Diplopoda ()F India~
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DIPLOPODA ()F INDIA~ By C.... L\.TTEMo Vienna. CONTENTS. PAGE. Introduction 136 List of Literature 1::l9 DistributiQn of Indian Genera . 140 List of Species 143 Systematic Account 152 Sphaerotheridae ]52 Arthrosphaera Poe. 153 Zephronia Gray 167 Lophozephronia, gen. nov. 182 Indosphaera, gen. nov. 183 Kophosphaera, gen. nov. 187 Chinosphaera Att. 191 TonI inobelum Verh. • 192 ~:' Prionobelum Verh. 0 • 192 Sphae'J'obelum Verh. 192 Borneopoeus Verh. 193 Glomeridae . 194 Rhopalome'!"is Verh. 194 Dinoglomeris Silv. 194 Hyperglomeris Verh.. 194 Annameris Verh. 194 .A. piomeris C~ok 195 • Glomeridesmidae . 195 Termitodesmus Silv. 195 Strongylosomidae ]95 O"thomo'fpha Poe. ]97 Orthomorpha Att. H17 Kalo'fthomorpha Att. 200 Anoplodesmus Poe. ~O6 Ohondrornorpha Silv. 209 Euphyodesrn~ls Att. 213 P'rionopeltis Poe. 215 H elicortlwmorpha Att. 215 Pagioprium Att. 215 Streptogonopus Att. 215 Eudasypeltis Poe. 218 133 B 134 lJiemoirs of the Indian J.l1usewJn. [VOL. XI, ; A E. N edyopus Att. 219 Paranedyopus Carl 219 Singalorthornorpha Att. 219 Sundanina Att .. 219 Dasypharkis, gen. nov. 223 Kronopolites Att. 225 H imantogonus Carl 233 Telodrepanurn Carl 233 Polydfi'epanum Carl 233 Gramrnorhabdus Carl 233 X iphidiogonus Carl . 233 Yunnanina, gen. nov. 234 Delarthrurn, gen. nov. 236 GOllobelus, gen. nov. 237 Alogolykus, gen. nov. 238 Akribosoma Carl 240 Hillgstonia Carl 240 Strongylosorna Brdt. 240 Leptodesmidae 241 Fontaria Gray . 241 PIatyr hachidae 241 Platyrhacus Koch 241 Vanhoeffeniidae . 242 Ootacodesmus Carl 242 Pseudosphaeroparia Carl 243 Lankadesrnus Carl 243 K ukkalodesrnus Carl . 243 Sholaphilus Carl 243 Coonoorophilus Carl . 243 Eutriclwdesrnus Silv. 244 CryptodeSluidae . 244 Trichodesrnus Poe. 244 Trichopeltis Poe. 244 Archandrodesmus Carl 244 Pagodesmus Carl 245 Akreiodesrnus Carl 24[. P1'opyrgodesmus Carl . 245 Skotodesrnus Carl 245 J{limakodesrnus Carl . 246 Pyrgodesmus Poe. 246 Ste.ganostigmus Carl . 246 EustaledeS'lnus Silv. 246 Catapyrgodesmus Silv. 246 Chordeumoidea 24:7 H eterochordewma Poe .. 247 1936.] C. ATTEMS: Diplopoda of India. 135 PAGE. Stemmiuloidea 247 Diopsiulus Silv. 247 Juloidea 248 Julus 248 Skeleroprotopus Att. 248 Anaulaciulus Poco 248 Calnbaloidea . 249 Cambalidae 249 Apatidea, gen. nov. 249 Glyphiulus Verh. 251 Trachyiulus Peters 252 Cambalopsis Poco 252 Cambalomorpha Poco . 253 Pericambala Silv. 253 Spirostreptoidea 233 Harpagophoridae 253 Thyropygus Poco 256 Thyroglutus, gen. nov. 268 Gongylorrhus, gen. nov. 273 Ktenostreptus Att. 278 Anurostreptus Att. 285 Drepanopus Verh. 285 H arpurostreptus, gen. nov.. '. 285 Leptostreptus, gen. nov. 291 Stenurostreptus Carl . 294 Spiro boloidea . 299 Spirobolidae 299 Spirobolus Brdt. 300 Pseudospirobolellus Carl 300 Cyclothyrophorus Poco 300 Physobolus, gen. nov .. 301 Trigoni ulidae 302 Trigoniulus Poco 30;3 Stenobolus Carl. 303 Xenobolus Carl . 303 Cingalobolus Carl 304 Epombrophilus, gen. nov. 30G Pachybolidae 307 Aulacobolus Poe. 307 Eucentrobolus Poco 311 Colobognatha ~nl Siphonophora Brdt. 314 Alphabetic Index; of the Species 317 B 2 136 Memoirs of the Ircdian Museum. [VOL. XI, INTRODUOTION~ When the authorities of the Indian Museum, Calcutta, requested me to work out the unnamed Diplopoda in their collection, a:nd to revise the species named by Pocock and Silvestri, I hoped that I will be able to study'the Diplopod fauna of India as a whole, but this has not been possible. The Indian Museum collection is fairly extensive, but it contains only a small percentage of the described species, and nearly all the tubes of unnamed material sent to me contained new species. I have, therefore, not been able to study the majority of the Indian species, and I cannot do more than. furnish the foundation stones for a future 'monograph of the Indian fauna. Under" India" I include the whole territory of the Indian Peninsula, Ceylon, Burma, the Indo-Chinese countries and China, excepting the Malay Peninsula. The high moun tains of the Himalayan range, which form in the north the frontiers between the Indian Territory and the Palaearctic Region, form a very sharp barrier. For other groups of animals, as for example, the birds, the separation is less sharp. Jerdon in " The Birds of India" says that the Himalayan region has two components in its fauna, one common with the hills of Assam and Burma and the second in the higher regions common with Tibet and Northern Asia. In the Diplopoda there are no Himalayan species of Asiatic origin, but the Himalayan fauna is very poorly known at present. In the East we cannot trace any sharp boundaries between India-China and the Palaearctic Region. The Diplopod fauna of the south of China is purely tropical-Indian, in the north it is mixed and composed of Indian and palaearctical elements. Such palaearctic genera in the Chinese fauna are of the family Blaniulidae-Skeleroprotopus and Anaulaciulus. The remaining forms apper tain to true Indian genera and families and we cannot exclude China from the Indian Territory. It is not necessary to affirn1 