Scolopendra chlorotes L. Koch in Rosenhauer, 1856

Doménech, Carles, 2024, Taxonomic and nomenclatural reassessment of the Iberian Peninsula’s nomina obscura, Scolopendra viridipes Dufour, 1820 and S. chlorotes L. Koch in Rosenhauer, 1856 (Chilopoda, Scolopendromorpha, Scolopendridae), ZooKeys 1208, pp. 49-80 : 49-80

Scolopendra chlorotes L. Koch in Rosenhauer, 1856

Figs 2 D, E , 5 , 6 , 9 B, D , Table 3 , Suppl. material 1: file 3

Scolopendra chlorotes L. Koch in Rosenhauer, 1856: 417.

? S. oraniensis Lucas, 1846 : Kraepelin 1903: 246.

S. chlorotes : Attems 1930: 49, as unrecognisable taxon.

Etymology.

From the Greek word χλοερός (khloerós, verdant) and χλόη (khlóē, “ the green of new growth ”) meaning greenish yellow, pale green, pale, pallid, or verdant, referencing their pale greenish and yellowish leg colouration.

Type series and type depository.

Types currently lost.

Collector and collection date.

W. G. Rosenhauer, in 1849 ( Rosenhauer 1856).

Type locality.

“ Near Málaga ”, Andalusia, Spain.

Distribution.

As for type locality.

Neotype designation.

With the express purpose of clarifying the taxonomic status and the type locality of the nominal taxon S. chlorotes L. Koch in Rosenhauer, 1856, the following neotype is designated ( ICZN 1999: Art. 75 and 76.3):

Male. Carretera de Coín , Alahurín de la Torre, Málaga province ( Spain) (36 ° 39 ' 37 '’ N, 4 ° 31 ' 0.4 '’ W 104 m a. s. l.) (Figs 5 , 6 ; Table 3 ; Suppl. material 1: file 1). Coll. 18 Nov. 2021. C. Doménech Leg. Repository CEUA with the collection number CEUAMr 29 (In this text also referred as “ S. chlorotes topotype 5 " before its neotype designation) .

Proposed new nomenclatural status.

Scolopendra chlorotes L. Koch in Rosenhauer, 1856 is an invalid name, here subjectively proposed as a junior synonym of Scolopendra oraniensis Lucas, 1846 .

Translation of the original descriptions from German

[annotations in brackets]. (Original description available from: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/42185817#page/425/mode/1up)

Scolopendra chlorotes Koch.

Brownish green, feeding pliers [forcipules], end-shield [ ULBS tergite] and last pair of legs [terminal legs] reddish brown, on the last seven tergites, a furrow at the lateral edges [margination in tergites], on the first podomere of the last pair of legs [UL prefemur] 19 small teeth on the underside [ventral position], seven small teeth directed inward on the upper-side [medial and dorsomedial positions].

Length 20 ‘ lignes’ [1 German – Nuremberg – lignes ≈ 2.11 mm; 42.22 mm].

Shiny; head [cephalic plate] longish, rather narrow, the head area dentate [probably referring to tooth plates] in the middle, tergite sides straight, those of the 3 rd and the penultimate tergite rounded anteriorly, the seven last tergites with a furrow at the lateral edges [tergite margination]. Tergites with the two normal stripes [paramedian sutures], except the first and the last tergites; the end-shield [ ULBS tergite] shows a distinct median longitudinal furrow [suture]. The sternites have two longitudinal furrows [paramedian sutures], except the last sternite. The last pair of legs short, dorsally flat, the tooth-like process at the inner angle of the first podomere short [UL prefemoral process] with two blunt teeth [spines] at the tip; at the inner side [medial position] of this podomere [UL prefemur] seven small teeth [spines] at the upper side [medial position], 19 small teeth [spines] arranged in four rows at the underside [ventral position]. Head [cephalic plate], antennae, and tergites, except the last one, brownish green, the first podomeres [prefemur, femur, and even tibia] of the legs yellowish, the last [tibia and tarsi 1 and 2] green; maxillipeds, lower lip [probably trochanterprefemoral parts of the forcipula, tooth plates or / and coxosternite], end-shield [ ULBS tergite] and last pair of legs [UL] reddish brown, the capture-claw [forcipules] brownish black from the middle [tarsungula].

