identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
0382FB30FFC41B10FF7CFB6CFCB839F1.text	0382FB30FFC41B10FF7CFB6CFCB839F1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Amynthas popi Shen & Chang 2025	<div><p>Amynthas popi Shen &amp; Chang,  sp. nov.</p><p>(Figure 1)</p><p>Holotype: Clitellate (mature) specimen (312 mm in total length, dissected), along Rural Highway Tao119, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=121.38063&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=24.828014" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 121.38063/lat 24.828014)">Fuhsing</a>, Taoyuan City, 24°49'40.85''N, 121°22'50.25''E, 7 April 2022, Chieh Kao (NTUM-EW-09352).</p><p>Paratypes: 1 clitellate (dissected), along a hiking trail to <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=121.39237&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=24.835562" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 121.39237/lat 24.835562)">Juansi Waterfall</a>, Shihlin, Taipei City, 25°09'19.38''N, 121°33'56.29''E, 23 September 2010, Wen-Jay Chih &amp; Chi-Lun Li (NTUM-EW-07908);  1 clitellate, along Rural Highway Tao119, Fuhsing, Taoyuan City, 24°50'08.02''N, 121°23'32.55''E, 4 March 2022, Chieh Kao (NTUM-EW-09336) .</p><p>Other material.   1 aclitellate along a hiking trail to <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=121.508385&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=25.171877" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 121.508385/lat 25.171877)">Juansi Waterfall</a>, Shihlin, Taipei City, 25°09'19.38''N, 121°33'56.29''E, 23 September 2010, Wen-Jay Chih &amp; Chi-Lun Li (NTUM-EW-08072);   1 clitellate along a rural highway to <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=121.508385&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=25.171877" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 121.508385/lat 25.171877)">Mt. Zhuzi</a>, Beitou, Taipei City, 25°11'32.73''N, 121°32'46.76''E, 29 October 2011, Wen-Jay Chih (NTUM-EW-08360);   1 clitellate along a hiking trail to <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=121.508385&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=25.171877" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 121.508385/lat 25.171877)">Miantian Pond</a>, Tamsui, New Taipei City, 25°10'18.76''N, 121°30'30.18''E, 20 April 2012, Wen-Jay Chih (NTUM-EW-08700)  .</p><p>Diagnosis. Large earthworm. Length (clitellates) 210–316 mm. Segments numbering 138–150. Setae 54–60 in VII, 63–92 in XX, 12–15 between male pores. First dorsal pore in 12/13. Clitellum XIV–XVI. Spermathecal pores four pairs in 5/6–8/9, 0.19–0.24 body circumference ventrally apart. Preclitellar papillae closely or widely paired in presetal VIII. Male pores 0.25–0.31 body circumference ventrally apart in XVIII, with a postsetal papilla medial to each pore. Postclitellar papillae often widely paired in postsetal XIX, and occasionally with additional, more closely paired papillae in presetal XIX. Spermathecae four pairs in VI–IX. Seminal vesicles small, two pairs in XI and XII. Prostate glands compact, confined to XVIII, divided into upper and lower two main lobes. Prostatic ducts short, stout, horizontal, confined to XVIII, extending slightly downward at distal end. Accessory glands absent.</p><p>Description. External: Length (clitellates) 210–316 mm. Segments numbering 138–150. Clitellum XIV–XVI, setae and dorsal pores absent, 5.23–7.51 mm in length and 7.25–8.6 mm in width. Prostomium epilobous. Three annuli (secondary segments) per segment in VI–XIII. Setal number 54–60 in VII, 63–92 in XX, and 12–15 between male pores in XVIII. First dorsal pore in 12/13. Spermathecal pores four pairs in intersegmental furrows of 5/6–8/9 (Fig. 1A), distance between paired pores 0.19–0.24 body circumference ventrally apart. Genital papillae closely paired in presetal VIII for two specimens (Fig. 1B), widely paired in presetal VIII for one specimen (Fig. 1C), one in the middle of presetal VII and one on right side of presetal VIII for one specimen (Fig. 1A), preclitellar region damaged for one specimen, and papillae not visible in the aclitellate specimen. Each papilla round, 1.0– 2.15 mm in diameter. Female pore single, mid-ventral in XIV. Male pores paired in XVIII, 0.25–0.31 body circumference ventrally apart, each situated on a round porophore about 1.0 mm in diameter, with