S. Mahunka szerk.: Folia Entomologica Hungarica 57. (Budapest, 1996)

Bedel included three species in Bidessus, calling them as Hydroporus minimus, H. minutissimus and H. parvulus. These species now are usually named as — Hydroglyphus geminus (Dytiscus minimus: Bedel, 1881, nec Scopoli, 1763; D. unistriatus: Bedel, 1881, nec Goeze, 1777, nec Schrank, 1781; D. monostriatus: Bedel, 1881, nec Fourcroy, 1785; D. geminus Fabricius, 1792); — Bidessus minutissimus (Hydroporus minutissimus Germar, 1824); — Bidessus unistriatus (Dyticus parvulus O. F. Müller, 1776, a senior subjective synonym of Dytiscus unistriatus Goeze, Mil). The previous type designations for Bidessus have been based on the assumption that this name was published by Sharp in 1882, where the species Dytiscus unistriatus Schrank, 1781 (a homonym of D. unistriatus Goeze, 1777) was included. However, this nominal species was not originally included in Bidessus Bedel, 1881. 1 designate Dyticus parvulus O. F. Müller, 1776 as the type. As this specific name is a senior subjective synonym of Dytiscus unistriatus Goeze, 1777, therefore, this type designation does not affect the present usage of the generic name Bidessus. Deronectes originally included the following four species: Hydroporus elegáns, H. duodecimpustulatus, H. duodecimmaculatus and H. canaliculars. These species now are usually called as — Potamonectes elegáns (Dytiscus elegáns Panzer, 1794); — Stictotarsus duodecimpustulatus (Dytiscus duodecimpustulatus Olivier, 1795, a homonym ofű. duodecimpustulatus Fabricius, 1792 and a junior subjective synonym of Dyticus quadratus Fourcroy, 1785 — all of them are junior subjective synonyms of Dytiscus quadrimaculatus Goeze, 1777); — Stictotarsus procerus (Hydroporus duodecimmaculatus Régimbart, 1877, a junior subjective synonym of H. procerus Aubé, 1838); — Potamonectes canaliculars (Hydroporus canaliculars Lacordaire, 1835). The previous applications (and type designations) of Deronectes have been based on the assumption that this name was published by Sharp in 1882, where the species Hydroporus latus Stephens, 1829 was included. However, this species was not originally included in Deronectes Bedel, 1881. I designate Dytiscus elegáns Panzer, 1794 as the type. The genus based on Hydroporus latus (erroneously called as Deronectes) should hereafter be named as Bartheus Houlbert, 1934 (type species: Hydroporus latus Stephens, 1829; fixed by Houlbert, 1934, by monotypy). ' Nilsson and Angus (1992) divided the genus Potamonectes Zimmermann, 1921 by its structure of parameres. The species with "potamonectine" parameres (including Dytiscus elegáns Panzer, 1794, the type of the genus Potamonectes) were transferred to the genus Nebrioporus Régimbart, 1906; those with "hydroporine" parameres were assigned to Stictotarsus Zimmermann, 1919. The African Nebrioporus kilimandjarensis Régimbart, 1906 and the European Potamonectes elegáns (with its congeners) have a similar structure of parameres. However, some characters of Nebrioporus are so distinctive that I cannot accept the merging of this genus with Potamonectes. Nebrioporus and Potamonectes, consequently, have been treated here as separate genera. Stictotarsus, in my opinion, is also a distinct genus, containing two European species only. (Nevertheless, as a result of the phylogenetic analysis by Nilsson and Angus, the species with "hydroporine" parameres — Dytiscus griseostriatus De Geer, 1774 and its congeners — might be removed from the genus Potamonectes.) In any case, Deronectes Bedel, 1881 is a senior objective synonym of Potamonectes Zimmermann, 1921 (and of Potamodytes Zimmer-