Bulletin Zoölogisch Museum
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bulletin Zoölogisch Museum UNIVERSITEIT VAN AMSTERDAM Vol.11 No. 11 1988 The generic position of Orthomorpha bucharensis Lohmander and O. mumi- nabadensis Gulička, and the taxonomic status of Hedinomorpha Verhoeff (Diplopoda, Polydesmida, Paradoxosomatidae) C.A.W. Jeekel Abstract Redescription of Orthomorpha muminabadensis Gulička based on topotypical specimens. It is a synonym ofOrthomorpha bu- and the charensis Lohmander, species belongs to the genus Hedinomorpha Verhoeff. The latter is referred definitely to the tribe Sulciferini. INTRODUCTION "possibly the discovery of related forms will throw In 1933 Verhoeff published his paper on the scanty some more light on the ultimate status of this genus" but precious collection of Myriapoda obtained during (Jeekel, I.e.: 74). the Sven Hedin Expedition to China. A majority of New information on Hedinomorpha has become to the Diplopoda belonged the family Paradoxosoma- available recently by the description of a new spe- tidae, of which Verhoeff described four monotypical cies, H. biramipedicula, from China by Zhang & Tang genera. Two of these, Kochliopus Verhoeff and (1985). Kansupus Verhoeff, have long been recognized as Moreover, the examination of topotypical speci- synonyms of Helicorthomorpha Attems and Krono- mens of Orthomorpha muminabadensis Gulióka, de- polites Attems, respectively (cfr. Attems, 1937). scribed from Muminabad, Tadzhikistan, U.S.S.R., The other two, Hedinomorpha Verhoeff and Man- kindly submitted to me by my colleague Dr. S.I. Golo- darinopus Verhoeff, were treated as synonyms of vatch, Moscow, has shown that this species belongs Orthomorpha Bollman and Sundanina Attems, re- to Hedinomorpha. spectively, by Attems (I.e.), but reinstated as valid In addition, Dr. Golovatch informed me that re- genera by the present writer (Jeekel, 1968), and ten- examination of the female type of Orthomorpha bu- tatively referred to the tribe Sulciferini. With regard charensis Lohmander, 1933, from "Buchara, Tschi- the to Hedinomorpha remark was made that lik-dara", proved the identity of this species with 0. 98 muminabadensis. A redescription of this species is Enggano, Java); given presently. Oranmorpha Verhoeff, 1941 (4 sp., S.W. Europe, Consequently, the genus Hedinomorpha now con- N.W. Africa, Macaronesia, Eritrea,. Ethiopia); sists of the following taxa: Orthomorphella Hoffman, 1963 (1 sp., N. China, 4 Hedinomorpha hummelii Verhoeff, 1933: 15.- Korea, Japan) ); Kansu. Riukiu Is- China: Oxidus Cook, 1911 (4 sp., Korea, Japan, Hedinomorpha bucharensis (Lohmander, 1933: lands); 31).- U.S.S.R.: Tadjikistan. Syn.: Orthomorpha mumi- Paranedyopus Carl, 1932 (6 sp., India, Ceylon, 5 nabadensis GuliÓka, 1972:43. Sikkim) ); 6 Hedinomorpha biramipedicula Zhang & Tang, 1985: Parchondromorpha Jeekel, 1980 (3 sp., India) ); Shansi. 35.- China: Sichotanus Attems, 1914, (2 sp., East Sibiria, 7 With three included species it is possible to evalu- Korea, N. China) ); ate the status of Hedinomorpha more precisely than Sigipinius Hoffman, 1961 (1 sp., China); before. It is clear now that the genus falls well within Tylopus Jeekel, 1968 (6 sp., Burma, Thailand, In- 8 ). the spectrum of the genera assigned to the tribe Sul- dochina) ciferini. At the times of its reinstatement (Jeekel, 1968), this tribe included 16 named Since genera. Notes then a considerable number of changes have been 1) Two generic names recently have become available for It therefore, be in here to brief- the unnamed proposed. may, place genus comprising Orthomorpha nordens- kioeldi (Attems, 1909) and O. fimbriata Attems, ly enumerate the sulciferine genera recognized to- 1944, from Japan (Jeekel, 1968: 72). These are the day. It should be emphasized here once again, that one mentioned above and Orientosoma Golovatch, 1980. the limits of the tribe towards related of paradoxoso- The North Korean type-species these two genera, C. gloriosa Golovatch, 1980, and C. koreana (Golovatch, matid tribes, such as Cnemodesmini, Orthomorphini, 1980), respectively, are clearly congeneric with the Sundaninini, etc. are still far from satisfactory. species described by Attems. The latter two, however, the characters of the The following genera are now assigned to the Sul- should be revised to reveal gono- pods which them from the other two ciferini: distinguish spe- cies. In the light of the new information it seems right Annamina Attems, 1937 (1 sp., Indochina); now to add to the same generic concept Kronopolites Anoplodesmus Pocock, 1895 (about 14 nominal kanoi Takakuwa, 1943, from Japan (Jeekel: 74), which seems to be related to C. koreana. sp., India, Ceylon, Burma, Sumatra); 2) Material of this genushas beenexamined and the tenta- 1980 Ja- Cawjeekelia Golovatch, (5 sp., Korea, tive