Near Malaga, sporadic.

Remarks involving the type series and type series depository.

All attempts to locate the type series of S. chlorotes were unsuccessful; the curators in their four probable depositories ( NHMN, NHMUK, ZMB, and FAU) found no samples in their collections (pers. comm. Aug. 2020 to Nov. 2021).

According to Rühm (1925) and Hessel (2000) the types of this species most probable depository should be the NHMUK, on the basis that in 1925 the Naturhistorische Gesellschaft ( NHG), lacking financial resources, decided to move a large number of their specimens preserved in ethanol to the British Museum of Natural History. Nevertheless, the types of S. chlorotes are not registered nor found there.

The other smaller part of Koch’s wet collection, probably containing this species type series, did remain at the NHMN. However, the NHG rooms, their catalogues, and a large part of the collections were damaged during World War II in 1945 and presumably also the S. chlorotes types (EM Neupert ( NHG) pers. comm. Sep. 2020). Therefore, the type series of S. chlorotes is considered to be lost.

Original description comparison.

Because the type material is unavailable, the features in the original description are compared to those of other Scolopendromorpha found in Peninsular Spain to determine to which taxon L. Koch was referring when he erected S. chlorotes as a new species (Table 2 ). In this case, the original description of S. chlorotes allows exclusion of all Cryptops species because the sternite sutures are cruciform or trigonal (rather than only the two paramedial ones) and the UL prefemoral spines and (most likely referred to as) coxosternal tooth plates are absent in this genus ( Schileyko et al. 2020). Neither of the two Mediterranean representatives of the family Plutoniumidae match with the morphological description of S. chlorotes since both have sternites with a distinctive single medial longitudinal suture and none, or just one, spine on UL prefemur ( Bonato et al. 2017 b). The compatibility of S. cingulata is also rejected due to the absence of the longitudinal suture on the T 21 with the incompatibilities in the prefemoral spinulation of the UL (Table 2 ). Furthermore, all of these taxa can be also ruled out because their colours do not match with those of S. chlorotes (Table 2 ).

Hence, its unambiguous morphology and colouration, compatible location, and the exclusion of all other Iberian Scolopendromorpha are facts that, combined, strongly suggest that if it is not the same taxon, the closest relative to S. chlorotes is S. oraniensis (Table 2 ).

Neotype and “ topotypes ” morphological comparisons.

A total of fifteen S. chlorotes topotypical specimens were collected in five municipalities “ near Málaga ” (L. Koch 1856; Figs 2 A, D, E , 5 , 6 ; Suppl. material 1: file 3). All these specimens were examined and confirmed to be conspecific (Suppl. material 1: file 3). Among those, a neotype was selected ( ICZN 1999: Art. 75; Figs 5 , 6 , Table 3 , Suppl. material 1: file 3). The comparison of the neotype and the other “ topotypes ” with the seven syntypes of the closest taxon S. oraniensis demonstrated that all these specimens possess identical diagnostic morphological features (see diagnosis and redescription above; Table 3 ; compare Figs 5 , 6 with Figs 7 , 8 ) and therefore, both taxa should be considered to be the same species.

Additionally, the neotype of S. chlorotes and the other “ topotypes ” were compared with those of S. viridipes , and conspecificity was also confirmed (compare Figs 3 , 4 with Figs 5 , 6 ; Table 3 ). Consequently, S. chlorotes , S. viridipes , and S. oraniensis are considered a single taxon with three names (Figs 3 – 8 ; Table 3 ).

Taxonomic and nomenclatural status.

As long as the taxon S. chlorotes L. Koch in Rosenhauer, 1856 is recognised as conspecific with S. oraniensis Lucas, 1846 , the principle of priority indicates that the valid name of S. chlorotes is S. oraniensis ( ICZN 1999: Art. 23.3). Hence, S. chlorotes is subjectively designated as an invalid name since it is here considered a junior synonym of S. oraniensis ( ICZN 1999: Art. 23.3).

