104,961 research outputs found
Dorypetalum helenae Stoev & Enghoff, 2006, sp. n.
No full textDorypetalum helenae sp. n. Figs 2–14 Material examined Holotype: adult male; Turkey (European part), Edirne Province, Kuru Daġ Mts, SE Keşan, 350 m, Pinus / Quercus forest, 9.v. 1995, H. Enghoff, M. Frater, H. Read leg. (Zool. Mus. Copenh. Exp.) (Natural History Museum of Denmark — ZMUC) — Paratypes: 2 females, 1 juvenile, same locality, date and collectors as holotype (ZMUC). Etymology The species is named after the British myriapodologist Dr. Helen Read, a participant in the expedition to Turkey organized by the ZMUC, very likely the actual collector of the new species and author of several papers on millipede taxonomy. Description Length: adult male broken, exact length unknown, adult female: ca. 17 mm. Width of midbody pleurotergite (PT) of female paratype: 1.2 mm. Adults with 43 PTs; juvenile with 35 PTs. Body color (Fig. 2): generally browngrayyellowish; metazonites with dark, brownish, posterior band; prozonites greywhitish; dorsal crests usually darker, contrasting against a yellowish background; collum and next five PTs with medial dark band, forming something like an uninterrupted darker line extending from middle of collum to posterior end of PT 6 (Fig. 4); legs pale brownyellowish; antennae (excluding apical cones) and head dark brown. Front of head concave in males, convex in females, covered with slender, whitish setae: frontal margin brownish, sometimes with irregular lighter spots in the middle, labral zone yellowish, edge between the frontal and posterior side of head, stipes and cardo marbled yellowish — brown (Fig. 3). Ocellaria subtriangular, composed of 22 transparent ocelli arranged in 5 rows on a black background. Organs of Tömösváry larger than an ocellus, placed between anterior side of ocellar triangle and antennal pit, well separated from both. Antennae: moderately long, almost reaching the mid of PT 6 when folded backward; fifth antennomere with a posterior field of stout sensilla (Fig. 5); eight article comprised of 4 short, whitish cones. Male sixth and seventh PTs moderately enlarged, not as strongly as in some other callipodidans (e.g. Paracortina, Bollmania). Collum smooth, other anterior PTs with moderately developed almost flattened crests, crests getting more pronounced towards the body end. Four crests between the ozopores on seventh PT. Ozopores visible on all PTs from the 6 th backwards, except on the last two PTs, placed at the base of 3 rd crest. Chaetotaxy: Table 1. First and second legpairs markedly shorter, third slightly shorter than subsequent legs, all with tarsal claws, tarsi undivided, ventrally with a row of long setae instead of pads (Figs 6–8). Male legpairs 4–7 without tarsal claws, tarsi with a trace of division; pads poorly developed, concentrated on the posterior third (7 l. p.) or fourth (4– 6 l.p.) of tarsi. Prefemur of first male leg with a lateral outgrowth (j) on its posterior side (Fig. 6). Coxae of second leg pair with posterior gonopore (Fig. 7). Male third leg unmodified (Fig. 8). Prefemur of male 4 th leg heavily enlarged, with ventral outgrowth (h), coxa projected ventrally, its apical part pointed and curved cephalad (Fig. 9). Prefemur of male 5 th legpair moderately enlarged, subconcave ventrally (Fig. 10). Coxa of male 6 th leg dorsally expanded, femur incrassate (Fig. 11). Coxa of male 7 th leg with a long ventral protrusion (z), prefemur with a posterior thickening, femur slightly incrassate, tarsus elongated (Fig. 12). Coxal sacs present at least from 3 rd to 7 th leg pair, in subsequent legs either missing or not visible. Hypoproct tripartite, medial sclerite largest, trapezoidal, bearing two paramedian macrosetae. Paraprocts divided into larger ventral and smaller dorsal sclerites, each bearing a pair of macrosetae. Spinnerets thin and long, ending with a long macroseta. Anterior setae Posterior setae Collum a, d + a, d b, c, e + b, c, e 2 nd pleurotergite a, d, e a + a, d, e b, c + b, c 3 rd pleurotergite a, e + a, e b, c, d + b, c, d 4 th pleurotergite a + a b, c, d, e + b, c, d, e 5 th pleurotergite a + a b, c, d, e + b, c, d, e 6 th pleurotergite a, b, c, d, e + a, b, c, d, e 7 th pleurotergite a + a b, c, d, e, f + b, c, d, e, f 8 th pleurotergite a + a b, c, d, e, f + b, c, d, e, f a. Setae d and e are not in a truly anterior position, just about the mid distance between the anterior and posterior rows. The same holds true for seta e on the third PT. Male gonopods (Figs 13–14): telopodite (t) and prefemoral process (pf) as typical for the genus (see Hoffman & Lohmander (1964) for detailed description). Mesal coxal process (mp) long, erected, apically broadened, racketshaped, its apical part subdivided into a dorsal (d) and a ventral (v) lamina, t and pf ending close to them; tuft of long and stout setae (k) placed in a row at about midlength of the anterior side of mp; upper edge of larger lamina somewhat irregularly serrate, bearing a few tiny setae. Lateral coxal process (lp) S shaped, apically pointed, as high as 2 / 3 rd of the mesal coxal process, a small distal tooth (f) placed at about its midlength. The new species differs significantly from the other congeners in the shape of the mesal coxal process. Females: Second leg pair normal. All female legs with a tarsal claw. Remarks Regarding the shape of gonopods, D. helenae sp.n. is morphologically close to D. bulgaricum Strasser, 1973, both species being characterized by the cluster of spines lying directly on the anterior side of the mesal coxosternal process (see also the key below). However, it is well distinguished from the latter by the specific racketshape of the mesal process, and also by having the lateral process apically pointed, devoid of denticles. D. bulgaricum is unique among all congeners in having an extra pleurotergite, i.e. 44 vs. 43, but the significance of this character for species characterisation in Dorypetalidae is still uncertain. PLATE 1. Dorypetalum helenae sp. n., female paratype: Fig. 2: lateral view; Fig. 3: ventral view; Fig. 4: dorsal view. Being quite uniform with regard to the telopodite and prefemoral processes, the question whether the mesal and lateral processes of dorypetalid gonopods are of any importance to species distinction or their slightly different shape is due to an individual variation was brought up by Hoffman & Lohmander (1964). This issue was commented also by Strasser (1974) who stated “.... the question remains open whether we are dealing with different species or, as Hoffman suspects, with a single, geographically strongly variable species“ (our translation). We think that the new evidence at hand, and especially the quite unusual shape of the mesal process in D. helenae, show that these characters are of certain value and can be used for taxonomic purposes. Other taxonomically important characters for species’ separation can be observed in male pregonopodal legs. PLATE 2. Dorypetalum helenae sp. n., holotype: Fig. 5: antenna, lateral view; Figs 6–12: male legs 1–7, respectively, anterior views. Abbreviations, see text. Scale bar: 1 mm.Published as part of Stoev, Pavel & Enghoff, Henrik, 2006, A review of the millipede genus Dorypetalum Verhoeff, 1900 (Diplopoda: Callipodida: Dorypetalidae), pp. 29-43 in Zootaxa 1254 on pages 31-34, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17305