that India has not a single species or genus common with the Palaearctic Region in the West. Our systematic and faunistic knowledge of the Indian Diplopoda is as yet very incom plete, and I may remark, as I did recently about the A~thiopian Diplopod fauna, that we are only in the beginning of a faunistic exploration of India. Some years ago the well known Swiss diplopodologist Dr. Johann Carl explored the southern parts of India and published the first chapter of his results on the Polydesmoidea; the numerous species he found and so well described were nearly all new to science; many new genera were also discovered. Of all parts of India only this part, South India, can be considered as properly explored. Humbert published in 1865 an important paper on the Myriopods of Ceylon; his descrip tions are very good for his time, and the majority of his' species can be recognised, a fact which cannot be asserted about most of the older forms. Humbert found 26 species of Chilopoda and Diplopoda in Ceylon, and remarked that this number would be increased to 60 by more intensive exploration. This view h~s been fully confirmed, for we now kno,v 55 species of Diplopoda alone. In one point I cannot agree with him. He ~emarked : " J usqu' a present, les myriapodes n' ont pas fourni des .faits de distribution geographique bien interes sants; aucune famine, et meme aucun genre nombreux en especes n'est special a un con tinent" On the contrary, the distribution of the Myriopods, especially the Diplopods, is very important for the solution of zoogeographical questions; genera with a world-wide distributIon are rare today, the determ.in~tion of the genera is more exact &nd the relation- 1936.] c. ATTEMs: Diplopoda of India. 137 ships of the ·faunas of different countries is much clearer. In 1892 Pocock published an imp,ortant paper on the Myriopoda of Ceylon. The fauna of Burma and the Mergui Archipelago was studied by Pocock; but umortunately many of his species cannot be recog nised. The papers of Pocock on the Sphaerotheridae of Ceylon and Burma are much better. Silvestri published a good paper on the Oniscomorpha-Glomeridia of India. In 1914 I dis cussed the Myriopod fauna of the Indo-Australian Region, based principally on the materials from the Sunda- and New Guinea Archipelagoes. From the Indian Territory I cited 106 species and 36 genera, excluding the doubtful species. Today we know 92 genera and 290 species, and when all Indian areas are properly explored this number is sure to increase appreciably. In the present paper 62 new species and 15 new genera are described. In view of the fact that the faunistic exploration of India is far from complete, a discussion of the details of zoogeographical consideration will not be. of much value, and I, therefore, confine my self to demonstrate the principal features of the fa~na as they appear at this time. The most characteristic feature of the Indian Diplopod fauna is the great number of Sphaerotheridae, all the genera excepting Zephronia are endemic. As is well known, the Sphaerotheridae are distributed now in two widely separated areas: the Indo-Australian Region and in South Africa and Madagascar ; in the two areas the genera, however, are quite different. This phenomenon can be explained, if we suppose that the Sphaerotheridae once inhabited the countries between the two areas, Indo-~L\.ustralian Region and Madagas car-South Africa, and that they later died out in the intermediate countries because of the unsuitable climatic conditions, etc. It is not necessary to postulate the Indo-Madagassian bridge to explain the present-day distribution. The Oniscomorpha-Glomeridia are also distributed in two distinct areas, the Palaearctic Region and the Indo-Australian Region. The Indian forms belong to the genera Dinoglo meris, Hyperglomeris and Annameris endemic in Tonkin, Rhopalomeris in Tonkin, Burma, Mergui Archipelago and Malay Peninsula, Apiomeris in British India including Assanl, Siam, Sunda Archipelago (Sumatra, Celebes, Borneo, Nias). It has to be supposed that the Indo Australian Region has received the Glomeridia by way of the East Indies and China, but un fortunately no Glomeridia are known so far from China, and the exploration of the Chinese mountains of Yunnan, etc., would be especially interesting in this connection. The distri bution of the Glomeridia is just the opposite of the distribution of the Sphaerotheridae: the Glomeridia came from the east to India, while the connection between the areas of the Sphaerotheridae is in the west. Further remarkable features are :-a great number of Strongylosomidae with 13 endemic genera and 9 genera which are also found in the Sunda Archipelago. All the Indian genera of Vanhoeffeniidae and Cryptodesmidae are endenlic. The genus Platyrhacus, which is so common in the Sunda Archipelago, with a dozen of species in the Malay Peninsula, is represented by only 3 species in the Extra-Peninsula and China. The Spirostreptoidea are represented only by Harpagophoridae, a family also repre sented in South Africa, but by different genera.