01004nas a2200121 4500008004100000245010500041210007300146260003700219300001200256520042300268100002800691856016300719 2002 eng d00aArácnidos y miriápodos: alacranes, arañas, ciempiés y otros parientes artrópodos poco conocidos0 aArácnidos y miriápodos alacranes arañas ciempiés y otros parient aCuliacánbEl Colegio de Sinaloa a211-2193 a

Recommended citation: Sánchez-Vargas, D. A. (2002): Arácnidos y miriápodos: alacranes, arañas, ciempiés y otros parientes artrópodos poco conocidos. Pp. 211-219. In: Cifuentes-Lemus, J. L., Gaxiola-López, J. (Eds.). Atlas de la biodiversidad de Sinaloa. México: El Colegio de Sinaloa.

Publication date: 10/2002.

1 aSánchez-Vargas, D., A. uhttps://myriatrix.myspecies.info/content/ar%C3%A1cnidos-y-miri%C3%A1podos-alacranes-ara%C3%B1as-ciempi%C3%A9s-y-otros-parientes-artr%C3%B3podos-poco-conocidos00673nas a2200145 4500008004100000022001400041245004600055210004100101260001500142300000800157490000700165520028100172100002000453856005400473 1843 eng d a0374-548100aDescription of a new British Iulus0 aDescription of a new British iIulusi c01/04/1843 a3160 v113 a

Recommended citation: Newport, G. (1843): Description of a new British Iulus. The Annals and Magazine of Natural History, including Zoology, Botany and Geology, ser. 1, 11 (70): 316. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/18642221

1 aNewport, George uhttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/1864222102439nas a2200133 4500008004100000022004600041245004300087210003900130260006400169300001200233520200200245100001902247856003902266 2019 eng d a978-952-11-4973-3, ISBN 978-952-11-4974-000aTuhatjalkaiset - Myriapods - Myriapoda0 aTuhatjalkaiset Myriapods Myriapoda aHelsinkibYmpäristöministeriö & Suomen ympäristökeskus a340-3433 a

Viittausohje, kun viitataan yksittäiseen Punaisen listan lukuun: Vahtera, V. 2019. Tuhatjalkaiset. Julk.: Hyvärinen, E., Juslén, A., Kemppainen, E., Uddström, A. & Liukko, U.-M. (toim.) 2019. Suomen lajien uhanalaisuus – Punainen kirja 2019. Ympäristöministeriö & Suomen ympäristökeskus. Helsinki. S. 340-343. http://hdl.handle.net/10138/299501

Reference of a separate chapter of the Red List: Vahtera, V. 2019. Myriapods. In: Hyvärinen, E., Juslén, A., Kemppainen, E., Uddström, A. & Liukko, U.-M. (eds.) 2019. The 2019 Red List of Finnish Species. Ministry of the Environment & Finnish Environment Institute. Helsinki. P. 340-343. http://hdl.handle.net/10138/299501

Summary: Myriapoda are a diverse group of terrestrial arthropods, some of which are herbivores, some predators and some decomposers. There are four classes of Myriapoda: centipedes (Chilopoda), millipedes (Diplopoda), pauropods (Pauropoda), and symphylans (Symphyla). In Finland, a total of 63 species have been found: 21 centipede, 28 millipede, eight pauropod, and six symphylan species. In total, there are ten red-listed species: the critically endangered (CR) Geophilus carpophagus, which was classified as Regionally Extinct (RE) in the two previous assessments, and the Near Threatened (NT) species G. electricus, G. truncorum and Julus scanicus. These species only have one known locality each, and no new observations have been made of the three Near Threatened (NT) species for a long time. Six species have been categorised as Data Deficient (DD). Many species were classified as Not Evaluated (NE) due to insufficient information on their occurrence. While no monitoring of Myriapoda has been organised in Finland, the information on the spread of the species in this country could be updated by organising a monitoring study of a few years in duration.

1 aVahtera, Varpu uhttp://hdl.handle.net/10138/29950108893nam a2200337 4500008004100000022004600041245005500087210005100142260006400193300000800257520789800265653001508163653002808178653001708206653000908223653002108232653001908253653001308272653001408285653001908299653002208318653002308340653002208363653002608385100002108411700001808432700002108450700002208471700002308493856003908516 2019 eng d a978-952-11-4973-3, ISBN 978-952-11-4974-000aSuomen lajien uhanalaisuus – Punainen kirja 20190 aSuomen lajien uhanalaisuus Punainen kirja 2019 aHelsinkibYmpäristöministeriö & Suomen ympäristökeskus a7043 a

