R. E. Crabill, Jr.
On the True Nature of the Azygethidae (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha).
Psyche 67:76-80, 1960.

Full text (searchable PDF, 304K)
Durable link: http://psyche.entclub.org/67/67-076.html

The following unprocessed text is extracted from the PDF file, and is likely to be both incomplete and full of errors. Please consult the PDF file for the complete article.

ON THE TRUE NATURE OF' THE AZYGETHIDAE
(CHILOPODA : GEOPHILOMORPHA)*
BY R. E, CRABILL, JR.
Smithsonian Institution, U. S. National Museum, Washington D. C. The family Azygethidae was proposed for the reception of a single genus and species, .+'zygethus atopus, by R. V. Chamberlin in his 1920 study1 of the +~~stralian region's rnyriopod fauna. The new group's suprageneric rank was defended really on two grounds. The ~~ltimate pedal segment reportedly had normal pleura1 sclerites, b~it even more remarkably this segment was said to bear a pair of spiracles. If the members of the genus did indeed all nor~~ially possess ultimate pedal se-ment spiracle?, then their allocation to a new family would surely be j~~stified, for they would thereby differ, not only from all other Geophilomorpha, but even from all other centipedes. This character was so extraordinary that, sixteen years later, At- tems expressed reservations as to its authenticity, and, regretting th~ total lack of figures, he urged that the specimen be re-examined. Nevertheless, in 1926~ he did include Azygethidae in his treatment clearly implying his suspicion that the critical character might have been misrepresented originallv.
And there the matter has remained until the present. No subse- quent specimens of atopus have ever been discussed. No new species have ever been referred to the family. The original types have never been re-examined. In short, no corroborative evidence has ever been adduced in support of Chamberlin's original interpretation. Furthermore, if we were to discount, for the moment, the spiracles and pleurites of the ultimate pedal segment and then attempt to imagine to what other family and genus the species could belong, our endeavor would prove fruitless. There are so many critical errors in the original description to lead one astray, that even a man of At- *This study was undertaken with the aid of a grant from the National Science Foundation and is published with the aid of a grant from the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. 'The Myriopoda of the Australian Region, Bull. Mus. Comp. 2001. Harvard, 64(1) : 32, (1920).
'Handbuch der Zoologic, Kukenthal and Krurnbach, Bd. 4: 366, (1926). of families. Two years later he failed even to mention the name3, but 'The Myriopoda of South Africa, Ann. South African Museum, 26, (1928). in his great monograph of 1g2g4 he referred to the family again, 4Geophilomorpha, in Das Tierreich, Lief. 52: 347, (1929).



================================================================================

tems' broad experience and at times almost clairvoyant insight could not possibly have guessed to which of the existing genei-a and families atofius might be referrable.
Thanks to the hospitality of Dr. Herbert W. Levi) who is in charge of the Arachnida and Myriapoda at Hal-vard's hluseum of Comparative Zoology) I have been able to study the holotype and paratype. Both are fenmles that were collected by W. $1. Mann at Levuka on Fiji. Without the slightest doubt in my mind, both are referrable to the 01-yid Orfih,naeus brevilahiatus (Newport). which is the most widespsead and common geophilomorph of the world's tropics.
Let us examine certain parts of the original description in light of what the type specimens themselves disclose. I shall not discuss those features that ase accurately) or essentially accurately, described therein. The mandible is said to have ('a single pectinate lamella". At lower magnifications this appears superficially to be the case; however, optima1 preparation and observation reveal the mandibles unquestion- abl~7 to be those of an oryid; they are not geophiliform. The pectinate lamellae are simply presscd tightly against the distal end of the man- dible, giving it) at first sight, a geophiliform appearance. The ('coxae", i. e. the coxosternal sides) of the first maxillae are reportedly "wholly discrete)') that is) totally separated. If the reader will examine figure I, plate 10) he will see that the coxosternum is continuous and that there is not the slightest division at point E. The two medial processes or lobcs, D) ai-e of course discrete) as they al- ways are. Perhaps Dr. Chamberlin confused the two in preparing his original analysis.
Ventral pores are said to be absent, but ventral pores are present and) in aggregate) form the patterns that are so distinctive of brlevila- biatus.
"Last pediferous segment with coxae distinct from the pleurae. . ." . Precisely what Chambeslin meant here is unclear; however) his use of the world pleurae) which is plural) implies a reference to pleural sclerites rather than to lateral body wall or membrane. In fact, be- tween the leg base and tergite there is a weakly sclerotized plate-like protuberance which appears to b~ an out-folding of the lateral body wall (plate 10, fig. 2) 5'). This same structure is to be seen in speci- mens of 0. brevilabiatus; it is more pronounced in some than others, Probably it represents an abortive paratergite) a serial homologue of the more anterior, typical paratergites. In any event) the statement



