@article {1994, title = {Shape variation of prey-catching structures in geophilomorph centipedes: A preliminary investigation using geometric morphometrics}, journal = {Zoologischer Anzeiger}, volume = {268}, year = {2017}, month = {10/05/2017}, pages = {11-18}, type = {Research paper}, abstract = {

Geophilomorph centipedes are common arthropod soil predators, but very little is known about their preying behaviour and their diet. Here we develop an exploratory morpho-functional approach to better understand their feeding habits, based on the morphology of feeding-related structures. Through geometric morphometrics, in a sample of five geophilomorph species, we investigated morphological variation in the three most conspicuous component structures of their prey-catching apparatus. At intra-specific level, we found no strong evidence for sexual dimorphism, left-right directional asymmetries and allometry across adult stages. At inter-specific level, shape differences in the feeding apparatus among the sample species were highly significant and large, even between two congeneric species. We also found a significant covariation between the shapes of the three structures, including those that do not directly articulate with each other, suggesting some degree of morphological integration between the different structures of the prey-catching apparatus. This study suggests the effectiveness and power of geometric morphometrics for the quantitative study of centipede functional morphology and provides a basis for wider comparative investigations on their phenotypic evolution.

}, keywords = {Allometry, Chilopoda, Directional asymmetry, Feeding ecology, Morphological integration}, issn = {0044-5231}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcz.2017.04.010}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0044523117300396}, author = {Baiocco, Matteo and Bonato, Lucio and Cardini, Andrea and Fusco, Giuseppe} } @article {1971, title = {ChiloBase. A web resource for Chilopoda taxonomy}, year = {2006}, abstract = {

Recommended citation: Minelli, A., Bonato, L., Dioguardi, R., Chagas-Jr., A., Edgecombe, G. D., Lewis, J. G. E., Pereira, L. A., Shelley, R. M., Stoev, P., Uliana, M., Zapparoli, M. (2006-2015): ChiloBase. A web resource for Chilopoda taxonomy. Formerly available at http://chilobase.bio.unipd.it

}, keywords = {Chilopoda}, url = {http://chilobase.bio.unipd.it}, author = {Minelli, Alessandro and Bonato, Lucio and Dioguardi, Rosario and Chagas-Jr., Amazonas and Edgecombe, Gregory D. and Lewis, John G. E. and Pereira, Luis Alberto and Shelley, Rowland M. and Stoev, Pavel and Uliana, MARCO and Zapparoli, Marzio} } @article {1789, title = {Evolutionary trends and patterns in centipede segment number based on a cladistic analysis of Mecistocephalidae (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha)}, journal = {Systematic Entomology}, volume = {28}, year = {2003}, month = {24/10/2003}, pages = {539-579}, abstract = {

Evolutionary changes in segment number during the radiation of Mecistocephalidae, a group of geophilomorph centipedes with segment number usually invariant at the species level, were explored based on a cladistic analysis of forty-six mecistocephalid species, representative of the extant diversity in segment number. The data matrix included 118 morphological characters. Trends were recognized in the evolution of segment number and discussed in relation to the underlying ontogenetic mechanisms of segmentation. The basic trend was towards an increasingly higher number of leg-bearing segments, from (most probably) forty-one to sixty-five (101 in one exceptional case). Changes always involved even sets of segments. Additions of two, four or eight segments usually occurred, but a case of overall duplication of the whole number was also documented. Most changes occurred starting from values belonging to the arithmetical series forty-one, forty-five, forty-nine, whereas the intermediate values forty-three, forty-seven, fifty-one were often evolutionary dead-ends. This evidence suggests a multiplicative mechanism of segmentation involving one or more final run of duplication, as well as a precise control of the final number of segments which produces absolute number stability, except for a single, highly derived species with an exceptionally high number of segments. These ideas contribute to a more general model of arthropod segmentation recently developed by Minelli. A taxonomic revision of mecistocephalids is presented: three subfamilies are proposed (Arrupinae, Dicellophilinae and Mecistocephalinae) and Sundarrup is recognized as a junior synonym of Anarrup.

}, issn = {0307-6970}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3113.2003.00217.x}, url = {https://resjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1365-3113.2003.00217.x}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Foddai, Donatella and Minelli, Alessandro} } @article {1756, title = {Geophilomorph centipedes from the Cretaceous amber of Burma}, journal = {Palaeontology}, volume = {57}, year = {2013}, month = {03/10/2013}, pages = {97-110}, abstract = {

The only previously known Mesozoic fossils of the chilopod order Geophilomorpha are two species from the Late Jurassic and Late Cretaceous, both known from single specimens that cannot be assigned with precision to a family. Four specimens from the Late Cretaceous (earliest Cenomanian) amber of Burma include three that can be identified as conspecific, described here as Kachinophilus pereirai gen. nov. sp. nov. These specimens preserve greater morphological detail in comparison with other fossil geophilomorphs: the form and fine features of the head, the maxillary complex, the trunk sternites with associated glandular pores and the ultimate pair of legs defend the assignment of the species to the extant family Geophilidae, and most probably to a derived subgroup including well-known extant genera such as Ribautia Br\ölemann, 1909. Confocal laser scanning microscopy supplements examination under incident and transmitted light to document details of high taxonomic relevance in the head and the forcipular segment. The modern appearance of this species and its membership among deeply nested extant clades are consistent with molecular estimates that most of the diversity of crown-group Geophilomorpha originated before the Late Cretaceous.

}, keywords = {Cenomanian, evolutionarily conserved morphology, Geophilidae, Kachinophilus}, issn = {0031-0239}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/pala.12051}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pala.12051}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Edgecombe, Gregory D. and Minelli, Alessandro} } @article {1584, title = {Case 3403. Mecistocephalus Newport, 1843 and Pachymerium Koch, 1847 (Chilopoda): proposed conservation of current usage by designation of Mecistocephalus punctifrons Newport, 1843 as the type species of Mecistocephalus Newport, 1843}, journal = {The Bulletin of zoological nomenclature}, volume = {64}, year = {2007}, month = {09/2007}, pages = {166-173}, abstract = {

The purpose of this application, under Article 70.2 of the Code, is to conserve Mecistocephalus punctifrons Newport, 1843 as the type species of the genus Mecistocephalus Newport, 1843, following current universal use; this requires suppression of the earlier but long forgotten valid designation of Geophilus ferrugineus Koch, 1835 as the type species of this genus. Accepting G. ferrugineus as the type species of Mecistocephalus would threaten the current, universal use of both names Mecistocephalus Newport, 1843 and Pachymerium Koch, 1847 for two well-established genera of centipedes. These genera have long been recognised as very distinct and included in different families; both have a wide geographical distribution and encompass more than 120 and 20 valid species respectively. The name Mecistocephalus, as currently applied, is threatened by Lamnonyx Cook, 1896, which has not been used as valid in taxonomic and faunistic literature since 1945. The name Pachymerium, as currently applied, is threatened by Mecistocephalus, which is currently and universally applied to a different genus.

Recommended citation: Bonato, L. \& A. Minelli (2007): Case 3403. Mecistocephalus Newport, 1843 and Pachymerium Koch, 1847 (Chilopoda): proposed conservation of current usage by designation of Mecistocephalus punctifrons Newport, 1843 as the type species of Mecistocephalus Newport, 1843. The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, 64 (3): 166-173. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/part/42820

}, keywords = {Chilopoda, geophilomorph centipedes, Geophilus ferrugineus, Mecistocephalus, Mecistocephalus punctifrons, nomenclature, Pachymerium, Taxonomy, type species}, issn = {0007-5167}, url = {https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/part/42820}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Minelli, Alessandro} } @article {1577, title = {Mecistocephalus guildingii Newport, 1843, a tropical centipede with amphi-Atlantic distribution (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha)}, journal = {Zootaxa}, volume = {2271}, year = {2009}, month = {22/10/2009}, pages = {27-42}, abstract = {

