See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322618623

Considerations on the genus Carabus species protected in Romania by the

Natura 2000 network.

Article · May 2012

CITATIONS READS

14 528

1 author:

Florin Prunar
University of Life Sciences "King Michael I" from Timisoara
44 PUBLICATIONS 67 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Florin Prunar on 20 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE GENUS CARABUS SPECIES PROTECTED IN

ROMANIA BY THE NATURA 2000 NETWORK

J. BARLOY(1), F. PRUNAR(2)
(1)
Agrocampus Ouest (FR), 65, Rue de Saint-Brieuc CS 84215, Rennes Cedex 35042,
(2)
Banat’s University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Agricultural
Sciences, Timisoara, Calea Aradului no. 119, RO-300645, Romania,
E-mail: jean.barloy@orange.fr

Abstract. In Romania, the Natura 2000 network is widespread, especially in mountainous or hilly
highly developed, with 273 SIC covering 17% of areas; Carabus (Morphocarabus) zawadzkii
the country and also has three biosphere reserves seriatissimus Reitter, 1896 its range has recently
(Danube Delta, Retezat Mountains and Rodna specified (see attached map). The global name
Mountains). The study is interested in heritage Carabus (Morphocarabus) hampei of the Council
species of Genus Carabus named in the Annexe II Directive 92/43/EEC includes three species:
and IV (modified version 2007) of the “Council Carabus (Morphocarabus) rothi comptus Dejean,
Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the 1831; Carabus (Morphocarabus) rothi incompsus
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna Kraatz, 1880; Carabus (Morphocarabus) rothi
and flora”. The paper make an analysis of the hampei Kuster, 1846 and the infraspecific diversity
romanian carabus species by european community are at least 12 taxa spread over the national
interest in terms of taxonomic observations, territory (see map attached). Moreover, the authors
geographical distribution, ecology of species, attract attention to the need of the Romanian state
conservation status and the problems due to the responsible, to protect the endemic species of the
bibliographic inconsistencies. These species of Genus Carabus. The paper provides a summary of
European Community interest are examined for the personal and bibliographic observations which
their recent taxonomic name and their are in the interest of : the entities which aim to
geographical distribution established from reliable species conservation, the protected area managers,
bibliographical data, researches of the authors and the entomologists interested by the Carabus genus
the indications of SCI (Site of Community species and, we hope, the legislative bodies that
Importance) Natura 2000 for the confirmed sites. have capacity to making decision for the
Carabus (Pachystus) hungaricus Fabricius, 1792 is management to protection species that require
extremely rare (only one sure station); Carabus attention.
(Hygrocarabus) variolosus Fabricius, 1787 is more

Key words: Natura 2000 Network, carabus, hampei, hungaricus, variolosus, zawadszkii, taxonomy,
distribution, habitats, inventory mapping.

INTRODUCTION
I. The Network Natura 2000
The European Union has taken various measures so to ensure the biodiversity by the
conservation of the natural habitats, of the flora and wild fauna on the territory of the Member
States. Among those appears the Directive „Habitats, Fauna Flora” DHFF 92/43 CEE (21 May
1992) creating a common framework of intervention. It defines habitats and species of
Community interest allowing the identification of sites of Community importance. (SACs-
Special Areas of Conservation or ASCIs-Areas of Special Conservation Interest, known’s as
SCI) that constitute with Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for birds the Network Natura 2000.
In Romania this network counts 273 SIC covering 17% of the own territory (the
highest percentage of the EU) and 3 reserves biospheres: Delta of the Danube, Mounts Retezat,
and Mounts Rodna. Each” Standard data form“ of SICs includes as scientific information data
on the characteristics of natural habitats, the list of the species of the fauna and flora retained of
151
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
community interest, the statute of conservation and must comprise a bibliography of reference.

II Species of the G. Carabus in Natura 2000

The annexe I of the DHFF lists the species of Community interest (patrimonial
species) which are whether:
- in danger of extinction (red list)
- vulnerable (species may be in danger if the sudden pressures do not decrease)
- rare (widespread species but with low density, very localised species and abundant
in their biotopes; species very badly sampled by the traditional methods and met by
chance)
- endemic, strictly localised at a particular restricted geographical area.
For Romania, the Annexe II (DHFF) and the forms Natura 2000 mention C.
hungaricus (3 SIC), C. hampei (21 SIC), C. variolosus (24 SIC), C. zawadszkii (3 SIC). The
reasons of this choice are not specified but are justified for C. hungaricus and C. variolosus
disappeared or extremely rare in several European countries.
The examination of available data to establish the geographical distribution led to the
following remarks:
1. Insufficiency of reliable and recent references on the geographical localization.
Contrary, for example to the superabundant and brought up to date phyto-
geographical data, species of Genus Carabus have a distribution badly known
(insufficiency of collection) or based on old or sometimes erroneous references.
2. Specificity of research, because of their night and seasonal activity, the detection of
the presence of species of Genus Carabus implies a capturing according to
suitable techniques during the often short exit of the imagos or their research in
the site/sites of hibernation (specific studies based on biological and behavioural
knowledge).
3. Insertion of old names in modern taxonomy and useful extension of the biodiversity
for the infraspecific level. The biodiversity does not relate to only the species but
should take into account the infraspecific diversity for the most characteristic
populations. Indeed although the proof is difficult, some isolated populations can
beings genetically different, due to isolation or adaptation to the medium. For the
patrimonial species covered by the DHFF, it is the case for Carabus hampei
meets on a vast territory (HU, RO, UA) (cf. will infra).
4. For the old data (before 1932) or recent of Hungarian origin, the difficulty in
identifying the current Romanian localities starting from German or Hungarian
designations, related to the history.
The study which follows proposes for the species of the Genus Carabus protected in
Romania, their taxonomic position, their geographical distribution and preferential habitats
when those are sufficiently characteristic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The work is based to the studies made in the lasts ten years to the Carabus genus in
Romania and to the scientific bibliographical studies. In the field observations the Carabus
species was captured using the Barber pitfalls mainly in the Natural and National Parks or in
the interesting sites for Carabus species quoted in literature work.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

