An overview of the extant genera and subgenera of the order Scolopendromorpha (Chilopoda): a new identification key and updated diagnoses Author Schileyko, Arkady A. schileyko1965@gmail.com Author Vahtera, Varpu varpu.vahtera@gmail.com Author Edgecombe, Gregory D. 0000-0002-9591-8011 schileyko1965@gmail.com text Zootaxa 2020 2020-08-10 4825 1 1 64 journal article 8703 10.11646/zootaxa.4825.1.1 5ab5f5c8-481e-4d1a-8643-21e72c367278 1175-5326 4402145 F230F199-1C94-4E2E-9CE4-5F56212C015F (!) Scolopendropsis Brandt, 1841 Figs 42–47 Synonyms. Rhoda Meinert, 1886: 188 syn. nov. Type species. Scolopendra bahiensis Brandt, 1841 (by original designation). Diagnosis. Cephalic plate considerably narrower than tergite 1 ( Fig. 45 ), with incomplete (but well-developed) posterior median suture extending for 1/2–3/4 of its length ( Fig. 46 , fig. 2 in Schileyko 2006 ), its posterior margin clearly overlapped by tergite 1. Forcipular tooth-plates well-developed ( Fig. 42 ), from visibly shorter to longer than trochantero-prefemoral process. Anterior part of pleuron includes a set of longitudinal pleurites coaxial with body axis (fig. 4 in Schileyko 2006 ); longitudinal pleurites are numerous and so closely stacked to each other that the intersclerite membrane (= membranous part of pleura) is inconspicuous between them (fig. 12 in Chagas-Jr et al. 2008). Spiracles open laterally, edges of peritrema not curved. Number of LBS either fixed as 21 or variable within a species, when variable either 21–23 (in Scolopendropsis bahiensis ) or 39–43 (in S . duplicata Chagas-Jr, Edgecombe & Minelli, 2008 ). Leg with tarsus 2 approximately twice as long as tarsus 1 ( Fig. 42 ), both tarsal spur and pretarsal accessory spines well-developed; tarsal spurs absent in Rhoda thayeri (= Scolopendropsis thayeri (Meinert, 1886) syn. nov. ; see below). Pretarsi with abrupt transition from a pale-coloured proximal third to a strongly pigmented distal two-thirds, the latter has a concave ventral surface bounded laterally by sharp marginal ridges. Ultimate segment ( Figs 47 ) considerably (sometimes nearly twice) longer than penultimate ( Fig. 45 ). Coxopleuron lacking processes, with a spine in its place ( Fig. 43 ); ultimate sternite with well-developed median longitudinal sulcus/depression. Ultimate legs truly “pincer-shaped” ( Figs 45, 47 ), prefemur with spines; pretarsus elongated (but no longer than ultimate tarsus 2) and falcate, lacking accessory spines. Number of species. 5. Sexual dimorphism. Unknown. Remarks. Treated as a genus (“ Scolopendropsis incl. Rhoda ”) in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 399) . The most recent morphological accounts on this genus are those by Schileyko (2006) and Chagas-Jr et al. (2008). Schileyko (2006: 15) noted that such an unusual structure/composition of the pleuron (see above) is “unique among Scolopendromorpha ”; in fact the similar morphology is also observed (at least) in Cormocephalus mediosulcatus Attems, 1928 (see Chagas-Jr et al. 2008: 37) and in Scolopendra afer (Meinert, 1886) . Schileyko (2009: 519) stated that the elongation of the ultimate LBS always correlates with the ‘pincer’-shaped ultimate legs ( Fig. 45 ) and “Such an enlargement may be due to the presence of enlarged muscles, which are necessary to manipulate these appendages”. It should be noted also that such a structure (with their ventral surface concave) of pretarsi of locomotory legs is very unusual among scolopendromorphs, which normally have these pretarsi round/oval in cross-section. FIGURES 73–77. Notiasemus glauerti Koch, 1985 ; WAM 97/2921 (photos by Dr. Markus Koch) 73 LBS 12–21 + ultimate legs ventro-laterally 74 apical part of maxilla 2 laterally 75 head + LBS 1 dorsally 76 head + forcipular segment ventrally 77 general view dorso-laterally; ( as )—accessory spines, ( cp )—coxopleural process, ( cst )—forcipular coxosternite, ( p2 )— pretarsus of maxilla 2, ( pl )—pleuron, ( pr )—much reduced trochantero-prefemoral process, ( s )—spiracle covered by flap, ( T1 )—tergite 1, ( tp )—forcipular tooth-plates, ( ul )—ultimate leg, ( ut )—ultimate tergite. Schileyko (2006) analyzed in details the closest similarity of Scolopendropsis and Rhoda based on several unique synapomorphies, but kept the latter as an independent genus for “formal reasons alone” ( Schileyko 2006: 16 ). Subsequent studies of this monophyletic group have confirmed the closest relations between Scolopendropsis and Rhoda (Chagas-Jr et al . 2008), and no diagnostic characters serve to separate them. Taking in consideration these facts we consider Rhoda Meinert, 1886 to be a junior synonym of Scolopendropsis Brandt, 1841 syn. nov.