Mecistocephalus guildingii Newport, 1843 (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha: Mecistocephalidae) is redescribed, and its geographical distribution revised and updated, after examination of 28 specimens from different localities together with critical assessment of published accounts and records. Mecistocephalus guildingii Newport, 1843 (= Mecistocephalus punctilabratus Newport, 1845, n. syn.; = Lamnonyx leonensis Cook, 1896, n. syn.; = Mecistocephalus maxillaris guadeloupensis Demange and Pereira, 1985, n. syn.) is distinguished from other Mecistocephalus species, with which it has been often confused, mainly in head elongation and some features of the clypeus. M. guildingii has been reported hitherto from less than two dozen sites on the eastern side of tropical Americas, however it is actually established in islands and coastal sites on both sides of the tropical part of the Atlantic ocean: on the American side from Bermuda through the Antilles to southern Brazil; on the African side in the Cape Verde archipelago and from Gambia to Liberia. It is also established in a locality on the Pacific coast of Mexico, and has been found occasionally inland in Brazil and in European hothouses and other disturbed anthropic sites.

}, keywords = {amphi-Atlantic distribution, geographical distribution, Mecistocephalidae, Mecistocephalus guildingii}, issn = {1175-5334, 1175-5326}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2271.1.2}, url = {https://mapress.com/zt/article/view/zootaxa.2271.1.2}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Cupul-Maga{\~n}a, Fabio G. and Minelli, Alessandro} } @article {1575, title = {Phylogeny of Geophilomorpha (Chilopoda) inferred from new morphological and molecular evidence}, journal = {Cladistics}, volume = {30}, year = {2014}, month = {10/2014}, pages = {485-507}, abstract = {

To address the phylogenetic relationships of the centipede order Geophilomorpha (more than 1000 species), we have reinterpreted and expanded the knowledge on their morphological disparity, and have doubled the amount of molecular data available. We performed maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood analyses, using 195 phylogenetically informative morphological characters for 80 species, and DNA sequences of 28S, 18S, 16S rRNA and COI for up to 48 species. We found strong support for the monophyly of Geophilomorpha, the basal dichotomy between Adesmata and Placodesmata = Mecistocephalidae, and the basal dichotomy within Adesmata between two clades that are recognized here as superfamilies Himantarioidea and Geophiloidea. With respect to the families currently in use, Himantarioidea comprises three well supported clades corresponding to (i) Oryidae, (ii) Himantariidae, and (iii) Schendylidae s.l. including Ballophilidae; Geophiloidea comprises another three supported clades corresponding to (iv) a new family Zelanophilidae, (v) Gonibregmatidae s.l. including Eriphantidae and Neogeophilidae, and (vi) Geophilidae s.l. including Aphilodontidae, Dignathodontidae, Linotaeniidae, and Macronicophilidae.

}, isbn = {0748-3007}, issn = {0748-3007}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12060}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cla.12060}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Drago, Leandro and Murienne, J{\'e}r{\^o}me} } @article {1406, title = {MyrNet, an initiative to exchange data between myriapodological databases}, journal = {International Society for Myriapodology Newsletter}, volume = {6}, year = {2021}, month = {17/11/2021}, pages = {10-11}, url = {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356598485}, author = {Decker, Peter and Bonato, Lucio and Carlos A. Mart{\'\i}nez-Mu{\~n}oz and Sierwald, Petra and Spelda, J{\"o}rg and Reip, Hans S. and Voigtl{\"a}nder, Karin} } @article {1378, title = {Case 3673: Geophilus alpinus Meinert, 1870 (Chilopoda): proposed conservation of the specific name}, journal = {Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature}, volume = {72}, year = {2015}, month = {03/2015}, abstract = {

The purpose of this application, under Article 23.9.3 of the Code, is to conserve the specific name\ Geophilus alpinus\ Meinert, 1870\ for a widespread European species of geophilomorph centipedes. This name, currently in use, is threatened by the subjective synonyms\ Geophilus impressus\ C.L.\ Koch, 1847\ and\ Geophilus palustris\ C.L.\ Koch, 1863, which have been disregarded since 1874 and 1882 respectively.

}, keywords = {Chilopoda, geophilomorph centipedes, Geophilus, Geophilus alpinus, Geophilus impressus, Geophilus palustris, nomenclature, Taxonomy}, issn = {2057-0570}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.21805/bzn.v72i1.a10}, url = {https://bioone.org/journals/the-bulletin-of-zoological-nomenclature/volume-72/issue-1/bzn.v72i1.a10/Case-3673Geophilus-alpinus-Meinert-1870-Chilopoda--proposed-conservation-of/10.21805/bzn.v72i1.a10.full}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Minelli, Alessandro} } @article {1375, title = {Case 3680: Geophilus bonensis Meinert, 1870 (currently Gnathoribautia bonensis; Chilopoda): proposed conservation of the specific name}, journal = {Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature}, volume = {72}, year = {2015}, month = {06/2015}, pages = {109-114}, type = {Case}, abstract = {

The purpose of this application, under Article 23.9.3 of the Code, is to conserve the specific name\ Geophilus bonensis\ Meinert, 1870\ for a species of geophilomorph centipede, currently classified in the genus\ Gnathoribautia\ Br\ölemann, 1909.\ G.\ bonensis\ is universally considered the valid name for this species after 1963 and it has often been used in past and recent literature; however it is threatened by the long forgotten subjective synonym\ Necrophloeophagus punctiventris\ Newport, 1844, which has been completely disregarded as a valid name since 1880.

}, keywords = {Arthronomalus mandibularis, Arthronomalus punctatus, Chilopoda, geophilomorph centipedes, Geophilus bonensis, Geophilus hirsutus, Gnathoribautia, Necrophloeophagus punctiventris, nomenclature, Taxonomy}, issn = {2057-0570}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.21805/bzn.v72i2.a16}, url = {https://bioone.org/journals/the-bulletin-of-zoological-nomenclature/volume-72/issue-2/bzn.v72i2.a16/Case-3680Geophilus-bonensis-Meinert-1870-currently-Gnathoribautia-bonensis-Chilopoda/10.21805/bzn.v72i2.a16.short}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Minelli, Alessandro} } @article {1218, title = {Morphology, taxonomy and distribution of Diphyonyx gen. n., a lineage of geophilid centipedes with unusually shaped claws (Chilopoda: Geophilidae)}, journal = {European Journal of Entomology}, volume = {105}, year = {2008}, month = {15/05/2008}, pages = {343-354}, abstract = {

A new genus Diphyonyx is proposed here for a previously unrecognised lineage of geophilid centipedes. It is distinct from other geophilids in its unique combination of morphological characters, including the peculiar shape of the pretarsus of the legs on the anterior part of the trunk. The type species D. conjungens (Verhoeff, 1898), comb. n., is redescribed in detail and its geographical distribution updated (Balkan Peninsula, Anatolia, Crimea). Included in Diphyonyx are also D. sukacevi (Folkmanov\á, 1956), comb. n., and D. garutti (Folkmanov\á \& Dobroruka, 1960), comb. n., both from southern Russia. D. garutti is raised here to species rank.

}, keywords = {Chilopoda, Diphyonyx, Diphyonyx conjungens, geographical distribution, Geophilidae, Geophilomorpha, morphology, new genus, Taxonomy}, issn = {1210-5759}, doi = {10.14411/eje.2008.041}, url = {http://www.eje.cz/artkey/eje-200802-0017_morphology_taxonomy_and_distribution_of_diphyonyx_gen_n_a_lineage_of_geophilid_centipedes_with_unusually_sh.php}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Zapparoli, Marzio and Minelli, Alessandro} } @article {449, title = {Morphology of a neglected large-sized species of Geophilus from Iran (Chilopoda: Geophilidae)}, journal = {Zootaxa}, volume = {3736}, year = {2013}, month = {11/10/2013}, pages = {486-500}, abstract = {

Geophilus gigas was described briefly by Attems in 1951 from two sites in Iran, but neither reported nor cited subsequently. The original description is inadequate to understand the full morphology and the taxonomic position of the species. Thus it is here redescribed and figured in detail based on the examination of a syntype and newly collected specimens. Furthermore it is compared with the most similar species of the genus Geophilus. G.\  gigas can be reliably distinguished from other related species for the maximum body size (more than 6 cm), the arrangement and extent of the sternal pore-fields (with additional groups of pores), the coxal pores number and distribution (tens, scattered), and the size of the ulti-mate legs (swollen in both sexes).

