identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03E1C602FFC3FFF2FCD4FE09432738F7.text	03E1C602FFC3FFF2FCD4FE09432738F7.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus Attems 1898	<div><p>GENUS PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS ATTEMS, 1898</p> <p>(FIGS 1–8)</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus Attems, 1898: 270, 479. – Attems, 1914: 161. – Brölemann, 1916: 569. – Attems, 1926: 139. – Verhoeff, 1929: 619. – 1931: 305, figs 1–7. – Attems, 1940: 139, figs 201, 202. – Carl, 1941: 291, figs 1, 2. – Chamberlin, 1943c: 17. – Hoffman, 1950: 222, fig. 4. – 1974: 346 (= Dixidesmus). – [Withrow, 1988: 64.] – Hoffman, 1999: 442. – Djursvoll et al., 2000: 40.</p> <p>Dixidesmus Chamberlin, 1943c: 18. – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 65.</p> <p>Type species: Polydesmus canadensis Newport, 1844. By monotypy.</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Body form: Adult members of the genus Pseudopolydesmus always with 20 body rings including telson (never 19). Lateral corners of collum equal or exceed maximal width of mandibular stipites (narrower in Polydesmus and Brachydesmus, e.g. Djursvoll et al., 2000: 43, fig. 2a), except in Ps. paludicolus. Colour of adults in life ranging from dark brick red (Fig. 1A) to light chestnut brown (Fig. 1B).</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture: Paranota mostly level, extending horizontally (Fig. 2). Leading margin flexed anterodorsad, forming a narrow rim. Tergal sculpture pattern (described above; Fig. 4) very similar to other members of Polydesmidae, such as Po. inconstans and Po. complanatus, the latter of which is the type species of Polydesmus. Tergal blister pattern in Pseudopolydesmus less distinct than the strongly impressed pattern of Polydesmus. Unlike Po.inconstans and Po. complanatus, tergal setae not usually visible under dissecting microscope except in Ps. paludicolus, but may be visible with UV enhancement.</p> <p>Gonopod: Gonocoxae large, with two long setae at the ventromedial margin. Posterior margin of gonocoxa divided into ventral and dorsal plate-like lobes that partly surround the telopodite basally. Ventral lobe with one or two gonocoxal plates stacked dorsoventrally. Telopodite falcate. Seminal canal originating medially before looping laterad, debouching at ectal base of pulvillus. Pulvillus entirely covered in bristles (Fig. 3). Seminal chamber large, with an associated duct (duct of the telopodite gland according to Verhoeff, 1931). Acropodite bearing between four and eight dentate to laminar processes along its ectal and medial surfaces; subterminally bearing from about ten to 60 terminal bristles (Fig. 5A, not socketed like true setae) similar in appearance to a toothbrush; terminally bifurcating into small ectal and medial processes or laminae too small to distinguish under dissecting microscope (Fig. 5B).</p> <p>Somatic male characters: Prefemora of all walking legs beginning with leg pair 3 (body ring 4) strongly swollen dorsad in Pseudopolydesmus males (Fig. 6A), much more than in Polydesmus males (Fig. 6C). Male sterna with prominent paired lobes or tubercles of various shapes between leg pairs of body rings 5, 6, 7 and 8 (Fig. 7), which carry stiff, peg-like setae, differing from the unmodified setae of the walking legs. Leg pair 3 (body ring 4) with a pair of low lobes in some species; leg pairs 4 and 5 (body ring 5) with prominent lobes; leg pair 6 (anterior legs of body ring 6) with strongly elongated tubercles; leg pair 7 with small tuft of peg-like setae; leg pair 9 (directly posterior to gonopods) with tubercles flattened into longitudinal ridges (Fig. 8); leg pair 10 (anterior leg pair of body ring 8) with prominent ventrad-directed tubercles. This is unlike male Polydesmus, in which tubercles of leg pairs 9 and 10 (the first two leg pairs directly posterior of the gonopods) are absent or very slight. In some species (e.g. in Ps. erasus) there is an additional pair of lobes at the base of leg pair 11.</p> <p>The species entries that form the remainder of the taxonomic section are presented in the order they appear in the above key to species. Each species name is given a comprehensive bibliography of published literature, including its junior synonyms and instances in which the name was misapplied. Notes are provided on the disposition of type material for each nominal species. Type abbreviations are as follows: HT, holotype; PT, paratype (s); ST, syntype (s). Names of states in the USA and provinces of Canada are shortened to their standard two-letter postal abbreviations. Specimen numbers of millipedes pictured in this paper that are not part of a type series are notated in bold with an asterisk, e.g. FMNH INS 312685 *.</p> <p>KEY TO SPECIES OF PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS MALES</p> <p>1 a. Large recurved e2 process or fused recurved e2+e3 process ………………………………………………… 2 b. e2 notrecurved………………………………………………………………………………………………………4</p> <p>2(1) a. Large recurved e2 not fused with e3 (Figs 10–12) …………………………………………………… Ps. erasus b. Fused e2+e3 process (Fig. 7) …………………………………………………………………………………… 3</p> <p>3(2) a. m3 process distolaterad of m2; e1 elongate (Fig. 14) ………………………………………… Ps. canadensis b. m3 absent; e1 absent or severely reduced (Fig. 16) ……………………………………………… Ps. collinus</p> <p>4(1) a. e3 large, spike-shaped; pulvillus large, rounded (Figs 18–20) ………………………………… Ps.pinetorum b. Ectal processes subtriangular or flanged; pulvillus pointed …………………………………………… … 5</p> <p>5(4) a. Ectal surface strongly flanged, m4 process present ……………………………………………………………6 b. Ectal surface not flanged, with or without strongly flanged medial surface ………………………………7</p> <p>6(5) a. Ectal flange smooth; large triangular m2 between flange and pulvillus (Figs 23–25) ………… Ps. minor b. Ectal flange bearing e3; no process between flange and pulvillus (Figs 27–28) ………………… Ps. caddo</p> <p>7(5) a. Strongly flanged medial surface bearing m2 and m3 (Figs 30–31) ………………………… Ps. paludicolus b. Not flanged, with pronounced transverse ridge connecting e2 and m2 (Figs 8, 33) …………… Ps. serratus</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFC3FFF2FCD4FE09432738F7	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