Tiivistelmä: Julkaisussa esitellään Suomen lajien viides uhanalaisuusarviointi. Suomen lajimäärän arvioidaan nykyään olevan vähintään 48 000. Riittävät tiedot uhanalaisuusarviointiin oli 22 418 lajista tai alemmasta taksonista, mikä on noin 47 % lajistosta. Uhanalaisiksi arvioitiin 2 668 lajia tai alempaa taksonia eli noin 11,9 % arvioiduista lajeista. Punaisen listan lajeja, joihin kuuluvat uhanalaisten lisäksi hävinneet, silmälläpidettävät ja puutteellisesti tunnetut on yhteensä 6 683 (29,8 %). Arvioiduista lajeista äärimmäisen uhanalaisia (CR) on 489, erittäin uhanalaisia (EN) 918, vaarantuneita (VU) 1 260, silmälläpidettäviä (NT) 1 912, puutteellisesti tunnettuja (DD) 1 792, hävinneitä (RE) 312 ja elinvoimaisia (LC) 15 735. Arviointi tehtiin Kansainvälisen luonnonsuojeluliiton (IUCN) ohjeiden ja kriteerien mukaan. IUCN:n alueellisen uhanalaisuusarvioinnin kriteerit perustuvat lajien havaittuun, arvioituun, pääteltyyn tai ennustettuun populaatioiden pienenemiseen, levinneisyys- tai esiintymisalueen kokoon, pieneen ja jatkuvasti taantuvaan tai hyvin pieneen populaatioon tai kvantitatiiviseen analyysiin. Lisäksi Suomessa on dokumentoitu lajien elinympäristöt sekä uhanalaisuuden syyt ja uhkatekijät. Enemmistö uhanalaisista lajeista elää metsissä (31 %) sekä perinneympäristöissä ja muissa ihmisen muuttamissa ympäristöissä (24 %). Uhanalaisten osuus kunkin elinympäristön arvioiduista lajeista on korkein tunturipaljakalla (37,9 %). Uhanalaisten lajien määrä on suurin hemiboreaalisella ja eteläboreaalisella vyöhykkeellä Etelä-Suomessa. Julkaisussa vertaillaan arvioinnin tuloksia vuoden 2010 tuloksiin esimerkiksi uhanalaisuusindeksin avulla. Lisäksi julkaisussa tarkastellaan vuoden 2010 uhanalaisuusarvioinnin ohjausryhmän ehdotusten toteutumista. Arvioinnin tulosten pohjalta Eliölajien uhanalaisuuden arvioinnin ohjausryhmä (LAUHA) esittää 13 toimenpide-ehdotusta uhanalaisten lajien suojelun, hoidon, tutkimuksen ja seurannan järjestämiseksi ja rahoittamiseksi. Arvioinnit on tehty eliöryhmäkohtaisissa työryhmissä ja työn tulokset esitellään eliöryhmittäin 39 luvussa.

Viittausohje, kun viitataan koko julkaisuun: Hyvärinen, E., Juslén, A., Kemppainen, E., Uddström, A. & Liukko, U.-M. (toim.) 2019. Suomen lajien uhanalaisuus – Punainen kirja 2019. Ympäristöministeriö & Suomen ympäristökeskus. Helsinki. 704 s. http://hdl.handle.net/10138/299501

Sammandrag: I denna bok presenteras resultat av Finlands femte hotbedömning. Finlands artantal uppskattas för tillfället till minst 48 000. Tillräckliga uppgifter för hotbedömning fanns om 22 418 arter eller lägre taxa, vilket utgör 47 % av alla arter. Av dessa bedömdes 2 667 arter eller lägre taxa vara hotade, d.v.s. 11,9 %. Rödlistade arter, som förutom hotade arter även innefattar försvunna arter, nära hotade arter och arter som det råder kunskapsbrist om, uppgår till 6 683 (29,8 %). Av de bedömda arterna är 498 akut hotade (CR), 918 starkt hotade (EN), 1 260 sårbara (VU), 1 912 nära hotade (NT), 1 792 med kunskapsbrist (DD), 312 försvunna (RE) och 15 735 livskraftiga. Hoten har bedömts på basis av Internationella Naturvårdsunionens (IUCN) regionala hotbedömningskriterier. Kriterierna grundar sig på observerad, deduktiv eller estimerad minskning av populationer eller utbrednings- och förekomstområden, en liten och kontinuerligt minskande eller en mycket liten population eller på kvantitativ analys. Därutöver har arternas livsmiljö, hotorsak och hotfaktorer i Finland dokumenterats. Majoriteten av de hotade arterna lever i skogar (31 %), vårdbiotoper och andra kulturmiljöer (24 %). Antalet hotade arter är högst inom den hemiboreala och sydboreala zonen i södra Finland. Andelen hotade arter i en specifik habitattyp är högst i kalfjället(37,9 %). I publikationen jämförs resultaten av hotbedömningen med resultaten från år 2010 t.ex. med hjälp av rödlisteindexet. Vid sidan av bedömningsresultaten beskrivs de mest påtagliga administrativa och juridiska åtgärder som vidtagits för artskydd samt forskning och övervakning sedan den föregående bedömningen. Hotbedömningens styrgrupp (LAUHA ) föreslår 13 åtgärder för organisering och finansiering av skydd, vård, forskning och övervakning av hotade arter. Resultaten av bedömningen som är genomförd av expertgrupper presenteras i 39 kapitel som omfattar olika organismgrupper.

