Nedyopus pectinatus (Wang, 1957) Chen & Golovatch & Chang, 2006

Chen, Chao-Chun, Golovatch, Sergei I. & Chang, Hseuh-Wen, 2006, The millipede tribe Nedyopodini, with special reference to the fauna of Taiwan (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Paradoxosomatidae), Journal of Natural History 39 (47), pp. 3997-4030 : 4006-4008

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00222930600556112

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CC8786-FFFC-FFF5-EE3F-FD94FD60FF66

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Nedyopus pectinatus (Wang, 1957)
status

comb. nov.

Nedyopus pectinatus (Wang, 1957) View in CoL , comb. n.

( Figures 11–21 View Figures 11–21 , 62–72 View Figures 62–72 , 103–108 View Figures 103–108 ) Neotype: „ ( NSYSUB-DI 192 ), Taiwan ( R.O.C.), Taoyuan County, FuSiing, SihLeng , 1244 m a.s.l., 19 April 2003, leg. S.-I. Wu.

Other material. 1 „, 2♀ ( NSYSUB-DI 193–195 ), 1 „ , 1♀ ( ZMUM), same locality and date, together with holotype. 2 „, 1♀ ( NMNS 4418-002 View Materials ), Nantou County, LuGu , FengHuangGu, at bamboo forests in birds garden, ca 734 m a.s.l., 29 April 1996, leg. W.-H. Chou. 7 „ , 2♀ ( NMNS 4418-003 View Materials ), Nantou County, LuGu , FengHuangGu, lawn region behind the administration building, 734 m a.s.l., 27 January 1996 , same collector. 3♀ ( NMNS 4418-004 View Materials ), same locality, 29 April 1996 , same collector. 1 „ ( NMNS 4418- 005 View Materials ), same locality, 29 May 1996, same collector. 6 „ , 4♀ ( NMNS 4418-006 View Materials ), same locality, YinTan , natural forests, February 1997 , same collector. 8 „ ( NCHUL), Nantou County, RenAi, HueiSun , 1664 m a.s.l., 7 April 1998, leg. S.-H. Wu. 1♀ ( NCHUL), same locality, at decayed wood in natural forest, 27 December 1997, same collector. 4 „ , 1♀ (NTNUL-My 36–40), Taichung County, HePing, GuGuan , JiiaBaoTai, ca 1000–1406 m a.s.l., 25 January 1988, leg. S.-H. Chen. 1♀ (NTNUL-My 45), same locality, date, and collector .

Diagnosis

Differs from congeners by the black-brown coloration, combined with the long antennae, the metatergal transverse sulcus on segments 4–19, some other peculiar somatic characters (see below and key), and the gonopod telopodite tip consisting of only one large lobe with up to three marginal, shallow lobules.

Description

Length ca 19–25 („, n 510) or 22–29 mm (♀, n 56); width of metazonite 10 ca 1.5–2.0 („) or 2.0–2.5 mm (♀). Neotype ca 22 mm long and 1.7 mm wide. Coloration in alcohol blackbrown; usually a wide, dark brown, axial, moniliform stripe broadened subtrapeziform on metaterga, sometimes visible only on metatergum 19; calluses in ozopore region, pleurosternal region and epiproct similarly dark brown; antennae increasingly blackish distally, but tip contrastingly pallid; hypoproct, sterna and distal podomeres light to light brown; basal podomeres lighter, yellow to yellow-brown. Coloration faded to milky yellowbrown upon long preservation in alcohol. Coloration of ♀ usually somewhat lighter, but paraterga, tergal parts adjacent to paraterga, pleurosternal region and epiproct brown; basal podomeres pallid to light yellow-brown.