Eupolybothrus (Leptopolybothrus) tridentinus
No full text<p>Eupolybothrus (Leptopolybothrus) tridentinus (Fanzago, 1874)</p> <p>Matic & Golemansky (1967b, p. 124, sub Eupolybothrus leptopus); Kaczmarek (1973, p. 184, fig. 2, sub Polybothrus leptopus); Ribarov (1985, p. 89); Ribarov (1986a, p. 225, fig. 2); Ribarov (1987a, p. 285); Ribarov (1989b, p. 172); Ribarov (1992, p. 364, fig. 3, tab. 2); Beron (1994, p. 36); Ribarov (1996, p. 238, tab. 1); Stoev (1997b, p. 99, tab. 1); Deltshev et al. (1998, p. 149, app. 23, sub E. leptopus); Deltshev et al. (2000a, p. 535); Stoev (2001b); Stoev (2001c, p. 49).</p> <p>List of the localities: West Stara Planina Mts.: Lakatnik *, Vodni pech Cave near Dolni Lom, Pepina doupka Cave near Gintsi. Central Stara Planina Mts.: Central Balkan N.P.: Paskal Peak - Zavodna River, Karchov preslap - Troyanski Pass, Troyanski Pass - Dobrila Peak. Vitosha Mts.: Bistritsa. Rila Mts.: Rila Monastery Natural Park: near the mouth of Kalin River. Osogovo Mts.: Bogoslov. Sredna gora Mts.: Mecha glava Country. Strandzha Mts.: Malko Tarnovo. Sakar Mts.: 5 km S of Topolovgrad. Bakadzhishki Heights: Voinika, Chargan. Derventski Heights: between Oman and Stefan Karadzhovo. Manastirski Heights: Krumovo. western Danubian Plain: Lagoshevtsi (new record). Black Sea Coast: Tvarditsa, S of Bourgas.</p> <p>Distribution in the country: West and Central Stara Planina Mts., Vitosha Mts., Rila Mts., Osogovo Mts., Sredna gora Mts., Strandzha Mts., Sakar Mts., Bakadzhishki Heights, Derventski Heights, Manastirski Heights, western Danubian Plain, Black Sea Coast.</p> <p>Altitude: 120-1,600 m.</p> <p>Habitats: (A) Fagus sylvatica, Picea abies, Salix sp., Corylus avellana; (B) Tilia sp.; (C) Quercus sp.; (D) Quercus sp., Pinus sp.; (E) Fagus orientalis; (F) Ostria carpinifolia; (G)?seashore; (H) caves.</p> <p>Chorotype: SE-European.</p>Published as part of <i>Pavel Stoev, 2002, Eupolybothrus (Leptopolybothrus) tridentinus (Fanzago, 1874), pp. 18-19 in A catalogue and key to the centipedes (Chilopoda) of Bulgaria, Sofia :Pensoft</i> on pages 18-1
Eupolybothrus (Mesobothrus) transsylvanicus
No full text<p>Eupolybothrus (Mesobothrus) transsylvanicus (Latzel, 1882)</p> <p>Polybothrus ochraceus Folkmanova, 1936 syn. n.</p> <p>Jurinich (1904, p. 14, sub Lithobius grossipes); Anonymous (1907, p. 397, sub Lithobius grossipes); Verhoeff (1928, p. 120, sub Polybothrus transsilvanicus sic!); Folkmanova (1936, p. 93, sub Polybothrus ochraceus); Matic & Golemansky (1965, p. 13); Matic & Golemansky (1967b, p. 124); Matic & Golemansky (1967c, p. 17); Matic (1973b, p. 254); Kaczmarek (1973, p. 183, fig. 2, sub Polybothrus transsylvanicus and p. 185, figs. 3-6, sub Polybothrus ochraceus); Dobroruka (1977, p. 6, sub E. transsilvanicus sic!); Ribarov (1985, p. 88); Ribarov (1986a, p. 225, fig. 2); Ribarov (1989a, p. 34); Ribarov (1989b, p. 177); Ribarov (1992, p. 364, figs. 2-3, tab. 2, sub E. transsylvanicus and E. ochraceus); Beron (1994, p. 36); Ribarov (1996, p. 238, tab. 1, sub E. transsylvanicus and E. ochraceus); Stoev (1997b, p. 99, tab. 1, sub E. transsylvanicus and E. ochraceus); Deltshev et al. (1998, p. 146, app. 21, sub E. ochraceus); Deltshev et al. (2000a, p. 535, sub E. ochraceus); Deltshev et al. (2000b, p. 521, sub E. grossipes, E. transsylvanicus and E. ochraceus); Stoev (2001a, p. 104); Stoev (2001b); Stoev (2001c, p. 49); Stoev (in press).</p> <p>List of the localities: West Stara Planina Mts.: Krachimirskoto vrelo Cave near Krachimir, Petrohan, Lakatnik, Zidanka Cave near Lakatnik Railway Station, Petreski dol near Lakatnik Railway Station (new record), near Razhishkata peshtera Cave near Lakatnik Railway Station (new record), deserted mine gallery near Bov, Vodnata peshtera Cave near Tserovo, Studenata peshtera Cave near Cherepish, Vitinya Pass, near Parshevitsa Hut (new record). Central Stara Planina Mts.: near Botev (= Yumruk chal) Peak (locus typicus of P. ochraceus!), Glozhenski Monastery. West Rhodopi Mts.: Banite, Tsrancha, Sveti Petar Monastery near Patalenitsa, foot of Elenin Peak near Kamenitsa, Metoh, Hvoina, Asenovgrad: Anatima, Asenova krepost, Bachkovski Monastery, Chepelare, Batak, Rakitovo, Velingrad, Dupcheto Cave near Velingrad, Dzhurken, Beglika, Erkyupriya, Smolyan, between Mugla and Smolyan (new record), Rudozem, Trigrad, Trite doupki Cave near Yagodina, Garmen (new record), Marko Nikolov Railway Station (new record). East Rhodopi Mts.: Zandana Cave near Dolno Cherkovishte, Jarasa Ini Cave near Sredna Arda, Mechkina doupka Cave near Beli dol. Vitosha Mts.: Boyana, above Boyana (new record), Dragalevski Monastery, Urvich. Rila Mts.: Rila Monastery, Kostenets, Rila N.P.: Rilets Ridge, Malyovitsa - Mechit Ridge, Rila Monastery Natural Park: foot of Tsarev Peak, along Iliina River, along Radovichka River, Rizvanitsa, Brichebor, near Kalin Dam. Pirin Mts.: Orelyak Wildlife Refuge (new record), near Byala River (new record). Osogovo Mts.: Bogoslov, Kyustendil Distr.: cave in Valchi dol near Gorna Rakovitsa, S of Eleshnitsa River (new record). Belasitsa Mts. Sredna gora Mts.: Turiya. Predbalkan: Patleina near Shoumen. Vlahina Planina Mts.: Boichovata peshtera Cave near Stanke Lisichkovo. Konyavska Planina Mts.: Zemen, Dragomirovtsi. Lozenska Planina Mts.: Pancharevo (new record), Starkelovo gnezdo (new record), Kokalyansko hanche (new record). Besaparski Heights: Ognyanovo. Thracean Plain: Chirpan: Bazata. Toundzha Plain: Yambol. Kresna Gorge: Stara Kresna Railway Station. Sandanski-Petrch Valley: Petrich, Sandanski. Sofia: Loven park, Lozenets, Knyazhevo.