Sperchon (Hispidosperchon) carpaticus Biesiadka, 1975

Sabatino, Antonio Di, Gerecke, Reinhard, Gledhill, Terence & Smit, Harry, 2009, On the taxonomy of water mites (Acari: Hydrachnidia) described from the Palaearctic, part 2: Hydryphantoidea and Lebertioidea, Zootaxa 2266, pp. 1-34 : 21-22

Sperchon (Hispidosperchon) carpaticus Biesiadka, 1975

Species incerta

Discussion: This species has not been recorded since the first description that was based on a single female from the Polish Carpathians. Due to the presence of integumental papillae, Biesiadka (1975) attributed it to the subgenus Mixosperchon , here synonymized with Hispidosperchon – however, his statement that the species belonged to the Sperchon (Hispidosperchon) setiger group, suggests that he was not convinced about separation of the two subgenera. He compared his species with two African species, obviously overlooking that in the Western Palaearctic fauna, a rather similar species, S. algeriensis , is present. This species is in perfect agreement in palp morphology and dorsal sclerite pattern, with the only difference of distinctly smaller measurement values ( Gerecke 1991a - e.g. L P-3 180-220, in S. carpaticus 281). In its relatively large dimensions, S. carpaticus agrees well with S. setiger from which it differs only in the presence of integument papillae.

In the Sperchon setiger group, species separation based on single specimens is problematic. Also characters considered as species-diagnostic may be subject to individual variability and monstrosities are frequently observed. The holotype of S. carpaticus might represent a S. setiger with atypical integument structure, an unusually large S. papillosus Thor, 1901 with aberrant doubled ventral setae on P-3, or an unusually large S. algeriensis . The latter explanation, most convincing from a morphological point of view, is extremely improbable because this species was so far recorded from areas with a Mediterranean climate only – there being frequent and in large populations. As long as this species is not documented from larger numbers and in both sexes, S. carpaticus must be considered a species incerta .