03E1C602FFCCFFF0FCF1FAE143463E9F.text	03E1C602FFCCFFF0FCF1FAE143463E9F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus erasus (LOOMIS 1943) ERASUS (LOOMIS 1943	<div><p>PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS ERASUS (LOOMIS, 1943)</p> <p>(FIGS 9–12)</p> <p>Polydesmus erasus Loomis, 1943: 406, fig. 17, pl. 1: fig. 5, ♂ HT (MCZ, non vidi).</p> <p>Dixidesmus erasus – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18. – Causey, 1952: 7 (= D. humilidens). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 66.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus erasus – [Withrow, 1988: 84, figs 19, 84, 88, 92, 108, 113, 122–126, map 5, tables 9–11.] – Hoffman, 1999: 444 (= D. tallulanus; D. penicillus).</p> <p>Dixidesmus tallulanus Chamberlin, 1943c: 19, fig. 34, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 67.</p> <p>[Pseudopolydesmus tallulanus – Withrow, 1988: 79, figs 75, 83, 87, 91, 107, 112, 122–128, map 5, tables 9–11.]</p> <p>in Ps. serratus. Leading and distal margins moderately curved, similar to Ps. serratus but less curved than Ps. canadensis and Ps. collinus. Denticles weak to obliterated. Trailing margin only slightly concave, nearly straight. Anterior blister row medially much thicker than median blister row, narrowing laterally to become much narrower than median blister row. Median blister 2 much larger in area than MB1. Median blister row thicker than posterior blister row. Central paranotal blisters occupying medial two-thirds of paranota. Lateral blisters anteriorly extending mediad.</p> <p>Dixidesmus penicillus Chamberlin, 1943c: 19, fig. 35, ♂ / ♀ ST (USNM, vidi). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 67.</p> <p>Dixidesmus humilidens Chamberlin, 1943c: 20, fig. 36, ♂ / ♀ ST (USNM, vidi).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Size: Large to medium-large, with length ranging from 15.8 to 31.8 mm and an average body length of 21.4 mm (N = 143; Withrow, 1988: 83, 88, 199). Size variable, comparable to Ps. canadensis, Ps. collinus and Ps. serratus. Usually larger than Ps. pinetorum.</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture (Fig. 9): Corners of paranota forming a trapezoid, with the anterior (AMC to ALC) edge longer than the posterior (PMC to PLC) edge. Ratio of anterior to posterior edge length smaller than Gonopod (Figs 10–12): Gonocoxa ventral lobe with single gonocoxal plate. Telopodite basally curved, moreor-less straight between pulvillus and process m4, terminally curved, basal half of acropodite distinctly thickened. Pulvillus large and pointed, midway between base and terminus of acropodite. Process m3 absent. Process e1 elongate and straight, arising from thickened area; e2 large and recurved, originating close to base of e3; e3 subtriangular, varies from large to miniscule; e4 nearly identical to m 4 in size and shape (Figs 10A, 11A, 12A). Process m1 conspicuous, medial of pulvillus; m2 large, subtriangular; m4 typically shaped, well separated from larger m2 (Figs 10B, 11B, 12B).</p> <p>Type notes</p> <p>Polydesmus erasus (♂ HT and three ♀ PT, MCZ, non vidi): From Monte Sano State Park, Madison Co., AL, USA, collected 22 July 1939. According to the description by Loomis (1943), the e3 process is completely absent in Ps. erasus. No such specimen has been seen by the authors; it is more likely that Loomis overlooked the process or his specimen was damaged.</p> <p>Dixidesmus tallulanus (♂ HT and one ♂ PT, USNM, vidi): ♂ HT from between Clayton and Tallulah Falls, Rabun Co., GA, USA, collected 28 April 1943; ♂ PT from Tallulah Falls, Habersham Co., GA, USA, collected 27 April 1943; both collected by W. Ivie. We found two type lots. Type lot 1: labelled ‘HT’, contains one fragmented male, with dissected gonopods in genitalia vial. Type lot 2: labelled ‘PT’, contains one intact male.</p> <p>Dixidesmus penicillus (11 ♂ and five ♀ ST, USNM, vidi): Chamberlin (1943c) described an unspecified number of male and female specimens from north and northwest of Clarkesville, Habersham Co., GA, USA, collected 27 April 1943 by W. Ivie. We found two type lots. Type lot 1: labelled ‘Types’, contains two intact males, two fragmented females, and two small vials; first small vial labelled ‘HT’ (by Withrow?), contains fragmented male, with dissected gonopods in genitalia vial; second small vial labelled ‘Lectoallotype’ (by Withrow?), contains fragmented female. Type lot 2: labelled ‘Paratypes’, contains two females and eight males, some males with gonopods damaged.</p> <p>Dixidesmus humilidens (two ♂ and two ♀ ST, USNM, vidi): From Gainesville, Hall Co., GA, USA collected 24 April 1943 by W. Ivie. Type lot labelled ‘ erasus ’ by Withrow. Contains one female, one fragment and two small vials; first small vial labelled ‘Holotype’ by Withrow, contains fragmented male, with dissected gonopods in genitalia vial; second small vial labelled ‘Lectoallotype’ by Withrow, contains intact female with everted vulvae.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Southern Appalachian Mountains, west through Tennessee and Kentucky into southern Illinois and south through Alabama to the coast of the Gulf of Mexico.</p> <p>Additional specimens examined</p> <p>FMNH INS1554, 1556, 3120684, 3120685 *.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFCCFFF0FCF1FAE143463E9F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
