Chthonius pygmaeus Beier, 1934

Novák, János, 2024, An updated checklist for the pseudoscorpion fauna of Hungary (Arachnida: Pseudoscorpiones), Zootaxa 5433 (1), pp. 51-95 : 83

Chthonius pygmaeus Beier, 1934

Chthonius (Neochthonius) pygmaeus Beier, 1934: 53–54 . Not Chthonius pygmaeus Beier : Kárpáthegyi 2007: 82–83 (misidentification, see C. carinthiacus and C. hungaricus );

Christophoryová et al. 2011b: 36 (partim); Červená et al. 2020a: 221 (partim); WPC 2023 (partim).

Remarks: Chthonius pygmaeus was described by Beier (1934) from the Slovakian portion of the Carpathian Mts (holotype from „Vasberzencze” valley), but due to the historical border changes erroneously attributing the type locality to Hungary, which resulted the subsequent literature to erroneously mention the species as part of the Hungarian fauna (Beier 1963; Szalay 1968) and was reported from north-eastern Hungary by Kárpáthegyi (2007), near the Slovakian border, from Jósvafő (Valley of Tohonya Spring) and Szögliget (Vecstés Spring). I have examined all of the pseudsocorpion material discussed by Kárpáthegyi (2007), but I could not find any sample labelled as C. pygmaeus . However, I found two vials containing chthoniids, that had labels matching Kárpáthegyi’s published data of C. pygmaeus (no other labels had these locality, collector, and date combinations within Kárpáthegyi’s material, and they neither could be found in the HNHM collection). The vial with the label data „Jósvafõ, Tohonya patak v, szikláról száraz moha Északi o. 1987.iv.8. leg Mahunka, Molnár” [Jósvafő, Valley of Tohonya Brook, dry moss from rock, N-side, 08.04.1987. leg. S. Mahunka & Molnár]” contained eleven specimens of C. carinthiacus , while the vial with the label data „Aggtelek, Szögliget, Vecstés forrás környéke, gyertyános tölgyes, 1989.viii.23. leg. Sziráki Gy.” [Aggtelek, Szögliget, near to Vecstés Spring, oak-hornbeam forest, 23.08.1989. leg. Gy. Sziráki] and also (probably accidently) labelled by Kárpáthegyi as „ Chthonius tenuis ” contained seven specimens of C. hungaricus and one specimen of an unidentified Neobisium . As Kárpáthegyi reported no loss of material from this collection, and he confirmed the possibility that this material was used to record C. pygmaeus (Kárpáthegyi, personal communication), I therefore exclude C. pygmaeus from the Hungarian fauna.