DOCSLIB.ORG

Geophilomorpha: Schendylidae)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Geophilomorpha: Schendylidae) University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Insecta Mundi Florida March 1991 Systematics and biogeography of Marsikomerus Attems, 1938, a misunderstood genus of centipedes (Geophilomorpha: Schendylidae) Richard L. Hoffman Martinsville, VA Luis A. Pereira La Plata, Argentina Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi Part of the Entomology Commons Hoffman, Richard L. and Pereira, Luis A., "Systematics and biogeography of Marsikomerus Attems, 1938, a misunderstood genus of centipedes (Geophilomorpha: Schendylidae)" (1991). Insecta Mundi. 406. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi/406 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Florida at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Insecta Mundi by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Vol. 5, No. 1, March 1991 45 Systematics and biogeography of Marsikomerus Attems, 1938, a misunderstood genus of centipedes (Geophilomorpha: Schendylidae) Richard L. Hoffman Virginia Museum of Natural History Martinsville, VA 241 12 and Luis A. Pereira Museo de la Plata 1900 - La Plata, Argentina Abstract trail as far as existing materials permit, and Marsikomerus (Attems 1938) is transferred present here results of our inquiries: at least some from Geophilidae to Schendylidae, and shown to be questions have been answered and some contingent a senior synonym of Simoporus (Chamberlin 1940) difficulties defined for future attention. and Lanonyx (Chamberlin 1953). The type species M. pacificus is redescribed and illustrated in detail Taxonomy from the holotype; similar but less extensive treatment is provided for M. lanaius and M. texan- Family Schendylidae Cook us. The value of some traditionally used charac- ters and the distribution of the genus (Hawaii, Genus Marsikomerus Attems southwestern United States, northern Mexico) are discussed. Marsikomerus Attems, 1938, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lon- don, (B) 108(II): 372. Type species, M. pacif- Introduction icus Attems, by monotypy. In his 1938 report on myriapods from the ?Mexiconyx Chamberlin, 1922, Psyche 29(1):9. Hawaiian Islands, C. Attems described a new Type species, M. hidalgoensis Chamberlin, by genus and species of geophilomorph centipede original designation. under the name Marsikomeruspacificus. Although Attems referred his genus to the family Geophil- ?Holitys Cook, 1899, Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington, idae, various details in both the description and 4:304. Type species, H. neomexicana Cook, by drawings suggested to us that M. pacificus was monotypy. actually a schendylid. Resolution of the problem, sufficiently desirable in itself, was also mandated Simoporus Chamberlin, 1940, Ent. News, 51:109. by the possibility of an error in identification or Type species, S. texanus Chamberlin, by origi- labeling - the Hawaiian Islands not being notable nal designation. NEW SYNONYMY! as a center for chilopod differentiation. Toward this end the holotype of M. pacificus Simoporus: Chamberlin, 1943, Bull. Univ. Utah, was obtained for study. Anybody familiar with the 33(6): 12, 15. tangled skein of chilopod taxonomy will not be sur- prised to learn that establishment of the taxonomic ?Morunguis Chamberlin, 1943, Bull. Univ. Utah, position of Marsikomerus, easy enough as the first 33(6):15. Type species, M. morelus step, immediately led into a labyrinth of systematic Chamberlin, by original designation. problems only partially amenable to solution at the present time. Nonetheless, we have followed the 46 Insecta Mundi Figures 1 - 6. Marsikomerus pacificus Attems, female holotype. 1. Clypeus and first antemomere. 2. Labrum. 3.Ist and 2nd maxillae, ventral surface. 4. Right lateroposterior sector of 2nd maxillae, ventral surface. 5. Left telopodite of 2nd maxillae, dorsal surface. 