03E1C602FFCEFFF4FC8AFADB42913E52.text	03E1C602FFCEFFF4FC8AFADB42913E52.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus canadensis (NEWPORT 1844) CANADENSIS (NEWPORT 1844	<div><p>PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS CANADENSIS (NEWPORT, 1844)</p> <p>(FIGS 7, 13–14)</p> <p>Polydesmus canadensis Newport, 1844: 265, immature ♀ HT (BMNH, non vidi). – Gervais, 1847: 106. – de Saussure &amp; Humbert, 1870: 52.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus canadensis – [Withrow, 1988: 89, figs 55, 61, 70–73, 76, 109, 114, 122–126, map 6, tables 9–11.] – Hoffman, 1999: 443 (= Po. glaucescens; Po. nitidus; Po. branneri; Po. echinogon; Po. conlatus; D. sylvicolens; D.christianus; D. catskillus; D.phanus; D. gausodicrorhachus). – Shelley, 2000: 246.</p> <p>Polydesmus glaucescens C. L. Koch, 1847: 133, types unknown. – Koch, 1863a: 59, pl. 26: fig. 51.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus glaucescens – Attems, 1940: 141, uncertain placement.</p> <p>Polydesmus nitidus Bollman, 1887a: 45, ♂ / ♀ ST (not located at USNM, non vidi).</p> <p>Dixidesmus nitidus – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 67.</p> <p>Polydesmus branneri Bollman, 1887b: 620, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi). – Loomis, 1943: 405, fig. 16, pl. 1: fig. 4.</p> <p>Dixidesmus branneri – Loomis &amp; Hoffman, 1948: 54 (= Polydesmus conlatus; Dixidesmus christianus). – Hoffman, 1950: 223. – Causey, 1952: 7. – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 65.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus branneri – Hoffman, 1974: 346, fig. 3. – Shelley, 1988: 1651, figs 27, 31 (= Dixidesmus catskillus; D. gausodicrorhacus [sic]).</p> <p>Polydesmus echinogon Chamberlin, 1942b: 10, fig. 33, ♂ / ♀ ST (USNM, vidi).</p> <p>Dixidesmus echinogon – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18. – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 66.</p> <p>Polydesmus conlatus Chamberlin, 1943b: 36, fig. 5, ♂ HT (FMNH INS977, vidi). – Sierwald et al., 2005: 40.</p> <p>Dixidesmus conlatus – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18.</p> <p>Dixidesmus sylvicolens Chamberlin, 1943c: 20, figs 37, 38, ♂ / ♀ ST (USNM, vidi). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 67.</p> <p>Dixidesmus christianus Chamberlin, 1946: 140, fig. 4, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 66.</p> <p>Dixidesmus catskillus Chamberlin, 1947: 24, fig. 2, ♂ HT (ANSP, non vidi). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 66.</p> <p>Dixidesmus phanus Chamberlin, 1951: 27, fig. 1, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 67.</p> <p>Dixidesmus gausodicrorhachus Johnson, 1954: 1, fig. 1, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 66.</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Size: Usually large, with length ranging from 11.8 to 28.6 mm (Withrow, 1988: 199) and an average body length of 22.2 mm (N = 162; Withrow, 1988: 94). Comparable in size or slightly larger than Ps. erasus and Ps. serratus. Often larger than Ps. collinus. Usually larger than Ps. pinetorum.</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture (Fig. 13): Corners of paranota forming a roughly rhomboid quadrilateral, with ALC posterior to AMC and lateral to PLC. Edges meeting at ALC and PMC forming right angles, with posterior edge shorter than in Ps. collinus. Leading and distal margins very rounded, denticles weak to obliterated. Angle of curve along distal margin and lateral portion of leading margin uniform from PLC past ALC. Trailing margin moderately concave, less so than Ps. serratus. Anterior, median and posterior blister rows subequal in thickness. Anterior blister row narrowing only slightly at lateral ends. Individual MBs and PBs subequal in area. Central paranotal blisters large, occupying more than two-thirds of paranotal breadth, as wide as long. Lateral blisters anteriorly widening laterad.</p> <p>e2 + e3 large, joined at base into elongate stalk (Fig. 7), sometimes connected by a lamina; e4 small (Fig. 14A). Process m1 small, medial of pulvillus; m2, m3 and m4 large, subtriangular, equidistant from each other; m3 offset laterad from m2 and m4 (Fig. 14B).</p> <p>Type notes</p> <p>Polydesmus canadensis (immature ♀ HT, BMNH, non vidi): Type presumed extant. Collected from Albany River, Hudson Bay, ON, Canada.</p> <p>Polydesmus glaucescens: Location of types, if extant, unknown. Koch (1847) described the type locality only as ‘Nordamerika’.</p> <p>Polydesmus nitidus (15 ♂ / ♀ ST, non vidi): Location of type material unknown (not located at USNM). Bollman (1887a) described 15 specimens from Pensacola, Escambia Co., FL, USA.</p> <p>Polydesmus branneri (♂ HT, USNM, vidi): From Mossy Creek (now Jefferson City), Jefferson Co., TN, USA. Vial contains one male and one dissected gonopod, tip of gonopod damaged.</p> <p>Polydesmus echinogon (three ♂ and nine ♀ ST, USNM, vidi): Chamberlin (1942b) described four specimens from Shawanese, Harveys Lake, Luzerne Co., PA, USA, collected 23 September 1905 by F. C. Paulmier. We found two type lots, both labelled ‘Types’ by Chamberlin and Gonopod (Figs 7, 14): Gonocoxa ventral lobe with single gonocoxal plate. Telopodite shallowly curved except at thickened section basal to pulvillus, with subterminal kink followed by straight terminal section. Pulvillus medium-sized, midway between base and terminus of acropodite. Process e1 elongate and kinked; processes with older labels erroneously identifying the specimens as Ps. serratus. Type lot 1 (probably the four specimens described by Chamberlin): contains one male with a single gonopod in situ, one intact female, and two small vials; first small vial labelled ‘MALE HT’ by Withrow, contains one male with a single gonopod in situ and two dissected gonopods (one damaged); second vial labelled ‘Lectoallotype’ by Withrow, contains one fragmented female. Type lot 2: contains five intact females, fragments of two females, one male with a single gonopod in situ, one genitalia vial with a single gonopod. We found two Ps. serratus males with gonopods in situ in Type lot 2 and separated them into a third vial.