Mimopidae Lewis, 2006

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, Zootaxa 4825 (1), pp. 1-64 : 23

Family Mimopidae Lewis, 2006

Diagnosis. Single ocellus on each side of cephalic plate ( Fig. 1 , fig. 1 of Lewis 2006). Pretarsus of maxillae 2 “pointed and without accessory spurs [= spines]. Not hooked as in Cryptops ” (Lewis 2006: 1232). Anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite with two small/short, rounded projections instead of tooth-plates ( Fig. 2 , fig. 15 in Lewis 2006). Forcipular trochantero-prefemur with rudimentary simple process, rounded apically. Sternites with complete paramedian sutures (“sulci” in Lewis 2006: 1236) ( Fig. 3 ). 21 LBS. Spiracles on macrosegments except for LBS 7, the spiracles of LBS 3 oval (see also fig. 13 in Lewis 2006; fig. 10 in Jiang et al. 2020), others more rounded (see Remarks below); spiracular atrium not deep, filled with humps. Ultimate LBS considerably shorter than the penultimate one, covered by numerous small spines on tergite, coxopleuron and margins of sternite ( Figs 4, 5 ). Coxopleuron with long, slender process covered by minor spines, but without well-developed apical one(s) ( Figs 4, 5 ). Tarsus of legs bipartite ( Fig. 3 ); legs 1–18 with two tibial spurs, leg 19 with one, leg 20 with none; legs 1–20 with two tarsal spurs. Ultimate legs of “common” shape ( Fig. 6 ), prefemur lacking corner spine, both prefemur and femur covered by numerous small spines, pretarsus not enlarged. Data on internal structure of gizzard absent.

Number of subtaxa. 1 genus.

Sexual dimorphism. Males have a pair of conical gonopods that bear several long setae ( Jiang et al. 2020).

Range. North China (Shaanxi, Henan) .

Remarks. Treated as a family in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 395), Vahtera et al. (2012a: 6), Jiang et al. (2020). The first available molecular data for M. orientalis , recently rediscovered after more than a century, validate its classification as a distinct family, as it is placed as sister group to a clade composed of the three blind families ( Plutoniumidae , Scolopocrytopidae and Cryptopidae ) ( Jiang et al. 2020).

Lewis (2006: 1235) wrote about Mimops orientalis Kraepelin, 1903 : “The spiracle cup filled with humps ( Figure 13 ), resembling those of the Otostigminae . The spiracles require further investigation”; the re-studied holotype showed otostigmine-like spiracles without any flap. Lewis described the ultimate legs (p. 1235) as “Pretarsal accessory spurs [= spines] are absent” but his figure 10 definitely shows at least one accessory spine normally developed; observation by the second author confirmed absence of these spines in the holotype, as is likewise the case in newly collected specimens ( Jiang et al. 2020). A single ocellus is visible in the holotype ( Fig. 1 ) and can likewise be detected in the same position within a depigmented area in a fig. 23 of Jiang et al. (2020) who mistakenly wrote (p. 79) “A pale area instead of lateral ocelli at the base of each antenna”.

No adequate literature data are available on the structure of the labrum and the condition of the holotype does not permit seeing the details of either the clypeus or the pretarsus of maxillae 2 without dissecting the specimen.

(!) Mimops Kraepelin, 1903

Figs 1–6

Type species. Mimops orientalis Kraepelin, 1903 (by monotypy).

Diagnosis. As for family.

Number of species. 1.

Remarks. Treated as a genus in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 395). The most recent morphological account on Mimops is Jiang et al. (2020).

Figures

FIGURES 1–6. Mimops orientalis Kraepelin, 1903; Holotype, ZMUH 1 head + LBS 1 dorso-laterally 2 forcipular segment ventrally 3 LBS 16–21 ventrally 4 LBS 21 dorso-laterally 5 LBS 21 ventro-laterally 6 ultimate legs; (20)—leg 20, (am)—anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite, (cp)—coxopleural process, (ll)—left ultimate leg, (o)—single ocellus, (ps)—sternal paramedian sutures, (pt)—rudimentary process of forcipular trochantero-prefemur, (rl)—right ultimate leg, (ss)—numerous small spines, (tas)—tarsal spur, (tis)—tibial spur, (ust)—ultimate sternite, (ut)—ultimate tergite.

FIGURES 7–13. Scolopocryptops melanostoma Newport, 1845; Ad. Rc 7172 7 LBS 23 and ultimate legs, laterally; Ad. Rc 7503 8 anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite + maxillae 2, ventrally; Scolopocryptops ferrugineus (L., 1767); Peru specimen from Markus Koch collection 9 forcipular segment ventrally; Scolopocryptops miersii Newport, 1845; BMNH, BM 1889.4.13.3–5 10 apical part of maxilla 2 laterally; Kethops utahensis (Chamberlin, 1909) 11 figures 4–6 of Chamberlin (1912); Thalkethops grallatrix Crabill, 1960 12 figure 15 of Crabill (1960); Kethops utahensis (Chamberlin, 1909); USNM Mill Creek (Utah) specimen 13 apical part of maxilla 2 ventro-laterally; (20)—leg 20, (am)—anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite, (cp)—coxopleural process, (cst)—forcipular coxosternite, (dms)—dorso-medial spinous process of ultimate prefemur, (p2)— pretarsus of maxilla 2, (pa)—short projection of anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite, (pf)—prefemur, (pla)—pretarsal lamellae, (pt)—process of forcipular trochantero-prefemur, (rl)—right[?] ultimate leg, (S)—? sternite, (st)—saw teeth-like small spinous processes, (t1)—ultimate tarsus 1, (t2)—ultimate tarsus 2, (ti)— ultimate tibia, (us)—ultimate LBS, (ust)—ultimate sternite, (vsp)—ventral spinous process of ultimate prefemur.