6. Head, proximal antennomeres, and tergum of prehensorial segment, dorsal surface. Vol. 5, No. 1, March 1991 Simoporus: Chamberlin, 1947, Ent. News, found in Hawaii. Lanonyx was diagnosed as a new 58(6): 147. genus distinct from Mexiconyx and Plesioschendyla in lacking sternal pore fields. Marsicomerus [sic] Attems, 1947, Annln Naturh. Since our study of the holotype of L. lanaius Mus. Wien, 55:107, 128. shows that such pores do occur on the anterior sterna, the basis for separation from Plesioschen- Lanonyx Chamberlin, 1953, Great Basin Natur., dyla becomes the nonpectinate 2nd maxillary claw 13(3-4):75. Type species, L. lanaius and absence of an unguiform ultimate pretarsus in Chamberlin, by original designation. NEW the latter. According to Chamberlin, Mexiconyx SYNONYMY! hidalgoensis differs by having longer prehensors. It is perhaps not too harsh a judgement of our Marsukomerus [sic]: Chamberlin, 1953, Great predecessor to note that many of his "new" geo- Basin Natur., 13 (3-41535. philoid taxa were based on single characters later found to be the result of faulty observation. The Simoporus: Crabill, 1961, Ent. News, 72:31, 36, term "mirage taxonomy" has some appeal as a 78. descriptor of Chamberlinian methodology. The next reference to Marsikomerus appeared Diagnosis: Pleurites of 2nd maxillae not fused in 1947, in Attems' attempt to update his 1929 with coxosternum; apical claw of 2nd maxillae "Tierreich" treatment. Here the genus was entered pectinate on both dorsal and ventral edges; sterna in the second couplet of a key to genera of the with ventral pore fields; last pair of legs with Geophilinae, and cataloged on a subsequent page seven podomeres (the pretarsus in the form of a with literature reference; in both cases the invalid well-developed claw); coxopleurae of last pedal emendation "Marsicomerus" was used, without segment each with an internal gland of simple explanation. In the key, Marsikomerus was set off structure ("homogeneous" in the terminology of from other genera by the combination of unipartite Brolemann & Ribaut, 1912), not ramose or lobed. labrum, pectinate second maxillary claw, and large coxal gland of the ultimate legs, all such obviously Distribution: Southwestern United States (Ar- schendylid characters that one can scarcely credit kansas, Texas), Mexico (Nuevo Leon), Hawaiian the idea of an Attemsian mistake. The omission of Islands (Fig. 60), see also discussion under the any reference to mandibular structure, normally a heading "Biogeography", p. 56. sine qua non in Attems' chilopod work, even sug- gests the possibility of a deliberate legerdemain Synonymy: The direct comparison of holotypes of put forth to test the perception of his colleagues the type species of the three nominal genera listed and successors. above shows that all are congeneric. Finally, in 1953, Chamberlin listed M. pacificus In the original description of Marsikomerus, in his paper on geophiloids of the Pacific region, Attems placed the genus in the subfamily Geophil- consistently with the misspelling Marsukomerus, inae without any comparison with possible relat- placing the genus in the "Pachymerinidae" with ives, making only the comment that "Diese Gat- only the comment that the genus resembled Hon- tung unterscheidet sich von den mir bekannten uaphilus "in having a single large coxal pit on each Geophilinae durch die eigentiimliche Driise der side..." Endbeine ..." Curiously he neither described nor Three other possible synonyms of Marsikome- figured the mandibles; had he done so their rus remain to be accounted through future studies. obviously schendylid form (cf. out Figs. 7 and 8) First is Holitys (Cook, 1899), based on a specimen would have precluded his astonishing familial from the Organ Mountains, New Mexico, which misidentification. Simoporus was, of course, estab- Cook named Holitys neomexicanus. This is obvi- lished with no reference whatever to Marsiko- ously a schendylid but the original description fails merus. For unknown reasons Chamberlin later to mention a number of important points, and the (1953: 85)~onsideredthe latter to be a genus in type is no longer available. Geographically, Holitys the Pachymeriidae, and in any event, it is incon- falls into the right area for consideration as conge- ceivable that he would have ever suspected a neric with Marsikomerus, and the possibility of Texan geophilomorph to be congeneric with one their identity was raised already by Crabill in Insecta Mundi 1961. However, no further action on this situation is any more "natural" than one in which pores may can be taken until somebody is able to collect be missing or present only on a few segments. If topotypic material of neomexicanus at Dripping there are no other substantiating differences, Springs in the Organ Mountains. If H. neomexica- perhaps the pore field character distinguishes only nus is found to be congeneric with M. pacificus, species, not genera. obviously Holitys must be resurrected as the senior For the present, we defer to previous practice, name with 40 years priority. and retain Morunguis until an adequate series of The original description of Mexiconyx hidalgo- topotypes is available for study, but with the ensis (Chamberlin, 1922) suggests that this species, prediction that such material will provide the also, might be congeneric with M, pacificus, but it demise of this genus. too fails to provide necessary structural details. To carry the parallelism with Holitys one step further, Key to the recognized species of Marsiko- the type of M. hidalgoensis cannot be found at the merus