</p> <p>Polydesmus conlatus (♂ HT and two ♀ PT, FMNH, vidi; ♂ / ♀ PT, USNM, vidi; additional ♂ / ♀ PT, non vidi): Chamberlin (1943b) nominated ♂ HT and described several male and female specimens from Gatlinburg, Sevier Co., TN, USA, collected 13–19 June 1942 by H. Dybas, and one male and one female from Thomasville, Thomas Co., GA, USA, collected 2 April 1940 by F. Field. The FMNH type lot is from the Gatlinburg locality: contains ♂ HT with gonopods in situ and two ♀ PT, images are available online at https://collections-zoology.fieldmuseum.org/ catalogue/956102, last accessed 25/3/2019 (FMNH INS 977). At USNM, we found an additional type lot from Greenbrier Cove, Sevier Co., TN, USA: labelled ‘Paratype’, contains at least one female, several males, one dissected gonopod in genitalia vial and one small vial labelled ‘Lectoallotype’; the small vial contains one female with one dislodged vulva. The location of the one ♂ and one ♀ PT from GA is unknown.</p> <p>Dixidesmus sylvicolens (♂ / ♀ ST, USNM, vidi): Chamberlin (1943c) described ‘many specimens’ from 7 miles north of Sylvania, Screven Co., GA, USA, collected by W. Ivie, 12 April 1943. We found one type lot: labelled ‘ branneri ’ by Withrow, contains several specimens including males with gonopods.</p> <p>Dixidesmus christianus (♂ HT, three ♂ PT and five immature PT, USNM, vidi): Chamberlin (1946) nominated ♂ HT and described three ♀ and five immature PT, all from Pass Christian, Harrison Co., MS, USA, collected 15 February 1946 by J. Rapp and W. Rapp. We found one type lot: labelled ‘ branneri ’ by Withrow, contains two intact males, one male with gonopods missing, five immature specimens and one small vial; small vial labelled ‘HT’, contains fragmented male with one gonopod missing. The three ♂ PT we found might represent the three ♀ PT described by Chamberlin.</p> <p>Dixidesmus catskillus (♂ HT, ANSP, non vidi): From Catskill, Greene Co., NY, USA, collected by Knight.</p> <p>Dixidesmus phanus (♂ HT and four PT, USNM, vidi): From Suwanee River, FL, USA, without further locality, collected 15 April 1950 by D.E. Beck. We found two type lots. Type lot 1: labelled ‘Male HT’ and labelled ‘ branneri ’ by Withrow, contains one male with gonopods. Type lot 2: contains several female specimens, one with vulvae everted.</p> <p>Dixidesmus gausodicrorhachus (♂ HT, one ♂ and two ♀ PT, USNM, vidi): From west side of Garnet Lake, Mackinaw Co., MI, USA, collected 31 July 1949. There are two type lots. Type lot 1: contains ♂ PT with gonopods in situ and one ♀ PT with vulvae everted, nominated by Johnson (1954) as the allotype. Type lot 2: contains ♂ HT with single gonopod and one ♀ PT.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Northern Wisconsin east through southeastern Ontario and southern Quebec to the Atlantic Coast, south through the Appalachian Mountains to the Gulf Coast as far west as southern Mississippi.</p> <p>Additional specimens examined</p> <p>FMNH INS1421, 1455, 1461, 1465, 1552, 1569, 3574, 6934 *, 7632, 7699, 14219, 3120683 *.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFCEFFF4FC8AFADB42913E52	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
03E1C602FFCAFFF5FCE3FB9B42A33E8F.text	03E1C602FFCAFFF5FCE3FB9B42A33E8F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus collinus COLLINUS HOFFMAN 1974	<div><p>PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS COLLINUS HOFFMAN, 1974</p> <p>(FIGS 15, 16)</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus collinus Hoffman, 1974: 346, figs 1, 2, ♂ HT (VMNH, non vidi but see type notes). – [Withrow, 1988: 98, figs 85, 89, 93, 110, 115, 122–126, map 7, tables 9–11.] – Hoffman, 1999: 444.</p> <p>? Polydesmus moniliaris – Williams &amp; Hefner, 1928: 112, fig. 13a. Mistaken identification!</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Size: Medium-large, with length ranging from 12.9 to 25.3 mm (Withrow, 1988: 199) with an average length of 19 mm (N = 40; Withrow, 1988: 101). Often smaller than Ps. canadensis and Ps. serratus. Comparable in size or slightly smaller than Ps. erasus. Usually larger than Ps. pinetorum.</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture (Fig. 15): Corners of paranota forming a roughly rhomboid quadrilateral, with ALC posterior to AMC and lateral to PLC. Edges meeting at ALC and PMC forming right angles, with posterior edge longer than in Ps. canadensis. Leading and distal margins very rounded, denticles weak. Angle of curve along distal margin and lateral portion of leading margin uniform from PLC past ALC. Trailing margin moderately concave, less so than Ps. serratus. Anterior blister row medially thicker than median blister row, narrowing only slightly at lateral ends. Median blister row thicker than posterior blister row. Central paranotal blisters large, occupying more than two-thirds of paranotal breadth, as wide as long. Lateral blisters anteriorly widening laterad.</p> <p>Gonopod (Fig. 16): Gonocoxa ventral lobe with single gonocoxal plate. Telopodite curved and slightly thickened basal to pulvillus, nearly straight beyond pulvillus, with a subterminal kink followed by straight terminal section. Pulvillus medium-sized, midway between base and terminus of acropodite. Process m3 absent. Process e1 reduced to near absence; e2 large, recurved, combined on short, thick stalk with large, subtriangular e3 (Fig. 16C); e4 small (Fig. 16A). Process m1 small, medial of pulvillus; m2 large, subtriangular; m4 typically shaped, well separated from m2 of a similar size (Fig. 16B).</p> <p>Type notes</p> <p>(♂ HT, non vidi; five ♂ PT and eight ♀ PT, VMNH, vidi): From Pinnacles of Dan, ~ 4 miles southwest of Vesta, Patrick Co., VA, USA, collected 22 April 1972. We found one jar at VMNH labelled ‘PARATYPE’, containing two vials. One vial contained five ♂ PT (VMNH PSE00044); the other vial contained eight ♀ PT (VMNH PSE00043). The ♂ HT might be included in the vial of ♂ PT without a label. Two male paratype specimens from VMNH PSE00044 were individually relabelled and imaged (VMNH PSE00202 * and VMNH PSE00203 *).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Southern Indiana east to West Virginia, south to central Virginia and north-central South Carolina. Williams &amp; Hefner (1928) reported Polydesmus moniliaris C. L. Koch, 1847 as common and abundant throughout the state of Ohio. Based on their figure (fig. 13), Withrow (1988) suggested that this was a misidentification of Ps. collinus, although the figure lacks detail and most probably depicts Ps. canadensis, which also occurs in Ohio.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFCAFFF5FCE3FB9B42A33E8F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
