MYRIAPODOLOGICA Virginia Museum of Natural History Vol. 8, No. 1 1 ISBN 0163-5395 Fcbruar>' 28, 2006 Comment on the milHped genus Eiphorus Chamberlin,! 951 (Diplopoda: Spirostreptidae) By Richard L. Hoffman ABSTRACT The genus Eiphorus is examined from both specimens and literature information, and considered to be valid and monotypic. The type species E. phanus Chamberlin, 1 95 1, is shown to be a subjective junior synonym of Synophryostreptus incertus Altcms, 1935, of uncertain generic identit) . The convoluted history of both names is summarized, some important anatomical features are discussed and illustrated, and a distribution map is also given. A sister-group taxon cannot be identified with present information. A large number of spirostreptid genera were proposed by R V. Chamberlin during the course of his publications on miscellaneous collections of millipeds from tropical regions. Despite the generally superficial treatment accorded these new taxa, a large number of them are fortuitously valid by default, for the reason that Chamberlin was the first person to describe mvTiapod material from many remote areas. Among the more interesting of Chamberlin's new African genera is Eiphorus, proposed in 1951 for the single species E. phanus from northeastern Angola. This genus was stated by its author to be " ..related most closely to the genus Kastinikus \sic! Kartinikus \ of Camcroun and South Africa" but the rationale for this opinion was not stated. Recently having had the opportunity to examine pertinent material in the collections of both Attems (Naturhistorisches Museum, Wien) and Chamberlin (U. S. National Museum, Washmgton), I found it possible to contribute something to the knowledge of this genus which now appears to be monotypic. My previous Scanned with permission by Virginia Tech Insect Systematics Group 2014 (www.jointedlegs.org) Myriapodologica \ 10 (1980: 93) statement that Eiphorus contains about five species was an error based on a misconception of the generic characters. As noted be> ond, Eiphorus is rather disjunct and until some other genera are studied more closely, especially as regards mouthparts, it will not be possible to postulate a 'sister-group' for it with an> confidence. Perhaps the information given here will suggest some clues for others to consider. Eiphorus. Eiphorus Chamberlin, 1951, Publ Cult. Companh. Diam. Angola, no. 10. p 88. Proposed witli a new species. Type species: E, phamis Chamberlin, by monot\py and original designation. -- Krabbe, 1982. Abh. Naturw. Vcrcin Hamburg, NF, no. 24, p. 139. Diagnosis: Moderately large, slendcr,spirostreptids (length to 1 70 mm), with 70- 71 segments. Oceliaria very^ large (Fig. 1), with 88 ocelli in 9 series (15-14-13-12- 10-9-7-5-3), separated by a space only equal to four ocelli (- 26% of an occllarial length); antennae unmodified. Gnathal lobe of mandible with 14(15) pectinate lamellae; margin of scctile scleritc completely smooth with no trace of lobes (Fig. 2). Ventral surface of mandibular stipe with an oval membranous siibapical convexity. Gnathochilarium (Fig. 3) of normal shape, stipes with distinct membranous surface around distal megaseta and two small isolated fields of short setae; lingual lamellae with the usual distal setae and an oblique subbasal row of 6 or 7 setae; mentum completely glabrous; prebasilar plate reduced to a large median and two smaller lateral sclerites widely separated by membrane. Hypostome with a small subtriangular median projection. First pair of legs (illustrated by Krabbe, 1982: fig. 133) of typical form, oral surface of coxal region with numerous dispersed setae, prcfemoral projection of modest size, subtriangular in form, prefemur per se with a few minute setae near midlcngth. Colluni of male moderately produced anteroventrad (Fig.4), with two or three sinuously curved sulci Body segments without modifications, metazona very slightly larger than prozona, the surface smooth but finely and densely punctate; prozona with about 15 concentric striae spaced increasingly wider postcriad, surface smooth with isodiamctiic mesh tc.xture except between segmental stricture and last stnae which is punctate like metazona. Sigilla variable in size and shape, in a single row. Sterna smooth Posterior coxal sockets open Legs long (length greater than body diameter), male with tibial and postfemoral pads except on last 15-16 pairs. Paraprocts without submarginal groove, not re- entrant. Gonopods (Fig. 5) of normal spirostreptid form, but with sclerotized, trapezoidal sternum coalesced with base of metaplicae; paracoxites relatively small, sigmoidalK reflexcd (Fig. 6). Apex of proplica (anterior coxal fold) moderately setose, rounded. Apex of mctaplica (posterior coxal fold) rounded, produced laterad into an elongate cone. Telopodite (Fig. 7) long and slender, region of torsion located far distad near Scanned with permission by Virginia Tech Insect Systematics Group 2014 (www.jointedlegs.org) Hof&nan: Eiphorus 111 center of curvature ("Knee") and, like the origin of antetorsal process, concealed m antcnor aspect by apex of anterior paragonocoel. Torsotope extended (Fig. 8), antetorsal process long, simple, slightly curved parallel to mam shaft of telopodite. Latter with large, flat, laminate, marginally transparent subapical lobe. Telopodites at rest held on anterior side ofgonopods, their apices overlapping in front of sternum. Species; Only one is recognized at prersent. Dfs i RiBirnoN; Zaire; northern Angola (Fig. 9). Comments: The generic position of E. incertus has been perplexing since the species was published; even the name seems particularly appropriate. Attems wrote "Diese Art gehort zweifellos in die kleine Gruppe der artenarmen Gattungen Globanus. Synophryostreptus^ Kartinikus und Aulonopygus, passt aber so gut in keine dieser Gattung liinein, so dass ich sie nur mit einigem Vorbehalt zur Gattung Synophryosireptiis stelle; ich scheue mich, eine neue Gattung fur diese Art aufzustellen, da es ja sonst wirklich dazu kommt, dass wir fur jede Art eine cigene Gattung haben. Bis dass mehr Arten aus dieser Gruppen bekannt sind, werden wir vielleicht leichter ihre naturliche Verwandschaft erkennen und besser den Umfang der Gattung bestimmen konnen." This doubt beset Attems for a long time and he changed his mind frequently. Specimens in his collection at Vienna stand under three generic names; Kartinikus, Synophryostrepius, and Doratogonus, sometimes all three names are on labels in one bottle. Chamberlin ( 1 95 1 ; 8 8) expressed the view that Eiphorus was most closely related to Kartinikus, without stating any particular evidence and without reference to Attems' earlier opinion. He had studied two male specimens, of which I have seen the male paratype, and it is an astonishing coincidence that the right telopodite m this specimen is deflected m almost exactly the same way as drawn by Attems in the original description of incertus. Not long afterwards, Kraus (1958; 67) studied material identified by him as phanus and stated his conviction that "Eiphorus ist ein sicheres Synonym von Kartinikus" . But in the same year, he (1958; 39) listed the species name incertus in Doratogonus, obviously unaware that incertus and phanus represent a single species. Perhaps he was just following Attems' 1950 allocation. Demange ( 1970: 376) admitted Eiphorus as valid but referred it to the status of "uncertain" genera. This position was essentially taken by the most recent commentator on the subject (Krabbe, 1982: 139), who thought substantial differences in details could be adduced for separation of Eiphorus from Kartinikus, but did not actually specify sister-group status for the two. As noted above, 1 am not able at present to establish the nearest relatives of Eiphorus. Of the several possibilities invoked by previous authors, both Syn- ophry^streptus and Globanus may be disqualified at once because of the normal Scanned with permission by Virginia Tech Insect Systematics Group 2014 (www.jointedlegs.org) Myriapodologi ca 112 position of the torsate region well distad of the flexure. Remaining are Karlimkus 20 \d An! onopygus^ both with the torsus located at or even proximad to the flexure. Both of these genera contain, however, species which are much smaller than E. incertns^ witli much lower segment numbers (49-56 as opposed to 70), smaller ocellaria, and smaller legs. The structure of tlieir mouthparts remains unknown to me. On balance, a close affinitv' of cither with Eiphonis seems unlikely. The significance of the notably proximal torsus is uncertain. It might be a primitive character or an independently evolved specialization: outgroup comparison offers no insights on this point, but the condition is extremely rare within the Spirostreptidae itself Throughout the erratic history of Eiphoms the status of phamts was not questioned or discussed by anyone. It continued to co-exist in the literature with incertns, which w as transferred from Synophnmsirepttis to Doratogonus b\ Kraus (1958b) - possibly on the basis of an Attemsian identification label - and then into Kartinikus, with some reservation, by Krabbc ( 1 982; 1 40). The parallel histories and separate identities of mcertus and phanns can now be terminated b\ the merger proposed herewith. Eiphorus mcertus (Attems). new combination (Figs. 1-8) 1935. Synophryostreptus incertus Attems, Rev. Zool. Bot. afr., vol. 26, p.l93, fig. 42. Numerous syntypes (MRAC) from seven localities (details in a subsequent paragraph), neither holotypc nor type locality was indicated and a lectotype has yet to be selected.. 1937. Synophr\H)Str€ptus incertus\ Attems, Explor. Parc Nat Albert, voi. 2. part 2, p. 15. 1950. Doratogonus incertus: Attems. Ann. Naturh. Mus. Wien. voi. 57. p. 189. 1951. Eiphorus phanns: Chamberlin, Publ. Cult. Comph. Diam. Angola, nr. 10, p. 88, figs. 54, 55. Holotype male (USNM) from Dundo, Angola, A. de Barros Machado leg. October 1946. New Synonymy! 1958. Doratogonus incertus: Kraus, Explor. Parc Nat. Upemba. pt. 54, p. 39. 1958. Kartinikus phanus: Kraus, Publ. Cult. Comph. Diam, Angola, nr. 38, p, 67. 