</p> <p>Distribution in the country: West and Central Stara Planina Mts., Rhodopi Mts., Vitosha Mts., Rila Mts., Pirin Mts., Osogovo Mts., Belasitsa Mts., Sredna gora Mts., Predbalkan, Vlahina Planina Mts., Konyavska Planina Mts., Lozenska Planina Mts., Besaparski Heights, Thracean Plain, Toundzha Plain, Kresna Gorge, Sandanski-Petrch Valley, Sofia.</p> <p>Altitude: 100-1,800 m;?above 2,000 m.</p> <p>Habitats: (A) Juglans regia, Tilia sp., Clematis vitalba; (B) Carpinus orientalis, Fraxinus excelsior, Fagus sylvatica, Tilia sp.; (C) Juniperus oxycedrus; Carpinus orientalis, Quercus sp.; (D) Pinus silvestris, Picea abies; (E) Carpinus orientalis, Fraxinus ornus, Acer campestre, Paliurus aculeatus, Cotinus coggygria, Cornus sanguinea; (F) Quercus protorubroides, Fagus sylvatica; (G) urban habitats: mine galleries, houses, bunkers, gardens, city park; (H) subalpine habitats; (I) caves.</p> <p>Chorotype: Carpathian-Balkan.</p> <p>Remarks. The taxonomical status of Polybothrus ochraceus is discussed in Stoev (2001b).</p>Published as part of <i>Pavel Stoev, 2002, Eupolybothrus (Mesobothrus) transsylvanicus (Latzel, 1882), pp. 17-18 in A catalogue and key to the centipedes (Chilopoda) of Bulgaria, Sofia :Pensoft</i> on pages 17-1
Typhloiulus rhodopinus Vagalinski, Stoev & Enghoff, 2015, sp. n.
No full textTyphloiulus rhodopinus sp. n. Figs 30–48 Material. Holotype ♂ (intact) (NMNHS), Bulgaria, East Rhodopi Mts., E of Madzharovo, abandoned mine gallery on the left bank of River Arda, 15.V. 1996, B. Petrov leg. Paratypes: 1 ♂ broken into 2 pieces, gonopods dissected (ZMUC), same locality and collecting data as of the holotype; 3 ♂ (NMNHS) (one gonopod mounted for SEM, second gonopod missing), Bulgaria, East Rhodopi Mts., Madzharovo Distr., abandoned mine gallery, 2 km from Madzharovo, road to v. Borislavtsi, below the road, decayed wood, 20.IV. 1996, P. Stoev & B. Petrov leg.; 2 ♀ (1 broken into 2 pieces, with dissected vulvae, left vulva mounted for SEM; second specimen broken into 2 pieces, not dissected) (NMNHS), same locality and collecting data; 1 intact ♀ (ZMUC), same locality and collecting data; 4 ♂ (1 intact specimen, 2 broken into 2 pieces, 1 broken into 3 pieces, with dissected gonopods), 4 ♀ (all broken into 2 or more pieces) (NMNHS), Bulgaria, East Rhodopi Mts., Lyubimets Distr., abandoned mine gallery between v. Lozen and v. Cherna mogila, 4.XI. 1999, B. Petrov, S. Beshkov & D. Vasilev leg.; 3 ♂ (2 dissected), 7 ♀ (ZMUC), same locality, rotten log, 12.IV. 1998, B. Petrov & B. Barov leg.; 2 ♂ (1 intact, second one broken into 3 pieces, penis dissected, gonopods mounted for SEM) (NMNHS), Greece, Evros Distr., v. Avas, cave Avanos, 17.V. 1987, P. Beron leg. Additional material. Bulgaria: 4 juv. (NMNHS), East Rhodopi Mts., Madzharovo Distr., abandoned mine gallery, 2 km from Madzharovo, road to Borislavtsi, below the road, decayed wood, 20.IV. 1996, P. Stoev & B. Petrov leg.; 1 ♀ (NMNHS), Kardzhali Distr., v. Oreshari, cave Razklonenata, 3.IV. 1992, B. Petrov leg.; 4 ♀ (NMNHS), Ivailovgrad Distr., cave Dupkata, 27.IV. 1995, B. Petrov leg.; 2 ♂ (ZMUC); same locality, 23.IV. 1996, B. Petrov & P. Stoev leg.; 1 ♀, 1 subad. ♂ (NMNHS), East Rhodopi Mts., Haskovo Distr., v. Dolno Cherkovishte, cave Zandana, 21.IV. 1996, B. Petrov & P. Stoev leg.; 1 ♀ (NMNHS), East Rhodopi Mts., Momchilgrad Distr., v. Kremen, cave Zlatnata yama, 27.IV. 1996, P. Stoev & B. Petrov leg.; 1 ♂, 1 ♀ (NMNHS), East Rhodopi Mts., abandoned mine gallery at the base of Kovan kaya near v. Dolno Cherkovishte, rotten log, 13.IV. 1998, B. Petrov leg. Greece: 2 ♂ (1 pair of gonopods mounted for SEM), 1 ♀ (ZMUC), Thrace, Nomos Evros, 20 km SW Dhadhia [Dadia], 80 m, stream, oak forest, 21.IV. 1994, leg. W. Schawaller, H. Schmalfuss ded. 1994. Diagnosis. T. rhodopinus sp. n. is morphologically similar to T. albanicus and T. giganteus. However, it can be readily distinguished by a combination of certain gonopodal and external body characters (see Table 1). Etymology. Named after the Rhodopi Mts., the main distribution area and type locality of the species. Adjective. Description. Holotype with 52 + 3 +T body rings, l = 24 mm, h = 1.3 mm. Paratype males with 49–63 podous body rings, with 1–3 apodous rings, l = 17–37 mm, h = 1–1.65 mm. Paratype females with 64–72 podous body rings, with 1–2 apodous rings, l = 22–34 mm, h = 1.1–1.65 mm. Colouration: light to dark brownish-beige, prozonae darker than metazonae, legs and antennae yellowish beige to light brown. External structures: 4 supralabral (a central 5 th seta present in one male, probably an aberration) and 14–16 labral setae. Labrum tridentate. Antennomeres 2, 3, 4 and 5 more or less equally long, somewhat longer than 6 th; antennomere 5 with a dense whorl of sensilla basiconica (somewhat smaller than 4 sensilla at antennal apex) dorsally and laterally; a similarly dense whorl of very small sensilla present on antennomere 6. Male mandibular stipites not enlarged. Gnathochilarium of normal julid appearance, with 3 apical setae on each stipes, and with 5 setae in a row on each lingual plate; promentum 0.5–0.53 times as long as lingual plates, length to width ratio: 1.6– 1.8. Collum smooth, with several shallow, parallel striae at postero-lateral corner. Prozonae smooth. Metazonae with mostly straight, parallel striae, with 5–7 striae in a square with sides equal to metazonal length just below ozopore level; a dense whorl of erect setae, ca 3 / 5 to equal to metazonal length at metazonal hind margin. Ozopores placed behind pro-metazonal suture at ca 1 / 5 – 2 / 5 of metazonal length. Telson (Fig. 31): preanal process moderately long, pointed, curved downwards, rather wedge- than roof-shaped, slightly surpassed by longest anal setae; several long setae present on its upper side. Subanal scale very short, rounded, not protruding behind rear contour of anal valves, with 2 rows of setae: a marginal row of 10–12 setae and an inner row of 5 setae. Anal valves densely pilose. Male pleurotergum 7 (Fig. 32) ventrally with rounded protrusions directed ventro-posteriad. Male leg-pair 1 (Fig. 33) normal hooks, slightly turned upwards, with or without a minute tarsal remnant. Male legs in anterior part of body (Figs 34 & 35) without adhesive pads, but with a pit (p) both on postfemur and tibia. Tarsus of male mid-body leg 1.6–1.8 times longer than tibia, and 3 times longer than apical claw. Penis (Fig. 36): elongated trapezoidal, with moderately long, mostly parallel apical lobes (al) ending with long, tapering, somewhat converging terminal lamellae (tl). Gonopods (Figs 37–47): Compact, in situ entirely concealed inside gonopodal sinus, promere covering tip of mesomere, opisthomere considerably outreaching both pro- and mesomere. Promere (Figs 37–39) somewhat higher than broad, with a convex lateral margin, a straight to slightly concave mesal margin and a rounded apex, strongly bent posteriad; apex and distal part of lateral margin with a tuberculate surface; parabasal internal lobe (il) short, edgy, with 2–4 apical setae; parabasal external lobe (el) elongated, distally tapering, somewhat outreaching internal one. Flagellum (f) thin, except for a very thick basal part, nearly 1.5 times longer than promere. Mesomere (M in Figs 40, 41 & 43–46) rather short and robust, bulging, with a tuberculate apical surface. Opisthomere (Figs 40–47) with a slightly convex posterior margin, without processes; basal spine (bs) crescent-like bent; single, smaller spines present distally behind flagellum channel (fc); intermediate lamella (l) well-developed, weakly to moderately pronounced, reaching ca 2 / 3 of opisthomere height; velum (v) unipartite, thin, pointed, slightly to strongly bent distad; a jagged distal lamella (dl) between velum and solenomere; solenomere (s) short, with a flat, posteriorly oblique apex, with a dense row of seti-form filaments (sf). Vulva (Fig. 48): Somewhat compressed antero-caudally, mostly symmetric, mesal valve slightly broader than lateral one. Opening (o) elongated, cleft-like, nearly reaching bursal base. 4 setae in a vertical row on each valve. Operculum (op) considerably higher than bursa, broadly convex, with 4 vertical rows of 4–5 setae each. Receptaculum seminis consisting of a moderately thick central tube (ct) not forming a distinct central ampulla and of a thin, somewhat folded posterior tube (pt) ending into an egg-shaped posterior ampulla (pa). Remarks. The examined material shows moderate variation in certain morphological characters. Morphologically the most aberrant is the population from the vicinity of Lyubimets which, unlike all remaining specimens examined, possesses 14 instead of 16 labral setae, and a considerably more strongly bent velum of the opisthomere. Also noteworthy are the observed size differences, the specimens from Greece being considerably larger than those from Bulgaria. Colouration seems to vary as well both in intensity and tincture. However, the above-mentioned differences are not sufficient to justify the erection of new subspecies, let alone more than one species. Ćurčić et al. (2003) emphasized the similarity between T. albanicus and T. giganteus. T. rhodopinus sp. n. obviously belongs to the same species-group characterized by an opisthomere with a well-developed, but not conspicuously pronounced intermediate lamella, a slender, unipartite, spine-like velum, a jagged distal lamella between the velum and the solenomere; and a slender penis with converging sides, deeply divided apical lobes and long, parallel or converging terminal lamellae. The group is so far confined to the central and eastern parts of the Balkan Peninsula. Typhloiulus is one of the well-defined genera of Julidae which shows a considerable number of distinctive characters, as already listed in the beginning of the systematic part. However, the grouping of species within Typhloiulus is far from settled. Many, often controversial, subgenera have been introduced in an attempt to resolve the intrageneric systematics. Two major, presumably natural, well defined groups appear from among the 33–36 presently known species. These are the subgenera Typhloiulus sensu stricto and Stygiiulus Verhoeff, 1929. Typhloiulus s. str. was properly characterized by Strasser (1962, 1966). It comprises 15 unquestionable species: T. albanicus, T. bureschi, T. ganglbaueri, T. georgievi, T. giganteus, T. hauseri, T. incurvatus, T. kotelensis, T. longinquus, T. nevoi, T. psilonotus, T. serborum, T. strictus, T. orpheus sp. n. and T. rhodopinus sp. n. They all share a very similar gonopod conformation, and the group is further supported by certain external characters, such as: male leg-pair 1 typically hook-shaped (except for the known males of T. ganglbaueri), the femora of male legs in the anterior part of the body without modifications on their ventral surface, the ozopores located closely behind the suture, and the preanal process straight or bent downwards. The distribution of Typhloiulus s. str. is mostly confined to the Balkan Peninsula, with several species expanding to the Carpathians and the Apennine Peninsula. In having a more elongated pro- and mesomere, the position of T. beroni, (from eastern Albania) in relation to this group needs still to be clarified. The position of T. bosniensis likewise remains unclear: this species lacks an intermediate lamella between the meso- and opisthomere. On the other hand, both latter species agree in all remaining diagnostic characters of Typhloiulus s. str. The intermediate lamella attracts attention as a potentially important phylogenetic character within Typhloiulus and the “Typhloiulini” in a broader sense. Apart from the members of Typhloiulus s. str., the “typhloiuline” genus Lamellotyphlus Tabacaru, 1976 displays a particularly strongly developed lamella which is completely fused with the mesomere. Enghoff (1987) suggested that such a lamella may represent a transitional evolutionary stage towards the true pro-mesomeral forceps seen in the “higher julids”, and placed the genus in the tribe Leucogeorgiini which is characterized by such an intermediate gonopod conformation. If this is true, then Typhloiulus s. str. should be the most plesiotypic/basal group within the genus, and the entire genus Typhloiulus as understood here, possibly subdivided into several monophyletic genera, and possibly together with some other related genera, should be placed near the base of the “higher julids”. However, Makarov et al. (2003) argued that the lamella in Lamellotyphlus seems not to be homologous with that observed in the Leucogeorgiini, suggesting instead that it may be a secondary structure leading to a gradual fusion between the already differentiated meso- and opisthomere; this is most evident in the monotypic genus Banatoiulus Tabacaru, 1985, from Romania. Strasser (1962) listed four species in the subgenus Stygiiulus: T. illyricus, T. ausugi, T. maximus and T. montellensis. T. tobias seems to be another good