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 Subfamily Scolopocryptopinae Pocock, 1896 Diagnosis. Antenna densely covered with collared sensilla apart from a few basal articles. Anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite sclerotized ( Fig. 8 ), sometimes with small processes ( Fig. 9 ), but never with well-developed tooth plates. Forcipular trochantero-prefemur with well-developed, simple (i.e. not furnished with additional tubercles) process ( Figs 8, 9 ). LBS 7 usually with spiracles (or without them in the former Dinocryptops ). Coxopleuron with conical process. Ultimate legs of “common” shape (sensu Schileyko 2009 ) i.e. the most similar to the locomotory ones ( Fig. 7 )—elongated, relatively slender and not transformed; ultimate prefemur with a single strong ventral and smaller dorsomedial spinous processes (the latter virtually absent in Scolopocryptops gracilis Wood, 1862 only), femur without those processes, pretarsus claw-shaped. FIGURES 1–6. Mimops orientalis Kraepelin, 1903 ; Holotype, ZMUH 1 head + LBS 1 dorso-laterally 2 forcipular segment ventrally 3 LBS 16–21 ventrally 4 LBS 21 dorso-laterally 5 LBS 21 ventro-laterally 6 ultimate legs; ( 20 )—leg 20, ( am )—anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite, ( cp )—coxopleural process, ( ll )—left ultimate leg, ( o )—single ocellus, ( ps )—sternal paramedian sutures, ( pt )—rudimentary process of forcipular trochantero-prefemur, ( rl )—right ultimate leg, ( ss )—numerous small spines, ( tas )—tarsal spur, ( tis )—tibial spur, ( ust )—ultimate sternite, ( ut )—ultimate tergite. Number of subtaxa. 1 genus. Sexual dimorphism. Unknown. Range. Temperate and tropical regions of North America, Central and South America, Caribbean Islands; W Africa; China , Japan , Korea , Vietnam , Philippines , Sunda Archipelago, New Guinea , Fiji . Remarks. Treated as a subfamily in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 403) , Vahtera et al . (2012a: 9) , Vahtera et al . (2012b: 232) , Edgecombe et al. (2012: 7687) . (!) Scolopocryptops Newport , 1844 Figs 7–10 Synonyms. Otocryptops Haase, 1887 ; Anethops Chamberlin, 1902 ; Dinocryptops Crabill, 1953 . Type species. Scolopocryptops melanostoma Newport , 1845 (by subsequent designation by Lucas, 1849) . Diagnosis. As for subfamily. Number of species. 25 (new data), 22 ( Edgecombe & Bonato 2011: 403 ), 24 ( Bonato et al . 2016 ). Remarks. Treated as a genus in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 403) , Vahtera et al. (2012a: 7) , Vahtera et al. (2012b: 232) , Edgecombe et al. (2012: 768) , Bonato et al. (2016) . The most recent morphological accounts on Scolopocryptops are those of Edgecombe et al. (2012) and Chagas-Jr & Bichuette (2015). The closely related genus Dinocryptops Crabill, 1953 (present in Edgecombe & Bonato 2011: 404 ) was formally placed in subjective synonymy under Scolopocryptops by Edgecombe et al. (2012: 777) : “… morphology-based analyses suggest that recognition of Dinocryptops leaves Scolopocryptops as a paraphyletic grouping ... The phylogenetic analyses described below strongly support the paraphyly of Scolopocryptops with respect to Dinocryptops , using morphological, molecular or combined data and we have accordingly placed Dinocryptops in subjective synonymy of Scolopocryptops ”.