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Myriapoda: Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha) from the Bolivian Amazon Forest
    Zootaxa 3905 (1): 001–026 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2015 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3905.1.1 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:4DE8E10A-2A06-4467-BFC4-F105C46DCCF1 A new schendylid centipede (Myriapoda: Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha) from the Bolivian Amazon Forest LUIS ALBERTO PEREIRA National Council for Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET) and National University of La Plata, Natural Sciences Faculty and Museum (Division of Invertebrate Zoology), Paseo del Bosque s/n, (1900) La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Schendylops grismadoi sp. nov., a new schendylid centipede (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha) from the Amazon forest of east-central Bolivia (Santa Cruz Department, Guarayos Province) is described and illustrated based on the holotype fe- male. The new species is characterized by having an uninterrupted series of ventral pore-fields, from first to penultimate sternite inclusive (undivided on anterior and posterior sternites, divided in two subsymmetrical areas on the intermediate); these combined traits being shared by five other Neotropical species currently included in the genus Schendylops Cook, 1899, i.e., S. tropicus (Brölemann & Ribaut, 1911) (from French Guiana), S. inquilinus Pereira, Uliana & Minelli, 2007 (from Brazil), S. coscaroni (Pereira & Minelli, 2006) (from Brazil), S. demelloi (Verhoeff, 1938) (from Brazil), and S. parahybae (Chamberlin, 1914) (from Brazil). The new taxon is differentiated from all aforementioned species by having the anterior margin of cephalic plate conspicuously notched in the middle, dentate lamellae of mandibles divided in two blocks, and basal internal edge of forcipular tarsungulum with a small pigmented tooth; it is included in a key which will enable the identification of all known Neotropical members having sternal pore-fields all along the trunk (including those with an interrupted series on some mid-body sternites).
    [Show full text]
  • Geophilomorph Centipedes in the Mediterranean Region: Revisiting Taxonomy Opens New Evolutionary Vistas
    SOIL ORGANISMS Volume 81 (3) 2009 pp. 489–503 ISSN: 1864 - 6417 Geophilomorph centipedes in the Mediterranean region: revisiting taxonomy opens new evolutionary vistas Lucio Bonato * & Alessandro Minelli Dipartimento di Biologia, Università di Padova, via U. Bassi 58b, 35131 Padova, Italy; e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] * Corresponding author Abstract Geophilomorph centipedes (Geophilomorpha) are represented in the Mediterranean region by almost 200 species, 77 % of which are exclusive. Taxonomy and nomenclature are still inadequate, but recent investigations are contributing to a better understanding of the evolutionary differentiation of this group in the region. Since 2000, identity has been clarified for ca. 40 nominal taxa, and unexpected evidence has emerged for the existence of three well-distinct lineages that had remained unrecognised before. Of these, Eurygeophilus has evolved an unusually stout body and needle-like forcipules, and the vicariant pattern of its two species is peculiar in encompassing both the Pyrenees and the Corsica-Sardinia microplate; Diphyonyx has evolved unusually pincer-like leg claws, convergent to those originated independently in two different unrelated geophilomorph lineages; Stenotaenia has maintained a very uniform gross morphology, while differentiating widely in body size and number of trunk segments. The fauna of the Mediterranean region is representative of most major lineages of the Geophilomorpha, and the almost exclusive Dignathodontidae exhibit a remarkable morpho-ecological radiation in the region. Essential to a better understanding of the regional evolutionary history of these centipedes will be assessing the actual species diversity within many of the already recognised lineages, and reviewing in a phylogenetic perspective the nominal taxa currently referred to the composite genera Geophilus and Schendyla .