a postsetal papilla medial to it, each papilla 0.75–1.0 mm in diameter. Genital papillae often widely paired in postsetal XIX (Fig. 1D), and occasionally with additional, more closely paired papillae in presetal XIX (Fig. 1E). For all six specimens examined, papillae widely paired in postsetal XIX for four specimens and two of them with an additional pair in presetal XIX, only one papilla on right side of postsetal XIX for one specimen, and papillae not visible in the aclitellate specimen. Each papilla round, with a slightly concave center, 1.0– 1.25 mm in diameter. Live worms pinkish or grayish with white or dark brown clitellum. Preserved specimens white and slightly darker on clitellum.</p><p>Internal: Septa 5/6–7/8 thick, 8/9 membranous, 9/10 absent, 10/11–12/13 muscular, thickened, 13/14 thick. Nephridial tufts on anterior faces of 5/6/7. Gizzard large, round in VIII–X. Intestine enlarged from XV. Intestinal caeca paired in XXVII, simple, extending anteriorly to XXIV. Esophageal hearts paired in XI–XIII. Spermathecae four pairs in VI–IX (Fig. 1F), ampulla elongated oval-shaped, surface wrinkled, 2.28–2.69 mm long and 1.35–2.13 mm wide, spermathecal duct stout, 0.56–1.63 mm in length. Diverticulum stalk straight or bent, 1.7–2.09 mm in length, seminal chamber oval, iridescent, 0.4–0.79 mm long. Accessory glands absent. Holandric. Testes round, two pairs in ventrally joined sacs in X and XI. Seminal vesicles small, two pairs in XI and XII, occupying 1/2–2/3 of the segmental compartment. Prostate glands compact, paired, confined to XVIII (Fig. 1G), divided into two main lobes: upper and lower. Prostatic ducts short, stout, horizontal, confined to XVIII, extending slightly downward at distal end. Accessory glands absent.</p><p>DNA barcodes.  GenBank accession numbers PP960539 (NTUM-EW-09352, holotype), PP960536 (NTUM-EW-07908, paratype), PP960538 (NTUM-EW-09336, paratype), and PP960537 (NTUM-EW-08072) (Table 1).</p><p>Etymology. The name  popi is in memory of Victor V. Pop, a warm and pleasant earthworm taxonomist.</p><p>Remarks. It is unusual for a large earthworm like  Amynthas popi sp. nov. to have compact prostate glands together with short, stout and horizontal prostatic ducts confined to segment XVIII among the native  Amynthas earthworms known from Taiwan. The morphological character with one postsetal papilla medial to each male porophore of  A. popi is fairly similar to that of  A. corticis,  Amynthas carnosus (Goto &amp; Hatai, 1899),  Amynthas biorbis Tsai &amp; Shen, 2010, and  Amynthas shengtangmontis Dong &amp; Jiang, 2019 .  Amynthas corticis has variable papilla arrangements with number of papilla ranging from zero to two, occasionally three, around each male porophore, and individuals with one postsetal papilla medial to each male porophore are common (Fig. 2A).  Amynthas carnosus has a large postsetal papilla medial to each male and closely or widely paired papillae in presetal VIII–IX and XVIII–XIX (Chang et al. 2016).  Amynthas biorbis has a large postsetal papilla medial to each male porophore (Tsai et al. 2010), but individuals without such a papilla were found in subsequent collections. As for  A. shengtangmontis, there is discrepancy between its description and figure (Figure 4 in Dong et al. 2019). Dong et al. (2019, p. 34) state in the diagnosis section of  A. shengtangmontis that “Four pairs of postsetal genital papillae arranged in VI–IX…One pair of male pores in XVIII, each on the top of a large raised, round porophore…with one presetal indented-topped genital papilla medial of each porophore”. Similar descriptions also appear in the remarks section and Table 4 of Dong et al. (2019). However, Figure 4 in Dong et al. (2019) shows four pairs of presetal genital papillae in VI–IX and one postsetal papilla medial to each male porophore. We think that what illustrated in the figure takes precedence over text. All the aforementioned species are octothecal with four pairs of spermathecae in VI–IX. Their characters are compared in Table 3. All four species are morphologically distinguishable from  A. popi:  A. corticis is smaller, and has fewer segments, lower setal number, papillae in presetal VI–IX, prostate glands absent or rudimentary, C- or U-shaped prostatic ducts, and stalked accessory glands;  A. carnosus has closely or widely paired papillae in presetal VIII–IX and XVIII–XIX, large prostate