Lamyctes africana: Attems (1939: 307)

Enghoff, Henrik, Akkari, Nesrine & Pedersen, Jan, 2013, Aliquid novi ex Africa? Lamyctes africanus (Porath, 1871) found in Europe (Chilopoda: Lithobiomorpha: Henicopidae), Journal of Natural History 47 (31 - 32), pp. 2071-2094 : 2082-2088

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00222933.2012.763062
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B9879D-1602-A07F-0883-3D40506A2290
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Lamyctes africana: Attems (1939: 307)
status

Treatment

Material studied

One juvenile, Kenya (Kinangop), NMW 4782.

Remarks

It is not possible to see if this juvenile belongs to the same species as the Danish one.

Molecular analysis of Danish L. africanus

The molecular data ( Figure 6 View Figure 6 ) indicate a sister-group relationship of the Danish L. africanus with L. emarginatus for both genes 16S and COI with maximum support (pp = 1).

This result was most unexpected and led us to re-examine available vouchers for L. africanus and L. emarginatus sequences in GenBank:

Lamyctes africanus, DNA 100287, SOUTH AFRICA: Newlands Forest, Cape Town (Western Cape Prov.), 1 November 1999, L. Prendini leg., G.D. Edgecombe det. (MCZ). 2 ♂♂ lacking posterior legs, 2 specimens of unknown sex (posterior part missing). – These specimens are part of the series which also contains the specimen from which Edgecombe et al. (2002) obtained DNA and of which they presented scanning electron micrographic images of the antenna base (their fig. 1D), maxillipedes (fig. 2A), and male genitalia (fig. 8I). – One of the males has complete antennae, and one of the unsexed specimens has one complete antenna. All three complete antennae have 26 antennomeres. All four specimens have the “raccoon mask” cephalic colour pattern. The forcipular coxosternal profile is identical to that of the Danish L. africanus ( Figure 2A,B View Figure 2 ). With reservation for characters which could not be observed, it is not possible to distinguish these specimens morphologically from what we call L. africanus . The number of antennomeres is slightly lower than seen in Danish specimens, but agrees with that seen in specimens from Île St Paul.

Lamyctes emarginatus, AM KS 57960, AUSTRALIA, Australian Museum Garden, Sydney, NSW, 27 August 1988, G. Edgecombe leg. (AM). One fragment of a specimen consisting of head, forcipular segment and the first four trunk segments. – It is therefore neither possible to check whether a distal spinose projection of the tibia is present on the 12th legs, nor to measure the dimensions of the last legs. One antenna seems to be intact and has 24 articles, which supports the identification to L. emarginatus . On the other hand the head has conspicuous black markings (“raccoon mask”), like the Danish specimens of L. africanus , a character not recorded in L. emarginatus . The forcipular coxosternite lacks the tooth-like porodont characteristic of Danish L. emarginatus ( Figure 2D View Figure 2 ) and rather looks like the Danish L. africanus ( Figures 2A,B View Figure 2 ) and, confusingly, like specimens of L. emarginatus from New Zealand (cf. Archey, 1917: fig. 6, 1937, plate 18: fig. 6).

A clear interpretation of the molecular results is therefore not possible. Sequences from additional, well-vouchered samples of L. africanus and L. emarginatus , as well as a clarification of whether European specimens referred to L. emarginatus are actually this species, will be needed to clarify relationships between these and other Lamyctes species.

Identification of European species of Lamyctes

Lamyctes coeculus is easily recognized by absence of eyes (but one should also look for Lamyctes hellyeri Edgecombe and Giribet, 2003 , the only other known blind Lamyctes , recently described from Tasmania where it is obviously synanthropic – it might well turn up in Europe as well).

The differential characters of the eyed European Lamyctes species (except the dubious Lamyctes inexpectatus ) are summarized in Table 4.

Key to European species of Lamyctes View in CoL (except L. inexpectatus )

Quantitative characters refer to adults.

1. No eyes; body length 4–6 mm .................................. L. coeculus –One eye on each side of the head, body length 5–11 mm ................. 2

2. A distal spinose projection of tibia of the 12th legs ( Figure 3C View Figure 3 ); 15th legs very slender ( Figure 3E View Figure 3 ), tibia, tarsus 1 and tarsus 2: 5.0 ×, 6.6–8.2 × and 8.9–9.7 × longer than their diameter; 28–29 antennal articles (rarely less) ( Figure 2E View Figure 2 ); body length 7–10 mm ......................................... L. africanus View in CoL –No distal spinose tibial projection on tibia of 12th legs ( Figure 3D View Figure 3 )....... 3

3. 15th legs very slender, tibia, tarsus 1 and tarsus 2: 5.8 ×, 7.9 × and 7.6 × longer than their diameter, 26 antennal articles, body length 5–6.5 mm ...................................................................... L. albipes View in CoL –15th legs stouter ( Figure 3F View Figure 3 ), tibia, tarsus 1 and tarsus 2: 3.2−3.5 ×, 4.2−4.4 × and 3.2−3.7 × longer than their diameter, usually 25 antennal articles, body length 6.5–11 mm ............................ L. emarginatus View in CoL

Records of Lamyctes africanus View in CoL outside Europe

Whereas Lamyctes africanus has not hitherto been reported from outdoor sites in Europe, it has been recorded from several widely scattered places elsewhere. Table 5 shows all records of the species known to us, with references and comments. It is clear from the comments that great confusion exists concerning variability and delimitation of L. africanus . Whereas it is not our intention to provide a full revision of the species it is obvious that the specimens referred to in the literature as L. africanus in fact belong to several species. We recognize the following records as truly representing L. africanus :

South Africa ( Porath, 1871) – original description

South-west Australia ( Attems 1911) – based on comparison of one of Attems’s specimens with our Danish samples

Île St Paul ( Attems, 1940) – based on comparison of Attems’s specimens with our Danish samples

Hawaii ( Zapparoli and Shelley, 2000) – based on comparison of description with Danish specimens

Denmark (present study) – based on comparison with original description

Attems, 1953 Rwanda −? see also www.africamuseum.be / collections / browsecollections / naturalsciences / biology / myriapoda /

Salt, 1954 Kenya (Kilimanjaro) −? R.V. Chamberlin det.

Lawrence, 1955 South Africa −?

Lawrence, 1960 Madagascar A few descriptive notes 22-27

Demange, 1963 Ivory Coast (Mt Nimba) Just a note on coxosternal? Demange (1963) suspected, due to the denticles isolated find on the summit of Mt Nimba, that a different species might be at hand, but found no morphological evidence in support of this idea

Demange, 1968 Gabon −?

Dobroruka, 1968 Congo see also www.africamuseum.be / collections / browsecollections / naturalsciences / biology / myriapoda /,

Zapparoli and Shelley, 2000 Hawaii A brief but quite detailed 24-29, Fits the Danish specimens

description usually

Edgecombe et al., 2002 South Africa −? vouchers for molecular analyses

Nishida and Beardsley, 2002 Midway Atoll −?

Bonato et al., 2006 Senegal original record?

“Material studied” in comments means that we have seen specimens pertaining to the specific record.

Quite possibly, some of the other records in the literature are correct, including part of those given by Attems (1928), but for the time being, this must be regarded as uncertain.