Research Article
Print
Research Article
New records of centipedes (Myriapoda: Chilopoda) in the fauna of Georgia, South Caucasus
expand article infoEleonora Kiria, Levan Mumladze, Shalva Barjadze, Ivan H. Tuf§
‡ Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
§ Palacký University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic
Open Access

Abstract

Georgia's rich biodiversity, as a key part of the Caucasus hotspot, makes it an ideal destination for scientific research. Nevertheless, knowledge about the species diversity of different animal groups in this area remains limited. In this article we provide information on the nine centipede species (Henia brevis (Silvestri, 1896), H. hirsuta Verhoeff, 1928, H. taurica (Sseliwanoff, 1884), Strigamia caucasia (Verhoeff, 1938), S. pusilla (Sseliwanoff, 1884), Harpolithobius spinipes Folkmanová, 1958, Lithobius antipai Matic, 1969, L. foviceps Muralevitch, 1926, and L. micropodus (Matic, 1980)) newly recorded in Georgia. Three of these species (H. brevis, H. hirsuta, and L. micropodus) are also new records for the Caucasus region. Data on their distribution, maps of the localities, and photos of the specimens studied are also given.

Key words

Georgia, Caucasus, new records, Geophilomorpha, Lithobiomorpha

Introduction

The biological diversity of Georgia is remarkable and fascinating. The country, like the entire Caucasus, has attracted the interest of many zoologists who have studied the fauna of this area over the last two centuries. However, a large part of Georgia’s biodiversity still remains unexplored (Mumladze et al. 2020). In this study, we contribute nine new records to the centipede fauna of Georgia, namely: Henia brevis (Silvestri, 1896), H. hirsuta Verhoeff, 1928, H. taurica (Sseliwanoff, 1884), Strigamia caucasia (Verhoeff, 1938), S. pusilla (Sseliwanoff, 1884), Harpolithobius spinipes Folkmanová, 1958, Lithobius antipai Matic, 1969, L. foviceps Muralevitch, 1926, and L. micropodus (Matic, 1980). Three of them, H. brevis, H. hirsuta, and Lithobius micropodus, are reported for the first time for the entire Caucasus. To date, 57 species and two subspecies were known from Georgia (Kiria et al. 2023); however, with the synonymization of Pleurogeophilus caucasicus under Clinopodes caucasicus, the number of species is reduced to 56. Subsequently, the number of known centipede species has increased to 65.

Materials and methods

The centipede specimens were collected between 2010–2023 in different regions of Georgia (Figures 12). Specimens were extracted from sieved leaf litter and topsoil using a Winkler extractor or collected by hand, then stored in 96% pure ethanol and identified using compound (Accu-Scope-Exc-350) and stereo microscopes (Unitron Z650HR). The specimens are deposited in the collections of the Institute of Zoology at Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia (ISUIZ). Images were taken with the same microscopes equipped with an Excelis AU-600HD camera and captured using Captavision 5.1 software. For species identification, we use Zalesskaja (1978) and the interactive key ChiloKey (Bonato et al. 2014). The classification and the currently valid names of the taxa follow Chilobase (Bonato et al. 2016). The scientific names of genera and species are arranged alphabetically.

The coordinates were recorded with Garmin GPSMAP 64s. The maps showing species distribution were created with QGIS (3.22.3).

Figure 1. 

Distribution map of newly recorded Geophilomorpha in Georgia.

Figure 2. 

Distribution map of newly recorded Lithobiomorpha in Georgia.

Results

Order Geophilomorpha Pocock, 1895

Family Dignathodontidae Cook, 1896

Genus Henia C. L. Koch, 1847

Henia brevis (Silvestri, 1896)

Type locality

Italy: Oriolo, Voghera, originally described as Chaetechelyne brevis Silvestri, 1896.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 1♂; eastern Georgia, Mtskheta municipality, Saskhori limestone quarry, sifting site N6; N41.84655°, E44.50885°; 640 m a.s.l.; 6 Mar. 2022; leg. M. Gogshelidze, E. Maghradze, L. Shavadze; • 1♂; sifting site N4; N41.84402°, E44.52403°; 655 m a.s.l.; 19 Apr. 2022; leg. M. Gogshelidze, E. Maghradze, L. Shavadze, N. Modebadze.

Distribution

Europe: British Is., France, Germany, Italy, Moldova (Zapparoli and Iorio 2012), Czech Republic (Tuf and Tajovský 2016).

Remarks

Henia brevis was described by Silvestri (1896) from Italy. This is the first record of this species in Georgia and the Caucasus as well.

Henia hirsuta Verhoeff, 1928

Fig. 3

Type locality

Greece: Mesolongi.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 3♂; eastern Georgia, Lagodekhi municipality, Lagodekhi National Park, subalpine meadow; N41.87408°, E46.37877°; 2347 m a.s.l.; 3 Jun. 2013; leg. L. Mumladze; • 2♂, 1♀; Lagodekhi National Park; N41.85232°, E46.28744°; 652 m a.s.l.; 26 May 2023; leg. E. Kiria, M. Gogshelidze, L. Shavadze, A. Margalitadze; • 2♂; eastern Georgia, Tianeti municipality, village Bochorma; N41.92391°, E45.10189°; 965 m a.s.l.; 24 May 2017; leg. L. Mumladze.

Distribution

Greece (Verhoeff 1928, Kanellis 1959, Matic 1976).

Remarks

This species was described from a specimen found near Mesolongi, central Greece (Verhoeff 1928). This was the only information on its distribution until now. This is the first record of this species for Georgia and also for the entire Caucasus.

Figure 3. 

Henia hirsuta Verhoeff, 1928, male, (a) head ventral view; (b) head and first two anterior sternites, ventral view; (c) posterior segments, ventral view; (d) segments showing sternal pores, ventral view. Scale bars: 0.2 mm (a, d); 0.5 mm (b, c).

Henia taurica (Sseliwanoff, 1884)

Fig. 4

Type locality

Ukraine: Crimea, originally described as Scotophilus tauricus Sseliwanoff, 1884.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 1♂; western Georgia, Mestia municipality, village Dizi; N43.00778°, E42.29167°; 834 m a.s.l.; 27 Jun. 2015; leg. L. Mumladze.

Distribution

Ukraine: Crimea (Sseliwanoff 1884), Russia: Krasnodar (Korobushkin et al. 2016).

Remarks

This species was described by Seliwanoff (1884) on the basis of 19 specimens (10♂ and 9♀) from the Crimea and was initially known as an endemic species of the Crimea. It was later recorded in Krasnodar, Russia, mainly under the stones of deciduous forests (Korobushkin et al. 2016). This is the first record of this species for Georgia.

Figure 4. 

Henia taurica (Sseliwanoff, 1884), female, (a) head, ventral view; (b) head and first anterior sternites, ventral view; (c) segments showing sternal pores, ventral view; (d) posterior segments, ventral view. Scale bars: 0.1 mm (a); 0.5 mm (b, d); 0.2 mm (c).

Family Linotaeniidae Cook, 1899

Genus Strigamia Gray, 1843

Strigamia caucasia (Verhoeff, 1938)

Type locality

Near Gora Abago, Krasnodar, Russia, originally described as Scolipolanes (Protoplanes) caucasius Verhoeff, 1938.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 1♀; western Georgia, Kobuleti municipality, Khino; N41.72792°, E42.08298°; 1022 m a.s.l.; 23 Aug. 2010; leg. L. Mumladze.

Distribution

Russia: Krasnodar (Verhoeff 1938)

Remarks

Originally, this species was described as Scolipolanes caucasius, and its taxonomic status was never questioned (Bonato et al. 2012). For a long time, this species was known only from a single locality in the western Caucasus, but recently larger material was collected from this region (Zuev 2016). This is the first record of this species for Georgia.

Strigamia pusilla (Sseliwanoff, 1884)

Type locality

Russia: Zarajsk, originally described as Scolioplanes pusillus Sseliwanoff, 1884.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 1♂, 1♀; eastern Georgia, Lagodekhi municipality, Lagodekhi National Park, mixed broadleaf forest; N41.84830°, E46.33423°; 1428 m a.s.l.; 3 Jun. 2013; leg. L. Mumladze.

