Strigamia pusilla ( Seliwanoff, 1884 ), Seliwanoff, 1884

Bonato, Lucio, Dányi, László, Socci, Antonio Augusto & Minelli, Alessandro, 2012, Species diversity of Strigamia Gray, 1843 (Chilopoda: Linotaeniidae): a preliminary synthesis, Zootaxa 3593, pp. 1-39: 18

publication ID 10.5281/zenodo.214898

publication LSID

persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Strigamia pusilla ( Seliwanoff, 1884 )


Strigamia pusilla ( Seliwanoff, 1884)  

Synonyms: Scolioplanes perkeo Verhoeff, 1935   ; Scolioplanes pseudopusillus Loksa, 1962   .

References for morphology: Seliwanoff 1884; Verhoeff 1935 (sub Scolioplanes perkeo   ); Loksa 1962 (sub Scolioplanes pseudopusillus   ); Kaczmarek 1981 (sub Strigamia perkeo   ); Zalesskaja et al. 1982; Dányi 2006.

Taxonomic notes. It was described originally as a species of Scolioplanes   by Seliwanoff (1884), but the name was introduced previously by Seliwanoff (1881) as a “nomen nudum” because it was not accompanied by a description. Other specimens were identified later. It was first assigned to Strigamia   by Dobroruka (1960) and its validity was never questioned.

Scolioplanes perkeo   was described by Verhoeff (1935). After examination of representative specimens, Dobroruka (1955) did not find any morphological difference with respect to S. pusilla   and therefore synonymized it under the latter, acknowledging that it could be maintained at most as a subspecies. Indeed, it was repeatedly cited as a distinct subspecies S. pusilla perkeo   by most subsequent authors (e.g., Kaczmarek 1981). However, as already done by Pereira (2009), we confirm here S. perkeo   as a synonym of S. pusillus   because no evidence exists for differences in morphology. Moreover, the male holotype of S. perkeo   and the two syntypes of S. pusillus   were described as differing only in the number of legs (33 pairs in the male S. perkeo   , 35 in the male S. pusillus   and 37 in the female S. pusillus   ) and the number of coxal pores (lower in S. perkeo   , which is however also smaller than the syntypes of S. pusillus   ). Both putative differences are very slight and within the expected interindividual variation. It is worth noting that Verhoeff (1935) introduced S. perkeo   without mentioning its distinction with respect to S. pusilla   .

Scolioplanes pseudopusillus   was described by Loksa (1962), and no other specimens have been recorded since. The species was cited rarely and eventually synonymized under S. pusillus   by Zalesskaja et al. (1982). We agree with the synonymy because Loksa (1962) acknowledged explicitly that S. pseudopusillus   could be distinguished from S. pusillus   only for the relatively higher number of ventral pores, however the number of the latter is well known to increase with individual growth in Strigamia ( Horneland & Meidell 2009)   and is variable between specimens.

Distribution: from Sudetes, Carpathians and Caucasus, to central Siberia and Mongolia.














Strigamia pusilla ( Seliwanoff, 1884 )

Bonato, Lucio, Dányi, László, Socci, Antonio Augusto & Minelli, Alessandro 2012

Strigamia (

Horneland & Meidell 2009