III. Species of Genus Carabus protected in Romania- taxonomy, distribution,
habitats.
152
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
A. Carabus (Pachystus) hungaricus Fabricius 1792
1. Taxonomy arrangements
Carabus hungaricus en Europe has three subspecies: hungaricus Fabricius 1792 for
the European form; mingens Quensel 1806 for the Russian Plain and Caucasus; and scythus
Motschulsky 1847 present in E Ukraine and middle Volga region. In the Pannonian Region
besides the typical species were described two taxons: hungaricus viennensis Kraatz 1877
spread in the Vienna Basin (Austria) and South of Moravia (Czech Republic) and hungaricus
frivaldskyanus Breuning 1933 spread in Serbian and Romanian Banat. The specimens collected
by Breuning in Romania and in Serbia (Delibat) were considered different, caused the
characteristics of primary foveae considered quite large and very strong. This name is
considered unavailable in the most of catalogues.
2. Geographical distribution in Romania
Currently, the only recent data for Romania relates to the localities of Jamu Mare and
Latunas from Banat (CS), to the Valée Semiţa in xerophytic meadow LIE 1994, 1995. This
author sought this species at Maşloc and Remetea Mică, places quoted by Breuning 1933 (a
specimen present in the Breuning collection preserved by the University of Amsterdam).The
periods of imagos activity are contingent of summer and autumnal pluviometry. (figure 1)

Figure 1. Seasonal evolution of C. (Pachystus) hungaricus Fabricius 1792 at Janu Mare

In Natura 2000, C. hungaricus Fabricius 1792 is quoted of Ciuperceni-Desa,

Coridorul Jiului and Silvostepa Olteniei according to the observations of Ienistea (personal
communication E. Nitu); no research confirms the current existence of the species. The
quotation of SCI Mlaştina Satchinez (TM) seems erroneous to us.
3. Habitat
The European form has a xero-termophilic preferring the sandy steppe at Jamu Mare
station the species is spread along a slope and prefer: the shelter cords or clumps of shrubs
mainly Prunus spinosa and Crataegus monogyna; lower and upper lip-edge of flat areas along
the contour, where humidity resulting in precipitation is kept longer; ravines along the slope,
formed by rainwater especially if it finds there vegetation and shrubs. We found this species
with a hight abundence and dominance in Serbia to the sandy steppe at Deliblat (Susara) and a
population quite well represented but in a very small area distribued in characteristic places
(areas shaded by shrubs, depressions or channels that retain soil moisture).

153
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
B. Carabus (Morphocarabus) hampei Kuster 1846
While referring to the specialized bibliography and our references of field
observations the global name C. hampei of the Sites Natura 2000 and the localities appearing in
the reference 2012 (Species Fact Sheets) include three species:
- C. (Morphocarabus) rothi comptus Dejean 1831 (2 taxa).
- C. (Morphocarabus) rothi incompsus Kraatz 1880.
- C. (Morphocarabus)hampei Kuster 1846 (9 taxa).
The distinction between these species is not always easy to nonspecialists and their
genetic bond is incompletely established. The linking of some taxa varies and remain partly
discussed. Because of difficulty of identification, the regrouping under the global designation
of C. hampei can be justified it marks nevertheless a great biological diversity.
Among the morphological criteria of identification:
- C. (Morphocarabus) rothi comptus present 4 primary intervals.
- C. (Morphocarabus) rothi hampei typically holds 5 primary intervals, identifiable
by the particular shape of the foveae. In absence of the duplication of the intervals,
the four primary are easily identifiable, the fifth being detectable when the number
of intervals reaches 20. However LAPOUGE (1916) mentions the great variability of
the number of these intervals.
- C. (Morphocarabus) rothi incompsus, morphologically similar to previous (elytra
shorter and broader, foveas indistinct), is identified by the shape of the endophallus.

a. C. (Morphocarabus) rothi comptus Dejean 1831

Taxonomy, geographical distribution
This species undoubtedly endemic of Romania (uncertain presence in the UK)
includes two taxa being distinguishing by the size and the altitudinal localization. (figure 2.)
 The typical form comptus comptus measures 18-22 mm and occurs in the mountains.

o Apuseni Mountains: Padiş at superior basin of Crişul Pietros, (TEODOREANU

1981) and surroundings Top Buteasa 1792 m. (Natura 2000); superior course
of Someşul Rece River 900-1300 m., Someşul Cald, (BIELZ 1845 BITRTHLER
1886)
o Poiana Ruscă Mountains: meadow Vaccinium sp. 1885m. (BARLOY and
PRUNAR 2005-2006)
o Ţarcu Mountains at various locations: Top Ţarcu in meadow 1900-2000 m.
(Lie 1994) , Top Mătania 2160 m., (BUDKA 2008), Top Nedeia 2000 m.
(KYNKA 2008); Muntele Mic (CSIKI 1908, BARLOY et al. 2012) with the
form szoerenyensis variously colored (brown bronze, red gilded, green,
violet), in meadow 1500 m. (LIE 1994); also at the foot of the mountains in
edge of the Sebeş River, colony formed by the water entrainment (BARLOY
and PRUNAR 2007, 2008)
o Retezat Mountains, CSIKI, PETRI (Narozsu), not found by LIE 1997.