glands in 1/2XVI–XIX, U-shaped prostatic ducts, and round accessory glands;  A. biorbis is much smaller, and has fewer segments, lower setal number, no papilla except the one medial to each male pore, large prostate glands in XVI–XX, U-shaped prostatic ducts, and large, sessile accessory glands;  A. shengtangmontis is smaller, and has fewer segments, lower setal number, papillae in presetal VI–IX, four pairs of esophageal hearts in X–XIII, well-developed seminal vesicles, large prostate glands in XV–XXII, U-shaped prostatic ducts, and stalked accessory glands (Table 3). The postclitellar genital papilla arrangement of  A. popi also looks somewhat similar to that of  Amynthas gageodo Blakemore, 2012 from South Korea.  Amynthas gageodo is also octothecal, but it is smaller and has fewer segments, four pairs of esophageal hearts in X–XIII, moderately large seminal vesicles, and sessile accessory glands (Table 3). There is no mention of prostate gland together with prostatic duct of  A. gageodo in the original description, yet the morphology of this organ is shown in Figure 1 in Blakemore et al. (2012, p. 257). All the species mentioned above are genetically distinct (Fig. 3; Table 4).</p><p>1 Data from Gates (1972).</p><p>2 Data from Chang et al. (2016).</p><p>3 Data from Kobayashi (1936).</p><p>Amynthas rodericensis (Grube, 1879),  Amynthas sheni (Chen, 1935),  Amynthas siam Blakemore, 2011,  Amynthas punicans Blakemore, 2015, and  Amynthas panhai Bantaowong et al., 2023 also have a postsetal papilla medial to each male porophore. These species are easily differentiated from  A. popi morphologically.  Amynthas rodericensis has large postsetal papillae reaching intersegmental furrow of 18/19 and four pairs of dorsally positioned spermathecal pores in 5/6–8/9 (Chang et al. 2016).  Amynthas sheni has postsetal papillae on VIII and occasionally also on IX, and has no spermatheca (Chen 1935).  Amynthas siam is much smaller with body length of 70–90 mm and has three pairs of spermathecae in segments VII–IX with diverticulum composed of narrow convoluted stalk and iridescent bulb (Blakemore 2011).  Amynthas punicans is much smaller with body length of 69 mm and has two pairs of spermathecae in segments VI–VII with long, zig-zagging spermathecal diverticula (Blakemore et al. 2015).  Amynthas panhai has widely paired postsetal papillae on VII and three pairs of spermathecae in segments VI–VIII with loosely coiled diverticula (Bantaowong et al. 2023).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0382FB30FFC41B10FF7CFB6CFCB839F1	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Shen, Huei-Ping;Chang, Chih-Han	Shen, Huei-Ping, Chang, Chih-Han (2025): A new earthworm species of the genus Amynthas (Clitellata: Megascolecidae) from northern Taiwan, false synonymy between Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) and Amynthas sheni (Chen, 1935) and other taxonomic issues relating to A. corticis. Zootaxa 5589 (1): 112-126, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10
0382FB30FFC11B1FFF7CFA6BFEEE3EAA.text	0382FB30FFC11B1FFF7CFA6BFEEE3EAA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Amynthas corticis (Kinberg 1867) Blakemore et al. 2015	<div><p>False synonymy between  Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) and  Amynthas sheni (Chen, 1935)</p><p>Amynthas sheni (Chen, 1935) from Hong Kong is an earthworm lacking spermathecae (Chen 1935). This species is listed as a synonym of  A. corticis with a question mark by Blakemore (2003; 2010; 2012; 2013b). Blakemore (2003, p. 16) cites Gates (1972, p. 217) and states that “  Pheretima sheni Chen, 1935 may be athecal morphs of either  A. robustus or  A. diffringens (=  A. corticis), most likely the latter”. Tsai et al. (2007, p. 365) elaborate differences between  A. sheni and  Amynthas robustus (Perrier, 1872) and also those between  A. sheni and  A. corticis, and conclude that  A. sheni is not referable to  A. robustus and shows no affinity with  A. corticis, either. An earthworm having no spermathecae is not necessarily the athecal morph of some other species. Among the 75 endemic earthworm species reported from Taiwan so far, eleven of them have variable numbers of spermathecae or even no spermathecae, and absence of spermathecae is commonly observed for seven of them. Among the eleven species, eight of them have been genetically proved distinctive including five species generally without spermathecae (Shen 2012; Shen et al. 2016; 2019). According to Semblat et al. (1998), for soil organisms particularly, parthenogenesis is likely to provide a selective advantage allowing conservation of the best adapted genotype for its specific environment. Parthenogenesis might have provided some benefits in propagation and survival for earthworms inhabiting the mountainous island of Taiwan with diverse habitats (Shen et al. 2012). Tsai et al. (2007, p. 375) also state that “Apparently, parthenogenetic earthworms are highly adapted to various environments, and each species has its own independent evolutionary lineage”.