candidate member of this group, although slightly deviating in its gonopodal features from the remaining species. The five species can be referred to as “the Alpine group”, considering their compact distribution in the southeastern foothills of the Alps. Spelaeoblaniulus Ceuca, 1956, is another distinctive subgenus which comprises one species, T. serbani, that possesses a very unusual opisthomere with a large, finely striated, microspinose solenomere, a vestigal velum and a conspicuous posterior process. T. motasi perhaps belongs to the same lineage given its morphological similarity to T. serbani (Tabacaru & Gava 1992). Their distribution in the Carpathian region provides further support of such an assumption. The remaining subgenera are mostly weakly defined, inappropriately used or even invalidly proposed, and thus can hardly be applied to the current systematics of Typhloiulus. The subgenus Allotyphloiulus Verhoeff, 1905, was erected to encompass the blind Cylindroiulus vulnerarius (Berlese, 1888) alone. For reasons hard to explain, Loksa (1960) found his newly described Typhloiulus polypodus to be most similar to the above cylindroiuline species and assigned it to the same subgenus. Haploprotopus Verhoeff, 1899, includes only T. ganglbaueri. Although Strasser (1962) recognized the subgenus, he did not consider it justified, since the gonopods of T. ganglbaueri are typical of T. s. str., and the only definitive character of the subgenus, the unmodified male leg-pair 1 as described by Verhoeff (1899) from 3 topotypic males, is more likely evidence of “junior males” (see below for explanation) than of an outstanding member of Typhloiulus. Two species were assigned to Inversotyphlus Strasser, 1962, T. lobifer and T. longipes. Both share an anteriorly bent promere, the main character that defines the subgenus, but differ significantly in a number of other features. On the other hand, T. lobifer is similar to T. gellianae, as already noted by Makarov et al. (2006). Mesoporoiulus Verhoeff, 1905, was invalidly proposed without a type species. Later Jeekel (1971) designated Typhloiulus roettgeni (described on the basis of a female, of a dubious status, but tentatively considered as a synonym of Trogloiulus boldorii) as the type species. Attems (1959) listed 5 species: T. albanicus, T. incurvatus, T. bureschi, T. psilonotus and T. kotelensis, in his newly defined subgenus Smeringolophus. However, all of these are recognized as members of Typhloiulus s. str. T. psilonotus is furthermore the only species in the subgenus Xestotyphloiulus Verhoeff, 1899. Not only the taxonomy of Typhloiulus, but also its monophyly is somewhat questionable. As for many other julid genera, the pioneer researchers used very broad defining concepts compared to the present-day systematic standards. This has resulted in many significantly diverse species to have been treated under Typhloiulus, (almost) solely based on the lack of ocelli. Some of them, like e.g. Apfelbeckiella trnowensis (Verhoeff, 1928) and Elbaiulus chrysopygus (Berlese, 1888), are today considered as hardly at all related to the Typhloiulini/ Leptoiulini. A number of other species from the “typhloiuline” group have been transferred to other genera, due to certain morphological differences, these mostly concerning the gonopodal apparatus. However, even after those taxonomic changes, Typhloiulus looks too much like a heterogenous assemblage. Part of the problems lie in the rather unsatisfactory diagnoses of some of the other “typhloiuline” genera. The absence of a flagellum is in fact the only character that separates Serboiulus Strasser, 1962, and Trogloiulus Manfredi, 1931, from Typhloiulus. Being a reductive character that has arisen independently many times in the evolution of Julidae, its phylogenetic weight is low. Moreover, members of Stygiiulus seem to have more in common with Trogloiulus, both in gonopodal and external features, than with their nominal congeners. In the light of this observation, the southern Alpine distribution of both Stygiiulus and Trogloiulus may be the result of common origins, and the loss of the flagellum might have subsequently occurred in some of the descendants. Aberrant species like, e.g., T. longipes, T. motasi and T. serbani, further strengthen the impression that we are dealing with a para-/polyphyletic genus. At present, the usage of the tribe Typhloiulini to encompass all blind julid genera possessing a pro-mesomerital forceps and a more or less well-differentiated velum of the opisthomere seems to lack a solid ground. Mauriès et al. (1997) regarded Typhloiulini as a “highly suspicious taxon”, emphasizing the impossibility to delimit it from the Leptoiulini in terms of gonopod characteristics. The two species of the genus Leptotyphloiulus Verhoeff, 1899, which, apart from lacking ocelli, possess gonopod features of a proper Leptoiulus type, are a good example of that. Indeed, the existence of Leptotyphloiulus alone is evidence of polyphyletic origins of the Typhloiulini. None of the remaining mono- or oligotypic “typhloiuline” genera, viz., Serboiulus, Trogloiulus, Alpityphlus (see above under Typhloiulus seewaldi), Buchneria Verhoeff, 1941, Leptotyphloiulus, Banatoiulus and Lamellotyphlus, looks more similar to Typhloiulus s. str. than the latter looks similar to each of the ocellate genera Leptoiulus Verhoeff, 1894, Xestoiulus Verhoeff, 1893 or Ophyiulus Berlese, 1884. It thus appears logical to assume the presence of two or more lineages within a larger tribe Leptoiulini that may have independently taken parallel evolutionary courses towards troglo-, geo- or petrophilic modes of life, this leading to adaptations like reduction of ocelli, pale body colour, dense and long setation, and long legs and antennae. There is, however, some evidence that at least some of these blind taxa may constitute a monophyletic group beyond the Leptoiulini. The molecular phylogeny of Enghoff et al. (2013) puts T. orpheus sp. n. (cited as Typhloiulus n. sp.) in an isolated clade, away from the genera Julus Linnaeus, 1758, Pacifiiulus Mikhaljova, 1982, Leptoiulus, Xestoiulus and Ophyiulus, that appear on the tree in a robust monophyletic clade. The unusual ‘premature’ acquisition of morphological sexual maturity observed in males of some “typhloiuline” taxa add support to the natural ‘identity’ of the tribe in one or another generic composition. The phenomenon is known as “junior males” (Strasser 1971 b, see also