1982. Eiphorus phanns: Krabbe, Abh, Naturw. Ver, Hamburg, NF, vol. 24, p. 1 39, figs. 133a-c. 1982. Kartinikus (?) incertus^ Krabbc, op. cit, p. 425. Comparison of the type material of 72 phanus with the published account of incertus and specimens so identified by Attems, convinces me - as did the original accounts of the two names - that onl)' a single species is involved. Eventual selection of a lcctot>pe from Attems’ numerous svnt\pes of incertus will also establish the restricted type locality. As I sec no appreciable geographic variation Scanned with permission by Virginia Tech Insect Systematics Group 2014 (www.jointedlegs.org) Hoffman: Eiphonts 113 in specimens examined from numerous localities within the species’ range, the possibility of salvaging phamis as a subspecies does not seem an option. 3 ^ 544 ^ cyizj / Figures 1-4. Eiphonts incertus (Atlems). peripheral characters. 1. Left side of head capsule, frontal aspect, to show large occllariiim and narrow intcrocellarial space. 2, Distal articles of mandible, showing absence of marginal lobes on the psectromcrc. 3. Gnathochilarium and base of mandible of right side showing membraneous areas on mandible and stipilal sclerites. 4. Right side of collum. Drawings from male paratype of Eiphonts phanus Chamberlin. Scanned with permission by Virginia Tech Insect Systematics Group 2014 (www.jointedlegs.org) 1 14 Mynapodologica Figures 5-8. Eiphoms incertus (Allems), gonopodal characters. 5. Right gonopod, anlcrior aspect. 6. Basal structures of right gonopod, lateral aspect. 7. Telopoditc of right gonopod, anterior aspect. 8. Torsal region of right telopodite, posterior aspect, showing extended torsotopc. Abbreviations: cx, coxa, ecs, ectosternal sclerite, ms. mesostcrnal sclerite, tc, tracheocoxal muscle, ts, tracheosternal muscle. Base of telopodite where coiilcsccd with ectostemum in black. Scanned with permission by Virginia Tech Insect Systematics Group 2014 (www.jointedlegs.org) Hoffman: Eiphorus 115 The descriptions given by Chamberlin and Attems are relatively complete and adequate. 1 can add (see generic diagnosis) only a few details about some characters neglected b\' niy predecessors, and provide some additional drawings to illustrate several of them. All of the localities mentioned under cither name are plotted on the map (Fig. 9) to show the rather extensive area occupied by the species. It seems reasonable to assume that it may be discovered m adjoining countries as well (Tanzania. Ruanda, Congo-Brazzaville). The original description of incerius mentioned specimens from Sankuru, Temvo, Boende. Lomani. Mukishi, Kwamouth, and Buscrcgcnyc without reference to a holot\pc. But in 1937, m his list of species known from tiic Albert National Park. Attems stated '"Buserengenye (Luja) (Typ.)'’, and perhaps it is justified to secure this tenuous indication by selecting a syntype from Buserengenye (Kivn),as lectotype of S. incertus. At my request. Dr. VandenSpiegel has identified a male specimen from that locality in the Tervuren collection (MRAC 1.806) and attached a lectotype designation which I provided for the purpose. It IS remarkable that until now , nobody working with these animals noticed the absolute identity of the gonopod draw ings published for incertus and phanus. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1 am indebted to Dr. Jurgen Gruber (Naturhistorisches Museum, Wien) for access to the Attems collection under his care, and Dr. Didier VandenSpiegel (Royal Museum for Central Africa, Tervuren) for assistance with the lectotype designation. REFERENCES Attems, C. 1935. Diplopoden des Bclgischcn Kongo (Fortsetzung 1). Rev. Zool. Bot. Afr.. 26; 327-396. Attems, C. 1937. Myriopodes, in; Exploration du Parc National Albert. I. Mission G. F. DeWitte (1933-1935). 2(2): 1-22. Attems, C 1950. Uber Spirostreptiden (Diplopoda). Ann. Naturh, Mus. Wien, 57; 179-257.. Chamberlin. R, V. 1951. On Diplopoda of North-East Angola. Publgoes cult. Comphan. Diam. Angola, 10: 65-93.. Demange. J.-M. 1970. Elements dhine revision des Spirostreptidae. I. Etude dc quelques caractcrcs taxonomiques des Spirostrcptinac. Bull. Inst. fr. Afr. noire. 32(A) 2: 366-411. Hoffman, R. L. 1980. Classification of the Diplopoda. Museum dHistoireNaturelle, Geneve. 239 pp. Scanned with permission by Virginia Tech Insect Systematics Group 2014 (www.jointedlegs.org) 1 ] 5 Mynapodologica Krabbe, E. 1982. Systeniatik der Spirostrcptidae (Diplopoda, Spirostreptomorpha). Abhandl. Natunv. Ver. Hamburg, NF 24; 1-476. Kraus. O. 1958. Diplopoden aus Angola. Publ^oes cult.Compaiih. Diam. Angola. 38: 49-84. Kraus, 0. 1958. Myriapoda, in: E.xploration du Parc National Upemba. Mission G. F. DeWitte, 54: 3-57. Address of the author; Dr. Richard L. Hoffinan Virginia Museum of Natural History Martinsville, Virginia 24112 Figure 9. Distribution records for Eiphorus incerius^ from published data and specimens personally examined. Scanned with permission by Virginia Tech Insect Systematics Group 2014 (www.jointedlegs.org)