Geoplana multipunctata Fuhrmann, 1914

Luna, Manuel De & Boll, Piter Kehoma, 2023, An annotated checklist of terrestrial flatworms (Platyhelminthes: Tricladida: Geoplanidae) from Mexico, with new records of invasive species from a citizen science platform and a new nomen dubium, Zootaxa 5297 (4), pp. 518-532 : 521-522

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5297.4.3

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:92A93902-69B9-4B4E-8FBA-79714AF43FFB

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8009117

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03ACB529-FFA1-FFC1-FF58-4FE7FA99FD46

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Geoplana multipunctata Fuhrmann, 1914
status

 

Geoplana multipunctata Fuhrmann, 1914

Figs. 5 View FIGURES 5–6 –7.

Hyman (1938: 25–25; figs. 1–2; MEXICO: Yucatan).

Ogren & Kawakatsu (1990: 127; catalog).

Ogren et al. (1997: 76, 93; catalog).

External diagnosis ( Hyman 1938). Salty black dorsally. Along each side of the body, there are numerous light spots (haloes) that surround some of the eyes. Grayish brown below on the creeping sole, with a narrow black line bordering the sole. Body convex above, tapering towards each end, more so on the anterior end.

The inconspicuous head differentiates it from both species of Bipalium . The large number of eyes (around 1000) differs Geoplana multipunctata from Diporodemus yucatani , Rhynchodemus sylvaticus and both species of Dolichoplana , which only have two. This species does not show any stripes, unlike all the recorded Caenoplanini .

Remarks. Hyman (1938) highlights the great differences between the type locality which is in the Andes region near Bogota, Colombia, at an altitude of 2660m a.s.l. ( Fuhrmann 1914); whereas the locality cited by Hyman (1938) is almost at sea level, far north in the Mexican Yucatan Peninsula. This problem is hard to solve, it would require locating and re-examining both Fuhrmann’s Colombian type material and Hyman’s Mexican material, as well as collecting fresh material from both localities to obtain mature specimens for histological and molecular analyses. While we believe that Fuhrmann’s and Hyman’s specimens are not conspecific, at present we do not have the evidence needed to state otherwise, therefore, we reluctantly add this species to the current checklist.

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF