DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15141989
title: Table 2 in Towards elucidating species diversity of European inland Strigamia (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha): a first reassessment integrating multiple lines of evidence

description: Table 2. Main differential characters between the species complexes of Strigamia in the study area, according to the results of the species delimitation analyses and data from reliably assigned specimens and validated published records (see the Materials and Methods). The sample size ‘ N ’ includes both specimens examined directly and specimens reported in publications.
NameOperational definitionS. acuminataS. carniolensisS. crassipesS. engadinaspecies complexspecies complexspecies complexBody lengthLength without appendages: mode, maximumMode 21, maximum 35 mmMode 31, maximum 60 mmMode 20,Maximum 50 mm(N = 631)(N = 390)maximum 65 mm(N = 5)(N = 529)ArrangementSetae on anterior clypeus:three groups vs. continuousThree groups: 100% (N = 301)Continuous row: 92%Continuous row: 99%Continuous row:of clypeal setaerowa(N = 83)(N = 235)100%(N = 2)Relative sizeForcipular tergite/head length: mean [minimum–0.34 [0.28–0.41]0.41 [0.34–0.51]0.43 [0.33–0.53]0.45 [0.41–0.48]of forcipular tergitemaximum]a(N = 72)(N = 47)(N = 97)(N = 2)Relative separationDistance between condyles of coxosternite/maximum1.9 [1.6–2.3]1.6 [1.4–1.8]1.8 [1.5–2.1]1.6 [1.6–1.6]of forcipuleswidth of trochanteroprefemur: mean [minimum–(N = 70)(N = 47)(N = 94)(N = 2)maximum]aPresence of projection onInternal margin of forcipular tibia: only small tubercle orSmall: 99%Large: 94%Large: 97%Large: 100%forcipular tibiashallow bump vs. large projectiona(N = 70)(N = 52)(N = 90)(N = 2)Relative sizeDistance between tip of tarsungulum and external hinge/0.82 [0.71–0.94]0.68 [0.63–0.77]0.75 [0.68–0.85]0.89 [0.84–0.94]of forcipular tarsungulumdistance between condyles of coxosternite: mean [mini-(N = 97)(N = 47)(N = 95)(N = 2)mum–maximum]aRelative sizeDistance between tip of denticle and forcipular external0.46 [0.39–0.52]0.62 [0.56–0.67]0.55 [0.48–0.62]0.50 [0.44–0.53]of forcipular denticlehinge/distance between tip of tarsungulum and external(N = 95)(N = 47)(N = 96)(N = 3)hinge: mean [minimum–maximum]aShapeExternal and internal margins of denticle of forcipularStraight: 99%Curved: 94%Curved: 100%Curved: 100%of forcipular denticletarsungulum: approximately straight vs. distinctly curved(N = 335)(N = 95)(N = 298):(N = 5)ShapeIntermediate part of external and internal margins ofConvergent: 91%Convergent: 100%Convergent: 100%Sub-parallel: 100%of forcipular tarsungulumforcipular tarsungulum (i.e., basal part of ungulum):Sub-parallel: 19%(N = 402)(N = 473)(N = 5)uniformly convergent vs. sub-parallel(N = 310)Number of legsNumber of leg-bearing segments37–4345–57 [males 45–55,37–6551–55[males 37–41,females 47–57][males 37–65,[males 51–53,females 39–43](N = 554)females 39–65]females 53–55](N = 1169)(N = 676)(N = 5)Presence of stripeMid-longitudinal sclerotized stripe at 20% of the series ofAbsent:100%Present: 100%Absent:100%Absent:100%on anterior sternitestrunk sternites:absent vs. present(N = 587)(N = 402)(N = 475)(N = 5)Average numberNumber of coxal pores on a coxopleuron at intermediateUsually ≤ 15Usually ≥ 25Usually ≤ 15Usually ≤ 15of coxal poresbody size (~25 mm long)(N = 552)(N = 288)(N = 508)(N = 5)Maximum numberMaximum number of coxal pores on a coxopleuron22563121of coxal pores(N = 592)(N = 314)(N = 569)(N = 5)Relative sizeMaximum diameter of coxal pores/head width0.03 [0.02–0.04]0.03 [0.02–0.05]0.06 [0.04–0.10]0.08 [0.07–0.08]of coxal pores(N = 74)(N = 47)(N = 100)(N = 2)Shape of coxal canalsDiameter of opening/diameter of canal:<1: 79%<1: 98%~1: 85%~1: 100%distinctly <1 vs. ~1a(N = 89)(N = 57)(N = 117)(N = 5)
aCharacter evaluated only in specimens> 15 mm long.
description: Published as part of Bonato, Lucio, Bortolin, Francesca, Zen, Giada De, Decker, Peter, Lindner, E. Norman, Orlando, Marco, Spelda, Jörg & Wesener, Karin Voigtländer and Thomas, 2023, Towards elucidating species diversity of European inland Strigamia (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha): a first reassessment integrating multiple lines of evidence, pp. 956 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 199 (4) on page 956, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlad070, http://zenodo.org/record/10470423