Hypochthonius C. L. Koch

van der Hammen, L., 1959, Berlese's Primitive Oribatid Mites, Zoologische Verhandelingen 40, pp. 1-93 : 14

publication ID	ORI111
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0DC6B575-3CB3-41C1-A3EC-850520AE4487
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6285260
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/9FCCF81E-DC99-DFE8-2C8C-EFAA30726EB6
treatment provided by	Thomas
scientific name	Hypochthonius C. L. Koch
status

Treatment

Hypochthonius C. L. Koch View in CoL , 1836

Hypochthonius C. L. Koch, 1836, fasc. 3 (19, 20); 1842, vol. 3, p. 109.

Hypocthonius , Berlese, 1896a, fasc. 79 (11); 1896b, pp. 24, 25.

Hypochthonius , Berlese, 1910, p. 217; 1913a, p. 36.

In the above the development is explained of Berlese's conception of the genus Hypochthonius . Berlese (1913a) finally regarded the following species as representatives: rufulus C. L. Koch (the type of the genus), ventricosus Canestrini (a species of uncertain relationship, possibly Archegozetes ), pallidulus (non C. L. Koch; now Eniochthonius fam. Eniochthoniidae ), crosbyi Ewing (recently redescribed, although insufficiently, by Woolley, 1956, p. 290, figs. 3, 4; the species certainly does not belong to the Hypochthoniidae or the Eniochthoniidae ), and asiaticus Berlese (now Eohypochthonius ).

Berlese dated the genus Hypochthonius at first as 1842, and later as 1835; in fact the correct date is 1836. I remark that for some time Berlese spelt the generic name as Hypocthonius .