Enghoff et al. 1993) in which the first leg-pair is unmodified or only partly modified, while the gonopods are (almost) fully developed, but are sometimes entirely protruding outside the gonopodal sinus. The term was coined by Strasser (1971 b) as “Junior-Männchen” on the basis of specimens of T. illyricus and Serboiulus deelemanni; we have observed junior males in Serboiulus spelaeophilus and Typhloiulus bureschi, and the same phenomenon probably concerns T. ganglbaueri. The adult males of these species have almost fully concealed gonopods and typical hook-like first leg-pair. In any case, the systematics of the seemingly related and more or less overlapping tribes Typhloiulini, Leptoiulini and Julini present a tough riddle. Unravelling the phylogeny of Typhloiulus, together with the other, aberrant blind genera, is inevitably related to a detailed revision of Leptoiulini, especially of the speciose and notoriously problematical genus Leptoiulus. The presently known somewhat more than 30 species of Typhloiulus are surely far below the real number of existing species. Many more are yet to be discovered, especially from undersampled areas in Serbia, Greece, Montenegro and, especially, Croatia, the latter the country in the Balkan Peninsula the richest in caves. Besides this, data on the distribution of most species is still insufficient, with nearly one-third so far known only from their type localities. Future studies would shrink these gaps in our knowledge and allow for better founded considerations on the systematic position and biogeographic affinities of the genus to be made.Published as part of Vagalinski, Boyan, Stoev, Pavel & Enghoff, Henrik, 2015, A review of the millipede genus Typhloiulus Latzel, 1884 (Diplopoda: Julida: Julidae), with a description of three new species from Bulgaria and Greece, pp. 334-362 in Zootaxa 3999 (3) on pages 352-358, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3999.3.2, http://zenodo.org/record/23401
Heptium Loomis 1937
No full textGenus Heptium Loomis, 1937 Heptium Loomis, 1937, Proc. U.S. Natl. Mus. Wash., 84 (3006): 130. Type species: H. carinellum Loomis, 1937, by original designation. Shelley, 1996, Ent. Scand., 27 (1): 37. Two species, extreme southern California (San Bernardino, Riverside, Imperial counties).Published as part of Stoev, Pavel, Sierwald, Petra & Billey, Amber, 2008, An annotated world catalogue of the millipede order Callipodida (Arthropoda: Diplopoda) *, pp. 1-50 in Zootaxa 1706 on page 36, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18090
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Typhloiulus orpheus Vagalinski, Stoev & Enghoff, 2015, sp. n.
No full textTyphloiulus orpheus sp. n. Figs 20–29 Typhloiulus n. sp.: Enghoff et al. 2013: p. 15, 21 Material. Holotype ♂ broken into 3 pieces, leg-pair 2 & penis dissected (NMNHS); Bulgaria, Western Rhodopi Mts., v. Trigrad, in close proximity to cave Dyavolskoto garlo, limestone scree with sparse European spruce trees, some 15–20 cm below the surface, in gravel with some rootless, 27.V. 2014, BV leg. Paratypes (NMNHS): 1 ♂ broken into 2 pieces; head + first 7 segments lost in the course of examination; gonopods, mid-body & end-body leg slide-mounted, same locality and collector as of the holotype, 15.VIII. 2011; 2 ♀, 1 intact, 1 broken into 2 pieces, same locality and collector as of the holotype, 30.VII. 2013; 4 ♀ (3 intact specimens, 1 broken into 2 parts, with dissected vulvae), 1 juv. (broken into 2 parts), same locality and collecting data as of the holotype. Diagnosis. Resembles its most similar congener— T. kotelensis —especially by the presence of bumps at the caudal margin of the anal valves, a character seen in no other species of Typhloiulus; differs from it by its smaller size, much paler colouration, relatively longer preanal process, and by gonopod details, viz., promere more or less parallel-sided with an almost straight apical margin, rather than gradually narrowing towards a broadly rounded apex; opisthomere straight, rather than bent anteriad in its distal part, with a less strongly developed intermediate lamella and a relatively smaller (compared to the solenomere) velum. Etymology. After Orpheus, a mythical hero, musician, poet, and prophet in ancient Greek religion. The species was found in close proximity to the cave ‘Devil’s throat’ (Dyavolskoto garlo) which, according to a local belief, is the gate to the underworld. According to local believes, Orpheus should have passed through the cave in his travel to retrieve his wife Eurydice from the Kingdom of Hades. Noun in apposition. Description. Holotype with 42 + 3 +T body rings, l = 12 mm, h = 0.85 mm; paratype ♂ with 58 + 1 +T body rings, h = 1.2 mm; paratype females (49–56)+(1–3)+T body rings, l = 14–19 mm, h = 0.95–1.2 mm. Colouration: white to light yellowish, head and first several rings somewhat lighter than remaining body; gut partly visible through a semi-transparent tegument. External structures: 4 supralabral and 18 labral setae. Labrum tridentate. Antennomeres 2, 3, 4 and 5 more or less equally long, ca 1.5 times longer than 6 th; antennomere 5 with a group of long sensilla basiconica (longer than the 4 sensilla on the antennal apex) laterally; similar, but much smaller sensilla present on antennomere 6. Male mandibular stipites not enlarged. Gnathochilarium of normal julid appearance, with 3 apical setae on each stipes, and with 4 setae in a row on each lingual plate; promentum relatively small, ca 0.35 times as long as lingual plates, length to width ratio: 1.66. Collum smooth with 4–5 shallow striae at postero-lateral corner. Body rings not or very slightly vaulted. Prozonae smooth. Metazonae with rather sparse, but well-pronounced striations; 6 striae in a square with sides equal to metazonal length just below ozopore level; a dense whorl of long (equal to or slightly exceeding metazonal length), erect setae at metazonal hind margin. Ozopores placed close (about 1–2 times of their diameter) behind pro-metazonal suture. Telson (Fig. 21) densely setose, dorsal surface evenly covered with very long setae. Preanal process long and slender, pointed, strongly curved downwards, equal to or slightly surpassing longest anal setae. Subanal scale short, flat, tightly fitting under anal valves, bearing several setae. Anal valves densely pilose, with a distinct row of shorter (1 / 3 – 1 / 2 of the lateral) setae along caudal margins; several rounded bumps present near each