</p><p>Furthermore, as indicated in Shen et al. (2024),  A. corticis has no postsetal papillae on the ventral side of the preclitellar region except those above spermathecal pores. Nevertheless,  A. sheni has postsetal papillae on ventrum of VIII and occasionally also on IX (Fig. 4A). Additionally,  A. sheni has four pairs of esophageal hearts in X–XIII, well-developed prostate glands in XVI–XXI and long, U-curved prostatic ducts (Chen 1935), whereas  A. corticis has three pairs of esophageal hearts in XI–XIII (Chen 1931; 1933; Gates 1972; HPS, personal observation) and its prostate glands are often absent with prostatic ducts confined to XVIII (Shen et al. 2024). In fact, Chen (1935) provides a detailed description of  A. sheni which is not easy for readers to confuse with  A. corticis . However, inadequate literature review is always a problem in earthworm taxonomy as addressed in Chang et al. (2024) and Shen et al. (2024). Worse still, it is not uncommon for researchers to refer to secondary citations rather than the original description. All these are sources of confusion and problems. HPS examined the type specimen of  A. sheni deposited in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., USA. (USNM no. 20181, Fig. 4A, B) on 7 September 2001. The result of this examination is consistent with the original description by Chen (1935).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0382FB30FFC11B1FFF7CFA6BFEEE3EAA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Shen, Huei-Ping;Chang, Chih-Han	Shen, Huei-Ping, Chang, Chih-Han (2025): A new earthworm species of the genus Amynthas (Clitellata: Megascolecidae) from northern Taiwan, false synonymy between Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) and Amynthas sheni (Chen, 1935) and other taxonomic issues relating to A. corticis. Zootaxa 5589 (1): 112-126, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10
0382FB30FFCE1B1DFF7CFA73FC963DEE.text	0382FB30FFCE1B1DFF7CFA73FC963DEE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Amynthas corticis (Kinberg 1867) Blakemore et al. 2015	<div><p>Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) and  Amynthas diffringens (Baird, 1869): One or two peregrine species?</p><p>The specific name,  Amynthas diffringens, was once widely used instead of “  Amynthas corticis ”. Easton (1981) revalidated  Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) and regarded  Amynthas diffringens (Baird, 1869) as a synonym of  A. corticis without providing any evidence or explanation. HPS examined the type specimens of  A. diffringens archived in the Natural History Museum in London, UK. (BMNH 1869.1.2.1) and that of  A. corticis in the Swedish Museum of Natural History in Stockholm, Sweden (SMNH-Type-1947) on 8 June 2016 and 13 December 2016, respectively. The type of  A. corticis is a macerated aclitellate broken into two which bears hardly any morphological characteristics. In contrast, the nine mature specimens of  A. diffringens types are morphologically recognizable. Meanwhile, the original description of  A. corticis contains limited information including only setal number (40), segment number (114) and body length (68 mm) (Kinberg 1867, p. 102). It is doubtful regarding the synonymy between the two species.