Parachipteria georgica Murvanidze & Weigmann, 2003, Murvanidze & Weigmann, 2003

Murvanidze, Maka & Mumladze, Levan, 2016, Annotated checklist of Georgian oribatid mites, Zootaxa 4089 (1), pp. 1-81: 60

publication ID

publication LSID

persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Parachipteria georgica Murvanidze & Weigmann, 2003


Parachipteria georgica Murvanidze & Weigmann, 2003  

Distribution in Georgia. Whole country (Murvanidze et al. 2011, 2013, 2015; Murvanidze & Arabuli 2015; Murvanidze & Todria 2015; Shtanchaeva & Subías 2010)

Global distribution. Caucasus

Ecology. Forest soils

Remark. In the world checklist, Subías (2004, electronically updated in 2006) placed P. georgica   in Campachipteria (Aoki, 1995)   . We do not agree with this placement since (1) P. georgica   has tridactylous legs vs monodactylous in Campachipteria (Aoki 1995)   and (2) genu IV of P. georgica   is not bent vs bent in Campachipteria (Aoki 1995)   . In the updated checklist of 2015, Subías listed P. georgica   as a junior synonym of C. patavina (Oudemans, 1914)   without presenting arguments. We do not agree with his statement for the following reasons: 1) all area porosae of P. georgica   are distinct and relatively large, round-oval (Fig. 3 A), while those of C. patavina   are small (see description in the keys of Ghilarov & Krivolutsky, 1975; Fig. 3 B); 2) sensilli of C. georgica   are long, with rounded head (Fig. 3 A) and sensilli of P. patavina   are short, broad and distally cut (Fig. 3 B, 4 A, 4 B) (Dubinina et al. 1966; Ghilarov & Krivolutsky 1975; Oudemans 1914); 3) in the description of Dubinina et al. (1966) tutoria of P. p at av i na are indicated as triangular, short and with very short, cut tips (Figs. 5 A), whereas P. georgica   has long, free tutorial tips (Fig. 5 B) that nearly reach each other (Murvanidze & Weigmann 2003). Based on the above mentioned differences, we consider P. georgica   as a valid species.