The form C. (Morphocarabus) rothi comptus ulrichoffmanni Lie 1982, size 25-27
mm., occurs in hilly area of Poiana Ruscă Mountains 300-400 m. Known places: Nădrag
Valley at Gosta 350-400 m. forest (LIE 1981), Căvăran in forest edge 360 m., Borlova into a
wet ravine 380 m. named Ogaşul Nicoară, Bouţari in a forest 600 m. to Micota Valley, (LIE
1982, 1994, 1999). The form borlovensis present an activity over a short period – from the end
of May to the mid of June (figure 3).

154
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012

Figure 2. Distribution of group Morphocarabus rothi Dej. species in Romania

b. C. (Morphocarabus) rothi incomptsus Kratz 1880

Morphologically close to hampei (but elytron with narrow intervals, the primaries
interrupted by some very shallow dimples), the surest identification rests on the form of the
endophallus. Specimens of the mentioned localities cf. above, not all were subjected to this
control; the oldest references come from famous carabologists (Bielz, Csiki…) however. The
recent researches among taxa of the species hampei have, for example, allowed to attach the
form mendax Csiki 1906 present in Ukraine (Mainly Mounts) at the species incompsus.

Figure 3. Seasonal activity example of species C. (M.) rothi comptus ulrichoffmanni Lie 1982,

155
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
The typical form can be found from Azuga-Buşteni to Odorheiu Secuiesc-Vlăhiţa:
Azuga-Sinaia-Buşteni (FLECK 1904, MONTADON 1906). In PETRI (1912): Braşov, Predeal Pass,
Crizbav, Vâlcele, Măieruş, Ştiuca, Mont Cristianul Mare. In LIE (2001) : Timişu de Sus,
Tâmpa 900 m.. BARLOY and PRUNAR collected at Poiana Braşov (1030 m.), Bogata Forest (600
m.). Specimens measure 27-30 mm. (600 m.), Top Vârghiş 720-820 m. (MATHE 2007).
 Two alpin forms are attached to incompsus:
o spectabilis Csiki 1906 of Rodna Mountains, Ineu Peak (2280 m.), Coronghiş
(1500-1800 m.), LIE 1992-Vatra Dornei (1500 m.). Size 26-27 mm.
o mehelyanus Csiki 1906 of Hăşmaş Mountains and Ţarcăului (HOLDHAUS
1910): Bălan, Ecem, Hăşmaşu Mare (1793 m), Piatra Singuratică (1648 m),
Piatra Tarcaului (1463 m), Munticelul (1000 m). Small size 20-22 mm.
The rare form rareulensis (Born 1907) of Rarău Mountains is attached to the previous.

c. C. (Morphocarabus) rothi hampei Kuster 1846.

This species, present in the North-West and the Centre-West of Romania, does not
exceed in the East the Carpathian arc and crosses the territorial limits to the extreme NNW on
the limited areas in Hungary and Ukraine.
In the zone of Romanian distribution, the species largely represented (considered as
eudominant PRUNAR et al. 2007, 2009) are quoted in many localities; undoubtedly not being
identified.
In this vast territory, it forms many populations sometimes distinguished on the
infraspecific level. The most typical, accepted in taxonomy are distinguish by their size, their
colour, the number of intervals but especially geographical localization, sometimes being the
only one (example gutiiensis TAKACS and LIE 1992), found only in the forest of the Bodi Lakes
(MM). Many others, less distinct are arranged in the standard species.
For the accepted forms on the infraspecific level, the table 1 above provides some
components ensuring the morphological distinction. Others, less characterized, in spite of some
attempts of nominations, are attached to the standard form.

Table 1.
Morphological features of C. (Morphocarabus) rothi hampei
Dimensions (1) Number
Dominant
Taxa of Notes
L mm l mm color
intervals
hunyadensis Csiki 1906 34-37 12,7-13,5 18-20 black ♀L 38-39 mm. indistinct foveae
brownish
gutiiensis Takacs and Lie 1992 34-36 12,9-13,7 20-24 ♀ l 14-15 mm
black
black dark
dacicus Csiki 1906 31-34 11,7-12,7 22-24 ♀ L 35-36 mm. raised intervals
blue
teleki Csiki 1987 30-31 11,1-11,4 18-21 variable intervals rather salient
hampei Kuster 1846 27-30 9,7-10,3 18-19 diverse small foveae
praedacicus Lie 1992 28-29 10,6-10,7 18-22 black intervals rather salient
ormayi Reitter 1896 27-30 - - diverse -
eximius Csiki 1906 22-25 - 18-19 blue -
zilahiensis Csiki 1906 24-26 9,2-9,7 18-19 violet blue foveae large, deep
(1) Dimensions:♂ then ♀
Localisation
 hunyadensis Csiki 1906 : Săcărâmb (800-900 m), Metaliferi Mountains ; Poiana
Aiudului, Trascău Mountains, (Szel 2007) ; only known localities
 gutiiensis Takacs and Lie 1992: forests surrounding the two Bodi Lakes, Gutai
Mounatins 500-700 m., single known station