</p><p>Blakemore (2013b) also points out this problem and further resurrects  A. diffringens after examination of its types based on its genital markings anteriorly of spermathecal pores. However, among the nine mature specimens of  A. diffringens types, three have no markings above spermathecal pores (Fig. 5G, H, I). Apparently, this single characteristic is subjected to individual variation and insufficient to distinguish a species. Moreover, we also found a specimen (GenBank accession number: JX290439) with markings anterior to spermathecal pores and markings adjacent to male porophores complying with those of the specimen with voucher number HY19 collected by Blakemore from Jeju, South Korea (Fig. 2B in Blakemore et al. 2015) (Fig. 2B, C). Blakemore et al. (2015, p. 4) made the following contradictory statements about this so-called  Amynthas cf. corticis specimen with voucher number HY19: “The current specimen’s sample HY19 appears to conform to  A. corticis group- 1 in the phylogram of Blakemore (2013: 101, fig. 1), e.g., 100% agreement with WM7 ( A. corticis from Arataki Honey, N.Z.), “  Amynthas corticis ” (DQ224190.1 from Taiwan) and 100% “  Amynthas diffringens ” (EF077548.1, EF077550.1 from China), also with w59 ( A. corticis from Incheon)=639/639 (100%) but differs slightly from w25 (“  A. diffringens ?” from Jeju)=635/639 (99%). The current dissected sample agrees superficially with  A. diffringens type as figured by Blakemore (2013d: fig. 9) and thus may be taken as representative of this taxon”. How can a specimen molecularly identified as  A. corticis be taken as representative of  A. diffringens? In addition, there is inconsistency about the identity of the specimen with DNA sample labeled as w25 by Blakemore (2013a, b). This specimen was identified as  Amynthas corticis corticis (Kinberg, 1867) by Blakemore (2013a, p. 26) but as  A. diffringens also by Blakemore (2013b, p. 123) (Table 2). Sequences of HY19 and our specimen with GenBank accession number JX290439 clustered with that of w25 (Fig. 3). However, this cluster also encompasses sequences from our other specimens without genital markings prior to spermathecal pores, i.e., sequences with GenBank accession numbers starting with “JX” except JX290439. Again, the presence or absence of the genital markings in front of spermathecal pores is individual variation which is far from being a diagnostic character for separating species. As demonstrated molecularly and morphologically, it is evident that there is only one valid species whether it is called  A. corticis or  A. diffringens . We suggest that  Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) is an invalid specific name because: 1) the type is a juvenile and damaged, and cannot provide useful taxonomic information; 2) the original description does not provide useful taxonomic information, and no one knows what species it is. On the other hand,  Amynthas diffringens (Baird, 1869) is a good species and it should be revalidated.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0382FB30FFCE1B1DFF7CFA73FC963DEE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Shen, Huei-Ping;Chang, Chih-Han	Shen, Huei-Ping, Chang, Chih-Han (2025): A new earthworm species of the genus Amynthas (Clitellata: Megascolecidae) from northern Taiwan, false synonymy between Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) and Amynthas sheni (Chen, 1935) and other taxonomic issues relating to A. corticis. Zootaxa 5589 (1): 112-126, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10
0382FB30FFCC1B1CFF7CFA65FD8A3D7A.text	0382FB30FFCC1B1CFF7CFA65FD8A3D7A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Amynthas corticis subsp. saeseum Blakemore 2013	<div><p>On the invalidity of the name  Amynthas corticis saeseum Blakemore, 2013</p><p>Blakemore (2013a, p. 26) described  Amynthas corticis saeseum from Saeseum Island, South Korea with DNA sample of the holotype labeled as w33. Blakemore (2013a) states in the remarks section that "  Amynthas corticis saeseum is possibly a ‘proto-species’ distinguished principally by its consistent bulbous augmentation to the spermathecae on either side…here considered equivalent to an allopatric sub-species". Besides, Fig. 1 in Blakemore (2013b) shows two lineages of  A. corticis . This is in agreement with our finding (Fig. 3). Sequences of w33 and our specimen with GenBank accession number JX290433 belong to the same group while that of our specimen with GenBank accession number JX290432 belongs to the other (Fig. 3). However, the two specimens with GenBank accession numbers starting with “JX” were found sympatric near a bridge in Fuhsing, Taoyuan, northern Taiwan (Table 1). Sympatry of different lineages has been observed in several peregrine earthworm species (Rota et al. 2018; Taheri et al. 2018; Chang et al. 2024). Similarly,  A. corticis