The Red List of Finnish Species 2019

Abstract: This publication describes the fifth assessment of Finnish threatened species. The current estimated number of species in Finland is at least 48,000. Sufficient information was available for the evaluation of 22,418 species or lower taxa, which is approximately 47% of all species. In total, 2,667 species or lower taxa (11.9%) were assessed as threatened. The red-listed species, which, in addition to threatened species, include the species classified as Regionally Extinct, Near Threatened, and Data Deficient, total 6,683 (29.8%). Of the species evaluated, 489 were classified as Critically Endangered (CR), 918 as Endangered (EN), 1,260 as Vulnerable (VU), 1,912 as Near Threatened (NT), 1,792 as Data Deficient (DD), 312 as Regionally Extinct (RE), and 15,735 as of Least Concern (LC). The assessment was carried out in accordance with guidelines and criteria issued by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and applied in assessments at the regional level. These criteria are based on observed, estimated, inferred, or projected population size reduction; the extent of occurrence or area of occupancy; continuing decline in a small population or a very small size of population; or a quantitative analysis. In addition, species’ habitats, as well as causes of threat and threat factors, were documented in the Finnish evaluation. The majority of threatened species live in forests (31%) and in rural biotopes and other cultural habitats (24%). Of the species assessed the proportion of threatened species is highest in Alpine habitats (37.9%). The number of threatened species is highest in the hemiboreal and southern boreal zones in southern Finland. The results of the assessment are compared to the previous assessment 2010 for example with the Red List Index. In addition, proceedings of the proposals given by the steering group of the previous assessment are evaluated. The steering group of this assessment made 13 proposals for measures for the arrangement and financing of the conservation, management, research, and monitoring of threatened species. The results of the work of the expert groups responsible for the evaluation are presented in 39 organism group -specific sections.

Reference of the publication: Hyvärinen, E., Juslén, A., Kemppainen, E., Uddström, A. & Liukko, U.-M. (eds.) 2019. The 2019 Red List of Finnish Species. Ympäristöministeriö & Suomen ympäristökeskus. Helsinki. 704 p. http://hdl.handle.net/10138/299501

Publication date: 26/02/2019

10abedömning10aconservation of species10ahotade arter10aIUCN10alajiston suojelu10apunainen lista10aRed list10arödlista10askydd av arter10athreat assessment10athreatened species10auhanalaiset lajit10auhanalaisuusarviointi1 aHyvärinen, Esko1 aJuslén, Aino1 aKemppainen, Eija1 aUddström, Annika1 aLiukko, Ulla-Maija uhttp://hdl.handle.net/10138/29950100362nas a2200121 4500008004100000245005200041210004600093260001200139300000800151490000700159100002000166856005400186 1880 eng d00aNote on a larval Lithobius-like Myriapod0 aNote on a larval iLithobiusilike Myriapod c05/1880 a3760 v141 aRyder, John, A. uhttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/4103925800569nam a2200145 4500008004100000050002100041245013900062210006900201250000700270260004900277300001300326490001000339100002200349856005200371 1767 eng d aQH43 .S97 1766x 00aSystema naturae per regna tria naturae: secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis.0 aSystema naturae per regna tria naturae secundum classes ordines  a12 aStockholmbImpensis Direct. Laurentii Salvii a533-13270 v1 (2)1 aLinnaeus, Carolus uhttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/13724002124nas a2200301 4500008004100000022002500041245007900066210006900145260001500214300001100229490000800240520123300248653001301481653001401494653001701508653001601525653001901541653002501560100001501585700002301600700002001623700002001643700002501663700002601688700002101714700001801735856006901753 2019 eng d a0012-9658, 1939-917000aA meta food web for invertebrate species collected in a European grassland0 ameta food web for invertebrate species collected in a European g c05/03/2019 ae026790 v1003 a