Figures

Figure 2. A topotype collection localities in the Iberian Peninsula (southwestern Europe): S. viridipes topotypes (= S. oraniensis); V 1 = Moixent and V 2 = Xàtiva (previously San Felipe), Valencia province, Valencian Country / Community, Spain and S. chlorotes topotypes (= S. oraniensis); C 1 = Málaga municipality, C 2 = Alahurín de la Torre, C 3 = Casabermeja, C 4 = Totalán and C 5 = Estepona, Málaga province, Andalucía, Spain. The “ O ” points S. oraniensis type localities, O 1 = Santon’s mountains [corrected from “ Sauton ” (sic.); Lucas 1846] and O 2 = “ Between Oran and Mers-el-Kebir ”, Oran province (Wilayah), Algeria B “ S. viridipes ” topotype 2, female, (CEUAMr 22) from C Moixent, Alacant D “ S. chlorotes ” topotype 6, female, (CEUAMr 30) from E Alahurín de la Torre, Málaga.

Figure 3. Scolopendra viridipes neotype (= S. oraniensis); male; (“ topotype 1 ", CEUAMr 21) A cephalic plate, antennae, and TT 1–5 B forcipular segment and sternites 1–3 C tooth plates D tergites 13–18 E sternites 10–15. Scale bars: 0.2 mm (C); 1 mm (A, B); 2 mm (D, E).

Figure 4. Scolopendra viridipes neotype (= S. oraniensis); male; (“ topotype 1 ", CEUAMr 21) A ULBS and UL ’ s dorsal view B ULBS ’ s and UL ’ s ventral view C ULBS ’ s, coxopleuron, and UL ’ s ventral lateral view. Scale bars: 1 mm (A, B); 2 mm (C).

Figure 5. Scolopendra chlorotes neotype (= S. oraniensis); male; (“ topotype 5 ", CEUAMr 29) A cephalic plate, antennae, and TT 1–3 B forcipular segment and sternites 1, 2 C tooth plates D tergites 10–14 E sternites 8–12. Scale bars: 0.2 mm (C); 1 mm (A, B); 2 mm (D, E).

Figure 6. Scolopendra chlorotes neotype (= S. oraniensis); male; (“ topotype 5 ", CEUAMr 29) A ULBS ’ s and UL ’ s dorsal view B ULBS ’ s and UL ’ s ventral view C ULBS ’ s, coxopleuron, and UL ’ s ventral lateral view. Scale bars: 1 mm (A, B); 2 mm (C).

Figure 7. Scolopendra oraniensis syntype “ 1 "; unsexed; (MNHN) A cephalic plate, antennae, and T 1 B forcipular segment and sternites 1, 2 C tooth plates D tergites 3–6 E sternites 6–8. Scale bars: 0.2 mm (C); 1 mm (A, B); 2 mm (D, E).

Figure 8. Scolopendra oraniensis syntype “ 1 "; unsexed; (MNHN) A dorsal view of ULBS and UL B ventral view of ULBS and UL C lateral view of ULBS and UL D Original manuscript labels ordered chronologically. Top: old label [Scolopendra canidens Newp. oraniensis Luc. H. Lucas. [Leg.] Oran [type locality]; Middle: Kraepelin’s 1903 labels [“ Type de H. Lucas. Scol. oraniensis Luc. (non canidens Newp.) ”]. Lower: MNHN staff “ modern ” summary label. Scale bars: 1 mm (A, B); 2 mm (C).

Figure 9. Scolopendra oraniensis genitalia A male (CEUAMr 24); and B female (CEUAMr 31), and detail of the setae (arrows) on tarsus 1 (C, D) on the same specimens C male and D female. Observe that on the contrary that Würmli (1980) indicated, the numbers of setae are actually similar in both genders. Legend: AV, anal valve; G. gonopod (folded back); LA, lamina adanalis; LS, lamina subanalis; P, penis; SGS I, sternite of genital segment 1; SGS II, sternite of genital segment 2. Scale bars: 0.1 mm.