Distribution

Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Romania, Russia, Mongolia (Tuf and Kupka 2015).

Remarks

Strigamia pusilla was described by Sseliwanoff (1884) based on 7♂ and 5♀ from Zarajsk, Russia. Here we presented the first record of this species for the territory of Georgia.

Order Lithobiomorpha Pocock, 1895

Family Lithobiidae Pocock, 1895

Genus Harpolithobius Verhoeff, 1904

Harpolithobius spinipes Folkmanová, 1958

Type locality

Russia: Krasnaya Polyana.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 1♂; eastern Georgia, Lagodekhi municipality, Lagodekhi protected areas, mixed broadleaf forest; N41.87438°, E46.36163°; 1970 m a.s.l.; 3 Jun. 2013; leg. L. Mumladze; • 1♂; western Georgia; Baghdati municipality, near Zekari Pass, subalpine forest; N41.84686°, E42.80745°; 2210 m a.s.l.; 11 Oct. 2013; leg. L. Mumladze; • 1♀; western Georgia; Baghdati municipality, near Zekari Pass, subalpine forest; N41.84609°, E42.80933°; 2204 m a.s.l.; 11 Oct. 2013; leg. L. Mumladze; • 1 ♂; western Georgia; Baghdati municipality, Sairme Gorge; mixed forest; N41.87473°, E42.78721°; 1615 m a.s.l.; 11 Oct. 2013; leg. L. Mumladze; • 1♀; western Georgia; Baghdati municipality, Sairme Gorge; mixed forest; N41.88185°, E42.76146°; 1439 m a.s.l.; 11 Oct. 2013; leg. L. Mumladze; • 1♂; western Georgia, Kobuleti municipality, Mtirala mountain, Colchic humid forest; N41.67383°, E41.85428°; 450 m a.s.l.; 25 Mar. 2014; leg. L. Mumladze; • 1♀; western Georgia, Tsalenjikha municipality, village Potskho Etseri; Zugdidi-Mestia roadside, under the rocks; N42.77657°, E42.05402°; 716 m a.s.l.; 27 Jun. 2015; leg. L. Mumladze; • 1♂; eastern Georgia, Stepantsminda municipality, village Kobi, Subalpine meadow, steep slope with boulders; N42.53774°, E44.49272°; 2280 m a.s.l.; 19 Aug. 2017; leg. L. Mumladze; • 1♂; eastern Georgia, Kvareli municipality, forest floor with large stones; N41.98228°, E45.85405°; 835 m a.s.l.; 5 Oct. 2021; leg. L. Mumladze.

Distribution

Russia (Folkmanová 1958; Korobushkin et al. 2016).

Remarks

This species is only known from the Caucasus. For a long time, only two localities were known from Russia until the study by Korobushkin et al. (2016) included new records from Krasnodar. We have added several new localities to the distribution of H. spinipes. This is the first record of this species for Georgia.

Genus Lithobius Leach, 1814

Lithobius antipai Matic, 1969

Fig. 5

Type locality

Iran: Mountain Demavend.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 2♀; western Georgia; Lagodekhi municipality, Lagodekhi protected areas, broadleaf forest; N41.88541°, E46.24866°; 740 m a.s.l.; 27 May 2023; leg. E. Kiria, M. Gogshelidze, L. Shavadze, A. Margalitadze; • 1♂; western Georgia; Lagodekhi municipality, Lagodekhi protected areas, broadleaf forest; N41.88695°, E46.25825°; 1058 m a.s.l.; 27 May 2023; leg. E. Kiria, M. Gogshelidze, L. Shavadze, A. Margalitadze; • 3♂; western Georgia; Lagodekhi municipality, Lagodekhi protected areas, broadleaf forest, location N2; N41.88386°, E46.25681°; 995 m a.s.l.; 27 May 2023; leg. E. Kiria, M.Gogshelidze, L. Shavadze, A. Margalitadze.

Distribution

Azerbaijan (Zalesskaja 1978), Russia, Iran (Matic 1969), Azerbaijan, Iran (Dyachkov et al. 2023).