03E1C602FFCBFFE8FCE3FAC247B63B40.text	03E1C602FFCBFFE8FCE3FAC247B63B40.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus pinetorum (BOLLMAN 1888) PINETORUM (BOLLMAN 1888	<div><p>PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS PINETORUM (BOLLMAN, 1888)</p> <p>(FIGS 17–20)</p> <p>Polydesmus pinetorum Bollman, 1888: 3, ♂ HT (USNM, non vidi, type lost).</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus pinetorum – Causey, 1952: 6, fig. 5 (= Po. americanus; Po. paroicus; Po. hubricthi; Po. modocus). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 70. – [Withrow, 1988: 72, figs 74, 80, 82, 86, 90, 106, 111, 122–128, map 4, tables 9–11.] – Hoffman, 1999: 445.</p> <p>Polydesmus americanus Carl, 1902: 611, pl. 11: fig. 37, two ♂ ST (MHNG, non vidi).</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus americanus – Attems, 1940: 140, fig. 202. – Carl, 1941: 292, figs 1–2.</p> <p>Polydesmus natchitoches Chamberlin, 1942b: 10, figs 34, 35, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi), synon. nov.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus natchitoches – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 70. – Hoffman, 1999: 445.</p> <p>Polydesmus paroicus Chamberlin, 1942b: 11, figs 37, 38, five ♂ / ♀ ST (USNM, vidi).</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus paroicus – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18. – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 70. – Hoffman, 1999; 445.</p> <p>Polydesmus hubrichti Chamberlin, 1943a: 15, figs 1, 2, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi).</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus hubrichti – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18.</p> <p>Polydesmus modocus Chamberlin, 1943b: 36, fig. 6, ♂ HT (FMNH INS927, vidi). – Sierwald et al., 2005: 40.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus modocus – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18.</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Size: Medium, with body length ranging from 13.6 to 25.6 mm and an average body length of 18.6 mm (N = 212; Withrow, 1988: 76, 199). Usually smaller than Ps. canadensis, Ps. collinus, Ps. erasus and Ps. serratus. Clearly larger than its small sympatric congeners Ps. minor and Ps. caddo.</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture (Fig. 17): Corners of paranota forming a broad rectangle, nearer to a square than any other Pseudopolydesmus species. Leading and distal margins weakly curved compared with Ps. erasus and Ps. serratus, denticles always distinct. Trailing margin concave, strongly curved. Anterior blister row much thicker than median and posterior blister rows, which are subequal in thickness. Median blister 2 and PB2 subequal in area and much larger than MB 1 and PB1. Central paranotal blisters large, occupying over two-thirds of paranotal breadth, as wide as long. Lateral blisters anteriorly widening laterad.</p> <p>Gonopod (Figs 18–20): Gonocoxa ventral lobe with single gonocoxal plate. Telopodite entirely arcuate and fishhook-shaped, section distal of pulvillus tightly curved. Pulvillus large, rounded, closer to terminus of acropodite than base. Processes e1, m3 absent. Process e2 lobe-like, recurved, separate from e3; process e3 very large, subtriangular to spike-shaped; process e4 small and laminate, proximal to terminal tuft of bristles (Figs 18A, 19A, 20A). Process m1 small, hidden at base of pulvillus; m2 small, subtriangular; m4 mediumsized, subtriangular, close to m2 (Figs 18B, 19B, 20B).</p> <p>Type notes</p> <p>Polydesmus pinetorum (♂ HT, USNM, non vidi, type lost): From Little Rock, Pulaski Co., AR, USA. Bollman (1888) mentions additional specimens from Clark, Pike and Sevier Cos in Arkansas. Apparently, Withrow examined the ♂ HT at USNM; no type material was found there (Sierwald, November 2015).</p> <p>Polydesmus americanus: (two ♂ ST, MHNG, non vidi): From Texas, without further locality.</p> <p>Polydesmus natchitoches (four ♂ / ♀ ST, USNM, vidi; one ♂ ST, USNM, non vidi): Chamberlin (1942b) described four ST from two miles south of Saline, collected 12 April 1936, and one ♂ ST from four miles north of Chestnut, collected 14 April 1936. All collected by L. Hubricht. Both localities are in Natchitoches Par., LA, USA. One type lot found, from the Saline locality: labelled ‘= pinetorum ’ by Withrow, contains genitalia vial with two intact male gonopods and three or four fragmented male and female specimens, including one female with vulvae everted. Specimens sorted into three vials. Vial 1 contains one fragmented male with gonopods missing and genitalia vial containing two gonopods (most probably not from the same male). Vial 2 contains two fragmented females, one with everted vulvae. Vial 3 contains several specimen fragments. ♂ ST from Chestnut locality not found.</p> <p>Polydesmus paroicus (three ♂ and two ♀ ST, USNM, vidi): From 1.5 miles north of Clay, boundary of Lincoln and Jackson Parishes, LA, USA, collected 12 April 1936 by L. Hubricht. One type lot: contains two fragmented females, two fragmented males with gonopods in situ, one male with dissected gonopods but intact body ring 7, and one genitalia vial with fragments of body ring 7 and at least one gonopod, most probably not belonging to the male in this vial.