Patterns of feeding interactions between species are thought to influence the stability of communities and the flux of nutrients and energy through ecosystems. However, surprisingly few well-resolved food webs allow us to evaluate factors that influence the architecture of species interactions. We constructed a meta food web consisting of 714 invertebrate species collected over 9 years of suction and pitfall sampling campaigns in the Jena Experiment, a long-term grassland biodiversity experiment located in Jena, Germany. We summarize information on the 51,496 potential trophic links, which were established using information on diet specificity and species traits that typically constrain feeding interactions (trophic group, body size, and vertical stratification). The list of species identities, traits, and link-derivation rules will be useful not only for tests of plant diversity effects on food web structure within the Jena Experiment, but also for considering consistent construction of food webs from empirical data, and for comparisons of network structure across ecosystems. No copyright or proprietary restrictions are associated with the use of this data set other than citation of this Data Paper.

10afood web10agrassland10ainvertebrate10ameta-matrix10aspecies traits10atrophic interactions1 aHines, Jes1 aGiling, Darren, P.1 aRzanny, Michael1 aVoigt, Winfried1 aMeyer, Sebastian, T.1 aWeisser, Wolfgang, W.1 aEisenhauer, Nico1 aEbeling, Anne uhttps://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecy.267900690nas a2200145 4500008004100000245004400041210003500085250002500120260002200145300000600167490000800173520029300181100001400474856005600488 1900 eng d00a[Tausendfuß (Julus terrestris)]0 aTausendfuß iJulus terrestrisi aErste Morgen-Ausgabe aKölnc20/06/1900 a20 v4733 a

Recommended citation: Anonymous (1900): [Tausendfuß (Julus terrestris)]. Kölnische Zeitung, Mittwoch, 20. Juni. 1900 - Nr. 473, Erste Morgen-Ausgabe, Vermischte Nachrichten, page 2. https://zeitpunkt.nrw/ulbbn/periodical/zoom/7594565

1 aAnonymous uhttps://zeitpunkt.nrw/ulbbn/periodical/zoom/759456500928nam a2200157 4500008004100000050002100041245013900062210006900201250000700270260004900277300000800326490000600334520035700340100002200697856005100719 1758 eng d aQK91.C58 1758-5900aSystema naturae per regna tria naturae: secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis.0 aSystema naturae per regna tria naturae secundum classes ordines  a10 aStockholmbImpensis Direct. Laurentii Salvii a8240 v13 a

Recommended citation: Linnaeus, C. (1758): Systema naturæ per Regna Tria naturæ, Secundum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, Cum Characteribus, Differentiis, Synonymis, Locis. Editio decima, reformata. Tomus I. Impensis Direct. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiæ. 824 pp. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.542

1 aLinnaeus, Carolus uhttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/1027700656nas a2200109 4500008004100000245003600041210003400077260010700111520022400218100002800442856007600470 1900 eng d00a[Postcard to Ludwig Döderlein]0 aPostcard to Ludwig Döderlein aStrasbourg, Grand Est, FrancebArchives de la Ville et de l’Eurométropole de Strasbourgc20/06/19003 a

Recommended citation: Verhoeff, C. W. (1900, June 20). [Postcard to Ludwig Döderlein]. Archives de la Ville et de l’Eurométropole de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, Grand Est, France.

1 aVerhoeff, Carl, Wilhelm uhttps://myriatrix.myspecies.info/content/postcard-ludwig-d%C3%B6derlein00651nas a2200109 4500008004100000245003400041210003200075260010700107520022300214100002800437856007600465 1898 eng d00a[Letter to Ludwig Döderlein]0 aLetter to Ludwig Döderlein aStrasbourg, Grand Est, FrancebArchives de la Ville et de l’Eurométropole de Strasbourgc08/08/18983 a

Recommended citation: Verhoeff, C. W. (1898, August 8). [Letter to Ludwig Döderlein]. Archives de la Ville et de l’Eurométropole de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, Grand Est, France.

