https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/chironomus/issue/feedCHIRONOMUS Journal of Chironomidae Research2025-04-03T20:05:44+00:00Torbjørn Ekremchironomus.editors@vm.ntnu.noOpen Journal Systems<p>The CHIRONOMUS Journal of Chironomidae Research is devoted to publishing peer-reviewed research articles related to all aspects of chironomid research. The journal also serves as an updated news bulletin for the Chironomidae research community. The journal has one issue per year, but articles are published online continuously after they are accepted. The journal is open access, and can be downloaded freely from this website. All research articles submitted to CHIRONOMUS<em> Current Reseach</em> section are subject to peer-review. There are no page charges for manuscripts accepted for publication.</p>https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/chironomus/article/view/6302Correcting a mistake: Limnophyes stagnum Namayandeh, Guerra & Ram, 2024 is not conspecific with Limnophyes sp. 14ES2025-02-08T16:20:10+00:00Armin Namayandeha.namayan@taxanama.comEdris Ghaderied.ghaderi@uok.ac.irJeffrey L. Ramjeffram@med.wayne.edu<div><span lang="EN-US">In this communication, we report on correcting DNA barcoding records of <em>Limnophyes stagnum</em> Namayandeh, Guerra & Ram, 2024. The five sequences we submitted to BOLD and published in Namayandeh et al. (2024) under <em>L. stagnum</em>match the CO1 sequences of <em>Limnophyes</em> sp. 14ES and the two species are not conspecific. Both species were collected from the type locality of <em>L. stagnum</em> but at different times with a misassumption that both species represent a single taxon. We have corrected our records in BOLD, replacing the names of the five sequences with <em>Limnophyes</em> sp. 14ES. Additionally, we obtained and uploaded a single CO1 sequence of <em>L. stagnum</em> in BOLD and incorporated it into new molecular analyses reported here. Based on our results, the closest sequences to <em>L. stagnum</em> were those of <em>Limnophyes natalensis </em>(Kieffer, 1914). The minimum K2P distance of <em>L. stagnum</em> with <em>L. natalensis </em>was 10.0% (average 11.4%), large enough to support the delimitation of <em>L. stagnum</em> sp. nov. from <em>L. natalensis</em>. Further discussion on the morphological differences of the two species and those of <em>L. stagnum</em> and <em>Limnophyes</em> sp. 14ES are provided.</span></div>2025-04-03T00:00:00+00:00Copyright (c) 2025 Armin Namayandeh, Edris Ghaderi, Jeffrey L. Ram