Stenotaenia rhodopensis, (KACZMAREK, 1970)

Bonato, Lucio & Minelli, Alessandro, 2008, Stenotaenia Koch, 1847: a hitherto unrecognized lineage of western Palaearctic centipedes with unusual diversity in body size and segment number (Chilopoda: Geophilidae), Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 153 (2), pp. 253-286 : 272

STENOTAENIA RHODOPENSIS ( KACZMAREK, 1970)

Geophilus rhodopensis Kaczmarek, 1970: 85 (original description), figs 2–3. Stoev, 2002: 90 (in key).

Type locality: ‘ Devin (NW-Rhodopen)’ = Devin ( Bulgaria) .

Type material: Holotype, male (according to the original description, but see below), 25-mm long; the specimen was originally deposited in the collections of the Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań.

Diagnosis: A Stenotaenia species of intermediate body size (total length reaching at least 2.5 cm); c. 55 leg-bearing segments; labrum with about five tubercles; first maxillae without distinct lappets on the coxosternum and with small lappets on the telopodites; chitin lines of the forcipular coxosternum reaching the anterior condyles; anterior margin of the forcipular coxosternum almost straight; forcipular intermediate articles distinct; sternal pore areas in the anterior part of the trunk subtriangular, longer than wide, and placed on the posterior half of each sternum; each coxopleuron with one anterior pouch with pores and one posterior single pore (see also Table 3).

Taxonomic history: After the original description by Kaczmarek (1970), it was recorded from other localities by Ribarov (1986, 1989, 1996) and by Stoev (2002). Its validity and its assignment to the genus Geophilus has never been questioned.

Assignment to Stenotaenia: It is assigned quite confidently to Stenotaenia (comb. nov.), as the detailed original description and illustrations document a combination of characters that are diagnostic for this genus (Table 2). Actually, the coxal glands were described as independently opening on the surface, but the accompanying drawing may be interpreted as an anterior pouch of aggregated pores and a single, large posterior pore, i.e. a pattern that is typical of Stenotaenia . The legs of the last pair were described and illustrated as quite slender in the holotype, which was identified as a male, but the accompanying drawing of the genital region suggests conversely that the holotype could actually be a female. The putative presence of five tubercles on the labrum and the evidence of a socket along the anterior margin of the anteriormost sterna, resembling a ‘carpophagus’ socket, as in many Geophilus species , are quite unusual features compared with other Stenotaenia species. However, the combination of all the other traits strongly supports the inclusion of this species in Stenotaenia . It is worth noting that Kaczmarek (1970), in describing G. rhodopensis , stated explicitly that it was very similar to S. linearis , which is the type species of Stenotaenia . Direct examination of specimens putatively representative of S. rhodopensis (identified as such by P. Stoev; see also Stoev & Lapeva-Gjonova, 2005) confirmed that they share all major diagnostic characters of Stenotaenia , including the absence of carpophagus sockets and the arrangement of coxal pores.

Validity: It is treated here as a distinct species, based on the original description and illustrations ( Table 3). However, some putative peculiar traits described in this species need to be evaluated in other specimens. It is worth noting that the putative specimens of S. rhodopensis examined directly by us (see Appendix) agree with the original description in the presence of some distinct tubercles on the labrum, namely two tubercles and two other close projections that resemble tubercles in colour. The actual relations of S. rhodopensis to other species deserve to be assessed, mainly in respect to S. antecribellata and S. cribelliger .

Distribution: It is known to occur in the Carpathian Mountains, the Rhodopes chain, and some neighbouring regions. It was recorded from differing localities from the Vitosha Mountains in the west, through the Sredna Gora, and the Rhodopes Mountains, to the Toundzha Plain and the Strandzha mountains in the east, but these subsequent records were not accompanied by evidence supporting the species identity in respect to other similar species.