03678nas a2200337 4500008004100000022001400041245010200055210006900157260001500226300001200241490000700253520268000260653001402940653001302954653001002967653002502977653001603002653001403018653001803032653001603050653001103066653001203077653004203089653002903131653001703160653001703177653001503194100002403209700002803233856007903261 2020 eng d a0136-006X00aNew records of lithobiid centipedes from Siberia, Russia (Chilopoda: Lithobiomorpha: Lithobiidae)0 aNew records of lithobiid centipedes from Siberia Russia Chilopod c19/06/2020 a185-1980 v293 a

Abstract: Based on new material and previously unstudied collections, the distributions of 13 lithobiid species from Siberia have been refined. The subgenus Chinobius Matic, 1973 and two species, Lithobius (Ch.) opinatus (Zalesskaja, 1978) and L. (Ezembius) giganteus Sseliwanoff, 1881, are reported from western Siberia for the first time. Some species, L. (E.) giganteus Sseliwanoff, 1881, L. (Monotarsobius) fugax Stuxberg, 1876 and L. (M.) nordenskioeldii Stuxberg, 1876, are new to the Republic of Altai. The first data on the lithobiid fauna of the Republic of Khakassia, encompassing 5 species, are provided: L. (Ch.) opinatus (Zalesskaja, 1978), L. (E.) princeps Stuxberg, 1876, L. (M.) curtipes C.L. Koch, 1847, L. (M.) fugax Stuxberg, 1876 and L. (M.) worogowensis Eason, 1976. The distributions of all species encountered are mapped for the first time in the Siberian region.

РЕЗЮМЕ. По результатам обработки нового материала и необработанных ранее коллекций уточнено распространение в Сибири 13 видов многоножек-костянок. Подрод Chinobius Matic, 1973 и два вида, Lithobius (Ch.) opinatus (Zalesskaja, 1978) и L. (Ezembius) giganteus Sseliwanoff, 1881,  формально впервые указываются для Западной Сибири. Виды L. (E.) giganteus Sseliwanoff, 1881, L. (Monotarsobius) fugax Stuxberg, 1876 и L. (M.) nordenskioeldii Stuxberg, 1876 являются новыми для Республики Алтай. Приводятся первые данные по фауне костянок Республики Хакасия, включающей 5 видов: L. (Ch.) opinatus (Zalesskaja, 1978), L. (E.) princeps Stuxberg, 1876, L. (M.) curtipes C.L. Koch, 1847, L. (M.) fugax Stuxberg, 1876 и L. (M.) worogowensis Eason, 1976.  Для всех видов впервые выполнено картирование ареалов в пределах Сибири.

10aChinobius10aEzembius10afauna10alithobiid centipedes10aLithobiidae10aLithobius10aMonotarsobius10anew records10aRussia10aSiberia10aмногоножки-костянки10aновыенаходки10aРоссия10aСибирь10aфауна1 aNefediev, Pavel, S.1 aFarzalieva, Gyulli, Sh. uhttps://kmkjournals.com/journals/AS/AS_Index_Volumes/AS_29/AS_29_2_185_19802589nas a2200181 4500008004100000022001400041245013500055210006900190260001500259300000900274520195400283100002502237700001902262700002102281700002702302700002002329856005802349 2020 eng d a0748-300700aPhylogeny of Lithobiidae Newport, 1844, with emphasis on the megadiverse genus Lithobius Leach, 1814 (Myriapoda, Chilopoda)0 aPhylogeny of Lithobiidae Newport 1844 with emphasis on the megad c04/11/2020 a1-233 a

Phylogenetic analyses based on molecular and morphological data were conducted to shed light on relationships within the mostly Palaearctic/Oriental centipede family Lithobiidae, with a particular focus on the Palaearctic genus Lithobius Leach, 1814 (Lithobiidae, Lithobiomorpha), which contains >500 species and subspecies. Previous studies based on morphological data resolved Lithobius as nonmonophyletic, but molecular‐based phylogenetic analyses have until now sampled few species. To elucidate species inter‐relationships of the genus, test the validity of its classification into subgenera, and infer its relationships with other Lithobiidae, we obtained molecular data (nuclear markers: 18S rRNA, 28S rRNA; mitochondrial markers: 16S rRNA, COI) and 61 morphological characters for 44 species of Lithobius representing four of its eight subgenera and nine other representatives of Lithobiidae. The data were analyzed phylogenetically using maximum‐likelihood, parsimony and Bayesian inference. This study suggests that (i) a close relationship between L. giganteus and the pterygotergine Disphaerobius loricatus highlighted in recent morphological analyses is also strongly supported by molecular data, and Pterygoterginae is formally synonymized with Lithobiinae; (ii) the Oriental/Australian genus Australobius is consistently resolved as sister group to all other sampled Lithobiidae by the molecular and combined data; (iii) the subfamily Ethopolyinae may be paraphyletic; (iv) the genus Lithobius is nonmonophyletic; (v) the subgenera Lithobius, Sigibius and Monotarsobius are nonmonophyletic and should not be used in future taxonomic studies; and (vi) there are instances of cryptic species and cases in which subspecies should be elevated to full species status, as identified for some European taxa within Lithobius.

1 aGanske, Anne‐Sarah1 aVahtera, Varpu1 aDányi, László1 aEdgecombe, Gregory, D.1 aAkkari, Nesrine uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cla.12431