An arrangement of the Geophilidae, a family of Chilopoda

Cook, O. F.

doi:10.5479/si.00963801.18-1039.63

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Geophilomorph mandibles have generally been described using a terminology applied to other groups of chilopods, with reference to one or more pectinate lamellae (‘pectinate laminae’ in some literature) and a dentate lamella (‘dentate lamina’). We endorse the view of Cook (1896: 63), among others, who considered, ‘The compound pectinate lamellae of Dicellophilus , Orya and Himantarium are evidently the homologues of the laciniate processes of the mandibles of Scolopendridae and Lithobiidae’. This homology was disputed by Verhoeff (1918 in Verhoeff, 1902–1925), who regarded the pectinate lamellae of Geophilomorpha to be novel structures.…”

Section: Phylogenetic Analysissupporting

confidence: 64%

The preoral chamber in geophilomorph centipedes: comparative morphology, phylogeny, and the evolution of centipede feeding structures

Koch

Edgecombe

2012

Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geophilomorpha differ from other Chilopoda with respect to feeding mechanisms, having an inferred prevalence of food intake by pharyngeal sucking, and all components of the preoral chamber, mandibles, and head endoskeleton are so modified that inferring homologies with other chilopods is a challenge. Light and scanning electron microscopic documentation of the epipharynx, hypopharynx, mandibles, tentorium, and pharynx in 26 species sampling ten families of Geophilomorpha adds 24 phylogenetically informative new characters to a published morphological dataset for phylogenetic analysis. The mandibular gnathal edge of Geophilomorpha is recognized as being composed of pectinate lamellae only, i.e. lacking a molar plate and true teeth; the sclerotized lamellae traditionally identified as dentate are a modified pectinate lamella. An inferred transformation of the gnathal edge within Adesmata involves a reduction in the number of pectinate lamellae and their re-arrangement from imbricate to continuously aligned along the edge. Geophilid mandibles maintain a single pectinate lamella, to which the armature of the former ventral margin of the gnathal lobe is added distally to envelop the hypopharynx. This distal prolongation of the gnathal edge and transformation of the hypopharnyx into a tapering cone contribute new support for the monophyly of Geophilidae under implied character weighting. The interpretation that geophilomorphs have an immobile tentorium is consistent with the anatomy of Adesmata, but tentorial muscles in Placodesmata suggest mobility. Sensilla arrangements on the epi-and hypopharynx provide new characters for a grouping of Oryidae, Himantariidae, Schendylidae, and Ballophilidae, although cladistic analysis with other morphological characters also places Gonibregmatidae within this clade.

show abstract

Section: Phylogenetic Analysissupporting

confidence: 64%

The preoral chamber in geophilomorph centipedes: comparative morphology, phylogeny, and the evolution of centipede feeding structures

Koch

Edgecombe

2012

Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the moment, we propose to ignore the traditional subgenera within Mecistocephalus . In the same vein, we have already proposed to abandon Megethmus Cook, 1896, a nominal genus introduced for Mecistocephalus microporus , which clearly falls within the radiation of Mecistocephalus (Bonato et al ., 2001).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Included genera. Dicellophilus Cook, 1896 (four species); Anarrup Chamberlin, 1920 (= Sundarrup Attems, 1930) (two species); Proterotaiwanella Bonato, Foddai & Minelli, 2002 (two species).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nomenclature. The name was originally proposed by Cook (1896) as family Dicellophilidae, to include all the mecistocephalid species described to that time. Hence, equivalent to Mecistocephalidae Bollman, 1893.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Included genera. Mecistocephalus Newport, 1843 (= Lamnonyx Cook, 1896; Megethmus Cook, 1896. Including also: Brachyptyx Chamberlin, 1920; Dasyptyx Chamberlin, 1920; Ectoptyx Chamberlin, 1920; Pauroptyx Chamberlin, 1920; Formosocephalus Verhoeff, 1937) ( c .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evolutionary trends and patterns in centipede segment number based on a cladistic analysis of Mecistocephalidae (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha)

Bonato¹,

Foddai²,

Minelli³

2003

Systematic Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Evolutionary changes in segment number during the radiation of Mecistocephalidae, a group of geophilomorph centipedes with segment number usually invariant at the species level, were explored based on a cladistic analysis of forty‐six mecistocephalid species, representative of the extant diversity in segment number. The data matrix included 118 morphological characters. Trends were recognized in the evolution of segment number and discussed in relation to the underlying ontogenetic mechanisms of segmentation. The basic trend was towards an increasingly higher number of leg‐bearing segments, from (most probably) forty‐one to sixty‐five (101 in one exceptional case). Changes always involved even sets of segments. Additions of two, four or eight segments usually occurred, but a case of overall duplication of the whole number was also documented. Most changes occurred starting from values belonging to the arithmetical series forty‐one, forty‐five, forty‐nine, whereas the intermediate values forty‐three, forty‐seven, fifty‐one were often evolutionary dead‐ends. This evidence suggests a multiplicative mechanism of segmentation involving one or more final run of duplication, as well as a precise control of the final number of segments which produces absolute number stability, except for a single, highly derived species with an exceptionally high number of segments. These ideas contribute to a more general model of arthropod segmentation recently developed by Minelli. A taxonomic revision of mecistocephalids is presented: three subfamilies are proposed (Arrupinae, Dicellophilinae and Mecistocephalinae) and Sundarrup is recognized as a junior synonym of Anarrup.

show abstract

The second Mecistocephalus centipede without a spiculum: Mecistocephalus aspiculus sp. n. from south China (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha: Mecistocephalidae)

Zhao,

You,

Jiang

2024

Journal of Natural History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An arrangement of the Geophilidae, a family of Chilopoda

Abstract: That the genera included in this family present structural characters of great diversity has been known since the publication of Mei-

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

The preoral chamber in geophilomorph centipedes: comparative morphology, phylogeny, and the evolution of centipede feeding structures

The preoral chamber in geophilomorph centipedes: comparative morphology, phylogeny, and the evolution of centipede feeding structures

Evolutionary trends and patterns in centipede segment number based on a cladistic analysis of Mecistocephalidae (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha)

The second Mecistocephalus centipede without a spiculum: Mecistocephalus aspiculus sp. n. from south China (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha: Mecistocephalidae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About