Cryptocorypha Attems, 1907

Enghoff, Henrik, 2022, A mountain of millipedes X: Species of Pyrgodesmidae and Cryptodesmidae in the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania (Diplopoda, Polydesmida), European Journal of Taxonomy 845, pp. 66-100 : 67-69

Genus Cryptocorypha Attems, 1907

Type species

Cryptocorypha stylopus Attems, 1907 , Java, by monotypy.

Other included species

Twenty-eight, including three new species described below. See Golovatch (2019) and Likhitrakarn et al. (2019).

Remarks

This genus was recently reviewed by Golovatch (2019) building on several other recent treatments ( Golovatch et al. 2017; Likhitrakarn et al. 2019).

An extensive diagnosis of the genus Cryptocorypha was provided by Golovatch (2019). This diagnosis (actually more like a general description) is reproduced here, with necessary updates to accommodate the new species, plus some linguistic and terminological adjustments, but without reference to specific species and illustrations:

A genus of small Pyrgodesmidae (3–15 mm long) with a strongly flat body and high paraterga. Adult body with 17 or 18 podous rings in both sexes, but more usually with 17 podous rings in ♂ and 18 podous rings in ♀. Head usually unmodified, only in several Afrotropical species with a paramedian pair of vertigial humps (only in ♂ or both in ♂ and ♀). Antennae C-shaped, mostly exposed, antennomere 6 the largest; interantennal isthmus> 1.6 × diameter of antennal socket. Collum flabellate, fully or almost fully covering head from above, fore margin regularly convex, not or nearly not lobulated, but with 6+6 (sub)equal sectors divided by 11 radii; central part usually with two transverse rows of 3+3 and 2+2 flat, roundish or transversely oval bosses or low tubercles; sometimes both rows and knobs vague. Postcollum metaterga each with three transverse rows of regular, non-differentiated, flat bosses or low rounded tubercles partly extending onto paraterga. Lateral margin of postcollum paraterga always indistinctly lobulated, without porosteles: paraterga 2 and 3 invariably trilobate, following ones 3-, 4- or 5-lobate, but poreless paraterga mostly showing fewer lobulations (typically three) than pore-bearing ones (typically four). Anterolateral lobulations absent, but 1–3 caudolateral ones mostly present. Tergal setae missing in most species. Pore formula normal (5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15–18(19)), ozopores inconspicuous, open flush on tergal surface near base of penultimate lateral lobulation. Telson fully exposed in dorsal view, epiproct conical. Last tibia or both last and penultimate tibiae (♂ and / or ♀) often, but not always with an apicodorsal trichostele (= a long tactile seta on stalk or knob). Gonopods from relatively simple to complex, typically clearly transverse; coxae globose, each usually with one or a few strong setae, laterally papillate and microsetose, usually divided by a central sternal tubercle; cannulae unmodified curved tubes; telopodites remaining well-exposed beyond a small to modest gonocoel, each typically tri- or quadripartite, consisting of a distinct mesal solenomere branch mostly flanked by a more or less prominent, membranous, sometimes ornate, sac- or lobe-shaped, anterolateral velum, and a normally long and lateral exomere process. Sometimes velum and exomere fully fused into a single sac-shaped structure, or velum more or less strongly appressed to exomere or endomere, leaving gonopodal telopodite bi- or slightly tripartite. When telopodite clearly quadri- or tripartite, a more or less evident endomere branch normally also distinct. (Modified from Golovatch 2019.)

Transforming this extensive characterization into a differential diagnosis of Cryptocorypha is not possible, not the least considering the high degree of variability in gonopod structure among the included species. The genus obviously belongs to the “ Pyrgodesmidae cryptodesmiformes”, an informal grouping named by Mauriès & Maurin (1981) for several genera of Pyrgodesmidae with a superficial resemblance to species of Cryptodesmidae . Neither Mauriès & Maurin (1981) nor any subsequent author has provided a more strict diagnosis of this grouping or an account of its content. As examples of cryptodesmiform pyrgodesmids Mauriès & Maurin (1981) mentioned the genera Dusboscquiellina Brolemann, 1926 and Cachania Schubart, 1955 . Based on available literature ( Brolemann 1926, Schubart 1955, Golovatch & VandenSpiegel 2014), Cryptocorypha differs from Dusboscquiellina by the unmodified third male femur (tuberculate in Dusboscquiellina) and from Cachania by the lobulated / striate collum (neither lobulated nor striate in Cachania ).

While Cryptocorypha thus remains poorly diagnosed, it serves as a useful temporary ‘home’ for several Afrotropical and Oriental cryptodesmiform pyrgodesmids. Future revisionary and phylogenetic studies will probably reshuffle the taxonomy of the species currently ascribed to the genus, as well as pyrgodesmid (and cryptodesmid, see Discussion) taxonomy in general.

Golovatch (2019) gave a provisional key to the 25 Cryptocorypha species recognized at that time, and Likhitrakarn et al. (2019) gave details about the species known to them.