</p> <p>Polydesmus hubrichti (♂ HT and 13 ♂ PT, USNM, v i d i): C h a m b e r l i n (1 9 4 3a) d e s c r i b e d ♂ H T, ♀ allotype, and approximately ten additional ♂/♀ PT from University City, St. Louis Co., MO, USA, collected 29 March 1936 by L. Hubricht. We found one type lot and two additional lots; all labelled with the nomenclaturally invalid manuscript name ‘ Polydesmus scholasticus ’ by Chamberlin, labelled ‘ P. serratus ’ by Hubricht. Type lot: labelled ‘Types’, contains ≥ 14 specimens: male labelled ‘Lectotype’ with one dissected gonopod in a genitalia vial and 13 adult males, most with intact gonopods in situ. Non-type lot 1: labelled ‘Paratype’, contains a single female collected March 1936 under logs, from 4.3 miles northwest of Glencoe Station, St. Louis Co., MO, USA. Non-type lot 2: labelled ‘Paratypes’, collected 8 March 1936, from Creve Coeur Lake Park, St. Louis Co., MO, USA, containing seven specimens belonging to three species: two males of Ps. pinetorum (both with gonopods in situ, one with a single intact gonopod), two females of Ps. pinetorum, two males of Ps. minor (gonopods intact in situ) and one female Ps. serratus (with everted vulva). Despite labelling three lots as types (for Po. scholasticus), Chamberlin (1943a) explicitly designated only the material from University City (vial labelled ‘Types’) in the Po. hubrichti type series.</p> <p>Polydesmus modocus (♂ HT, FMNH, vidi): From between Modoc and Roots, Randolph Co., IL, USA, collected 14 April 1936 by K. P. Schmidt. ♂ HT in fragments, single gonopod in genitalia vial, images are available online at https://collections-zoology. fieldmuseum.org/catalogue/955981, last accessed 25/3/2019 (FMNH INS 927).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Louisiana north to southern Iowa, east through Alabama and Tennessee. Most commonly collected west of the Mississippi River.</p> <p>Additional specimens examined</p> <p>FMNH INS1435, 1438, 1445 *.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFCBFFE8FCE3FAC247B63B40	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
03E1C602FFD6FFE9FF16FEF44249398E.text	03E1C602FFD6FFE9FF16FEF44249398E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus minor (BOLLMAN 1888) MINOR (BOLLMAN 1888	<div><p>PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS MINOR (BOLLMAN, 1888)</p> <p>(FIGS 21–25)</p> <p>Polydesmus minor Bollman, 1888: 2, ♂ ST (USNM, non vidi, type lost). – Chamberlin, 1942b: 19, fig. 32.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus minor – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18. – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 70. – Loomis, 1959: 161, fig. 9. – [Withrow, 1988: 120, figs 62, 79, 97, 101, 105, 117, 119, 122–126, map 9, tables 9–11.] – Hoffman, 1999: 444.</p> <p>Polydesmus neoterus Chamberlin, 1942b: 10, figs 30, 31, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi), synon. nov.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus neoterus – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18. – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 70.— Hoffman, 1999: 445.</p> <p>Polydesmus euthetus Chamberlin, 1942b: 11, fig. 36, two ♂ / ♀ ST (USNM, vidi), synon. nov.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus euthetus – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18. – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 70.— Hoffman, 1999: 444.</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Size: Small, with body length ranging from 8.8 to 12.7 mm and an average body length of 10.5 mm (N = 31; Withrow, 1988: 124, 199). Comparable in size to Ps. caddo and Ps. paludicolus. Clearly smaller than all other congeneric species.</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture (Figs 21, 22): Corners of paranota forming a narrow parallelogram, with medial and lateral edges roughly twice as long as anterior and posterior edges. Anterior lateral and posterior lateral corners posterior to AMC and PMC, respectively, giving characteristic swept-back appearance. Leading and distal margins highly variable, ranging from moderately to weakly curved. Anterior lateral corners and denticles ranging from moderate to obliterated. Trailing margin concave, strongly curved. Anterior blister row as thick as MB and PB rows combined. Individual MBs and PBs subequal in area. Central paranotal blisters occupying two-thirds of paranotal breadth. Lateral blisters unusually distinct, extending anteriorly past all setiferous denticles, aligned with longitudinal axis.</p> <p>Gonopod (Figs 23–25): Gonocoxa ventral lobe with two gonocoxal plates stacked dorsoventrally (Fig. 25A). Telopodite uniformly curved. Pulvillus elongate, pointed, much closer to base of acropodite than terminus. Processes e1, e3 and m3 absent. Process e2 very small, lobe-like (Fig. 25A); e4 medium-sized, unusually prominent, basal to terminal bristles. Ectal surface also with large flange (possibly homologous to e3) between processes m2 and m4 (Figs 23A, 24A, 25A). Process m1 unusually large, subtriangular, proximal to pulvillus; m2 large, subtriangular, midway between base and terminus of acropodite; m4 small (Figs 23B, 24B, 25B).</p> <p>Type notes</p> <p>Polydesmus minor (♂ ST, USNM, non vidi, type lost): Bollman (1888) described an unspecified number of specimens from Little Rock, Pulaski Co., AR, USA. He made no mention of female specimens. No type specimens of Ps. minor were located in the USNM collection (Sierwald, November 2015).</p> <p>Polydesmus neoterus (♂ HT and two ♂ PT, USNM, vidi): From New Orleans, LA, USA, collected 17 April 1936 by L. Hubricht. Type lot: contains two ♂ PT, ♂ HT with gonopods removed, distal extremities of one broken gonopod (without pulvillus). The gonopod remains do not allow unequivocal identification of the specimen. However, paranota shape and tergal sculpture is distinct from that in the types of Ps. caddo (= Ps. bidens), the only small-bodied congener that occurs in Louisiana.</p> <p>Polydesmus euthetus (one ♂ and one ♀ ST, USNM, vidi): From Buder Park, Fenton, St. Louis Co., MO, USA collected 15 March 1936 by L. Hubricht. Type lot contains ♂ ST erroneously labelled ‘HT’ with a single dissected gonopod and ♀ ST labelled ‘Lectoallotype’.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Southern Arkansas northward through Missouri and Illinois to Lake Michigan. Most commonly collected near the Mississippi River and its tributaries.</p> <p>Additional specimens examined</p> <p>FMNH INS7107 *.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFD6FFE9FF16FEF44249398E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
03E1C602FFD7FFEEFCF1FBD742863CE0.text	03E1C602FFD7FFEEFCF1FBD742863CE0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus caddo CHAMBERLIN 1949	<div><p>PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS CADDO CHAMBERLIN, 1949</p> <p>(FIGS 26–28)</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus caddo Chamberlin, 1949: 97, fig. 11, ♂ / ♀ ST (USNM, vidi). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 69. – [Withrow, 1988: 115, figs 50, 77, 96, 100, 104, 116, 118, 122–126, map 9, tables 9–11.] – Hoffman, 1999: 442 (= Ps. bidens).</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus bidens Loomis, 1959: 161, fig. 8, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Size: Small, with body length ranging from 7.5 to 13.3 mm and an average body length of 10.0 mm (N = 28; Withrow, 1988: 119). Comparable in size to Ps. minor and Ps. paludicolus, clearly smaller than all other congeneric species.</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture (Fig. 26): Corners of paranota forming a roughly trapezoidal quadrilateral, with lateral edge longer than medial edge, giving the paranota a characteristic flared-out appearance. Leading margin moderately curved, distal margin nearly straight, trailing margin strongly concave. Anterior lateral corner and denticles always strongly distinct. Anterior blister row thicker medially than MB row, MB row thicker than PB row. Median blister 2 much larger in area than MB 1. Tergal blisters poorly differentiated, PB row nearly obliterated except lateral sulcus of PB3. Central paranotal blisters occupying two-thirds of paranotal breadth. Lateral blisters aligned with longitudinal axis.</p> <p>Gonopod (Figs 27, 28): Gonocoxa ventral lobe with single gonocoxal plate. Telopodite uniformly curved. Pulvillus elongate, pointed, midway between base and terminus of acropodite. Processes e1, e2, e4 and m3 absent. Process e3 projecting from a flanged ectal lamina (Fig. 28B). Processes m1, m2 and m4 all medium-sized, subtriangular; m1 at base of pulvillus; m2 connected to e2 via weak transverse ridge (not as distinct as in Ps. serratus); m4 proximal to terminal bristles. Our process m4 might be homologous to e 4 in other Pseudopolydesmus: it is located subterminally on the acropodite and, in both the Ps. bidens and Ps. caddo type specimens, does not bear proximal bristles (although the specimens may have been damaged).</p> <p>Type notes</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus caddo (two ♂ and one ♀ ST, USNM, vidi): From 5 miles northwest of Shreveport, Caddo Par., LA, USA, collected 13 April 1936 by L. Hubricht. Two ♂ ST both with gonopods removed; one is erroneously labelled ‘HT’ with gonopods in genitalia vial, left gonopod with tip broken off. ♀ ST labelled ‘Lectoallotype’.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus bidens (♂ HT, six ♂ and five ♀ PT, USNM, vidi): Loomis, 1959 nominated ♂ HT and described six additional ♂ and five ♀ from site between Kinder and Le Blanc, Allen Par., LA, USA collected 20 December 1958 by E. M. Loomis and H. F. Loomis. We found one type lot containing one small vial labelled ‘Holotype’, one male with gonopods in situ, one male with gonopods dissected into a genitalia vial and one intact female. Holotype vial contains complete male with both dissected gonopods.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Coast and coastal plain of the Gulf of Mexico, from eastern Texas to southern Mississippi.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFD7FFEEFCF1FBD742863CE0	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
03E1C602FFD0FFEFFC89F93842BC38B4.text	03E1C602FFD0FFEFFC89F93842BC38B4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus paludicolus PALUDICOLUS HOFFMAN 1950	<div><p>PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS PALUDICOLUS HOFFMAN, 1950</p> <p>(FIGS 29–31)</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus paludicolus Hoffman, 1950: 222, fig. 4, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi, gonopods missing). – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 70. – Hoffman, 1999: 445.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus paludicola [sic] – [Withrow, 1988: 111, figs 95, 99, 103, 126, map 9, table 11.]</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Size: Small, with male body length measured at 11 and 13 mm (N = 2; Withrow, 1988: 111). Comparable in size to Ps. minor and Ps. caddo. Clearly smaller than all other congeneric species. May be mistaken, e.g. for the similarly sized Po. inconstans, because, unlike in most Pseudopolydesmus, the collum is narrower than the mandibles and tergal setae are clearly visible under the dissecting microscope.</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture (Fig. 29): Corners of paranota forming a longitudinally oblong rectangle. Leading and distal margins moderately curved. Denticles strongly distinct with unusually long, easily visible setae, but ALC indistinct. Trailing margin concave, strongly curved. Anterior blister row thicker than median blister row along its entire breadth, and MB row thicker than PB row. Individual MBs subequal in area, as are individual PBs. Central paranotal blisters occupying two-thirds of paranotal breadth. Lateral blisters aligned with longitudinal axis. Tergal and paranotal blisters also with unusually long, easily visible setae.</p> <p>Gonopod (Figs 30, 31): Gonocoxa ventral lobe with two gonocoxal plates stacked dorsoventrally (Fig. 31). Telopodite roughly boomerang-shaped, abruptly kinked distal from pulvillus, curving terminally. Pulvillus very small (comparable in size to process m1), pointed, slightly closer to base of acropodite than terminus. Processes e1, e3 and m4 absent. Process e2 projecting laterally (Fig. 30C); e4 unusually large, spike-shaped. Process m1 unusually large, subtriangular, medial of pulvillus; m2 and m3 medium-sized, connected by a shared lamina (Figs 30–31); m2 offset laterad from m3 (Fig. 30C).</p> <p>Type notes</p> <p>(♂ HT, USNM, vidi): From Sand Bridge, City of Virginia Beach, Princess Anne Co., VA, USA, collected 8 May 1949 by L. M. Carter, H. I. Kleinpeter and R. L. Hoffman. ♂ HT intact with gonopods removed (gonopods non vidi).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Coastal plain of southeastern Virginia south to South Carolina.</p> <p>Additional specimens examined</p> <p>VTEC MPE01167 *, 01169 *, 01170 *.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFD0FFEFFC89F93842BC38B4	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
