Lithobius corrigendus Dobroruka, 1988

Tuf, Ivan Hadrián, Wytwer, Jolanta & Tajovský, Karel, 2008, On the identity of the species described in the genus Lithobius Leach, 1814 by L. J. Dobroruka from the former Czechoslovakia (Czech and Slovak Republics) (Chilopoda: Lithobiomorpha), Zootaxa 1788, pp. 37-46 : 39

Lithobius corrigendus Dobroruka, 1988

Lithobius corrgendus (sic!) – Dobroruka 1988: 6 – nomen novum for Lithobius parvus Folkmanová, 1946 ; Lithobius corrigendus – Dobroruka 1998: 134 – correction of name

Type locality. Křivoklát region, valleys of Zbiroh’s Stream and of Berounka River, Bohemia, Czech Republic.

Type specimens. Folkmanová (1946) mentioned 3 ɗ found in the valley of the Zbiroh Stream and 2 ɗ and 1 Ψ found in the valley of the Berounka River. This original material of Lithobius parvus Folkmanová, 1946 is lost, most probably destroyed during World War II.

Material examined. 1 ɗ, 12.8.1997, Devĕt Mlýnû, Podyjí National Park (NP), Moravia, Czech Republic, leg. & det. L.J. Dobroruka, found in the SMMZ collection. This specimen designated here by Dobroruka, currently deposited in the NMP collection (a neotype).

Remarks. This species was repeatedly recorded by Dobroruka from several Czech localities ( Dobroruka 1956, 1988, 1998; Verner 1959), as well as from the BiałowieŻa National Park, Poland ( Dobroruka 1988), also referred to on two further occasions as L. parvus ( Folkmanová 1954, Folkmanová et al. 1955).

The species Lithobius parvus was described by Folkmanová (1946) and distinguished from Lithobius lucifugus L. Koch, 1862 based on the smaller body size (6–7 mm), the lower number of ocelli (6–8), the shorter antennae (31–36 articles), the absence of VT and DF spines on the enlarged last legs, and the darker colour of the head. Later, she considered this taxon as possibly a subspecies of L. lucifugus due to the discovery of intermediate forms ( Folkmanová 1954; Folkmanová et al. 1955). So Dobroruka (1956) referred to it as the subspecies L. lucifugus parvus while Folkmanová (1959) repeated this in her key. Borek (1967), however, reevaluated the variability of L. lucifugus and recognized L. parvus as a “good” species with a less strongly developed chaetotaxy of the male and female gonopods. Borek used his own material for his study and he revealed a narrower range of variation than found by Folkmanová. In addition, Borek failed to use all of Folkmanová’s papers related to the variability of this species. Later, also Dobroruka (1988, 1998) recognized this taxon as a bona fide species. Since the name L. parvus Folkmanová, 1946 had been preoccupied by L. parvus Verhoeff, 1901 , it was duly replaced by corrigendus Dobroruka, 1988 .

The re-examined specimen identified by Dobroruka is an immature male. The spinulation of its last legs is D: 1,0,3,0,0 and V: 0,1,3,3,0 and the antennae have 39 and 36 articles. The absence of a 15 DF spine is also common in L. lucifugus ( Latzel 1880) , so there is no reason to consider it as a species different from L. lucifugus .

Taxonomic note. Lithobius corrigendus Dobroruka, 1988 (= Lithobius parvus Folkmanová, 1946 ) is just another of the numerous junior subjective synonyms of Lithobus lucifugus L. Koch, 1862 , syn. n.