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the RESTRUCTURING of ARTHROPOD TROPHIC RELATIONSHIPS in RESPONSE to PLANT INVASION by Adam B. Mitchell a Dissertation Submitt
    THE RESTRUCTURING OF ARTHROPOD TROPHIC RELATIONSHIPS IN RESPONSE TO PLANT INVASION by Adam B. Mitchell 1 A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Entomology and Wildlife Ecology Winter 2019 © Adam B. Mitchell All Rights Reserved THE RESTRUCTURING OF ARTHROPOD TROPHIC RELATIONSHIPS IN RESPONSE TO PLANT INVASION by Adam B. Mitchell Approved: ______________________________________________________ Jacob L. Bowman, Ph.D. Chair of the Department of Entomology and Wildlife Ecology Approved: ______________________________________________________ Mark W. Rieger, Ph.D. Dean of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources Approved: ______________________________________________________ Douglas J. Doren, Ph.D. Interim Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: ______________________________________________________ Douglas W. Tallamy, Ph.D. Professor in charge of dissertation I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: ______________________________________________________ Charles R. Bartlett, Ph.D. Member of dissertation committee I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: ______________________________________________________ Jeffery J. Buler, Ph.D. Member of dissertation committee I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Millipedes of Ohio Field Guide [Pdf]
    MILLIPEDES OF OHIO field guide OHIO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE This booklet is produced by the Ohio Division of Wildlife as a free publication. This booklet is not for resale. Any unauthorized repro- duction is prohibited. All images within this booklet are copyrighted by the Ohio Division of Wildlife and its contributing artists and INTRODUCTION photographers. For additional information, please call 1-800-WILDLIFE (1-800-945-3543). Text by: Dr. Derek Hennen & Jeff Brown Millipedes occupy a category of often seen, rarely identified bugs. Few resources geared towards a general audience exist HOW TO VIEW THIS BOOKLET for these arthropods, belying their beauty and fascinating biol- Description & Overview ogy. There is still much unknown about millipedes and other Order Name myriapods, particularly concerning specific ecological informa- Family Name tion and detailed species ranges. New species await discovery Common Name and description, even here in North America. This situation Scientific Name makes species identification difficult for anyone lucky enough Range Map to stumble upon one of these animals: a problem this booklet indicates distribution and counties intends to solve. Here we include information on millipede life were specimen was collected Size history, identification, and collecting tips for all ~50 species denotes the range of length of Ohio’s millipedes. Millipede species identification often common for the species depends on examining the male genitalia, but to make this Secondary Photo (when applicable) booklet accessible as a
    [Show full text]
  • Myriapoda of Canada 169 Doi: 10.3897/Zookeys.819.29447 REVIEW ARTICLE Launched to Accelerate Biodiversity Research
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 819: 169–186 (2019) Myriapoda of Canada 169 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.819.29447 REVIEW ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Myriapoda of Canada David W. Langor1, Jeremy R. deWaard2, Bruce A. Snyder3 1 Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, 5320–122 St. NW, Edmonton, Alberta, T6H 3S5, Canada 2 Centre for Biodiversity Genomics, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada 3 Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Georgia College and State University, 320 N. Wayne St., Milledgeville, Georgia, 31061, USA Corresponding author: David W. Langor ([email protected]) Academic editor: C. Sheffield | Received 31 August 2018 | Accepted 9 October 2018 | Published 24 January 2019 http://zoobank.org/A6836D8C-1793-47CF-8921-6473AEB851E5 Citation: Langor DW, deWaard JR, Snyder BA (2019) Myriapoda of Canada. In: Langor DW, Sheffield CS (Eds) The Biota of Canada – A Biodiversity Assessment. Part 1: The Terrestrial Arthropods. ZooKeys 819: 169–186. https://doi. org/10.3897/zookeys.819.29447 Abstract The currently documented fauna of described species of myriapods in Canada includes 54 Chilopoda, 66 Diplopoda, 23 Pauropoda, and two Symphyla, representing increases of 24, 23, 23, and one species, respectively, since 1979. Of the 145 myriapod species currently documented, 40 species are not native to Canada. The myriapods have not been well documented with DNA barcodes and no barcodes are avail- able for Pauropoda. It is conservatively estimated that at least 93 additional myriapods species will be dis- covered in Canada: Chilopoda (40), Diplopoda (29), Pauropoda (17), and Symphyla (seven).
    [Show full text]
  • Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha)
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 443:ChiloKey, 1–9 (2014) an interactive identification tool for the geophilomorph centipedes of Europe... 1 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.443.7530 DATA PAPER http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research ChiloKey, an interactive identification tool for the geophilomorph centipedes of Europe (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha) Lucio Bonato1, Alessandro Minelli1, Massimo Lopresti2, Pierfilippo Cerretti3 1 Department of Biology, University of Padova, via Ugo Bassi 58B, 35131, Padova, Italy 2 Centro Nazionale Biodiversità Forestale – Corpo Forestale dello Stato, via Carlo Ederle 16/A, 37128 Verona, Italy 3 DAFNAE- Entomology, University of Padova, Viale dell’Università 16, 35020, Legnaro, Italy Corresponding author: Lucio Bonato ([email protected]); Pierfilippo Cerretti ([email protected]) Academic editor: V. Chavan | Received 17 March 2014 | Accepted 4 September 2014 | Published 29 September 2014 http://zoobank.org/77CFE160-C9C7-4C85-9B0C-B9C51302836E Citation: Bonato L, Minelli A, Lopresti M, Cerretti P (2014) ChiloKey, an interactive identification tool for the geophilomorph centipedes of Europe (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha). ZooKeys 443: 1–9. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.443.7530 Resource citation: Bonato L, Minelli A, Lopresti M, Cerretti P (2014) ChiloKey, an interactive identification tool for the geophilomorph centipedes of Europe (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha). Available from: http://www.biologia.unipd.it/ chilokey/ and http://www.interactive-keys.eu/chilokey/. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.443.7530 Abstract ChiloKey is a matrix-based, interactive key to all 179 species of Geophilomorpha (Chilopoda) recorded from Europe, including species of uncertain identity and those whose morphology is known partially only. The key is intended to assist in identification of subadult and adult specimens, by means of micros- copy and simple dissection techniques whenever necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Clinopodes Vesubiensis: New Species of Centipede (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha: Geophilidae) from Slovenia
    Acta Soc. Zool. Bohem. 82: 79–87, 2018 ISSN 1211-376X Clinopodes vesubiensis: New species of centipede (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha: Geophilidae) from Slovenia Anja Kos & Ivan Kos University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical faculty, Department of Biology, Večna pot 111, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia; e-mails: [email protected]; [email protected] Received 24 August 2018; accepted 26 October 2018 Published 27 December 2018 Abstract. Centipedes are a well studied and diverse goup of invertebrates with 98 confirmed species from Slovenia. During field surveys many specimens of unknown species ahave beenwere found, which awere recorded as Clinopodes n. sp. and deposited in the Department of Biology, Biotechnical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana. We examined 195 of these specimens and compared their morphology with the original description ofthe Clinopodes vesubiensis (Bonato, Iorio et Minelli, 2011). Furthermore, we analyzed the variation and its dependence on size of some of the morphological characters. Our results confirm thatClinopodes vesubiensis is a new species for the Slovenian fauna. By inspecting many specimens collected at seven locations throughout the year, we increased the knowledge of this species. We noticed substantial variation in some morphological characters. Distance from the previously known locations for this species in southeastern France is remarkable, which raises questions about the history of this species and its taxonomic status. Key words. Taxonomic characters, size-dependent morphological characters, Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha, Geophilidae, Clinopodes vesubiensis, Slovenia. INTRODUCTION Studies on centipedes in Slovenia reach far back in history, with first records over 300 years ago, when J. V. Valvasor (1641–1693) depicted a lithobiid centipede (Valvasor 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • Irish Biodiversity: a Taxonomic Inventory of Fauna
