Diplopoda, Julida, Julidae), the Only Schizophylline Known from Libya (North Africa) and Notes on Libyan Millipedes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Zootaxa 3652 (3): 392–396 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Correspondence ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2013 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3652.3.7 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:967A533E-B1EF-495E-80F5-15D7A340C1FA On the identity of Julus rimosus Karsch, 1881 (Diplopoda, Julida, Julidae), the only schizophylline known from Libya (North Africa) and notes on Libyan millipedes NESRINE AKKARI Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, Dk-2100 København Ø, Denmark. E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] The first millipede recorded from Libya was a male julid, described by Karsch (1881) from Jebel Tarrhuna, Bir Milrba as Julus rimosus Karsch, 1881. The original description of rimosus was mainly based on coloration. The gonopods were however briefly described as brown, with a long yellow curved thread (“corpore genital fusco, filo flavo, curvato, longo”). Karsch (1881) additionally provided two figures illustrating the telson and gonopods (figs 4, 4b) with a remark stating that the species is similar to Julus lapidarius, 1846 (now Ommatoiulus lapidarius) of which only females were hitherto described by Lucas (1846). Subsequently, Silvestri (1896) providing a comprehensive list of all myriapods of Tunisia, presented an overview of North African fauna and proposed new synonymies for several species. Among these, Silvestri (1896) considered Julus rimosus as a junior synonym of Julus lapidarius Lucas, 1846 (now Ommatoiulus lapidarius). Silvestri (1896: 160) was obviously not sure about the identity of rimosus, except that he was convinced that the gonopods, as illustrated by Karsch (1881), definitely were not representative of an ‘Julus’ species: “Karsch described J. rimosus and provided at the same time an illustration of the male copulatory organ, but what the devil he mistook for this organ I cannot say. It is certain that that figure cannot even be remotely representative of Julus. Fortunately I was able to examine the individuals of Julus he determined as J. rimosus and I found that this species is none other than J. lapidarius Lucas” (translated from Italian). In his list of North African Myriapoda, Brolemann (1921) disregarded several synonymies made by Silvestri (1896), recording Iulus rimosus as a valid species from Libya and at the same time, Ommatoiulus punicus (Brölemann, 1894) and O. fuscounilineatus (Lucas, 1846) also synonymised with O. lapidarius by Silvestri (1896), as valid species from Tunisia. Manfredi (1939) was among the rare authors to study Libyan millipedes, describing two new species of the orders Polydesmida and Julida, respectively Strongylosoma festai Manfredi 1939 and Macheiroiulus libicus Manfredi, 1939, and doubtfully recording the order Callipodida with a female identified as Lysiopetalum? sp?. In the same work, she also recorded Karsh’s species as a synonym of O. lapidarius, referring to Silvestri (1896). This synonymy was subsequently repeated by Schubart (1952) in his updated list of North African millipedes and by Akkari et al. (2009) in their annotated list of North African Julida. The millipedes of Libya are still very poorly studied and constitute a gap in the knowledge of the North African fauna. In fact, apart from the dubious record of the order Callipodida (Manfredi 1939), the total millipede fauna hitherto described for the area amounts to the three species mentioned above viz. Macheiroiulus libicus, Ommatoiulus rimosus, Strongylosoma festai in addition to a troglobitic glomerid, Glomeris monostriata Golovatch & Mauriès, 2009, recently described from a cave in Cyrenaica (Golovatch et al. 2009). The study of a few undetermined Ommatoiulus specimens collected in northern Libya triggered my curiosity about the identity of ‘Julus rimosus’. The holotype of Julus rimosus Karsch, 1881 (Zoological Museum Berlin, ? ZMB) and nontype material (Museo Civico di Storia Naturale ‘Enrico Caffi’, Bergamo, Italy, ? MSNB) were obtained from the respective repositories for study. The material, preserved in 70 % alcohol, was studied using a Leica Wild M10 equipped with camera lucida. Photographs were prepared using a Leica digital camera M205 mounted on a Leica stereomicroscope DFC 420. Image stacking was performed with Helicon Focus 4.60.2 Prosoftware. Images were processed using Adobe Lightroom 4.3 and Adobe Photoshop CS.5. The study of the holotype has revealed that Julus rimosus is a valid species of the genus Ommatoiulus Latzel, 1881. In contrast to Silvestri’s (1896) presumption, it is a species completely different from the Moroccan species Ommatoiulus lapidarius, known also from Western Algeria (Lucas 1846, Brölemann 1897) but never recorded with certainty further east in North Africa; hence we consider its occurrence in Libya as highly doubtful. 