwater habitats throughout Croatia.

4.2 Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Zavrel, 1924)

Despite intensive research over the past decade on aquatic Diptera in Croatian freshwater habitats (e.g. Čerba et al., 2010, 2011; Ivković et al., 2013; Kvifte et al., 2013; Płóciennik et al., 2014; Ivković and Pont, 2015; Kolcsár et al., 2015), the present study shows that the knowledge on their faunistic traits and distribution is still increasing. S. rhithrogenae, a species recorded in Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Swiss and Ukraine, northern and central European part of Russia, the Near East and eastern Palaearctic (Giłka et al., 2007; Antonov Dashinov and Nikolova Vidinova, 2018; Brabec et al., 2018), has now also been recorded in Croatian streams for the first time.

The rare presence of this species in Croatia could be due to its requirement for habitats with high quality ecological status, as suggested by Antonov Dashinov and Nikolova Vidinova (2018). As our study area is located in a protected area, and is characterized by a high number of pristine cold mountainous streams (Mrakovčić et al., 2008; Previšić et al., 2013), this may have ensured the adequate conditions for this species. The species was recorded at three streams, minimally affected by anthropogenic influences, all located at altitudes over 200 m, which is in accordance with the literature data (e.g. Giłka et al., 2007; Brabec et al., 2018). It is possible that it is present at an even higher number of streams, and targeted research is required.

S. rhithrogenae is a rheophile species that prefers the upper reaches (rhithral sections) of fast flowing cold mountainous streams; therefore, its host selection is highly influenced by these requirements (Schmedtje and Colling, 1996; Brabec et al., 2018). The species is a true and obligate parasite almost exclusively of Heptageniidae nymphs, where the majority of genera prefer such habitats (Bauernfeind and Soldán, 2012). The most favoured choice was reported to be species of Rhithrogena of the group semicolorata. However, the species has also been recorded as a parasite on other heptageniids, such as other species groups of the Rhithrogena genus (e.g. Kovács and Godunko, 2008; Antonov Dashinov and Nikolova Vidinova, 2018), species of Electrogena (e.g. Kriska et al., 1998; Kovács, 2007), Ecdyonurus (e.g. Soldán, 1979), Epeorus, Heptagenia (e.g. Makarchenko et al., 2015) but also Habroleptoides confusa Sartori and Jacob, 1986, of the family Leptophlebiidae (e.g. Soldán, 1978; see also in Jacobsen, 1995). As in Antonov Dashinov and Nikolova Vidinova (2018), in this study the parasite was recorded only on nymphs of the genus Rhithrogena (i.e. species from the semicolorata group), even though several other heptageniid species were present at all these sites, even at higher population densities in places. Nevertheless, due to the limited number of parasites recorded in this study, caution is required before drawing any significant conclusions on its host preferences in this area. Therefore, in order to be able to understand the biology of this parasite species, further more detailed studies are required.

5 Conclusions

With new data about the distribution and habitat choice of the 18 recorded mayfly taxa, this study represents an important contribution to our knowledge of mayfly assemblages and species distribution in South-East Europe. Moreover, with a newly recorded species for the country, this study has indicated that the knowledge of the Croatian chironomid fauna is still growing.

New and rare species recorded in the area of Papuk Nature Park, highlight the area's high conservation value, and the justification for continued preservation of this protected area. Such studies on assemblage composition, distribution and biodiversity are crucial for planning conservation activities dealing with species but also their habitats. Thus, the knowledge of mayfly faunal composition, distribution and habitat choice presented could contribute to the classification and protection of the South-East European streams.

Future activities should include the systematic annual study of mayfly ecological traits in the study area, e.g. the systematic study of their relationship with environmental factors, their preferences for microhabitat type and their life cycles. Moreover, future steps should also include deciphering the taxonomic status of Rhithrogena gr. semicolorata nymphs collected within this study using molecular genetic analysis of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase c subunit I.


This study was conducted as a part of the project DNA Barcoding of Diversity of Croatian Fauna (IP-2016-06-9988, supported by Croatian Science Foundation; PL. Mladen Kučinić). The authors would like to thank Professor Kučinić for his support, and Miran Katar for assistance in the field. Miran Katar and Dr. Igor Stanković are thanked for their assistance with artwork. Finally, we would like to thank the reviewers whose comments and suggestions markedly improved the manuscript.


  • Antonov Dashinov D, Nikolova Vidinova Y. 2018. First records of the parasite Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Zavrel, 1924) (Diptera: Chironomidae) in several streams of Rila Mountain, Bulgaria. Aquat Insects 38: 255–259. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bauernfeind E, Humpesch UH. 2001. Die Eintagsfliegen Zentraleuropas − Bestimmung und Ökologie. Wien: Verlag NMW, 240 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Bauernfeind E, Moog O. 2000. Mayflies (Insecta: Ephemeroptera) and the assessment of ecological integrity: a methodological approach. Hydrobiologia 422: 71–83. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bauernfeind E, Soldán T. 2012. The Mayflies of Europe (Ephemeroptera). Ollerup, Denmark: Apollo Books, 781 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Brabec K, Janecek BFU, Rossaro B, Spies M, Bitusik P, Syrovatka V, Schmidt-Kloiber A. 2018. Dataset “Chironomidae”. − the taxa and autecology database for freshwater organisms, version 7.0. (Accessed on 06.04.2018). [Google Scholar]
  • Breitenmoser-Würsten C, Sartori M. 1995. Distribution, diversity, life cycle and growth of a mayfly community in a prealpine stream system (Insecta, Ephemeroptera). Hydrobiologia 308: 85–101. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brittain JE, Saltveit SJ. 1989. A review of the effect of river regulation on mayflies (Ephemeroptera). Regul Rivers Res Manage 3: 191–204. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brittain JE, Sartori M. 2003. Ephemeroptera (Mayflies). In: Resh VH, Cardé RT, eds. Encylopedia of Insects. Amsterdam: Academic Press, pp. 373–380 [Google Scholar]
  • Buffagni A, Cazzola M, López-Rodríguez MJ, Alba-Tercedor J, Armanini DG. 2009. Distribution and Ecological Preferences of European Freshwater Organisms, Vol. 3 – Ephemeroptera, Sofia- Moscow: Pensoft Publishers, 254 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Buffagni A, Armanini DG, Cazzola M, Alba-Tercedor J, López-Rodríguez MJ, Murphy J, Sandin L, Schmidt-Kloiber A. 2018. Dataset “Ephemeroptera”. − the taxa and autecology database for freshwater organisms, version 7.0. (Accessed on 06.04.2018). [Google Scholar]
  • Čerba D, Mihaljević Z, Vidaković J. 2010. Colonisation of temporary macrophyte substratum by midges (Chironomidae Diptera). Ann Limnol - Int J Lim 46: 181–190. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Čerba D, Mihaljević Z, Vidaković J. 2011. Colonisation trends, community and trophic structure of chironomid larvae (chironomidae: diptera) in a temporal phytophylous assemblage. Fund Appl Lim 179: 203–214. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Céréghino R, Cugny P, Lavandier P. 2002. Influence of intermittent hydropeaking on the longitudinal zonation patterns of benthic invertebrates in a mountain stream. Int Rev Hydrobiol 1: 47–60. [Google Scholar]
  • Clarke KR, Gorley RN. 2006. PRIMER V6: User Manual/Tutorial. Plymouth: Primer-E. [Google Scholar]
  • Codreanu R. 1939. Recherches biologiques sur un Chironomide Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (ZAVR.), ectoparasite “cancérigène” des Ephémères torrenticoles. Arch Zool Exp Gen 81: 1–283. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dekić S, Ćuk R, Belfiore C. 2016. Contribution to Croatian mayfly fauna (Insecta: Ephemeroptera). Nat Croat. 25: 101–108. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Di Giovanni MV, Goretti E, Ceccagnoli D, La Porta G, Chiappafreddo U. 2001. Ephemeroptera and Plecoptera in the Chiascio River (Central Italy) since a dam's building. In: Proceeding of 2001 International Joint Meeting on Ephemeroptera and Plecoptera. [Google Scholar]