    Irish Biodiversity: a taxonomic inventory of fauna Irish Wildlife Manual No. 38 Irish Biodiversity: a taxonomic inventory of fauna S. E. Ferriss, K. G. Smith, and T. P. Inskipp (editors) Citations: Ferriss, S. E., Smith K. G., & Inskipp T. P. (eds.) Irish Biodiversity: a taxonomic inventory of fauna. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 38. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin, Ireland. Section author (2009) Section title . In: Ferriss, S. E., Smith K. G., & Inskipp T. P. (eds.) Irish Biodiversity: a taxonomic inventory of fauna. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 38. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin, Ireland. Cover photos: © Kevin G. Smith and Sarah E. Ferriss Irish Wildlife Manuals Series Editors: N. Kingston and F. Marnell © National Parks and Wildlife Service 2009 ISSN 1393 - 6670 Inventory of Irish fauna ____________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................1 Acknowledgements.............................................................................................................................................2 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................3 Methodology........................................................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • New Records and Remarks on the Centipede Fauna of Endogean Habitats of Sardinia (Chilopoda)*
    coNservazioNe habitat iNvertebrati 5: 223–242 (2011) cNbfvr New records and remarks on the centipede fauna of endogean habitats of Sardinia (Chilopoda)* Marzio ZAPPAROLI Department for Innovation in Biological, Agro-food and Forest systems, Università degli Studi della Tuscia, Via San Camillo de Lellis snc, I-01100 Viterbo, Italy. E-mail: [email protected] *In: Nardi G., Whitmore D., Bardiani M., Birtele D., Mason F., Spada L. & Cerretti P. (eds), Biodiversity of Marganai and Montimannu (Sardinia). Research in the framework of the ICP Forests network. Conservazione Habitat Invertebrati, 5: 223–242. ABSTRACT Thirty-two species of centipedes, mostly collected with specifi c methods (soil-washing, Berlese type funnels), mostly in endogean habitats (i.e., the portion of soil comprised between the lower humus layer and the maximum depth of plant roots) of Sardinia, and representing about 60% of the centipede fauna of the island (55 species), are listed and discussed. The Mediterranean species Nannophilus eximius (Meinert, 1870) (Geophilo- morpha, Schendylidae) is for the fi rst time recorded from the island. An updated list of the centipedes of Sardinia is also given, according to their distribution in the present-day administrative division of the region. General considerations on the centipede fauna of deep-soil habitats of Sardinia are presented: the Geophilomorpha are the most represented group (20 species, more than 70% of the known Sardinian representatives of the order), followed by the Lithobiomorpha (8 species) and Scolopendromorpha (3 species); species with a small or medium body size are mostly represented, while large species apparently occur only occasionally or are represented by immature specimens; no species have been exclusively found in this habitat so far, although some species seem more frequent in endogean samples than in epigean ones; species diversity is generally low, the number of species per site ranging from 1 (30 sites out of 78) to 8 (1 site).
    [Show full text]
  • New State Records and Additions to the Alien Terrestrial Arthropod Fauna in the Hawaiian Islands Janis N
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ScholarSpace at University of Hawai'i1 at Manoa Proceedings of the hawaiian entomological society (2019) 51(1) 1–71 New State Records and Additions to the Alien Terrestrial Arthropod Fauna in the Hawaiian Islands Janis N. Matsunaga1, Francis G. Howarth2, and Bernarr R. Kumashiro1 1Hawaii Department of Agriculture, Plant Pest Control Branch, 1428 S. King St. Honolulu, Hawaii 96814. 2Distinguished Research Associate, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii. Email: [email protected] Abstract. An annotated list of 393 adventive terrestrial arthropod species plus three new varieties of known established species, which have been recorded in Hawaii since the Fourth Edition of Bishop Museum’s Hawaiian Terrestrial Arthro- pod Checklist (Nishida 2002), is presented. This compilation includes records of over 362 nonnative arthropod species published between the years of 2001 and 2017 as well as over 30 new Hawaii State records that have not been previously recorded. Annotations include date first detected, island distribution, citation, relevant biological notes, and for new state and island records, the collection data. A separate table with about 150 entries lists the synonyms, misidentifications, dele- tions, and changes of status for species included in the 2002 checklist that were discovered during our research. However, the latter list is not comprehensive as a complete revision of the 2002 checklist was beyond the scope of our project. Also included is a bibliography of the approximately 270 source documents that were consulted. We intend for this publication to be a useful supplement to the 2002 edition of the Hawaiian Terrestrial Arthropod Checklist.
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Barcoding Facilitates a Rapid Biotic Survey of a Temperate Nature Reserve
    Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e6313 doi: 10.3897/BDJ.3.e6313 Taxonomic Paper Biodiversity inventories in high gear: DNA barcoding facilitates a rapid biotic survey of a temperate nature reserve Angela C Telfer‡‡§‡‡‡, Monica R Young , Jenna Quinn , Kate Perez , Crystal N Sobel , Jayme E Sones , Valerie Levesque-Beaudin‡, Rachael Derbyshire ‡, Jose Fernandez-Triana |, Rodolphe Rougerie ¶, Abinah Thevanayagam‡‡‡#‡, Adrian Boskovic , Alex V Borisenko , Alex Cadel , Allison Brown , Anais Pages¤, Anibal H Castillo ‡, Annegret Nicolai «, Barb Mockford Glenn Mockford», Belén Bukowski˄, Bill Wilson»§, Brock Trojahn , Carole Ann Lacroix˅, Chris Brimblecombe¦, Christoper Hayˀ, Christmas Ho‡, Claudia Steinke‡‡, Connor P Warne , Cristina Garrido Cortesˁ, Daniel Engelking‡‡, Danielle Wright , Dario A Lijtmaer˄, David Gascoigne», David Hernandez Martich₵, Derek Morningstar ℓ, Dirk Neumann ₰, Dirk Steinke‡, Donna DeBruin Marco DeBruin», Dylan Dobiasˁ, Elizabeth Sears‡, Ellen Richardˁ, Emily Damstra»‡, Evgeny V Zakharov , Frederic Labergeˁ, Gemma E Collins¦, Gergin A Blagoev ‡, Gerrie Grainge»‡, Graham Ansell , Greg Meredith₱, Ian Hogg¦, Jaclyn McKeown ‡, Janet Topan ‡, Jason Bracey»»‡‡‡, Jerry Guenther , Jesse Sills-Gilligan , Joseph Addesi , Joshua Persi , Kara K S Layton₳, Kareina D'Souza‡, Kencho Dorji₴, Kevin Grundy», Kirsti Nghidinwa₣, Kylee Ronnenberg‡, Kyung Min Lee₮, Linxi Xie ₦, Liuqiong Lu‡, Lyubomir Penev₭, Mailyn Gonzalez ₲, Margaret E Rosati ‽, Mari Kekkonen‡‡‡, Maria Kuzmina , Marianne Iskandar , Marko Mutanen₮, Maryam Fatahi‡, Mikko Pentinsaari₮,
    [Show full text]
  • The Phylogenetic Position of Dinogeophilus and a New Evolutionary Framework for the Smallest Epimorphic Centipedes (Chilopoda: Epimorpha)
    Contributions to Zoology, 84 (3) 237-253 (2015) The phylogenetic position of Dinogeophilus and a new evolutionary framework for the smallest epimorphic centipedes (Chilopoda: Epimorpha) Lucio Bonato1, 3, Alessandro Minelli1, Leandro Drago1, Luis Alberto Pereira2 1 Department of Biology, University of Padova, via Bassi 58b, I-35131 Padova, Italy 2 Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Paseo del Bosque s.n., AR-1900 La Plata, Argentina 3 E-mail: [email protected] Key words: Geophilidae, miniaturization, molecular phylogeny, paedomorphosis, Schendylidae Abstract Introduction The centipedes of the clade Epimorpha change slightly during Within the extant centipedes (Chilopoda), two thirds of post-embryonic growth but there is huge variation between the species (nearly two thousand) are in the clade Epi- species in the maximum body size. New specimens of the rare- ly collected Neotropical genus Dinogeophilus provide further morpha, all of which form all their trunk segments and evidence that this genus comprises the smallest species of the appendages before or very shortly after hatching Epimorpha, with a recorded maximum length of 5.5 mm. Up to (Minelli and Sombke, 2011; Brena, 2014). Nevertheless, Dinogeophilus now has been invariantly classified in Geophi- different species of Epimorpha grow up to very differ- lidae but different sources of evidence (examination by SEM, cladistic evaluation of morphology, similarity and phylogenet- ent body sizes and their maximum length spans two ic analysis of molecular data) agree on a very different phylo- orders of magnitude, from millimetres to decimetres. genetic hypothesis: Dinogeophilus is actually a derived line- Such huge differences are found within each of the two age of Schendylidae, only distantly related to Geophilidae, and major clades within the Epimorpha, i.e.
    [Show full text]