opinion on its relationship espressed earlier 1 1968: can be confirmed. It seems that pan) ); (Jeekel, 86) Kaschmiriosoma is most closely related to Parchondro- 1953 Chapanella Attems, (1 sp., Indochina); morpha Jeekel. The only noteworthy difference in the 1897 nominal two Chondromorpha Silvestri, (about 10 gonopods of the genera concerns the great length of the solenomerite and solenophore in Kaschmiriosoma. sp. and ssp., India, Ceylon); Otherwise the basic structure of the gonopods is quite Echinopeltis Jeekel, 1979(1 sp., Sumatra); similar. It has been noted, that Kaschmiriosoma holds a Harpagomorpha Jeekel, 1980 (1 sp., India); position intermediate between the Sulciferini and the Cnemodesmini. Hedinomorpha Verhoeff, 1933 (3 sp., N. China, 3) Since 1968 two species have been added (Golovatch, Centr. Asia); the known 1983; Jeekel, 1983), extending range of the Hoffmanina Jeekel, 1968 (1 sp., Mozambique); genus from China as farwestward as Kashmir. Kaschmiriosoma 4) Hoffman (1973) restudied material of the Schubart, 1935 (3 sp., N. India, genus Chamberlinius and could discard the for- 2 Wang, 1956, N. Pakistan) ); merly expressed idea (Jeekel, 1968: 73) that this name of Kronopolites Attems, 1914 (6 sp., China, Taiwan, is a synonym Orthomorphella. The result was that 3 Orthomorphella was reinstated as a valid name in the Indochina, Thailand, N. India) ); Sulciferini, whereas Chamberlinius was removed to the Mandarinopus Verhoeff, 1933 (1 sp., China); tribe Chamberliniini. Orthomorphella, with O. pekuensis 1979 Margaritosoma Jeekel, (3 sp., Sumatra, (Karsch) as type-species, probably also embraces O. 99 cristata (Takakuwa, 1942). Tibiotarsus consisting of a solenophore and an ad- latter from 5) The synonymy of Akribosoma Carl, 1935, with Para- ditional process, the usually arising nedyopus Carl, 1932, proposed by Golovatch (1984), near the base of the solenophore 3 is accepted here, adding the type-species of Akribos- 3. Tibiotarsus of gonopods in situ curving essentially oma to the former of the (Jeekel, concept genus 1980). the mesad, in direction of the opposite gono- 6) This was proposed as a monotypical (Jeekel, genus pod IChondromorpha, Echinopeltis, Harpago- The taken 1980:168). name Parchondromorpha was up morpha, Margaritosoma, Orthomorphella subsequently by Golovatch (1984: 336) for a new ge- Tibiotarsus of gonopods in situ curving in a lateral nus containing two new species from India. Although we direction, away from the opposite gonopod 4 are dealing here with an obvious case of junior homony- 4. Femorite of short in it does not to gonopods relatively compari- my, seem necessary propose a replace- " son to the prefemur, somewhat swollen; ment name for Parchondromorpha Golovatch. Actually, distally tibiotarsus with solenophore of moderate length, the two species described by Golovatch seem conge- broadish lamellate, not curving in a circle. Parano- neric with the type-species of Parchondromorpha Jee- ta not kel. weakly developed, ridgelike, caudally pro- duced Cawjeekelia( 7) The gonopods in Sichotanus eurygaster (Attems, be in outline Femorite of gonopods relatively long in comparison 1898) appear to variable the of various and lamellae. has led to the to prefemur, not particularly swollen distally; so- processes This description lenophore slender, elongate, curved in an almost of a number of forms as different species. However, it complete circle. Paranotawell developed, winglike, seems best to follow Golovatch, 1981, and Mikhaljova, with posterior edges caudally produced at least in 1982, and adopt a wider morphological concept. The this besides posterior half of body Hedinomorpha consequence of is, that, S. popowi Golo- vatch, 1976, and S. mandshuricus Golovatch, 1978, also S. longipes Verhoeff, 1936, should be united with S. eurygaster. bucharensis 8) Since 1968 only one new species has been added to this Hedinomorpha (Lohmander) Dr. H. genus (Hoffman, 1973). However, Enghoff, Co- penhagen (pers. comm.) assures me that according to Orthomorpha bucharensis Lohmander, 1933:31, figs. 16- this personal experience Tylopus is richly represented 17.(1) in Thailand. Orthomorpha muminabadensis GuliÖka, 1972:43, fig. 5-1. Certain genera, like Polylobosoma Jeekel, 1980, and An- (2) tichirogonus Jeekel, 1980, formerly assigned to the Sulciferini are better removed from that tribe (Jeekel, 1980:172). However, their taxonomic position has to be Previous records clarified. U.S.S.R., Tadjikistan, Chil-dara (="Tschilik-dara") A similar problem is formed by another recently pro- Armolites (1); Tadjikistan: Muminabad (2). posed genus, Golovatch, 1984, based on Kronopolites spiniger Attems, 1936, from N.E. India. The of this with the relationship genus Sulciferini, sug- Material gested by Golovatch, should be reconsidered. U.S.S.R., Southern Turkmenia,