156
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
 dacicus Csiki 1906 : surroundings Beclean, Gherla, Nasaud, (CSIKI, BIELZ, TAKACS),
Beclenuţ, wood edge of Someşul Mare River 300 m., (BARLOY and PRUNAR 2008),
Arcalia 600 m. (RUICĂNESCU).
 teleki Csiki 1937 left bank of Mureş River at Nemeşeşti, Margina, Pojoga, Icuiul
Coşteiului (LIE 1991), Căprioara Ilteu, Pojoga (BARLOY and PRUNAR 2008). Forest
and meadow: SZEL et al. (2007) attach this taxon to C. Morphocarabus rothi rothi
Dejean 1829 due to the absence of the fifth primary. LAPOUGE 1926 reports this
frequent case for hampei. Moreover the largest individuals females of teleki have 5
primary intervals.
 hampei hampei Kuster 1846. Many localities are attached to the type species. The
collect operated by SZEL et al. 2007 quote: Aiud, Alba Iulia, Cerghid, Chinari,
Cristuru Secuiesc, Gheorgheni, Iernut, Ilia-Bacea, Mircurea Nirajului, Reghin,
Rimetea, Ruganeşti, Sebot, Şincai, Sovata, Targu Mureş, Târnăveni, Troiţa,
Valişoara. TAKACS (2003), mentions Jibou, Buzeşti, (wood near Ardusat), Someş
Odorhei, Gârdani (edge of Someş River), Rupea. BARLOY and PRUNAR 2010 add
Cisnădioara, Turnu Rosu Pass, Sărăţeni. Lie (2001) mention Sărmaşu (supposed
place of the type of Kuster) and designates three central regions: region Cristuru
Secuiesc-Sighişoara (300-400 m), region Târgu Mureş with the taxon fraternus Csiki
1906, region Ilia-Sibot. Ruicanescu adds Ciucea-Valea Drăganului 770 m. (1993),
Scăriţa-Belioara 700 m. (1994).
 praedacicus Lie 1992. Described by 5 specimens Valea Mare (400-600 m. near
Zlatna). Found in mass (BARLOY and PRUNAR 2008, 2009) in forest edge and in
meadow (road Zlatna-Almasu Mare).
 ormayi Reitter 1896. Well represented in Hungary (NE extreme) and in Ukraine, this
taxon appears at NNW of Romania: Micula, (TAKACS 2000), Moiad, Noroieni,
Sărmăşag, (SZEL et al. 2007). While approaching at Zalău, the distinction is less
clear. LIE 2001 indicates Jibou. A polychrome small size population with rather
heterogeneous of colour (L:22-25 mm, l:8-10,5 mm. is in forest Firminiş 2006-2011).
 eximius and zilhaniensis Csiki 1906. These two taxa, morphologically similar
(distinctive general form, shape of the pronotum, intervals interruptions), occupy
separate territories.
o eximius Csiki 1906 Băile Felix, Hididşelu de Sus, Hidişelu de Jos, Beftia,
Sinteu (BARLOY and PRUNAR 2009) 22-28 mm.
o zilahiensis Csiki 1906 Monts Meseş, Zalău, Crişeni (TAKACS et al. 2003).
The geographical distribution of these 2 forms requires verification.
 diffinis Csiki 1906. The position of this taxon is discussed LOBL et al. 2003 arrange it
under the subspecies comptus in spite of the presence of 5 primary intervals (Fuss
1871, Birthler 1886 considered him comptus). It resemble to eximius by the size (23-
28 mm), and the colour, but the surface of the elytra presents a silky reflection (net at
♂♂). Gilău Mounts (PETRI 1910), Cluj (Csiki 1906), Hill Hoia Cluj (TEODOREANU
1959). Quoted at Someşul Rece River (confusion with comptus?). Wood close to
route 103K near to Gârbău (BARLOY and PRUNAR 2007-2009).
This list does not include taxa corresponding to individual forms of colour
(aurosericus Kraatz 1880; liebli Dietl 1897; zoppai Kratz 1900), effective or dimensions of
intervals (bokori Csiki 1927; fraternus Csiki 1906; marusi Ormay 1890 ).

C. C. (Morphocarabus) scheidleri seriatissimus Reitter 1896

This species of big size (L : 33-37 mm, l : 12,1-12,9 mm) with individuals reaching 38
to 40 mm., has four primary intervals, and streaks formed by lines of points arranged on the
157
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
matte black elytra, is found in Ukraine (Maramureş Mountains) and in Romania in the
Maramureş and Bistriţa Năsăud districts.

Figure 4. Distribution of C. (Morphocarabus) scheidleri seriatissimus Reitter 1896

1. Localization (figure 4)
Maramureş : Lăpuş-Suplai (FUSS 1873); Sighetu Marmaţiei-Bocicoiul Mare 300m.
(KINGA et al. 2003 and MERKL 2008) ; Lunca la Tisa along the river Tisa (BARLOY and
PRUNAR 2007-2011), Vişeu de Sus (Kinga et al. 2003) Ruscova, Repedea in the Maramureş
Mountains 500 m., Bogdan Voda 480 m., Borsa 920 m. (BARLOY and PRUNAR 2011)
Bistriţa Năsăud : western edge of Rodnei Mountains: Fiad, Telciu, 440 m (BARLOY
and PRUNAR 2007-2011).
Les sites Natura 2000 : Valea Izei and Dealu Solovan, places close to Sighetu
Marmaţiei confirm the establishment of the species in this zone. The presence in the Secular
Forest of Strâmbu Băiuţ in the Gutâiului Mounts hears towards the south the zone of
distribution. However, the simultaneous presence of C. hampei and C. zawadzkii is strange.
2. Biotopes:
The habitats are either of the clear forests or the forest edges either of the bushes in
the limit of meadow in the vicinity of semi-permanent brooks.

158
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
D. Carabus (Hygrocarabus) variolosus (Fabricius 1787)
This hygrophyte species, frequent of multiple wet places in Romania, rather in forest
up to 1300 m (Mounts Semenic peat bog), and it meets on all the territory except Dobrogea.

CONCLUSIONS
The foregoing presentation and the context in which it is established, calls several
observations:
1. Endemic species, presents only in one state never appear in European texts, their protection
is the responsibility of the state that hosts them. Contrary to some European countries,
Romania has not yet taken a protective measure for endemic G. Carabus except those
made by European legislation. If Romania decide this protection, that concerning C.
(Morphocarabus) rothi comptus Dejean 1831 ; C. (Morphocarabus) rothi rothi Dejean and
Boisduval 1829 ; C. (Morphocarabus) rothi alutensis Săvulescu 1972; C.
(Morphocarabus) kollari Palliardi 1825, C. (Morphocarabus) rothi incompsus Kraatz
1880.
2. The patrimonial protected species, present in Romania are well described in the specialized
literature up to the infraspecific level for the group of species arranged under name C.
hampei. At this last level, the identification is in competence of carabologists specialists of
which should be surrounded the descriptors of the sites Natura 2000 (problems of
competences).
3. The territorial distribution is established as a whole in spite of the heterogeneity of the
collection dates. The old data provided by carabologists are invaluable because they
delimit a potential surface where the species (taxon) described can be found by thorough
research. The presence of certain species is unknown fault of investigations or is described
of only one locality: a systematic research makes it possible to fill this gap (example:
extension of the distribution surface of C. (Morphocarabus) rothi alutensis BARLOY and
PRUNAR 2011 and of C. (Morphocarabus) scheidleri seriatissimus BARLOY and PRUNAR
2011.
4. The natural habitat, defined by directive DHFF is primarily characterized by the vegetation
of the studied site (phytosociology). The description of the vegetal environment is not
enough to define the habitat of the genre Carabus species. For those, it is about a report of
presence, not explaining it. The evaluation of the explanatory biological and abiotic
factors, of the populations presence is seldom carried out (because complex) or is limited
to a major component such the hydrous supply (for example hungaricus rather xerophilous
and variolosus very hydrophilic). Extensive studies, carried out on C. hungaricus
(POKLUDA et al. 2012) considered as species of dry steppe show the complexity of the
relations with the medium micro localization territorial, difference in behaviour of the ♂♂
and the ♀♀.
5. For the protected species from the genre Carabus on the territory of Romania:
- C. (Pachystus) hungaricus remains an extremely rare species, perhaps insufficiently sought;
some sites Natura 2000 being doubtful (Satchinez). Disappeared from Republic of
Moldova (NECULISEANU et al. 1999), it appears on the red list of the Russian
Federation (IVANENKO 1999) and Ukraine (SERBAKA 1994).
- C. (Hygrocarabus) variolosus Fabricius 1787 is frequent, especially in mountainous and
hilly zones.
- C. (Morphocarabus) scheidleri zawadzkii seriatissimus Reitter 1896 occupies a large area in
Maramureş and Bistriţa Năsăud, and not all sites were identified.
- C. (Morphocarabus) rothi hampei Kuster 1846 considered in the broad sense of the Habitats
Directive occupies the majority of the territory located at the west of the Carpathic arc,
159
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
above the 450 of latitude.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. BARLOY, J., LIE P., PRUNAR, F., 2008 Faune des espèces des genres Carabus et Cychrus du Banat
roumain, 2 Tomes. Artpress. 167 pp.
2. BARLOY, J., PRUNAR, F., 2011: Studies on the populations of Carabus (Morphocarabus) scheidleri
seriatissimus Reitter, 1896 (Insecta: Coleoptera) in Maramureș (North Romania).
Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle «Grigore Antipa». Vol. LIV (1).
pp. 95–103.
3. BIELZ, E. A., 1887 Die Erforschung der Käferfauna Siebenbürgens bis zum Schlusse des Jahres 1886.
Verh. u. Mitt. Siebenbg.. Ver. f. Naturwiss. zu Hermannstadt, 37: 27-114.
4. BIELZ, E.A., 1852. Entomologische Beiträge. Verh. u. Mitt. Siebenbg.. Ver. f. Naturwiss. zu
Hermannstadt, 3(1): 13-16, 61-66, 99.
5. BIELZ, E.A.,1850 Beiträge zur Käferfauna der Walachei. Verh. u. Mitt. Siebenbg.. Ver. f. Naturwiss. zu
Hermannstadt, 1: 39-45.
6. BIRTHLER, F., 1886. Ueber Siebenbürgische Caraben und deren nächste Verwandte. Verh. u. Mitt.
Siebenbg.. Ver. f. Naturwiss. zu Hermannstadt, 36: 55-71.
7. BODOLA, E. K., A. TAKÁCS, 2002 - Cercetarea biotipurilor unor specii endemice de coleoptere din genul
„Carabus Linné“ în partea de nord a Transilvaniei. Acta Musei Porolissensis, 24: 731-
734. (in Romanian)
8. BORN, P., 1904: Zwei interessante Carabensendungen aus Österreich-Ungarn. Insekten-Börse, 21, 100-
101.
9. BORN, P., 1905: Noch einmal Carabus monilis Fabr. und seine Formen. (Insekten-Börse. XXII, 1905,
p. 111, 115, 119—120, 123—124.)
10. BORN, P., 1906: Weitere Erorterungen uber Carabus monilis und seine Formen. Iusektenborse Jahrg.
23 p. 151—152, 156, 158—159
11. BOUSQUET, Y., B. BREZINA, A. DAVIES, J. FARKACS, A. SMETANA, 2003 - Catalogue of Palaearctic
Coleoptera, Archostemata, Myxophaga, Adephaga, vol. 1. Tribe Carabini Latreille,
1802. I. Löbl, A. Smetana (eds), Apollo Books. Stenstrup. DK, p. 174, 819 pp.
12. BREUNING, ST., 1932 - Monographie der Gattung Carabus L. Bestimmungs-Tabellen der europäischen
Coleopteren, 104 Heft. Troppau: 1-496.