also has different lineages which sometimes are in sympatry. Consequently,  A. corticis saeseum is not an allopatric sub-species as stated in Blakemore (2013a). Shen (2018) criticized the erection of sympatric subspecies since this common, but harmful practice in earthworm taxonomy ignores the biogeographical connotation of the concept. In addition, specimen with DNA sample labeled as WO4 and the holotype (w33) of  A. corticis saeseum belong to the same lineage (Fig. 3), but this specimen, as depicted in Fig. 5 in Blakemore (2013b, p. 105), shows no sign of the bulbous augmentation to the spermathecae. Clearly, this character for distinguishing  A. corticis saeseum from the nominal  A. corticis is merely individual variation. The name  A. corticis saeseum is invalid.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0382FB30FFCC1B1CFF7CFA65FD8A3D7A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Shen, Huei-Ping;Chang, Chih-Han	Shen, Huei-Ping, Chang, Chih-Han (2025): A new earthworm species of the genus Amynthas (Clitellata: Megascolecidae) from northern Taiwan, false synonymy between Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) and Amynthas sheni (Chen, 1935) and other taxonomic issues relating to A. corticis. Zootaxa 5589 (1): 112-126, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10
0382FB30FFCD1B1BFF7CF8CAFEB23F72.text	0382FB30FFCD1B1BFF7CF8CAFEB23F72.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Amynthas jampeanus subsp. fumigatus (Michaelsen 1899)	<div><p>On the placement of “  Amynthas jampeanus fumigatus (Michaelsen, 1899) ”</p><p>Benham (1896) described  Amynthas jampeanus from Jampea Island, south of Sulawesi (= Celebes) based on three specimens and  Amynthas bonthainensis from Bonthain Peak, south Sulawesi based on one specimen only. Michaelsen (1899) considered  A. bonthainensis to be a subspecies of  A. jampeanus and added another two subspecies of  A. jampeanus,  A. jampeanus fumigatus and  A. jampeanus tigrinus, collected from central and south Sulawesi, respectively. In the original description of Benham (1896),  A. jampeanus has widely paired male pores with 13–14 setae in between and each pore on a papilla at each end of a pink, dumb-bell-shaped area, no other genital papillae, spherical ampulla, and stout, short prostatic duct in an obliquely longitudinal direction. However,  A. bonthainensis has closely paired male pores with only 3 setae in between and each pore on a large round swollen area with an anterior papilla, three papillae in presetal XVII and XIX–XX (left one wanting in XX), oval ampulla, and short, straight, thick prostatic duct. Benham (1896) also provided illustrations for both  A. jampeanus (Fig. 1 in Plate XX) and  A. bonthainensis (Fig. 3 in Plate XX). Obviously,  A. jampeanus and  A. bonthainensis are different species. In a recent paper by Bantaowong et al. (2023), their Figure 4 shows the morphology of the syntype of one of the subspecies of  A. jampeanus,  A. jampeanus fumigatus . Its male pore region appears nearly identical to that of  A. bonthainensis (Benham 1896, Fig. 3a in Plate XX). Actually, it is more close to  A. bonthainensis concerning the papilla arrangement, more closely paired male pores, oval ampulla, and short, straight, thick prostatic duct (Table 5). The only difference is its much lower setal numbers (Table 5) which was also mentioned by Michaelsen (1899, p. 66). This taxon should be regarded as a subspecies of  A. bonthainensis instead of  A. jampeanus . Therefore, the name,  Amynthas bonthainensis fumigatus (Michaelsen, 1899) comb. nov., is proposed. It is a geographic subspecies of  A. bonthainensis since it is distributed in central Sulawesi while the latter in south Sulawesi. HPS examined the holotype of  A. bonthainensis deposited in the Natural History Museum in London, UK. (BMNH 1896.9.30.1, Fig. 6) in 2014.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0382FB30FFCD1B1BFF7CF8CAFEB23F72	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Shen, Huei-Ping;Chang, Chih-Han	Shen, Huei-Ping, Chang, Chih-Han (2025): A new earthworm species of the genus Amynthas (Clitellata: Megascolecidae) from northern Taiwan, false synonymy between Amynthas corticis (Kinberg, 1867) and Amynthas sheni (Chen, 1935) and other taxonomic issues relating to A. corticis. Zootaxa 5589 (1): 112-126, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5589.1.10
