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 Newportia ( Ectonocryptops ) Crabill, 1977 Fig. 14 Type species. Ectonocryptops kraepelini Crabill, 1977 (by original designation). Diagnosis. Anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite slightly convex, lacking projections; tarsungula long, overlapping each other by at least 1/3 of their length when adducted (fig. 2 in Shelley & Mercurio 2008 ). Ultimate leg tibia practically twice the length of tarsus 1 ( Fig. 14 ), with distomedial ventral uncinate process and glandular pores medially; tarsus 2 globose, small but well-developed ( Fig. 14 ). Number of species. 1. Remarks. Treated as a genus in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 405) , suggested as a subgenus of Newportia by Vahtera et al. (2013: 589) . The most recent account on this genus is Shelley & Mercurio (2008: 66) . (!) Newportia ( Ectonocryptoides ) Shelley & Mercurio, 2005 Figs 15–18 Type species. Ectonocryptoides quadrimeropus Shelley & Mercurio, 2005 (by original designation). Diagnosis. Anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite evidently convex, with “two low, additionally chitinised, lobes” ( Schileyko 2009: 529 ); tarsungula long, overlapping each other by at least 1/3 of their length when adducted ( Fig. 17 ). Ultimate leg tarsus 1 slightly longer than tibia ( Fig. 15 ), the latter with glandular pores ventrally, without distomedial uncinate process (see also fig. 1b in Cupul-Magaña 2015 ); tarsus 2 absent or rudimentary. Number of species. 2. Remarks. Treated as a genus in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 405) , Vahtera et al. (2012a: 12 , 13); suggested as a subgenus of Newportia by Vahtera et al. (2013: 589) , treated as a subgenus in Cupul-Magaña (2015) . The most recent morphological accounts on Ectonocryptoides are those of Schileyko (2009) and Koch et al . (2010) .