Trogolaphysa Mills, 1938 sensu Soto-Adames (2015), Mills, 1938 sensu Soto-Adames, 2015

Nguyen, Minh & Soto-Adames, Felipe N., 2018, Annotated checklist of Afrotropical Trogolaphysa Mills, 1938 (Hexapoda: Collembola: Paronellidae) and description of a new species from Madagascar, Zoosystema 40 (10), pp. 179-196: 181-182

publication ID 10.5252/zoosystema2018v40a10

publication LSID


persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Trogolaphysa Mills, 1938 sensu Soto-Adames (2015)


Genus Trogolaphysa Mills, 1938 sensu Soto-Adames (2015)  

Trogolaphysa Mills, 1938: 184   .

TYPE SPECIES. — Trogolaphysa maya Mills, 1938: 184   , by original designation.

TYPE LOCALITY. — Yucatan, Mexico.

DIAGNOSIS. — Hyaline denticulated scales covering Ant. 1-2, head, body, and ventral face of furcula; 4th antennal segment not subdivided; eyes 0-8; head microchaeta Ps 3 absent; labial chaetae L1 and L2 subequal; inner dorsal chaetotaxy of metathorax and 1 st abdominal segment reduced to 4 and 3 chaetae, respectively; abdominal segments 2-4 with 2, 3, 3 bothriotricha; manubrium without spines; dens with 1-2 rows of spines; mucro square or rectangular but relatively short, with 3-5 teeth.


Published descriptions of species listed below as belonging to Trogolaphysa   (except for D. wahlgreni   and the new species) do not refer to most characters listed in the diagnosis of the genus. For this study, we assign to Trogolaphysa   all forms originally placed in the genus Paronella Schött, 1893   that, based on available descriptions, have a square or short rectangular mucro bearing 3-5 teeth, and lack manubrial spines and a subdivision on the 4 th antennomere. This limited combination of characters is not unique to Trogolaphysa   , as it would also fit some members of the genus Lepidonella Yosii, 1960   . Trogolaphysa   and Lepidonella   are easily distinguished based on chaetotaxy, and to a large extent, on mucro shape. Most species of Trogolaphysa   (at least the Neotropical forms) have the typical relatively short (or even shorter) mucro shown in Fig. 3C View FIG , whereas in Lepidonella   (and more so in Troglopedetes Absolon, 1907   / Cyphoderopsis Carpenter, 1917) the mucro tends to be appreciably longer. A few species of Lepidonella   do have short mucrones, but most of these are shaped very differently from those in Trogolaphysa   ( Fig. 3C View FIG ; Soto-Adames & Bellini 2015: figs 28, 29). Only Lepidonella ceylonica (Yoshi, 1966)   , and L. nigrofasciata ( Handschin, 1928)   have Trogolaphysa   -like short mucrones, and both species are found in South Asia. Lepidonella   has never been reported from the African mainland; only L. flava   ( Carpenter, 1916; from the Seychelles) has been reported from a region near Africa. The chaetotaxy of most species listed below is not known but the mucro is always illustrated. Although we use mucro shape as the main character to assign species to Trogolaphysa   , other characters, when available, are used in support of our determination. Thus, the description of Lepidonella flava   is not sufficiently detailed to assigned it to Lepidonella   or Trogolaphysa   , but we have retained it in Lepidonella   based on one aspect of the chaetotaxy. We present our comments on L. flava   following the identification key to African Trogolaphysa   . Trogolaphysa vivieni ( Barra, 1969)   and T. monomaculata   have distinctive mucrones (especially T. viviani   ), which are atypical for the genus, but Soto-Adames & Bellini (2015) transferred them to Trogolaphysa   on account of the number of bothriotricha on the 4th abdominal segment and absence of head chaeta Ps 3. Justification for placing other species in Trogolaphysa   is given in the ‘Remarks’ to each form.

ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF AFRICAN TROGOLAPHYSA   Thibaud’s (2013) report on African springtails lists 17 species and three subspecies in the genera Paronella   , Microparonella Carpenter, 1916 and Trichorypha Schött, 1893 that may belong in Trogolaphysa   ( Table 1 View TABLE ). We evaluated published descriptions of the species listed in Thibaud (2013) in light of current generic delimitation and the distinguishing criteria listed above, and our conclusions are presented below ( Table 1 View TABLE ).

Following Deharveng & Bedos (1995) Microparonella   caerulea Carpenter, 1916 belongs in Troglopedetes   . Mitra (2002a) studied a syntype of M. caerulea Carpenter, 1916 and suggested that Microparonella   was a valid genus. However, the specimen Mitra examined was missing the three distal antennal segments and he could not be aware of the diagnostic character placing the species in Troglopedetes   (see Remarks below under L. flava   ).

Paronella villiersi Delamare Debouteville & Pauliani, 1947   has been cited close to 10 times in the last 65 years, but the species was never described or illustrated and therefore the combination is a nomen nudum. Paronella penicillata obscura Delamare Debouteville, 1951   , from Ivory Coast was never diagnosed and is also a nomen nudum.

Paronella eburnea Delamare Debouteville & Paulian, 1947   is a nomen nudum, which may have referred to a species from Ivory Coast later described as Aphysa eburnea Delamare Debouteville, 1951   . The shape of the mucro and length of antennae suggest that A. eburnea   belongs in Callyntrura Börner, 1906 or at least in Callyntrurini Mitra, 1993.

The generic status of Paronella atrofasciata ( Schött, 1893)   is unclear. Thibaud & Najt (1988) indicated that type material of P. atrofasciata   they examined fit the diagnosis of Paronella   in having 6+ 6 eyes, relatively short antennae and manubrial spines. However, Mitra (2002b) reported syntypes as having 8 + 8 eyes, antennae longer than body and manubrial spines absent. The absence of manubrial spines excludes the specimens Mitra examined from Paronella   . The additional absence of extra-ocular structure (eos) in combination with other characters lead Mitra to resurrect the genus Trichorypha. The chaetotaxy for Abd. 2-4 illustrated by Mitra (2002b) for T. atrofasciata   is unlike that seen in other Paronellini   . A clarification of the status of this species will require examination of the chaetotaxy of the complete type series or fresh material from Cameroon.

Paronella fusca Schött, 1893   (Type species of Paronella   ), P. montana Delamare Debouteville, 1952   and P. purpurea Barra, 1969   carry manubrial spines and belong to Paronella   s. str. ( Thibaud & Najt 1988).

, The remaining 12 species of Paronella   reported from Africa may be tentatively assigned to Trogolaphysa   . The annotated checklist and identification key presented below are based on our evaluation of published descriptions and records. In the annotations we discuss some important papers concerning the taxonomy of each species, but it was not our intention to list all citations for all species. Synonymies, complete up to around 2000, for all forms are available from www. collembola  .org ( Bellinger et al. 1996 -2018) under links to ‘Publications’ and ‘ Collembola  species catalogue’












Trogolaphysa Mills, 1938 sensu Soto-Adames (2015)

Nguyen, Minh & Soto-Adames, Felipe N. 2018


MILLS H. B. 1938: 184