1 aVerhoeff, Carl, Wilhelm uhttps://myriatrix.myspecies.info/content/letter-ludwig-d%C3%B6derlein-101550nas a2200145 4500008004100000022001400041245009200055210006900147260001500216300001000231490000700241520102500248100002401273856010701297 2020 eng d a2513-944400aMyriapod Trivia - Curiosities of British Natural History & The Rabbit and the Centipede0 aMyriapod Trivia Curiosities of British Natural History The Rabbi c03/04/2020 a95-970 v323 a

Over the years with an interest in the more formal study of myriapods, especially centipedes, I have also accumulated a few items of what we might call "trivia" - prints, pictures etc. The two items here come into that category and I know there are many more like them around and they are offered as light relief for Bulletin readers. I know little about The Penny Magazine but it clearly represents a cheap, presumably weekly, publication dedicated to that great Victorian aim of "self improvement". This issue comprises eight pages with items as varied as "Essays on the lives of Remarkable Painters No.XXXI: Andrea del Sarto", "The English and Irish Ordnance Surveys" and "The Hareem of Ibrahim Pasha". I have abridged the item on Centipedes and Millipedes from the original three pages. "The Rabbit and the Centipede" comes from a children's book of 1907. I am not sure that it sheds any particular new light on myriapod locomotory mechanisms.

1 aBarber, Anthony, D. uhttps://www.bmig.org.uk/sites/www.bmig.org.uk/files/bulletin/BullBMIG32(2020)95-97_Myriapod-Trivia.pdf02448nas a2200241 4500008004100000022001400041245008000055210006900135260001500204300000900219490000700228520175800235653001801993653002002011653001402031653002002045653002202065653002102087653001702108100002002125700001802145856004302163 2020 eng d a2075-445000aSoil Health and Arthropods: From Complex System to Worthwhile Investigation0 aSoil Health and Arthropods From Complex System to Worthwhile Inv c16/01/2020 a1-210 v113 a

The dramatic increase in soil degradation in the last few decades has led to the need to identify methods to define not only soil quality but also, in a holistic approach, soil health. In the past twenty years, indices based on living communities have been proposed alongside the already proven physical-chemical methods. Among them, some soil invertebrates have been included in monitoring programs as bioindicators of soil quality. Being an important portion of soil fauna, soil arthropods are involved in many soil processes such as organic matter decomposition and translocation, nutrient cycling, microflora activity regulation and bioturbation. Many studies have reported the use of soil arthropods to define soil quality; among taxa, some have been explored more in depth, typically Acari and Collembola, while generally less abundant groups, such as Palpigradi or Embioptera, have not been investigated much. This paper aims to evaluate and compare the use of different soil microarthropod taxa in soil degradation/quality studies to highlight which groups are the most reported for soil monitoring and which are the most sensitive to soil degradation. We have decided not to include the two most present and abundant taxa, Acari and Collembola, in this paper in consideration of the vast amount of existing literature and focus the discussion on the other microarthropod groups. We reported some studies for each taxon highlighting the use of the group as soil quality indicator. A brief section reporting some indices based on soil microarthropods is proposed at the end of this specific discussion. This paper can be considered as a reference point in the use of soil arthropods to estimate soil quality and health.

10abioindicators10amacroarthropods10amesofauna10amicroarthropods10asoil biodiversity10asoil degradation10asoil quality1 aMenta, Cristina1 aRemelli, Sara uhttps://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/11/1/5402152nas a2200217 4500008004100000022001400041245009300055210007100148260001500219520147300234653002601707653001601733653001401749653002101763653001201784653001401796100002401810700002201834700001901856856005901875 2021 eng d a1752-458X00aTemporal complementarity in activity‐density of two arthropod macro‐detritivore taxa0 aTemporal complementarity in activity‐density of two arthropod ma c21/01/20213 a

1. Macro‐detritivores are important fragmenters performing a first step in the ecosystem process of nutrient cycling. Woodlice and millipedes are important representatives of this group and their ecology and niche requirements are often regarded as very similar. However, it is unclear whether there is a difference in temporal activity throughout the year between both groups, possibly leading to temporal complementarity for leaf litter breakdown, and whether patterns of temporal variation in activity are consistent across different habitat types.

2. We studied year‐round pitfall‐trap data of woodlice and millipedes from an old sand quarry with a high habitat heterogeneity.

3. Our results indicate that there is high temporal complementarity between both detritivore taxa, with millipede activity‐density peaking in spring, while woodlice showing a peak in summer. Interestingly, timing of activity depended on habitat openness. Millipedes peak first in open habitat and later in closed habitat, while woodlice showed the opposite pattern.

4. Temporal turnover in community composition was high and of similar magnitude as spatial turnover in community composition across this relatively small scale of our study area.

5. We conclude that, although woodlice and millipedes show comparable habitat preferences, their temporal activity patterns show the potential for temporal complementarity for litter breakdown.