03E1C602FFD1FFEDFCC8FCC042E13812.text	03E1C602FFD1FFEDFCC8FCC042E13812.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudopolydesmus serratus (SAY 1821) SERRATUS (SAY 1821	<div><p>PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS SERRATUS (SAY, 1821)</p> <p>(FIGS 8, 32, 33)</p> <p>Polydesmus serratus Say, 1821: 106, type material not extant. – Gervais, 1847: 105. – de Saussure, 1860: 325. – Peters, 1864: 539. – Bollman, 1887b: 620 (?= Po. pennsylvanicus). – Williams &amp; Hefner, 1928: 112, fig. 13b.</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus serratus – Attems, 1940: 141, uncertain placement. – Chamberlin, 1943c: 18. – Chamberlin, 1951: 27. – Causey, 1952: 6. – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 71. – Loomis, 1959: 161. – Ramsey, 1966: 339. – [Withrow, 1988: 103, figs 12, 45, 46, 48, 57, 59, 63, 66, 67, 69, 78, 81, 94, 98, 102, 120, 122–126, map 8, tables 9–11.] – Hoffman, 1999: 446 (= Po. scopus; Po. planicolens). – Shelley, 2000: 246. – Shelley &amp; Snyder, 2012: 6, figs 2–4.</p> <p>Polydesmus canadensis – Wood, 1865: 216, figs 43, 44. Mistaken identity!</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus canadensis – Attems, 1898: 480, fig. 244. – Verhoeff, 1931: 305, figs 1–7. – Attems, 1940: 140, fig. 201. Mistaken identity!</p> <p>? Polydesmus pennsylvanicus C. L. Koch, 1847: 133, type material unknown.</p> <p>Polydesmus pensylvanicus [sic] – C. L. Koch 1863b: 18, pl. 69: fig. 142.</p> <p>Polydesmus scopus Chamberlin, 1942a: 16, fig. 1, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi).</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus scopus – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 71.</p> <p>Polydesmus planicolens Chamberlin, 1942a: 16, fig. 2, ♂ HT (USNM, vidi).</p> <p>Pseudopolydesmus planicolens – Chamberlin &amp; Hoffman, 1958: 71.</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Size: Usually large, with body length ranging from 13.2 to 32 mm and an average body length of 22.7 mm (N = 500; Withrow, 1988: 108, 199). Comparable in size to Ps. canadensis and Ps. erasus, usually larger than Ps. collinus and Ps. pinetorum.</p> <p>Paranota and tergal sculpture (Fig. 32): Corners of paranota forming a trapezoid, with the anterior (AMC to ALC) edge longer than the posterior (PMC to PLC) edge. Ratio of anterior to posterior edge length larger than in Ps. erasus. Leading and distal margins moderately curved, similar to Ps. erasus but less curved than Ps.canadensis and Ps.collinus. Denticles moderate to obliterated. Trailing margin concave, moderately curved. Anterior and median blister rows subequal in thickness, AB and MB rows much thicker than PB row. Median blister 2 only slightly larger in area than MB 1, individual PBs subequal in area. Central paranotal blisters occupying two-thirds of paranotal breadth. Lateral blisters anteriorly widening laterad.</p> <p>Gonopod (Figs 8, 33): Gonocoxa ventral lobe with two gonocoxal plates stacked dorsoventrally (Fig. 33A). Telopodite slender, kinked at pulvillus, strongly curved terminally. Pulvillus medium-sized, rounded, midway between base and terminus of acropodite. Processes e1, e3, m3 and m4 absent. Process e2 large, subtriangular, connected to m2 via prominent transverse ridge (Fig. 8); e4 small, surrounded by terminal bristles (Fig. 33A). Process m1 medium-sized, medial of pulvillus; m2 large, subtriangular (Fig. 33B).</p> <p>Type notes</p> <p>Polydesmus serratus (non vidi): Type material no longer extant. According to Hoffman (1999), Say collected millipedes on Assateague and Chincoteague Islands, off the eastern shore of Virginia. New collections from this area could serve as material to designate a neotype. In his description, Say noted that this species was found under the bark of Pinus variabilis (Aiton) Lamb., now a synonym of Pinus echinata Mill., shortleaf pine (Govaerts, 2019).</p> <p>Polydesmus pennsylvanicus (non vidi): Type material unknown, from ‘Pensylvanien’.</p> <p>Polydesmus scopus (♂ HT, USNM, vidi): From Ledges State Park, Boone Co., IA, USA, collected 19 May 1941 by D. T. Jones. ♂ HT in fragments with one loose gonopod. Chamberlin (1942a) mentioned one female collected nearby but expressed doubt in its identity.</p> <p>Polydesmus planicolens (♂ HT, USNM, vidi): From Ames, Story Co., IA, USA, collected spring 1941 by D. T. Jones. ♂ HT fragmented with gonopods in small vial, gnathochilarium dissected.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Minnesota east to southern Quebec, south to northern South Carolina, west to east Texas. Absent from Georgia and peninsular Florida.</p> <p>Additional specimens examined</p> <p>FMNH INS1413, 1416, 1423, 1436, 1441, 1443, 1452, 1453, 1454, 1495, 1513, 1514, 1517, 1559, 1572, 1576, 2817 *, 2818, 2819 *, 2820, 2821, 2823, 2827, 2828, 2829, 2832, 2833, 2835, 4814, 7103, 7104, 7109, 7185, 7207, 7312, 7316, 7348, 7363, 7366, 7373, 7384, 7390, 7490, 8238 *; VTEC MPE01173 *.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E1C602FFD1FFEDFCC8FCC042E13812	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Sierwald, Petra;Hennen, Derek A;Zahnle, Xavier J;Ware, Stephanie;Marek, Paul E	Sierwald, Petra, Hennen, Derek A, Zahnle, Xavier J, Ware, Stephanie, Marek, Paul E (2019): Taxonomic synthesis of the eastern North American millipede genus Pseudopolydesmus (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Polydesmidae), utilizing high-detail ultraviolet fluorescence imaging. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 187 (1): 117-142, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz020, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/187/1/117/5475011