================================================================================

? 8 PS~C~C [September
on p. 32, that "the pleural plates of the segment [are] normal" is quite misleading.
Finally, the ultimate pedal segment was reported to have a pair of spiracles, and in fact it has such spiracles (fig. 2, F). At the same time, there are mitigating circumstances. First, these spiracles occur only on the holotype: the paratype, otherwise identical with it, lacks them altogether. Secondly, the nature of the holotype's spiracles clearly suggests them to be anomalous, in this case probably ontogene- tic freaks. Both are abortive, the left one more so than the right, and there is no evidence that either was ever functional, Both evidently lack a connection with the tracheal chain linking the more anterior, normal spiracles.
Such spiracular anomalies are not unknown. Indeed, I have report- ed having found one in a cryptopid centipede, ScoZo~ocry~tops sex- spinosa (Say) 5. In this case anomalous spiracles were discovered on the 7th pedal segment, which normally lacks them, although in a related genus, Dinocryptops, the 7th segment normally has them. Thereby the old mystery surrounding the apocryphal family Azyge- thidae appears to be resolved. Azygethus atopus Chamberlin is a junior synonym of Orphnams brevilabiatus (Newport), and Azyge- thidae falls as a junior synonym of Oryidae. In closing I cannot help but wonder what other chilopod names owe their raison dJi?tre to noth- ing more than to such sporadic, anomalous characters, and how long they will continue to obscure the real fabric of the system before their paroles are terminated.
'On the reappearance of a possible ancestral characteristic in a modern chilopod, Bull. Brooklyn Ent. SOC., 50 (5) : 133-136, (1955). EXPLAXATION OF PLATE 10
Azygethus atopus Chamberlin
Figure 1. Paratype. First maxillae: left two-thirds, with adjacent second maxillae, the setae deleted. AzIappet of coxosternum. Bzlappet of telopodite. Cztelopodite. DEright medial lobe. E=coxosternum. F=hid- den continuation of coxosternum concealed beneath anterior edge of second maxillary coxosternum.
Figure 2. Holotype. Posterior-most body segments : right side tilted slightly downward, setae deleted. Aztergum covering the postpedal seg- ments. B=tergite of ultimate pedal segment. CzPretergite of ultimate pedal segment. D=Tergite of penultimate pedal segment. Exright ultimate
leg. F=Spiracle and plate-like bulge of ultimate pedal segment. GZCoxo- pleuron. HZParapretergite. IxStigmopleurite of penultimate pedal seg- ment. JzParatergite of penultimate pedal segment.



================================================================================




================================================================================

CAMBRIDGE ENTOMOLOGICAL CLUB
A regular meeting of the Club is held on the second Tuesday of each month October through May at 8:OO p.m. in Room B-455, Biological Laboratories, Divinity Ave,, Cambridge. Entomologists visiting the vicinity are cordially invited to attend. The illustration on the front cover of this issue of Psyche shows the head of the worker of Afyrmoieras larnyi Gregg. The original, drawti by Dr. R. E. Gregg, was published in Psyche, Volume 61, P. 21, 1954.
BACK VOLUMES OF PSYCHE
The Cambridge Entomological Club is able to offer for sale the following vol~~rnes of Psyche.
Volunws 3, dl, 5, 6, 7, 8, each covering a period of three years. $8.00 each.
Volun~es 10, 14, 17 to 26, each covering a single year, $2.00 each. Volumes 27 to 53, each covering a single year, $2.50. Volumes 544 to 65, each covering a single year, $3.00. Volume 66, covering a single year, $5.00. Some other volumes, lacking certain issues, are also available (information upon request) .
Orders for 10 or more volumes subject to a discount of 10yc. All orders should be addressed to
F. M. CARPENTER, Editor of Psyche,
Biological Laboratories,
Harvard University,
Cambridgey Mass.




================================================================================