10aCommunity composition10adecomposers10aDiplopoda10ahabitat openness10aIsopoda10aphenology1 aDe Smedt, Pallieter1 aProesmans, Willem1 aBaeten, Lander uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/icad.1247102749nas a2200265 4500008004100000022001400041245009700055210006900152260001500221300000900236490000800245520197300253653001902226653001402245653001402259653000902273653001202282653001802294100002102312700002102333700002202354700001902376700002102395856006702416 2020 eng d a0038-071700aRelease of greenhouse gases from millipedes as related to food, body size, and other factors0 aRelease of greenhouse gases from millipedes as related to food b c28/02/2020 a1-100 v1443 a

The release of greenhouse gases from millipede digestive tracts warrants study because of its potential effect on climate change and also as an indicator of microbial processes that transform organic matter during passage through the gut of these animals. Gas chromatography was used to quantify the release of methane (CH4), carbon dioxide (CO2), and nitrous oxide (N2O) from living millipedes in laboratory conditions. The effect of four food types (leaf litter of alder, oak, and maple, and rotten wood) on the release of CH4, CO2, and N2O by 12 species was also assessed. In addition, two julid species were fed pure cellulose to test the ability of these millipedes to obtain energy from cellulose and to determine the effect of this diet on gas production.

All of the tested millipede species produced CO2 and some produced CH4. Stable and substantial CH4 emission was restricted to the large millipedes in the tropical orders Spirobolida and Spirostreptida. This asymmetrical phylogenetic distribution of CH4 production may be related to body size and the presence of gut commensals, but these factors may influence each other and depend upon geographic distribution of species. The quality of the food and feeding regime can also affect CH4 production in that CH4 release was significantly higher when millipedes were fed alder leaf litter rather than oak or maple leaf litter. CO2 production from millipedes mainly reflected the metabolic response of the animals. Traces of N2O were only occasionally emitted by millipedes; this release evidently depends on the N content in the food and seems to be restricted to members of the Glomeridae family. Based on gas production, the tested species of millipedes were unable to obtain their energy needs from a diet of pure cellulose.

10aCarbon dioxide10aCellulose10aDiplopoda10aFood10aMethane10aNitrous oxide1 aŠustr, Vladimir1 aŠimek, Miloslav1 aFaktorová, Lucie1 aMacková, Jana1 aTajovský, Karel uhttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S003807172030062601223nas a2200121 4500008004100000245010700041210006900148300001000217490000700227520070200234100003000936856013500966 1977 eng d00aNew or poorly known Julida (Diplopoda) millipedes from the Sataplia State Nature Reserve (SSR Georgia)0 aNew or poorly known Julida Diplopoda millipedes from the Satapli a46-510 v823 a

Two new species of Julida (Diplopoda) from the Sataplia Reservation, West Transcaucasia are described. Pachyiulus krivolutskyi sp. nov. is distinguishable from the related P. flavipes C.L.K. and P. foetidissimus Mur. by an entirely light body color, slight striation of metazona and some details of gonopod structure. Cylindroiulus georgicus sp. nov. differs from related C. placidus (Lignau) mainly by the structure of gonopods and cyphopods. These two species together with C. ferganus Lohm. apparently from a fourth group of species whithin the subgenus Grenatoiulus, characterized by a short epiproct rounded at the apex.

1 aGolovatch, Sergei, Ilyich uhttps://myriatrix.myspecies.info/content/new-or-poorly-known-julida-diplopoda-millipedes-sataplia-state-nature-reserve-ssr-georgia00868nas a2200181 4500008004100000245012300041210006900164300001200233490000700245520023500252653001400487653001200501653001600513653002500529653002000554100002400574856008800598 2016 eng d00aA new species of the millipede genus Julus from the Rostov-on-Don Region, southern Russia (Diplopoda: Julida: Julidae)0 anew species of the millipede genus Julus from the RostovonDon Re a241-2450 v253 a

A new species of the millipede family Julidae, Julus alexandrae sp.n., is described from the Rostov-on-Don Region, southern Russia. It differs in gonopod characters, primarily the shape of the promere.

10aDiplopoda10aJulidae10anew species10aRostov-on-Don Region10asouthern Russia1 aEvsyukov, Aleksandr uhttps://kmkjournals.com/journals/AS/AS_Index_Volumes/AS_25/AS_25_3_241_245_Evsyukov01519nas a2200229 4500008004100000022001400041245009700055210006900152260001600221300001100237490000900248520078400257653001301041653001401054653001001068653001001078653001401088100002401102700003001126700001801156856011501174 2018 eng d a1175-533400aThe millipede genus Julus Linnaeus, 1758 in the Caucasus (Diplopoda: Julida: Julidae)0 amillipede genus iJulusi Linnaeus 1758 in the Caucasus Diplopoda  c2018 Aug 20 a89-1170 v44613 a

The genus Julus includes seven species already described from the Caucasus region: J. alexandrae Evsyukov, 2016; J. colchicus Lohmander, 1936; J. jedryczkowskii Golovatch, 1981; J. kubanus Verhoeff, 1921; J. lignaui Verhoeff, 1910; J. lindholmi Lohmander, 1936; and J. subalpinus Lohmander, 1936, as well as two new species: J. khostensis sp. n., from the Krasnodar Province, and, J. dagestanus sp. n., from the Republic of Dagestan, both in Russia. All nine species are described, illustrated and keyed, their morphological variations outlined, and distributions mapped, based on the literature data and abundant new samples. Altitudinal distribution patterns are also discussed.

