Lithobius lapadensis Verhoeff, 1900

Stoev, Pavel, 2005, On the identity of some poorly known lithobiid centipedes described by Karl Verhoeff (Chilopoda: Lithobiomorpha), Zootaxa 796, pp. 1-12 : 5-7

Lithobius lapadensis Verhoeff, 1900

Figs 5–6 , 15

Lithobius (Oligobothrus) lapadensis Verhoeff, 1900: 170 . Alokobius lapadensis : Attems, 1929: 288, 302.

Lithobius lapadensis Verhoeff, 1937: 207 .

Lithobius lapadensis: Dobroruka, 1956: 271 –272 , figs 1–3; 1959: 104, fig. 1; 1977: 246. Lithobius (Alokobius) lapadensis: Attems, 1959: 295 . Lithobius lapadensis: Moritz & Fischer, 1979: 321 .

Lithobius lapadensis: Kos, 1992: 356 ; 1996: 148.

Lithobius lapadensis: Stoev, 1997: 100 .

Lithobius lapadensis: Tajovský, 2001: 43 .

Material examined: male syntype mounted on a slide No. 270, Coll. Verhoeff, labelled “Lapad, ZMB No. 13 537”; lectotype by present designation. The fate of the other syntypes is unknown, so herein I designate as lectotype the only available and comparatively well­preserved specimen.

Verhoeff (1900) described Lithobius lapadensis from the Lapad Peninsula near Dubrovnik (Ragusa), Croatia. His very short description was not supplemented with illustrations. About sixty years later, Dobroruka (1956, 1959) reported it from the steppes of the Mohelno Natural Park in the Czech Republic, and later added another record from Brno ( Dobroruka, 1977). The original and Dobroruka’s finds were repeated in some general papers, e.g. Attems (1929, 1959), Verhoeff (1937), Moritz & Fischer (1979), Kos (1992, 1996), Stoev (1997) and Tajovský (2001). The type has not been studied by current taxonomists. Re­examination of the lectotype revealed that L. lapadensis possesses a row of macrosetae at the posterior margin of 14th tergite, a character found rarely in the Lithobiidae . In addition, the species has a bipartite female gonopodial claw and characteristic modifications on the hind legs (cf. Verhoeff, 1900; Dobroruka, 1956, 1959). All these characters clearly distinguish it from congeners. The head and maxillipedes of the lectotype are here illustrated for the first time ( Figs 5–8 ).

A morphologically similar species to L. lapadensis , Lithobius (Dacolithobius) domogledicus , was described as a new species and subgenus from B ă ile Herculane, south Romania ( Matic, 1961c). Recently it was found also in the cave of PeŞtera de la Ponorul PeciniŞc ă i located in region of the type locality ( Boitan & Negrea, 2001). The new subgenus was based on characters of uncertain importance, like the posterior edge of 14 th tergite emarginate, densely covered with a row of macrosetae; and the 14th tergite entirely covering the 15th, and reaching the midlength of the 16th tergite. Andersson (1981) had already stated that “The structures on the 14th and adjacent tergites do not seem reliable to use for subgeneric differentiation as was done by Matic”. The species status has never been reconsidered, thus its identity remained uncertain.

Table 2 shows a direct comparison between the main taxonomic characters of L. lapadensis and L. domogledicus based on both the literature (cf. Verhoeff, 1900; Matic, 1961c, 1962, 1966; Dobroruka, 1956, 1959) and re­examination of the type of L. lapadensis . As one can see they differ mainly in the shape of female gonopodial claw (bipartite vs. tripartite) and the modifications of the hind legs in males (present vs. absent). For a better separation of the two species, however, the types of L. domogledicus currently preserved in the Zoological Museum, Cluj (male holotype?, Nr. 931; two females and damaged adult specimen of unknown sex, paratypes, Nr. 932; Ilie, in litt.) or topotypic material should be studied in the future.

General distribution. Croatia: Lapad Peninsula; Czech Republic: Mohelno N.P., Brno ­ Mniší hora.

Figures

FIGURES 5–12. 5–6. Lithobius lapadensis Verhoeff, 1900: 5 – head, dorsal view; 6 – maxillipede, ventral view. 7–12 Lithobius karamani Verhoeff, 1937: 7 – head, dorsal view; 8 – maxillipede, ventral view; 9 – coxa, ventro­lateral view; 10 – 14th leg, lateral/ dorso­lateral view; 11 – 15th leg, dorsal/ dorso­lateral view. 12 – female gonopodial spurs and claw (redrawn from Verhoeff, 1937). Scale bars: 1 mm (Figs 5–8), 0.5 mm (Figs 10–11). Arrows show the regenerated part of the left antenna.