13. BREZINA, B., 1999 - World Catalogue of the Genus Carabus L. Edit. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow. 170 pp.
14. BREZINA, B., 2003 - Updated checklist of the Genus Carabus (includes all Carabus-species and
subspecies described before 2004). 54 pp. Available online at
www.roadtomyanmar.net/species.doc (January 2010)
15. CSIKI, E. 1906a: Magyarország bogárfaunája. Vezérfonal a magyar szent korona országainak területén
elõforduló bogarak megismerésére. 1. Kötet. [The beetle fauna of Hungary. Volume
1.] E. Csiki, Budapest, 546 pp.
16. CSIKI, E. 1906b: Adatok a magyarországi Morphocarabusok ismeretéhez. (Beiträge zur Kenntniss der
Ungarischen Morphocaraben.) – Annales Musei Nationalis Hungarici 259 pp.
17. CSIKI, E. 1923: Néhány futrinka nevérõl. [On the names of some Carabus species.] – Rovartani Lapok
26: 140–141.
18. CSIKI, E. 1937. Beschreibung neuer Coleopteren. Entomol. Nachr, l l : 5-8.
19. CSIKI, E. 1946: Die Käferfauna des Karpaten-Beckens. – In: TASNÁDI-KUBACSKA, A. (ed.):
Naturwissenschaftliche Monographien, IV. 798 pp.
20. DEJEAN, (P.F.) and BOISDUVAL, J.-A. 1937: Iconographie et histoire naturelle des Coléoptères
d'Europe. Paris et Bruxelles 1-297
21. DEUVE, TH., 2004 - Illustrated Catalogue of the Genus Carabus of the World (Coleoptera Carabidae).
Edit. Pensoft. Sofia-Moscow, 461 pp.
22. DEUVE, TH., 2009 - Liste Blumenthal 2009 (Liste des taxons valides du genre Carabus L., 1758). Edit.
Andrésy. 47 pp.
23. FLECK, E., 1905 – Die Coleopteren Rumäniens. Bulletin de la Société des Sciences de Bucarest, XIII:
31,207
24. FRIVALDSZKI, J. 1874. Magyarország Téhelyröpüinek Futonczféléi. [Carabidae aus der Fauna
160
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
Ungarns]. Magyar Tud. Akad. Évkönyvei 20.
25. FUSS, C., 1857. Die Käfer Siebenbürgens. Hst. Gymn. Progr., Sibiu, 1-36;
26. FUSS, C., 1871. Beiträge zum Verzeichniss der siebenbürgischen Käferfauna. Verh. u. Mitt. Siebenbg..
Ver. f. Naturwiss. zu Hermannstadt,. 21: 18-21.
27. FUSS, C., 1873 - Notizen und Beiträge zur Insectenfauna Siebenbürgens. Verhandlungen und
Mitteilungen des Siebenbürgischen Vereins für Naturwissenschaften zu
Hermannstadt, 23: 17-28.
28. HOLDHAUS, K., DEUBEL F. 1910. Untersuchungen über die Zoogeographie der Karpathen. (Unter
besonderer Berücksichtigung der Coleopteren), Abh. der K.K. Zool.-Bot. Ges. Wien,
6(1): 1-202.
29. HORMUZAKI, C. 1903: Beobachtungen über die aus Rumänien bisher bekannten Garabusarlen, von C.
von Hurmuzachi. Bucarest. Bull. Soc.. Scienc. XII, 3 und 4, 273-285.
30. ISHIKAWA, R. 1973: Notes on some Basic Problems in the Taxonomy and the Phylogeny of the
Subtribe Carabina (Coleoptera, Carabidae). – Bulletin of the National Science
Museum Tokyo 16(2): 191–215.
31. KLEINFELD, F., H. SCHÜTZE, 1999 - Systematische Liste der Gattung Carabus mit Zahlreichen
taxonomische Anmerkungen. Fürth/Gleichen Delta-Druck und Verlag, Peks. 70 pp.
32. KÖDÖBÖCZ, V. and MAGURA, T. 1999: Biogeographical connections of the carabid fauna (Coleoptera:
Carabidae) of the Beregi-síkság to the Carpathians. – Folia entomologica hungarica
60: 195–203.
33. KÖDÖBÖCZ, V. and MAGURA, T. 2005: Forests of the Bereg-Plain as Refuges Based on Their Carabid
Fauna (Coleoptera: Carabidae). – Acta Phytopatologica et Entomologica Hungarica
34. KRAATZ, G.,1880: Ueber Carabus comptus Dej. und dessen Varietäten. Ent Monatssbl-14; 49-53.
35. LAPOUGE, G. V., 1916 - Carabes nouveaux et mal connus. Miscellanea Entomologica, 23 (7): 75-76.
36. LIE, P. 1988. Carabus-Arten (Coleoptera) auf dem Ciuta-Hügel bei Groşi (Banat, Rumänien). Ber. Kr.
Nürnberg. Ent. Galathea, 4(2): 49-56.
37. LIE, P. 1989 Neue Angabe über Carabus comptus Dejean (Coleoptera: Carabidae) im rumünischen
Banat. Folia Ent. Hungarica, 50: 41-46.
38. LIE, P. 1991. Einige Carabofaunistische Beobachtungen im nord-östlichen Banat (Rumänien). Ber. Kr.
Nürnberg. Ent. Galathea, 7(3): 92-99.
39. LIE, P. 1992: Bemerkungen zu Carabus (Morphocarabus) hampei Küster, 1846 aus Transsylvanien
mit Beschreibung zweier neuen Unterarten. – Folia entomologica hungarica 53: 113–
120.
40. LIE, P. 1994 a. : Beobachtungen und Forschungen mit Bezug auf die Gattung Carabus des Nadrag-
Tales mit der Umgebung im Poiana-Ruscă Gebirgsmassiv (Banat, Rumänien). Bul.
Inf. Soc. Lepid. Rom. 5(2): 141-148.
41. LIE, P. 1994 b. : Einige Beobachtungen über die Carabofaune des Tarcul (spr. Zarkul) Gebirges
(Banat, Rumänien). Ber. Kr. Nürnberg. Ent. Galathea, 10(4): 123-129.
42. LIE, P. 1994 c. : Neue Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Carabofauna des Rumänischen Banates fur das Jahr
1993 (Coleoptera, Carabidae). – Folia Entomologica Hungarica, Budapest, Rovartani
Közlemények, LV. 225-232.
43. LIE, P. 1995: Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Carabus hungaricus frivaldskyanus Breuning neuentdeckt im
Banat, Rumanien (Coleoptera, Carbidae). -Folia Entomologica Hungarica, Budapest,
Rovartani Közlemények, LVI. 85-88.
44. LIE, P. 1996 Carabus (Pachystus) hungaricus frivaldskyanus BREUNING 1933, prezentă certă în
fauna României (Coleoptera, Carabidae). [Carabus (Pachystus) hungaricus
frivaldskyanus Breuning 1933, a sure presence in the Romanian fauna (Coleoptera,
Carabidae)]. Bul. Inf. Soc. Lepid. Rom., 7(1-2): 147-149.
45. LIE, P. 1997 Carabofaunistiche Beobachtungen in densüdwestlichen Gebieten Transsilvaniens
(Siebenbürgen, Rumänien). Ber. Kr. Nürnberg. Ent. Galathea, 13(1): 21-29.
46. LIE, P. 1999 Neue Betrachtungen mit Bezug auf das Vorkommen von Carabus (Morphocarabus)
comptus ulrichhofmanni Lie 1989 im rumänischen Banat (Coleoptera: Carabidae).
Ber. Kr. Nürnberg. Ent. Galathea, 15(1): 35-42.
47. LIE, P. and KLEINFELD, F. 2001: Betrachtungen über Carabus (Morphocarabus) hampei Küster, 1846