10aCaucasus10aDiplopoda10afauna10aJulus10amillipede1 aEvsyukov, Aleksandr1 aGolovatch, Sergei, Ilyich1 aReip, Hans, S uhttps://myriatrix.myspecies.info/content/millipede-genus-julus-linnaeus-1758-caucasus-diplopoda-julida-julidae01648nas a2200205 4500008004100000022001400041245013400055210006900189260001500258300001100273490000700284520094800291653002501239653002701264653001601291653002001307100002101327700002101348856007301369 2020 eng d a0237-541900aPresent status of the millipede fauna of Hungary, with a review of three species of Brachyiulus Berlése, 1884 (Diplopoda)0 aPresent status of the millipede fauna of Hungary with a review o c07/08/2020 a87-1030 v513 a

Since 2005, the last comprehensive species list of the millipedes of Hungary, several new species to the fauna have been approved. Here we provide an updated summary of all Hungarian Diplopoda, comprising altogether 107 species. Brachyiulus pusillus (Leach, 1815) and Chondrodesmus riparius Carl, 1914, based on recent collections, are considered as new to the fauna of Hungary. We give special remarks to the following taxa: Julus curvicornis Verhoeff, 1899, Typhloiulus polypodus (Loksa, 1960), Hungarosoma bokori Verhoeff, 1928, Heteracrochordum evae (Loksa, 1960), Ochogona spp., Haasea hungarica (Verhoeff, 1928), Mastigona spp., and some Polydesmidae. In addition, the taxonomical relationship between B. bagnalli (Brolemann, 1924), B. lusitanus (Verhoeff, 1898), and B. pusillus is discussed in detail. With 21 figures.

10aBrachyiulus pusillus10aChondrodesmus riparius10afaunal list10anew occurrences1 aKorsós, Zoltán1 aLazányi, Eszter uhttp://opuscula.elte.hu/PDF/Tomus51_S2/Op_Korsos_Lazanyi_Hungary.pdf01671nas a2200241 4500008004100000022001400041245008100055210006900136260001500205300001400220490000700234520090800241653001101149653002001160653001601180653001601196653002501212653003001237100002101267700002801288700003001316856008301346 2020 eng d a0132-806900aTwo interesting records of millipedes (Diplopoda) from near Borjomi, Georgia0 aTwo interesting records of millipedes Diplopoda from near Borjom c30/03/2020 a121–1220 v293 a

Polydesmus abchasius Attems, 1898 and Julus lindholmi Lohmander, 1936, both found recently near Borjomi, central Georgia, currently represent the southeasternmost records of the genera Polydesmus Latreille, 1803, subgenus Polydesmus s.str., and Julus Linnaeus, 1758, and of both these widespread, endemic, Caucasian millipede species.

РЕЗЮМЕ. Polydesmus abchasius Attems, 1898 и Julus lindholmi Lohmander, 1936, недавно найденные близ Боржоми (Центральная Грузия), пока представляют собой самые юго-восточные находки как родов Polydesmus Latreille, 1803, подрод Polydesmus s.str., и Julus Linnaeus, 1758, так и этих широкораспространенных эндемичных кавказских видов диплопод.

10aJulida10aJulus lindholmi10anew records10aPolydesmida10aPolydesmus abchasius10aновые находки1 aKokhia, Mzia, S.1 aEvsyukov, Aleksandr, P.1 aGolovatch, Sergei, Ilyich uhttps://kmkjournals.com/journals/REJ/REJ_Index_Volumes/REJ_29/REJ_29_1_121_12202593nas a2200217 4500008004100000022001400041245008200055210006900137260001500206300001200221490000800233520197300241653001402214653001202228653001302240653001002253653001402263100002102277700003002298856004702328 2020 eng d a1313-298900aDiversity and distribution of the millipedes (Diplopoda) of Georgia, Caucasus0 aDiversity and distribution of the millipedes Diplopoda of Georgi c28/04/2020 a199-2190 v9303 a

