Stenotaenia Koch, 1847: a hitherto unrecognized lineage of western Palaearctic centipedes with unusual diversity in body size and segment number (Chilopoda: Geophilidae)

Abstract

Based on morphological evidence, we newly define the genus Stenotaenia Koch, 1847 (= Scnipaeus Bergsøe & Meinert, 1866; = Simophilus Silvestri, 1896; = Onychopodogaster Verhoeff, 1902; = Insigniporus Attems, 1903; = Notadenophilus Verhoeff, 1928; = Bithyniphilus Verhoeff, 1941; = Schizopleres Folkmanova, 1956; = Euronesogeophilus Matic, 1972; all syn. nov.) as including the following 15 species: Stenotaenia linearis (Koch, 1835) (= Geophilus simplex Gervais, 1835; = Geophilus brevicornis Koch, 1837; = Scnipaeus foveolatus Bergsøe & Meinert, 1866; = Himantarium caldarium Meinert, 1886 syn. nov.; = Geophilus (Geophilus) linearis var. polyporus Verhoeff, 1896 syn. nov.; = Geophilus ormanyensis Attems, 1903 syn. nov., after lectotype designation; = Insigniporus acuneli Cȃ puşe, 1968 syn. nov.) from central and northern Europe; Stenotaenia frenum (Meinert, 1870) from northern Africa; Stenotaenia romana (Silvestri, 1895) (= Geophilus silvestrii Verhoeff, 1928 syn. nov.) and Stenotaenia sorrentina (Attems, 1903) (= Geophilus forficularius Fanzago, 1881 syn. nov.; = Geophilus linearis abbreviatus Verhoeff, 1925 syn. nov.) from the Italian peninsula and Sardinia; Stenotaenia antecribellata (Verhoeff, 1898) (= Simophilus albanensis Attems, 1929 syn. nov.), Stenotaenia cribelliger (Verhoeff, 1898), Stenotaenia palpiger (Attems, 1903), Stenotaenia rhodopensis (Kaczmarek, 1970), and Stenotaenia sturanyi (Attems, 1903) from the Balkan peninsula; Stenotaenia naxia (Verhoeff, 1901) (= Geophilus graecus Verhoeff, 1902) from the Aegean islands; Stenotaenia asiaeminoris (Verhoeff, 1898) and Stenotaenia bosporana (Verhoeff, 1941) from Anatolia; Stenotaenia giljarovi (Folkmanova, 1956) from western Caucasus; Stenotaenia fimbriata (Verhoeff, 1934) and Stenotaenia palaestina (Verhoeff, 1925) from Palestine; with the only exception of S. linearis, all of these binomens are comb. nov. In Stenotaenia, a strongly conserved overall morphology is matched by an unusual interspecific variation in both the body size of fully grown specimens (from 1.7 cm in S. romana to 7.7 cm in S. sturanyi) and the number of leg-bearing segments (from 43 in male S. romana to 115 in female S. sturanyi). The number of segments correlates with maximum body size.

A Moesian geophilomorph (Myriapoda: Chilopoda) species from the Carpathians: Review and redescription of Stenotaenia rhodopensis (Kaczmarek, 1970)

“…Due to their minor size, their collection and identification is more difficult compared with other centipedes and because of this our knowledge is relatively scarce on these species. This statement is supported by two facts: (i) the high number of nomenclatural acts referring to these taxa (e.g., Christian 1996; Bonato & Minelli 2008;Dányi 2007) indicates the taxonomical position of these species being often unclear; (ii) numerous occurrences reported just recently, lying at significant distances from the previously known area of a certain species show that the real distributions of these taxa are still far from being well investigated (e.g., Dányi 2006Dányi , 2007Lindner & Spelda 2008;Spelda et al 2005).…”

“…In one case Dȃrȃbanţu (1971) reported one occurrence of 4 males and 3 females as "Clinopodes abbreviatus (Verhoeff, 1925)" from the Romanian Carpathians ("Feleac, Ghiriş, Şapca verde"), subsequently repeated by Matic's (1972) monograph. This data were listed as Stenotaenia sorrentina Attems, 1903 by Bonato & Minelli (2008), but the given description and illustration report one separated coxal pore situated posteriorly on the coxopleura, a feature not matching with S. sorrentina (having one posterior pouch with several pores). As Dȃrȃbanţu (1971) mentioned lappets on the first maxilla, we can conclude that the specimens fit completely with S. rhodopensis.…”

“…The presence of the species in the Vitosha Mts is confirmed here, the records from the other sites, however, were questioned by Bonato & Minelli (2008: 272) because they "were not accompanied by evidence supporting the species identity in respect to other similar species". Bonato & Minelli (2008) indicated its presence in the Carpathian Mountains erroneously (L. Bonato in litt.). In deed, all the occurrences summarised by them are from the Balkan Mts.…”

“…Morphology can be highly variable in geophilomorph species (Misioch 1978), thus in spite of the recently revised, yet provisional circumscriptions of the Stenotaenia species given by Bonato & Minelli (2008) we still can not claim to have a complete picture of the traits of these species. Also the original description and subsequent redescriptions (partly under different species' names) of S. rhodopensis are far from being complete.…”

“…The genus Stenotaenia Koch, 1847 was revalidated and redefined just recently by Bonato & Minelli (2008). This genus has an unusual diversity in body size containing some minute species, one of them being Stenotaenia rhodopensis (Kaczmarek, 1970), recorded now first time from Slovakia and Romania.…”