  • Elliott JM, Humpesch UH, Macan TT. 1988. Larvae of the British Ephemeroptera: a key with ecological notes, Scientific Publications of the Freshwater Biological Association No. 49, 145 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Ferro ML, Sites RW. 2007. The Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera of Missouri State Parks, with notes on biomonitoring, mesohabitat associations, and distribution. J Kans Entomol Soc 80: 105–129. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Giłka W, Klonowska-Olejnik M, Godunko RJ. 2007. On the Biology of Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Zavrel, 1924) (Diptera: Chironomidae) from the Chornohora Mts., Ukraine. Polish J Entomol 76: 285–291. [Google Scholar]
  • Głowaciński Z, Makomaska-Juchiewicz M, Połczyńska-Konior G. 2002. Red List of Threatened Animals in Poland. Krakow: Instytut Ochrony Przyrody PAN. [Google Scholar]
  • Haybach A. 1999. Beitrag zur Larvaltaxonomie der Ecdyonurus-venosus-Gruppe in Deutschland. Lauterbornia 37: 113–150. [Google Scholar]
  • Hering D, Moog O, Sandin L, Verdonschot PFM. 2004. Overview and application of the AQEM assessment system. Hydrobiologia 516: 1–20. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hering D, Johnson RK, Kramm S, Schmutz S, Szoszkiewicz K, Verhonschot PFM. 2006. Assessment of European streams with diatoms, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates and fish: a comparative metric-based analysis of organism response to stress. Freshwater Biol. 51: 1757–1785. [Google Scholar]
  • Illies J. 1978. Limnofauna Europaea. Stuttgart and New York: Gustav Fischer Verlag, 532 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Ivković M, Pont AC. 2015. New records of Muscidae (Diptera) from Mediterranean countries. Zookeys 496: 131–144. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ivković M, Gračan R, Horvat B. 2013. Croatian aquatic dance flies (Diptera: Empididae: Clinocerinae and Hemerodromiinae): species diversity, distribution and relationship to surrounding countries. Zootaxa 3686: 255–276. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Jacobsen RE. 1995. Symbiotic associations between Chironomidae (Diptera) and Ephemeroptera. In: Corkum DL, Ciborowski IIH, eds. Current Directions in Research on Ephemeroptera. Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press Inc., pp. 317–332 [Google Scholar]
  • Jalžić B, Lajtner J. 2011. Graziana papukensis. In: IUCN 2012, IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • Jamičić D. 2003. Osnovne geološke značajke Slavonskih planina. Priroda 6–7: 20–27 (in Croatian). [Google Scholar]
  • Janecek BFU, Moog O, Moritz C, Orendt C, Saxl R. 2002. Chironomidae. In: Moog O., ed. Fauna Aquatica Austriaca, Lieferung 2002. Wien: Wasserwirtschaftskataster, Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft. [Google Scholar]
  • Kolcsár LP, Ivković M, Ternjej I. 2015. New records of Limoniidae and Pediciidae (Diptera) from Croatia. Zookeys 513: 23–37. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kovács T. 2007. Data to the distribution of three species of Electrogena in Hungary, based on larvae (Ephemeroptera: Heptageniidae). Folia Historico-Naturalia Musei Matraensis 31: 133–137. [Google Scholar]
  • Kovács T, Godunko RJ. 2008. Faunistical records of larvae of Ephemeroptera, Odonata and Plecoptera from the Zakarpats'ka Region, Ukraine. Folia Historico-Naturalia Musei Matraensis 32: 87–91. [Google Scholar]
  • Kriska G, Andrikovics S, Szitó A. 1998. Phenological data on a parasitic relationship between Electrogena lateralis (Curtis, 1834) (Ephemeroptera) and Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Zavrel, 1924) (Chironomidae). Opusc Zool Inst Zoosyst Oecol Univ Bp 31: 79–84. [Google Scholar]
  • Kuhta M, Brkić Ž. 2003. Hidrogeološka i hidrološka istraživanja na području Park šume Jankovac u Parku prirode Papuk. Park prirode Papuk, Velika (in Croatian). [Google Scholar]
  • Kvifte GM, Ivković M, Klarić A. 2013. New records of moth flies (Diptera: Psychodidae) from Croatia, with the description of Berdeniella keroveci sp.nov. Zootaxa 3737: 57–67. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lang C, Raymond O. 1993. Empirical relationships between diversity of invertebrate communities and altitude in rivers: application to biomonitoring. Aquat Sci 55: 188–196. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Langton PH. 1991. A Key to the Pupal Exuviae of West Plaearctic Chironomidae. Coleraine, Cambridgeshire, England: P. Langton, 386 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Lenat DR. 1988. Water quality assessment of streams using a qualitative collection method for benthic macroinvertebrates. J N Am Benthol Soc 7: 222–233. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lenat DR, Penrose DL. 1996. History of the EPT taxa richness metric. J N Am Benthol Soc 13: 305–306. [Google Scholar]