The diplopod fauna of Georgia, Transcaucasia, is very rich given the country’s relatively small territory; it presently comprises 103 species from 44 genera, 12 families, and 7 orders. Most of the Diplopoda known from Georgia (86 species, or 83%) demonstrate Caucasian distribution patterns, 36 and 46 species, as well as 8 and 9 genera being endemic or subendemic to the country, respectively. A single Holarctic family, Anthroleucosomatidae (order Chordeumatida), contains 44 Caucasian species and 20 genera, of which 27 species and 14 genera are endemic or subendemic to Georgia. Likewise, all species from the orders Polyzoniida, Siphonocryptida, Glomerida and Chordeumatida, as well as most species of Julida and Polydesmida are native, also endemic or subendemic to the Caucasus, but the genera and families they represent are widely distributed at least across the Euro-Mediterranean Realm. Most of the presumed troglobionts in the Caucasus appear to be confined to western Georgia’s karst caves (14 species, 5 genera). Within Georgia, the fauna of the western part (= Colchis) is particularly rich and diverse, while that of the central and eastern parts of the country grows increasingly depauperate inland following the gradual climatic aridisation from west (Black Sea coast) to east (Armenia and Azerbaijan). The vertical distribution of the Diplopoda in Georgia, as well as the Caucasus generally, shows the bulk of the fauna restricted to forested lowland to mountain biomes or their remnants. Only very few Chordeumatida and Julus species seem to occur solely in the subalpine to alpine environments and thus may provisionally be considered as high-montane elements. Ongoing and future research on the millipedes of the Caucasus, especially in cave and montane environments, will undoubtedly allow for many more novelties and details of the diversity and distribution of Georgia’s Diplopoda to be revealed or refined.

10achecklist10aColchis10aendemism10afauna10aMyriapoda1 aKokhia, Mzia, S.1 aGolovatch, Sergei, Ilyich uhttps://zookeys.pensoft.net/article/47490/01934nas a2200337 4500008004100000022001400041245011100055210007000166260001500236300001200251490000700263520089800270653001701168653001901185653001001204653001401214653001401228653001001242653001501252653001601267653001201283653001301295653004701308653005201355653003001407653001701437653002501454653001501479100002401494856007801518 2018 eng d a0136-006X00aJulus ghilarovi Gulička, 1963 s.str.: time to put an end to confusion (Diplopoda: Julida: Julidae)0 aiJulus ghilarovii Gulička 1963 sstr time to put an end to confus c29/03/2018 a284-2920 v273 a

The following few taxonomic changes are proposed: Julus ghilarovi Gulička, 1977, stat. revalid. ex Julus ghilarovi ghilarovi Gulička, 1972, Julus ghilarovi brachydactylus Gulička, 1972 = Julus brachydactylus Gulička, 1972, stat. n. = Julus insolitus Mikhaljova, 2009, syn. n. The distributions of both species are refined.

РЕЗЮМЕ. Предложены несколько таксономических изменений: Julus ghilarovi Gulička, 1972, stat.revalid. ex Julus ghilarovi ghilarovi Gulička, 1972, Julus ghilarovi brachydactylus Gulička, 1972 = Julus brachydactylus Gulička, 1972, stat.n. = Julus insolitus Mikhaljova, 2009, syn.n. Для обоих видов приведены уточненные сведения по их распространению.

10aAsian Russia10abrachydactylus10afauna10aghilarovi10ainsolitus10aJulus10amillipedes10anew records10aSiberia10aTaxonomy10aазиатская часть России10aдвупарноногие многоножки10aновые находки10aСибирь10aтаксономия10aфауна1 aNefediev, Pavel, S. uhttp://kmkjournals.com/journals/AS/AS_Index_Volumes/AS_27/AS_27_4_284_29200386nas a2200121 4500008004100000022001400041245005800055210005800113300001200171490000700183100002100190856005300211 1864 eng d a0029-397000aDescriptions of new species of North American Iulidae0 aDescriptions of new species of North American Iulidae a10–160 v161 aWood, Horatio, C uhttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/194269100737nas a2200133 4500008004100000245003600041210003600077260001200113300001200125490000600137520037700143100002900520856005400549 1887 eng d00aNotes on North American Julidæ0 aNotes on North American Julidæ c06/1887 a25–440 v43 a

The following paper is based upon the material of this family embraced in the entomological collection in the Museum of the Indiana University. In connection with the description of the new species, it has also been deemed best to introduce descriptions of those already known to science. The types of the new genera and species are deposited in the above museum.

1 aBollman, Charles, Harvey uhttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/35430622