Main somatic and gonopod characters as in N. hsientienensis , but width of head50 segments 5–16..collum54.2. 3 in „, or head (broadest)..collum5254.3,5, 6,7– 16 in ♀. Antennae relatively long, slender, reaching from stricture to end of segment 4 dorsally in „ ( Figures 11 View Figures 11–21 , 64 View Figures 62–72 ), a little shorter in ♀, reaching from stricture of segment 3 dorsally. Paraterga very poorly developed ( Figures 11–13 View Figures 11–21 , 64–67 View Figures 62–72 ), calluses virtually without denticles; calluses delimited by a sulcus both dorsally and ventrally, though ventral sulcus much finer than dorsal one, only present on segments 5, 7, 9–19, sometimes visible also on segment 8, a little more evident on pore-bearing segments; paraterga like more (porebearing segments) or less (poreless segments) evident ridges, slightly surpassing caudal tergal contour only on segment 2 ( Figures 11 View Figures 11–21 , 64 View Figures 62–72 ). Axial line from visible in places („) or wanting (♀) to evident from anterior part of collum to end of segment 19. Transverse sulcus on segments 4–19 in „, on segments 5–19 in ♀, usually only traceable, but sometimes wanting on segment 19, nearly reaching base of paraterga 4, 6, and 19, reaching the base on other segments ( Figures 11–13 View Figures 11–21 , 65–67 View Figures 62–72 ) in „, but only reaching base of paraterga 9, 10, 12, 13, and 15 in ♀. Surface of anterior halves of metaterga transversely rugose to rugulose ( Figures 12, 13 View Figures 11–21 , 65–67 View Figures 62–72 ); rear halves of metaterga 18 and 19 in „ smooth to rugose, collum and anterior metaterga rugulose; rear halves of metaterga rugose from midbody segments to segment 19 in ♀; metazona below paraterga rugulose sublongitudinally over posterior halves, evidently granular until segment 7, thereafter increasingly poorly granulose subcaudally on segments 8–18, the grains remaining only on, but not above, pleurosternal carinae on segments 5 and 6, sometimes evidently granular only until segment 5 in „, evidently granular only until segment 4 in ♀. Tergal setae short, pattern 2+2 anteriorly on collum and 1+1 also anteriorly on segment 2, onward abraded. Pleurosternal carinae evident on segments 2–7, like narrow rounded ridges on segments 2–4 ( Figures 11 View Figures 11–21 , 64 View Figures 62–72 ), like wider ridges on segments 5 and 6, with small but evident teeth caudally on segments 2 and 6, like a particularly prominent caudal tooth still failing to surpass rear contour on segment 7; thereafter carinae increasingly poorly developed, expressed like low rugulose bosses, until segment 10 more or less clearly delimited dorsally by a curved shallow sulcus or line, devoid of caudal teeth ( Figures 12 View Figures 11–21 , 67 View Figures 62–72 ); sometimes carinae rather well visible on segments 2–7, like narrow rounded ridges on segment 2, like wider ridges on segments 3 and 6, without teeth caudally on segments 2 and 6, but always with a particularly prominent caudal tooth on segment 7 in „, evident and like narrow rounded ridges on segments 2–4 in ♀. Epiproct very long in lateral view, ratio of epiproct length to pre-epiproct length of telson 1:1.9 ( Figure 69 View Figures 62–72 ), very faintly emarginate in dorsal view; pre-apical papillae evident to nearly wanting ( Figures 14 View Figures 11–21 , 68 View Figures 62–72 ). Hypoproct ( Figures 15 View Figures 11–21 , 70 View Figures 62–72 ) roundly subtrapeziform, 1+1 setae at caudal corners situated on very small, well-separated knobs.

Sterna not modified except for a subtriangular, very narrowly notched to rather broad, more or less long, linguiform, setose lamina between „ coxae 4 ( Figures 16, 17 View Figures 11–21 , 71, 72 View Figures 62–72 ) and a paramedian pair of strong setae between „ coxae 5 ( Figures 17 View Figures 11–21 , 72 View Figures 62–72 ); subsequent pregonopodial sterna with traces of paramedian pairs of bunches of long setae.

Legs 1 to those of segments 14–17 with tarsal brushes ( Figure 18 View Figures 11–21 ), setation gradually thinning out toward telson, usually replaced by relatively modest setation after segment 15 in „. Legs long, mostly.2 („) ( Figures 12 View Figures 11–21 , 67 View Figures 62–72 ) or ca 1.5 times (♀) as long as midbody height.

Gonopods ( Figures 19–21 View Figures 11–21 , 103–108 View Figures 103–108 ) complex, much as in N. hsientienensis , but lamella l with a smooth margin, divided in the middle into two similarly sized parts, end of sph either not divided into distinct lobes ( Figure 19 View Figures 11–21 ) or consisting of three lobules: A and an emarginate B, latter forming a separate D ( Figures 103–105 View Figures 103–108 ); a small lamina (m) present at base of solenomere on dorsal side.

Remarks

The neotype was collected from about 30 km south of the type locality. Although the original description of this species ( Wang 1957b) is even poorer than that of the previous species, all of the characters that are mentioned or illustrated tally, such as body size, the dark brown coloration with a non-contrasting lighter pattern, and even the gonopod outlines, with an easily recognizable lobe l 9.

R

Departamento de Geologia, Universidad de Chile

ZMUM

Zoological Museum, University of Amoy

Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF