Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
ZENODOarrow_drop_down
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2020
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2020
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2020
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2020
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 5 versions
addClaim

Scolopendridae Leach 1814

Authors: Schileyko, Arkady A.; Vahtera, Varpu; Edgecombe, Gregory D.;
Abstract

Family Scolopendridae Leach, 1814 Diagnosis. Four ocelli (Fig. 52) form a “rhomboid cluster” (the only blind exceptions—the genus Tonkinodentus and a clade of Western Australian Cormocephalus species; see below). Labrum with a single median tooth (fig. 7 of Waldock & Edgecombe 2012). Pretarsus of maxillae 2 not pectinate, robust and straight (Figs 59, 74, 80), accompanied by 2 (more rarely by 0 or 1) accessory spine(s). Anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite (Figs 40, 42, 50, 86) with tooth-plates (except for the monotypic genus Edentistoma; Fig. 114). Forcipular trochantero-prefemur practically always with well-developed process, the latter may be simple or furnished by 1–3 lateral tubercles. Sternites in most genera with longitudinal paramedian sutures. 21 LBS (21, 23, 39, 43 in Scolopendropsis only); spiracles on macrosegments, LBS 7 with or without spiracles. Ultimate LBS (Fig. 38) generally considerably shorter than the penultimate one (except for Scolopendropsis, Fig. 45). Tarsus of locomotory legs with two articles; legs with or without 1 or 2 tibial spurs and 1 tarsal spur. Coxopleuron usually with process (Fig. 49). Ultimate legs in most genera and species of “common” shape, rarely “pincer-shaped” or “leaf-shaped” (sensu Schileyko 2009). Prefemur of the ultimate legs without spinous processes but generally with varying number (2–20) of strongly chitinized spines, that are usually small (Figs 44, 49, 66, 70, 83) but rarely much enlarged, for example in Kanparka (= Scolopendra) (Fig. 56) or a few forms of Ethmostigmus Pocock, 1898 (Fig. 105, figs 36, 39 in Schileyko & Stoev 2016). Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 395) also wrote: “Labral bristle field completely covering distal sclerotisation of epipharynx (except Notiasemus; [no data on Tonkinodentus]); elongate, figure eight shaped groups of two smooth depressions surrounding each sensillum on clypeal part or epipharynx. Tufts of bristles on lateral flaps of hypopharynx form a continuous field with identical bristles medially… Poison calyx extending at least as far as proximal part of forcipular trochantero-prefemur… Spermatophore with a ventral invagination.” Number of subtaxa. 2 subfamilies, 19 genera (“More than 400 species in 21 genera” sensu Edgecombe & Bonato 2011: 397). Sexual dimorphism. Present rarely. Range. All tropical, subtropical and warm temperate regions. Remarks. Treated as a family in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 395), Kronmüller (2012: 19), Edgecombe et al. (2012: 770), Vahtera et al. (2012a: 4, 2012b: 235, 2013: 578), Schileyko (2014: 174), Schileyko & Stoev (2016: 252), Schileyko (2018: 69), Schileyko & Solovyeva (2019: 138).

Published as part of Schileyko, Arkady A., Vahtera, Varpu & Edgecombe, Gregory D., 2020, An overview of the extant genera and subgenera of the order Scolopendromorpha (Chilopoda): a new identification key and updated diagnoses, pp. 1-64 in Zootaxa 4825 (1) on page 26, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4825.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/4402145

Keywords

Arthropoda, Animalia, Biodiversity, Chilopoda, Scolopendridae, Scolopendromorpha, Taxonomy

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 4
  • 4
    views
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
4
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!