  • Makarchenko EA, Makarchenko MA, Tiunova TM. 2015. A new species of Symbiocladius Kieffer, 1925 (Diptera: Chironomidae: Orthocladiinae) from the eastern palaearctic. Eur J Environ Sci 5: 45–50. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Malmqvist B, Rundle S. 2002. Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. Environ Conserv 29: 134–153. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Moller-Pillot H. 2013. Chironomidae larvae of the Netherlands and adjacent lowlands. In: Biology and Ecology of the Aquatic Orthocladiinae. Zeist: KNNV Publishing, 314 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Monaghan MT, Robinson CT, Spaak PT, Ward JV. 2005. Macroinvertebrate diversity in fragmented alpine streams, implications for freshwater conservation. Aquat Sci 67: 454–464. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Moog O. 2002. Fauna Aquatica Austriaca. Edition 2002. Vienna: Wassserwirtschaftskataster, Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft. [Google Scholar]
  • Mrakovčić M, Mustafić P, Buj I, Marčić Z. 2008. Ihtiofauna i makrozoobentos većih potoka Parka prirode Papuk, Zvečevačkog jezera, Jankovačkih jezera i ribnjaka u Parku prirode Papuk. Zagreb: Faculty of Science (in Croatian). [Google Scholar]
  • Müller-Liebenau I. 1969. Revision der europäischen Arten der Gattung Baetis Leach, 1815. (Insecta, Ephemeroptera). Gewässer und Abwasser 66/67: 95–101. [Google Scholar]
  • Pamić J, Radonić G, Pavić G. 2003. Geološki vodič kroz Park prirode Papuk. Velika: Javna ustanova Park prirode Papuk (in Croatian). [Google Scholar]
  • Pandža M. 2010. Flora parka prirode Papuk (Slavonija, Hrvatska). Šumarski List 134: 25–43 (in Croatian). [Google Scholar]
  • Petrović A, Milošević D, Paunović M, Simić S, Đorđević N, Stojković M, Simić V. 2015. New data on the distribution and ecology of the mayfly larvae (Insecta: Ephemeroptera) of Serbia (central part of the Balkan Peninsula). Turk J Zool. 39: 195–209. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Petrović MD, Vasiljević DjA, Vujičić MD, Hose TA, Marković SB, Lukić T. 2013. Global geopark and candidate − comparative analysis of Papuk Mountain geopark (Croatia) and Fruška Gora Mountain (Serbia) by using GAM model. Carpath J Earth Environ 8: 105–116. [Google Scholar]
  • Płóciennik M, Gadawski P, Kazimierczak J. 2014. New records of non-biting midges from coastal regions of Croatia and Montenegro (Diptera, Chironomidae). Spixiana 37: 89–92. [Google Scholar]
  • Poff NL, Zimmermann JKH. 2010. Ecological responses to altered flow regimes: a literature review to inform the science and management of environmental flows. Freshwater Biol. 55: 194–205. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Previšić A, Ivković M, Miliša M, Kerovec M. 2013. Caddisfly (Insecta: Trichoptera) fauna of Papuk Nature Park, Croatia. Nat Croat 22: 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  • Sartori M, Landolt P. 1998. Atlas de distribution des Ephemeres de Suisse (Insecta: Ephemeroptera), Fauna Helvetica 2. Neuchátel: Schweizerische Entomologische Gesellschaft, 220 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Schiffels S. 2009. Commensal and Parasitic Chironomidae. Lauterbornia 68: 9–33. [Google Scholar]
  • Schmedtje U, Colling M. 1996. Ökologische Typisierung der aquatischen Makrofauna. Inf Ber Bayer Landesamtes Wasserwirtsch 4: 543. [Google Scholar]
  • Schmidt-Kloiber A, Hering D. 2015. − An online tool that unifies, standardises and codifies more than 20,000 European freshwater organisms and their ecological preferences. Ecol Indic 53: 271–282. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Šegota T, Filipčić A. 2003. Köppenova podjela klima i hrvatsko nazivlje. Geoadria 8: 17–23 (in Croatian). [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Šerić Jelaska L, Dumbović V, Kučinić M. 2011. Carabid beetle diversity and mean individual biomass in beech forests of various ages. Zookeys 405: 393–405. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Soldán T. 1978. Die Wirtsspezifizität und Verbreitung von Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Diptera, Chironomidae) in der Tschechoslowakei. Acta Entomol Bohemoslov 75: 194–200. [Google Scholar]
