Clinopodes latisternus ( Attems, 1947 ) Bonato & Iorio & Minelli, 2011

Bonato, Lucio, Iorio, Étienne & Minelli, Alessandro, 2011, The centipede genus Clinopodes C. L. Koch, 1847 (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha, Geophilidae): reassessment of species diversity and distribution, with a new species from the Maritime Alps (France), Zoosystema 33 (2), pp. 175-205 : 190-191

Clinopodes latisternus ( Attems, 1947) n. comb.

TYPE MATERIAL AND TYPE LOCALITY. — One specimen, holotype ; from “Cilicischer Taurus” (= Taurus Mountains [ Turkey]) ( Attems 1947) .

SYNONYMS. — Pleurogeophilus turkensis Chamberlin, 1952 , n. syn. (see below) (type material and type locality: holotype, from Mt Honaz [ Turkey]).

NOMINAL SUBSPECIES. — None.

MAIN REFERENCES. — Attems 1947: 64 (original description, as Pleurogeophilus latisternus ), 125 (in key); Chamberlin 1952: 204 (original description of Pleurogeophilus turkensis ).

MATERIAL EXAMINED. — None.

DIAGNOSIS. — A Clinopodes species with 69-75 pairs of legs; denticles of the forcipular coxosternite relatively short, wider than long; chitin-lines reaching the condyles; coxal organs opening through independent pores on the ventral side of the coxopleura. See also Table 3 and key to species.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION. — Southern Anatolia ( Turkey) (only two localities known).

TAXONOMIC AND NOMENCLATURAL NOTES Clinopodes latisternus n.comb. was originally described by Attems (1947) as a species of Pleurogeophilus . No other specimens were identified subsequently, and it was merely registered as a species of uncertain identity by Zapparoli (1999).A dubious record given by Zapparoli (1999) as “ Mersin?” is simply derived from a tentative interpretation of the type locality (Zapparoli pers. com.). The species is assigned here for the first time to the genus Clinopodes . According to the original description and illustrations ( Attems 1947), P.latisternus has a combination of characters unambiguously diagnostic for Clinopodes , namely the structure of the labrum, the overall features of the forcipular segment including the denticles on the anterior margin of the coxosternite and the chitin-lines, the presence of carpophagus sockets, the pattern of sternal pores, the shape of the metasternite of the ultimate leg-bearing segment, the arrangement of the coxal pores, and the lack of claws on the ultimate legs. Further support comes from the fact that the three differences listed by Attems (1947) between P. latisternus and P. mediterraneus (pattern

of sternal pores, shape of ultimate metasternite, and

arrangement of coxal pores) are actually differential characters between the two genera Clinopodes and Pleurogeophilus ( Table 2).Though the original description of P. latisternus is incomplete and even vague on some characters, it suggests that P. latisternus is possibly different from all other species of Clinopodes (see Table 3), and therefore it is maintained here provisionally as a distinct species.

NOTES ON NEW SYNONYMIES

Pleurogeophilus turkensis was described by Chamberlin (1952) based on a single specimen from “Honoz daĞi” (= Mt Honaz [ Turkey]). No other specimens were subsequently assigned to this nominal species, which remained of uncertain identity and was even suspected to be a synonym of P. mediterraneus ( Zapparoli 1999) . Based on the original description ( Chamberlin 1952), P. turkensis can be confidently recognized to belong to Clinopodes , as it is characterized by a combination of traits obviously diagnostic for this genus, namely the features of the labrum and the forcipular coxosternite (including anterior denticles and chitin-lines), the pattern of sternal pore-fields, the shape of the metasternite of the ultimate leg-bearing segment, and the lack of claws on the ultimate legs. It is worth noting that P. turkensis was described by Chamberlin (1952) as similar to P. gorizensis (synonymized here under C. flavidus ; see above), and putatively differing from the latter in the shape of the labrum and the sternal pore-fields, which are actually more consistent with Clinopodes . Among the known species of Clinopodes , the relatively high number of trunk segments and the independently opening coxal organs described for P. turkensis , as well as the geographical provenance of the holotype, are all suggestive of its identity with C. latisternus .