margin. Male pleurotergum 7 with broad, rounded protrusions, directed ventro-mesad. Male leg-pair 1 short, somewhat converging hooks without tarsal remnants. Male walking legs (Figs 22–24) without adhesive pads or other specialized structures. Tarsus of mid-body leg ca 1.5 times longer than tibia and ca 2 times longer than apical claw. Penis (Fig. 25): elongated, trapezoidal, with short, diverging apical lobes (al) ending with well-developed terminal lamellae (tl). Gonopods (Figs 26–28): Rather compact, in situ entirely concealed inside gonopodal sinus, promere covering tip of mesomere, opisthomere outreaching by far both pro- and mesomere. Promere (Fig. 28, P in Fig. 26) relatively short, rounded, subquadrangular, almost parallel-sided, with a concave posterior surface; apical part bent posteriad, with horizontal rows of small protuberances; parabasal internal lobe (il) short, edgy, with two apical setae; parabasal external lobe (el) oblong, outreaching by far internal one. Flagellum (f) thin, nearly 2 times longer than promere. Mesomere (M in Figs 26 & 27) short, with a posteriorly deeply concave middle part; apical surface densely tuberculate. Opisthomere (Figs 26 & 27) with a mostly straight posterior margin, without processes; basal spine (bs) slightly sigmoid, pointing distad; intermediate lamella (l) moderately pronounced, reaching ca 2 / 3 of opisthomere height; velum (v) unipartite, thin, pointed, slightly bent distad; solenomere (s) subconical, with a blunt apex bearing a row of several minute spine-like filaments (sf) on its posterior side. Vulva (Fig. 29): Considerably compressed meso-laterally, somewhat asymmetric: mesal valve broader and slightly higher than lateral one, operculum with a more steeply oblique lateral margin. Opening (o) narrow and cleft-like, positioned at ca half of bursal height. 5 setae in a vertical row on each valve. Operculum (op) much higher than bursa, with a narrowly rounded apical margin; 4 vertical rows of 4–5 long setae each in distal part of operculum. Receptaculum seminis consisting of a finger-shaped central tube (ct) not forming a distinct central ampulla (ca) and of a thin, somewhat folded posterior tube (pt) ending into an ovoid posterior ampulla (pa). Remarks. T. orpheus sp. n. is probably an endogean species considering its small size and an almost colourless body, coupled with the fact that it has not been found in any of the caves in the area, which are generally well-prospected in a biospeleological aspect. The name “ orpheus ” is the result of a public decision after one month of online voting through the website of the National Museum of Natural History in Sofia (NMNHS). The initiative was on the occasion of the 125 th anniversary of the museum in 2014, and aimed at raising awareness of taxonomy and and making people acquainted with taxonomists’ job.Published as part of Vagalinski, Boyan, Stoev, Pavel & Enghoff, Henrik, 2015, A review of the millipede genus Typhloiulus Latzel, 1884 (Diplopoda: Julida: Julidae), with a description of three new species from Bulgaria and Greece, pp. 334-362 in Zootaxa 3999 (3) on pages 349-352, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3999.3.2, http://zenodo.org/record/23401
Thereuonema microstoma Meinert 1886, New Combination
No full textThereuonema microstoma (Meinert, 1886) New Combination! Scutigera microstoma Meinert, 1886 b: 173. Thereuonema syriaca Verhoeff, 1905 b: 88 –90 New Synonymy! Type locality: a place 70 miles from Amballa and Koolloo, India. Lectotype: male in ZMUC (present designation); Paralectotypes: female in ZMUC; several specimens of different sex and age in MCZ. Material examined: The MNHN houses specimens identified by H.W. Brolemann, H. Ribaut and C. Attems from the following localities: SYRIA: Doummar; Koutaïfé; Ataïbe, E of Damas; AïnFidjé, Djebel Kasioun; ERITREA: Saganeiti (sub Scutigera aethiopica Silvestri); as well as the holotype (adult male) of Thereuonema tropicalis Ribaut, 1907 from Baltchi, Ethiopia. The latter was recognised as a junior synonym of Thereuonema syriaca by Würmli (1975). General distribution: Asia: India (East). Iran. Iraq. Israel. Jordan. Lebanon. Pakistan. Palestine. Saudi Arabia. Syria. Turkey (East Turkey, Kurdistan region). Yemen. Africa: Egypt. Eritrea. Ethiopia. Libya. Sudan. Remarks: Meinert (1886 b) described Scutigera microstoma from two localities – Amballa and Koolloo (=? Kulu) in NW India, both lying close to the border with Pakistan. Recently, Stoev (2002) noted that this species is identical to Thereuonema syriaca Ve rhoeff, 1905, the latter being widespread from the Near East and eastern Africa to Pakistan and NE India (Würmli, 1975; Stoev, 2002). We use this opportunity to elucidate the taxonomic status of microstoma and to show that it is a valid species of Thereuonema, conspecific with Verhoeff’s T. syriaca. The syntypes from the collections of the ZMUC and the MCZ were studied (courtesy to Prof. H. Enghoff and Mrs. Laura Leibensperger) and compared with non type material of syriaca from Turkey, Yemen, Iran and Egypt. In spite of the different coloration in the type material, undoubtedly resulting from long preservation in alcohol, we could not find any further differences in the setal ornamentation, shape of terga, second maxillae and female gonopods. Hence, the following new combination and synonymy: Thereuonema microstoma (Meinert, 1886) New Combination = Thereuonema syriaca Verhoeff, 1905 New Synonym. This taxonomic alteration is in agreement with the article 23.1. of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1999). The name T. syriaca has been cited only in 14 scientific papers published in the period 1905–2003. We cannot predict how long this name will be in use, as there is at least one older candidate to replace it, namely Cermatia rubrilineata Newport, 1844 (not rubrolineata after Newport (1845) and all subsequent authors), a possibility suggested by Haase (1887).Published as part of Stoev, Pavel & Geoffroy, Jean-Jacques, 2004, An annotated catalogue of the scutigeromorph centipedes in the collection of the Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris (France) (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha), pp. 1-12 in Zootaxa 635 on pages 5-6, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15801
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
No full textWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Harpolithobius dollfusi Verhoeff 1901, comb. n.
