S. Mahunka szerk.: Folia Entomologica Hungarica 60. (Budapest, 1999)

FOLIA ENTOMOLOGICA HUNGARICA ROVARTANI KÖZLEMÉNYEK LX 1999 pp. 115-123 Contribution to the aquatic and semiaquatic bug fauna of the Körös-Maros National Park (Heteroptera: Nepomorpha and Gerromorpha) B. Kiss, P. Juhász and P. Olajos Contribution to the aquatic and semiaquatic bug fauna of the Körös-Maros National Park (Heteroptera: Nepomorpha and Gerromorpha) — The presence of 19 aquatic and 11 semiaquatic Heteroptera species was assessed from the area of the Körös-Maros National Park. INTRODUCTION The research of aquatic macrofauna of the Körös-Maros National Park was carried out in 1996-1997. Although some areas of the trans-Tiscian region have been investigated by Halászfy (1953), Csongor (1956), Dosztál (1974), Moldoványi (1977, 1978), Bakonyi and Vásárhelyi (1981), Vásárhelyi et al. (1991), Ambrus et al. (1995), to date there have not been aquatic and semiaquatic heteropteran faunistical data available for the area of river Körös and its surroundings. The collecting localities were rivers, canals with dense vegetation, Körös backwaters, water bodies that dry out annually, salt marshes and fish ponds. During the collecting period, aquatic bugs were captured by intense sweeping with a long-handled pond net just above the substrate. Surface dwellers were collected by sweeping with the pond net slightly submerged. The samples were separated in the laboratory using a binocular microscope. Waterbugs were preserved in 70% alcohol. The insects were identified by using keys and descriptions by Benedek (1969), Jansson (1986), Savage (1989) and Soós (1963). In this paper, a total of 53 sampling localities are given with their administrative units, geographical co-ordinates and UTM codes according to Dévai et al. (1987) and Information Center for Nature Protection (HNP Directorate). The faunistical data include the collecting localities, the date of collecting, the number of individuals (males and females separately) and the collectors in alphabetic order (Dévai et al. 1987). In a few cases, next to the number of captured individuals, a subjective scale of abundance (abundant, numerous, scarce) was used for easily identifiable species. Some rare and sporadic species were found, like the Saucer Bug (Aphelocheirus aestivalis (Fabricius,