}, keywords = {Geophilomorpha, Geophilus gigas, Taxonomy, Western Asia}, issn = {1175-5326}, doi = {10.11646/zootaxa.3736.510.11646/zootaxa.3736.5.4}, url = {https://www.biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3736.5.4}, author = {Zarei, Roghaieh and Rahimian, Hassan and Bonato, Lucio} } @article {356, title = {Geophilomorpha from Alborz Mountains and a checklist of Chilopoda from Iran~}, journal = {Zootaxa}, volume = {4780}, year = {2020}, month = {22/05/2020}, pages = {132-146}, abstract = {

This study presents an updated checklist of centipedes (Chilopoda) from Iran based on a review of the literature and recently examined specimens of Geophilomorpha collected from many sites in the Alborz Mountains. The centipedes of Iran comprise 48 species, of which 17 species have so far only been reported from Iran. Many species are known from a single locality, and only from specimens of a single sex. Species of the geophilomorph genera Clinopodes and Strigamia are here reported from Iran for the first time. The checklist includes all published geographical distribution data from Iran and a comparison with the centipede fauna of neighboring countries using the Jaccard index. The Iranian centipede fauna is still scantily known and further investigations are expected to contribute substantially, especially because of the diverse physiography of the country.

}, keywords = {Chilopoda, Iran fauna, Middle East, west Asia}, issn = {1175-5326}, doi = {10.11646/zootaxa.4780.1.6}, url = {https://www.biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.4780.1.6}, author = {Zarei, Roghaieh and Rahimian, Hassan and Mirmonsef, Hassan and Bonato, Lucio} } @article {195, title = {A common terminology for the external anatomy of centipedes (Chilopoda)}, journal = {ZooKeys}, volume = {69}, year = {2010}, month = {18/11/2010}, pages = {17-51}, abstract = {

A common terminology for the external morphological characters of centipedes (Chilopoda) is proposed. Terms are selected from the alternatives used in the English literature, preferring those most frequently used or those that have been introduced explicitly. A total of 330 terms are defined and illustrated, and another ca. 500 alternatives are listed.

}, keywords = {Chilopoda, morphology, terminology}, issn = {1313-2989}, doi = {10.3897/zookeys.69.737}, url = {http://zookeys.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=2466}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Edgecombe, Gregory D. and Lewis, John G. E. and Minelli, Alessandro and Pereira, Luis A. and Shelley, Rowland M. and Marzio Zapparoli} } @article {189, title = {Evolution of Strigamia centipedes (Chilopoda): a first molecular assessment of phylogeny and divergence times}, journal = {Zoologica Scripta}, volume = {46}, year = {2017}, month = {Jan-07-2017}, pages = {486 - 495}, doi = {10.1111/zsc.2017.46.issue-410.1111/zsc.12234}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/zsc.12234}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Bortolin, Francesca and Drago, Leandro and Orlando, Marco and L{\'a}szl{\'o} D{\'a}nyi} } @article {95, title = {ChiloBase 2.0 - A World Catalogue of Centipedes (Chilopoda).}, year = {2016}, abstract = {

\&$\#$39;ChiloBase\&$\#$39; is intended to be a catalogue of all known centipedes (Chilopoda) of the world. It is an electronic database, publicly and freely available through the World Wide Web (http://chilobase.biologia.unipd.it/). Based on a nomenclator of all genus- and species-level names, it is intended to offer, as far as possible, a consistent, updated taxonomic system for the Chilopoda. In a searchable web-based format, it aims to be a user-friendly reference database for faunistic, ecological and medical research, as well as to stimulate further taxonomic research. This catalogue is the product of a project developed under the umbrella of GBIF.

}, keywords = {Chilopoda}, url = {https://chilobase.biologia.unipd.it}, author = {Bonato, Lucio and Chagas-Jr., Amazonas and Edgecombe, Gregory D. and Lewis, John G. E. and Minelli, Alessandro and Pereira, Luis Alberto and Shelley, Rowland M. and Stoev, Pavel and Marzio Zapparoli} }