  • Soldán T. 1979. The effect of Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Diptera, Chironomidae) on the development of reproductive organs of Ecdyonurus lateralis (Ephemeroptera, Heptageniidae). Folia Parasitol 26: 45–50. [Google Scholar]
  • Špoljar M, Dražina T, Ostojić A, Miliša M, Gligora Udovič M, Štafa D. 2012. Bryophyte communities and seston in a karst stream (Jankovac Stream, Papuk Nature Park, Croatia). Ann Limnol - Int J Lim 48: 125–138. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vilenica M, Gattolliat JL, Ivković M, Kučinić M, Mičetić Stanković V, Mihaljević Z, Sartori M 2014. The mayfly fauna (Insecta, Ephemeroptera) of the Plitvice Lakes National park, Croatia. Nat Croat 23: 349–363. [Google Scholar]
  • Vilenica M, Gattolliat J-L, Mihaljević Z, Sartori M. 2015. Croatian mayflies (Insecta, Ephemeroptera): species diversity and distribution patterns. Zookeys 523: 99–127. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vilenica M, Previšić A, Kučinić M, Gattolliat J-L., Sartori M, Mihaljević Z. 2016a. Distribution and autecology of mayflies (Insecta, Ephemeroptera) in a Mediterranean river in the Western Balkans. Entomol News 126: 19–35. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vilenica M, Previšić A, Ivković M, Popijač A, Vučković I, Kučinić M, Kerovec M, Gattolliat J-L., Sartori M, Mihaljević Z. 2016b. Mayfly (Insecta: Ephemeroptera) assemblages of a regulated perennial Mediterranean river system in the Western Balkans. Biologia 71: 1038–1048. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vilenica M, Brigić A, Kerovec M, Gottstein S, Ternjej I. 2016c. Spatial distribution and seasonal changes of mayflies (Insecta, Ephemeroptera) in a Western Balkan peat bog. Zookeys 637: 135–149. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vilenica M, Mičetić Stanković V, Sartori M, Kučinić M, Mihaljević Z. 2017a. Environmental factors affecting mayfly assemblages in tufa-depositing habitats of the Dinaric Karst. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 418: 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  • Vilenica M, Ivković M, Sartori M, Mihaljević Z. 2017b. Mayfly emergence along an oligotrophic Dinaric karst hydrosystem: spatial and temporal patterns, and species-environment relationship. Aquat Ecol 51: 1–17. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vilenica M, Brigić A, Sartori M, Mihaljević Z. 2018. Microhabitat selection and distribution of functional feeding groups of mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera) in lotic karst habitats. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 419: 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  • Vollenweider RA, Kerekes J. 1982. Eutrophication of Waters: Monitoring, Assessment and Control. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Cooperative programme on monitoring of inland waters (Eutrophication control), Environment Directorate. [Google Scholar]
  • Vuataz L, Sartori M, Wagner A, Monaghan MT. 2011. Toward a DNA taxonomy of Alpine Rhithrogena (Ephemeroptera: Heptageniidae) using a mixed Yule-Coalescent analysis of mitochondrial and nuclear DNA. PLoS One 6: e 19728. [Google Scholar]
  • Wentworth CK. 1922. A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments. J Geol 30: 377–392. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Zabric D. 2001. Analiza stanja biotske raznovrsnosti enodnevnic (Ephemeroptera). Ekspertne študije za Pregled stanja biotske raznovrsnosti in krajinske pestrosti v Sloveniji. Ljubljana: Agencija Republike Slovenije za okolje, pp. 116–122 (in Slovenian). [Google Scholar]
  • Zaninović K, Gajić-Čapka M, Perčec Tadić M, Vučetić M, Milković J, Bajić A, Cindrić K, Cvitan L, Katušin Z, Kaučić D, Likso T, Lončar E, Lončar Ž, Mihajlović D, Pandžić K, Patarčić M, Srnec L, Vučetić V. 2008. Klimatski atlas Hrvatske/Climate atlas 1961–1990, 1971–2000. Zagreb: Državni hidrometeorološki zavod, 200 p. (in Croatian). [Google Scholar]