392 Accepted by W. Shear: 19 Apr. 2013; published: 17 May 2013 It was striking to notice that the holotype has never been dissected and that neither Karsh nor Silvestri actually looked in detail at the gonopods which thus remained undescribed. Therefore, we might think that the very simple figure provided by Karsch (1881) to illustrate the rimosus gonopods was merely based on his observation of these in situ, and what he described as a ‘yellow long and curved thread’, and drew in fig. 4b might actually correspond to the part of the mesomerite which sticks out from the gonoceole and which is indeed slender, apically tapering and curved mesoanteriad (see Fig. 1, Ms). Silvestri (1896) obviously never looked at the type material of O. rimosus, consisting only of one male holotype which was undissected for 130 years, but perhaps at different material, maybe representing Ommatoiulus lapidarius and misidentified by Karsch. Order Julida Brandt, 1833 Family Julidae Leach, 1814 Tribe Schizophyllini Verhoeff, 1909 Genus Ommatoiulus Latzel, 1881 Ommatoiulus rimosus Karsch, 1881 new comb. Figs 1–5 Julus rimosus: Karsch 1881: 4, 9, figs 4, 4a. Iulus rimosus: Brolemann 1921: 100. Iulus lapidarius: Silvestri 1896: 159. Iulus lapidarius: Manfredi 1939: 119. Schizophyllum (Bothroiulus) lapidarium: Schubart 1952: 221. Ommatoiulus lapidarius: Akkari et al. 2009: 476. Material. Holotype: 1 ♂, NW Libya, Jebel Tarhuna, Tarhuna, Al Murqub district (ZMB 778). Non type material: 1 ♂, 2 ♀♀, NE Libya, 10 km East of Taknis, Al Marj district, 3.i.1968, Valle Bianchi leg. (MSNB). Description. Holotype: Male broken in 4 parts, 42 podous rings + 2 apodous rings + telson; maximum vertical diameter: 2.5 mm. General colour: clearly alternating yellowish brown metazonites and black prozonites. Head dark brown-blackish, yellowish on the labral zone; antennae dark brown. Prozonites laterally with blackish background covered with light brown spots vertically aligned, curving at ozopore level; dorsally darker. Metazonites shiny, yellowish to brown. Dorsum with a thin black mid-dorsal line; legs yellowish. Preanal ring blackish, finely spattered with light brown, margined with bright yellow, caudal projection pale yellowish; anal valves blackish; subanal scale pale yellowish. Metazonites with regular striation, ozopores as small yellow rounded spots, located behind suture at a distance from it equal to their diameter; prozonites with irregular oblique striae. Telson: Preanal ring laterally with 1–2 setae and a protruding caudal projection bearing 4–5 setae on each side, and a small hyaline process on the tip; anal valves setose with a row of short marginal setae, a row of submarginal longer ones and 2–3 setae on the surface; subanal scale setose. Gonopods. Promerite (P) (Figs 1, 2, 3) proximally broad, distally narrowing into a complex apical process; laterally protruding in a rounded lobe (l) delimited by a deep subapical notch (n) (Fig. 1); mesal ridge (Mr) broad, bearing a few setae on the margin and subapically with an edge with a bunch (bu) of longer ones; apically protruding in a mesal slender process pointing distad (Mp). Apical process (Ap) complex, triangular, bent anteriad, showing in lateral view two small tooth-like processes (p1, p2) pointing basad; remnant of telopodite not very conspicuous. Posterior gonopods (Figs 1, 4–5): Mesomerite (Ms) long, extending beyond the other gonopod processes, proximally uniformly broad, distally hook-shaped (ho), narrowing into a tapering protruding apical process, pointing mesoposteriad; solenomerite (S) broad, narrowing at mid-length and bearing an anterior blunt process (sp) pointing distad and separated from the apical part of the solenomerite by an incision (i), solenomerite apically with a broad folded lamella (la) serrated on the lateral margin, and a long protruding, slender and curved, distal process (ds), pointing anteriad and lodging the distal part of the seminal groove (g), the latter running from the fovea (F), located at the proximal part of the solenomerite, up to process ds. Paracoxite (Px) short, stout and lobed, apically bearing a few marginal serrations. THE IDENTITY OF JULUS RIMOSUS KARSCH Zootaxa 3652 (3) © 2013 Magnolia Press · 393 FIGURE 1. Ommatoiulus rimosus. Holotype: Left posterior gonopod, mesal view. Abbreviations: Ms. mesomerite. P. promerite; Px. paracoxite; S. solenomerite. Scale bar 0.5 mm. Non type material. Male: 42 podous rings + 2 apodous rings + Telson; maximum vertical diameter: 1.6 mm. Females: 44–46 podous rings + 1–2 apodous rings; maximum vertical diameter 1.9 mm. General colour alternating with blackish prozonites covered with yellow to light brown spots (same as holotype), laterally