161
Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
und seine Rassen in Transsylvanien, Rumänien (Coleoptera: Carabidae). – Galathea
17 (2): 75-94
48. LÖBL, I. and SMETANA,A. (eds) 2003: Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera. Volume 1. Archostemata -
Myxophaga - Adephaga. – Apollo Books, Stenstrup, 819 pp.
49. LORENZ, W. 2005: Systematic list of extant ground beetles of the world. (Insecta Coleoptera
“Geadephaga”: Trachypachidae and Carabidae incl. Paussinae, Cicindelinae,
Rhysodinae). Second Edition. – Wolfgang Lorenz, Tutzing, 530 pp.
50. MATHE, I. 2007- Studiul faunistic şi ecologic al carabidelor (Coleoptera: Carabidae) din Sectorul
Superior al Bazinului Olt. PhD Thesis Babes Bolyai Cluj.
51. MERKL, O., 2008 - Data to the knowledge on the beetle fauna of Maramureș, Romania (Coleoptera).
Studia Universitas “Vasile Goldi
(suppl.): 243-311.
52. MONTANDON A.L. 1906. Notes sur le faune entomologique de la Roumanie. Bull. Soc. Sc. Bucarest,
15(1-2): 30-80.
53. MONTANDON A.L. 1908. Notes sur le faune entomologique de la Roumanie. Additions au Catalogue
des Coléoptères. Bull. Soc. Sc. Bucarest, 17(1-2): 67-119.
54. MÜLLER-MOTZFELD, G. (ed.) 2004: Band 2. Adephaga 1: Carabidae (Laufkäfer). 2. Auflage. –In:
FREUDE, H.,HARDE, K. W., LOHSE, G. A. and KLAUSNITZER, B. (eds): Die
Käfer Mitteleuropas. Elsevier GMBH, Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, Heidelberg-
Berlin, 521 pp.
55. NAROZSNY, Z. 1938: Adatok Magyarország nagyfutó féléihez (Carabini). [Data to the knowledge of
Carabini of Hungary.] Doktori értekezés. [Doctoral thesis.] – Debreceni szemle 12: 1–
19.
56. PANIN S. 1955. Fauna Republicii Populare Române. Insecta–Familia Carabidae. 10 (2). Bucureúti: 5-
140.
57. PETRI K. 1912. Siebenbürgens Käferfauna auf grund ihrer Erforschung bis zum Schlusse des Jahre
1886. Hermannstadt, Jos. Drotleff . Ver. Naturw. XXXVII; 27-114
58. POKLUDA, P., HAUCK, D., CIZEK, L 2012.- Importance of marginal habitats for grassland diversity:
fallows and overgrown tall-grass steppe as key habitats of endangered round-beetle
Carabus hungaricus. Insect Conservation and Diversity 5, pp. 27–36
59. REITTER, E. 1896: Bestimmungs-Tabellen der europäischen Coleopteren. 34. Carabidae. 1.
Abtheilung: Carabini, gleichzeitig mit einer systematischen Darstellung sämtlicher
Subgenera der Gattung Carabus L. – Verhandlungen des Naturforschenden Vereines
in Brünn 34[1895]: 36–198.
60. SCHNEIDER, E. 1976. Untersuchungen über die Arthropodenfauna xerothermer Standorte im
südsiebenbürgischen Hügelland - III. Die Carabidenfauna eines südhanges und
angrenzender habitate im Hügelland Südsiebenbürgens. Stud. Com. Muz.
Bruckenthal, Sibiu, Şt. Nat. 20: 209-253.
61. SEIDLITZ, G. 1891: Fauna Transsylvanica. Die Käfer (Coleoptera) Sibenbürgens. Königsberg,
Hartung‘sche Verlangsdruckerei, 914 p.
62. SZALAI, K. 1994: Futóbogarak (Coleoptera: Carabidae) a Szatmár-Beregben, különös tekintettel a
Carabus hampeire (Küster 1846). [Carabids in the Szatmár-Bereg area, with special
attention to Carabus hampei (Küster 1846)]. – University thesis, KLTE, Debrecen, 32
pp.
63. SZÉL, GY. 1985. A Carabus-Génusz Kárpát-medencében élő fajainak elterjedése és alfaji tagozódása
(Coleoptera: Carabidae). {The distribution species and subspecies of the Carabus
genus of the Carpathian Basin (Coleoptera: Carabidae)}. PhD thesis, Budapest. 77 p.
64. SZÉL, GY. 1987: A Carabus (Morphocarabus) hampei magyarországi elõfordulása (Coleoptera,
Carabidae). (The occurrence of Carabus (Morphocarabus) hampei in Hungary
(Coleoptera, Carabidae).) – Folia entomologica hungarica 48: 299.
65. SZÉL, GY. 1993: Eine Neue Carabus-Unterart aus Ungarn (Coleopera: Carabidae). – Folia
entomologica hungarica 54: 123-129.
66. SZÉL, GY., A. TAKÁCS, A., LIE, P. and RETEZÁR, I. 2007: The occurrence of Carabus
(Morphocarabus) hampei Küster, 1846 in the Carpathian Basin (Coleoptera:

162
 Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 44 (2), 2012
Carabidae). – Folia entomologica hungarica 68: 71–80.
67. TAKÁCS, A., 1987 - Carabus hampei Kuster, var. zilahiensis Csiki endemism în Jude
Musei Porolissensis, Zalău, 11: 454-446. (in Romanian)
68. TAKÁCS, A., 2002 a - O valoroasă specie de Carabus în nordul Carabus seriatissimus Reitter
1896. Acta Musei Porolissensis, 24: 735-737. (in Romanian)
69. TAKÁCS, A., 2002 b - Descoperirea coleopterului Carabus hampei gutiiensis Takács et Lie. Acta
Musei Porolissensis, 24: 739-740. (in Romanian)
70. TAKÁCS, A., E. K. BODOLA, 2003 – Contribu Carabus Linné, 1758 în vestul
si nord-vestul României. Acta Musei Porolissensis, 25: 685-691. (in Romanian)
71. TEODOREANU, M., 1959. Contribuţii la cunoaşterea sistematică şi ecologică a faunei de Carabide din
jurul Clujului şi regiune. [Contributions à la connaissance systématique et écologique
de la faune des Carabides des environs de Cluj et de sa région]. Stud. Univ. Babeş-
Bolyai, Ser. Biol. 2(2): 89-95.
72. TEODOREANU, M., 1981 Coleoptere edafice din unele ecosisteme naturale ale Munţilor Bihor. [Edafic
Coleoptera of some natural ecosystems of the Bihor Mountains]. Stud. Cerc. Biol.,
Seria Biol. Anim. Bucureşti, 33(1): 69-74.
73. TURIN, H., PENEV, L., CASALE, A., ARNDT, E., ASSMANN, TH.,MAKAROV, K.,MOSSAKOWSKI,
D.,SZÉL,GY. and WEBER, F. 2003: 5. Species account. – In: TURIN,H., PENEV, L.
and CASALE, A. (eds): The genus Carabus L. in Europe. A synthesis. Fauna
Europaea Evertebrata. No 2. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow, pp. 151–280.

163

View publication stats