No full text<i>Harpolithobius dollfusi</i> (Verhoeff, 1901) comb. n. <p>Figs 1–4, 14</p> <p> <i>Lithobius Dollfusi</i> Verhoeff, 1901: 173.</p> <p> <i>Lithobius dolfusi</i> [sic!]: Matic, 1964: 188; 1966: 252.</p> <p> <i>Lithobius dollfusi</i>: Moritz & Fischer, 1979: 318.</p> <p> <i>Harpolithobius intermedius</i> Matic, 1958: 91, Figs 1–3 syn. n.; 1961a: 166; 1961b: 81–84, Figs 20– 22; 1966: 90, Fig. 35a–c.</p> <p> <i>Harpolithobius intermedius transsylvanicus</i> Matic, 1958: 93 syn. n.</p> <p> <i>Harpolithobius spinipes intermedius</i>: Dobroruka, 1960: 200.</p> <p> <i>Harpolithobius</i> cf. <i>intermedius</i>: Deltshev et al., 2000: 535.</p> <p> <i>Harpolithobius</i> cf. <i>intermedius</i>: Stoev, 2002: 55.</p> <p> <i>Harpolithobius intermedius</i>: Ilie, 2003a: 89; 2003b: 132.</p> <p> <i>Harpolithobius</i> cf. <i>intermedius</i>: Ilie et al., 2003: 93.</p> <p>Material examined: female syntype mounted on a slide No. 249, Coll. Verhoeff, labelled “ Rumänien, ZMB No 13 529”; lectotype by present designation. The fate of the other syntypes is unknown, so herein I designate as lectotype the only available and comparatively well­preserved specimen.</p> <p> Verhoeff (1901) described <i>Lithobius dollfusi</i> from Laculeţe and Azuga, Romania. The taxonomic status of the species has never been re­considered, and subsequent researchers never found it. <i>L. dollfusi</i> was even missed in Verhoeff’s (1937) sophisticated key to the species of the genus <i>Lithobius</i>, an argument used by Matic (1964, 1966) to declare it, mistakenly, as a “nomen nudum”! The examined material, though broken into pieces and mounted on a permanent microscope slide, allowed observation of some important characters revealing its identity. Immediately evident is the fact that <i>L. dollfusi</i> belongs to the genus <i>Harpolithobius</i> Verhoeff, 1904, which at the time of the original species description had not yet been established. The genus <i>Harpolithobius</i> is characterized by a number of synapomorphies, e.g. prosternal edge not incised medially, porodonts always thickened; male posterior legs with modifications, etc., and is hitherto known to comprise more than 30 species and subspecies. The genus range includes Asia Minor, the Caucasus, the Balkans, the Carpathians, and the Alps, with one species, <i>H. anodus</i> (Latzel, 1880), reaching the Ligurian Apennines to the west (Zapparoli, 2003). It has never been an object of comprehensive revision, and many taxa, especially from the Balkans and Asia Minor, still await a proper re­description. So far, eight species are known from Romania, four of which occur exclusively within the country boundaries (cf. Matic, 1966). One of these is <i>Harpolithobius intermedius</i> (including its junior synonym <i>H. intermedius transsylvanicus</i>) described from Valea Ord ă ncuŞei (Ord ă ncuŞei Valley), the Apuseni Mts. and Torda (= Turzii) Gorge, Romania (Matic, 1958). It was downgraded to a subspecies of <i>H. spinipes</i> Folkmanova, 1958 by Dobroruka (1960), but Matic (1961a) resurrected its full species rank and added new data on its morphology (Matic, 1961b). According to Matic (1961a) <i>H. spinipes</i> is well distinguished from <i>H. intermedius</i> by the tripartite female gonopodial claw (vs. single), shorter and thicker gonopodial spurs, first leg­pair richer in ventral spines and having unmodified tibiae (vs. single ventral spine and enlarged tibiae), etc.</p> <p> Recently, <i>H. intermedius</i> was recorded also from the Anina Mts., Banat (Ilie, 2003a, Ilie et al., 2003) and the region of CloŞani, Oltenia (Ilie, 2003b). Stoev (in Deltshev et al., 2000) mentioned it for the Central Stara Planina Mts., Bulgaria (record repeated in Stoev, 2002) without confidence about its identification. <i>H. intermedius</i> was distinguished from the other congeners by a number of characters, the most striking being the presence of a single female gonopodial claw. Though apparent, Matic failed to mention its close resemblance to <i>L. dollfusi</i>. A direct comparison between the two species, which is based on both the literature (cf. Verhoeff, 1901; Matic, 1958, 1961a, b, 1966) and original data from the lectotype, is given below in Table 1. Data deriving from the personal examination of Victoria Ilie (in litt.) of both the types of <i>H. intermedius</i> in the Zoological Museum, Cluj and his own material were also taken into account. The table shows that the main taxonomic characters of the two species overlap considerably, which is a reason to propose the following new synonymy and combination: <i>Harpolithobius dollfusi</i> (Verhoeff, 1901) comb. n. = <i>H. intermedius</i> Matic, 1958 syn. n.</p> <p>General distribution. Romania: Apuseni Mts., Torda Gorge, Anina Mts., CloŞani; Bulgaria?: Central Stara Planina Mts.</p> <p> a There are not prosternal teeth in the examined syntype although in the original description Verhoeff (1901) reported 2+2 teeth as characterizing the species. It could be due to an individual variation, which is known also in other congeners, namely <i>H. anodus</i> (Latzel, 1882) (cf. Eason, 1982).</p>Published as part of <i>Stoev, Pavel, 2005, On the identity of some poorly known lithobiid centipedes described by Karl Verhoeff (Chilopoda: Lithobiomorpha), pp. 1-12 in Zootaxa 796</i> on pages 2-4, DOI: <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/170548">10.5281/zenodo.170548</a>
- …