Cite this article as: Vilenica M, Ergović V, Mihaljević Z. 2018. Mayfly (Ephemeroptera) assemblages of a Pannonian lowland mountain, with first records of the parasite Symbiocladius rhithrogenae (Zavrel, 1924) (Diptera: Chironomidae). Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim. 54: 31

All Tables

Table 1

Characteristics of the 15 studied streams along the Papuk Mountain, Croatia.

Table 2

Mayfly taxa recorded in lotic habitats of the Papuk Mountain, Croatia. Study sites: 1–Jankovac stream, 2–Pušine stream, 3–Veličanka stream, 4–Bistra stream, 5–Vetovka stream, 6–Ćeralinica stream, 7–Djedovica stream, 8–Kutjevački potok stream, 9–Javornik stream, 10–Brzaja stream, 11–Kovačica stream, 12–Radetina rijeka stream, 13–Marin potok stream, 14–Dubočanka stream, 15–Vranovo stream.

All Figures

thumbnail Fig. 1

Geographical position of the Papuk Mountain in Croatia, and study area together with locations of the study sites.

In the text
thumbnail Fig. 2

Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination of mayfly assemblages based on Bray–Curtis similarity coefficient (group average linking) and their log transformed abundances in 15 streams along the Papuk Mountain, Croatia.

In the text
thumbnail Fig. 3

Structure of mayfly assemblages in 15 studied streams along the Papuk Mountain, Croatia, in terms of: (a) longitudinal zonal associations and (b) trophic structure (functional feeding groups) of recorded species.

In the text
thumbnail Fig. 4

(a) Kovačica stream, an example of the habitat of Symbiocladius rhithrogenae in the area of the Papuk Mountain, Croatia; (b) Rhithrogena gr. semicolorata nymph infested with S. rhithrogenae; (c) Pupa of S. rhithrogenae, ventral view.

In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.