Remarks

The original description of this species by Matic (1969) included two localities from Russia and Iran. Afterward, Zalesskaja (1978) added a new locality from Azerbaijan. Subsequently, nothing was known about this species until Dyachkov et al. (2023) reported additional new locality from Iran. Our report on this species is the first record in Georgia.

Figure 5. 

Lithobius antipai Matic, 1969, female, (a) head, ventral view; (b) head, lateral view; (c) genital segments, ventral view; (d) left coxa 15, ventral view. Scale bars: 1 mm (a, b, c); 0.5 mm (d).

Lithobius foviceps Muralevitch, 1926

Fig. 6

Type locality

Azerbaijan: Kemervan.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 1♀; Lagodekhi municipality, Lagodekhi protected areas, mixed broadleaf forest; N41.87438° E46.36163°; 1970 m a.s.l.; 3 Jun. 2013; leg. L.Mumladze.

Distribution

Azerbaijan: Kemervan (Muralevitch 1926, Dyachkov 2024).

Remarks

Until now, this species was known only from its type locality, which is only ca 150 km from Lagodekhi. We have recorded this species for the first time in Georgia.

Figures 6. 

Lithobius foviceps Muralevitch, 1926, female, (a) head, ventral view; (b) head, lateral view; (c) genital segments, ventral view. Scale bars: 1 mm (a, b); 0.5 mm (c).

Lithobius micropodus (Matic, 1980)

Type locality

Type locality is unknown. Matic (1980) proposed this nomen novum for Lithobius microps Auctorum, non Meinert, 1868, when synonymized Meinert´s species with L. duboscqui Brölleman, 1884. Original combination as Monotarsobius micropodus Matic, 1980.

Material examined

GEORGIA • 2♂; Lagodekhi municipality, Lagodekhi protected areas, subalpine meadow; N41.87408°, E46.37877°; 2347 m a.s.l.; 3 June 2013; leg. L. Mumladze.

Distribution

Mainland and insular Greece, Albania, Bosnia Herzegovina, Croatia, France, Italy, Montenegro, Romania, Russian Plain, Sardinia, Serbia, Sicily, Slovenia, Turkey (Zapparoli 2002 as cited in Simaiakis et al. 2004), Bulgaria (Bachvarova 2011), Czech Republic (Tuf and Tajovský 2016).

Remarks

This species is widely known in Europe but has never been recorded from the Caucasus. This is the first record for Georgia and also for the entire Caucasus.

Discussion

A recently published checklist of Georgian centipedes lists 59 (sub)species based on a thorough review of all literature sources. However, this list contains minor inaccuracies (Kiria et al. 2023).

  1. Lithobius piceus L. Koch, 1862, is included in the checklist based on the mention of the occurrence of the subspecies L. piceus caucasica Muralewitch, 1926, which was synonymized with this species by Matic and Darabantu (1968). However, a more recent paper by Golovatch et al. (2022) states that the subspecies L. piceus caucasica was synonymized with Hessebius megapus (Muralevitch, 1907). This information is not found in the cited article and is therefore probably a misstatement, thus the presence of L. piceus in Georgia is reported correctly.
  2. Pleurogeophilus caucasicus Folkmanová, 1958 is incorrectly included in the checklist. According to Bonato et al. (2011), it is a junior synonym of Clinopodes caucasicus (Sseliwanoff, 1884), which is already known from several Georgian localities and has recently been included in the checklist of Azerbaijan centipedes (Dyachkov 2024).
  3. For Strigamia cf. S. transsilvanica (Verhoeff, 1928), other possible occurrences in Asia were intentionally omitted. Although some, perhaps the same species similar to Strigamia transsilvanica, are repeatedly reported in several localities much further east (e.g., Nefediev et al. 2018, Dyachkov 2018). However, theoretically there may be several similar species morphologically close to S. transsilvanica, and the occurrence of a single species over such a large area is not very likely (Daychkov and Bonato 2024).
  4. Lamyctes coeculus (Brölemann, 1889) was listed as doubtful, because it was not clear where the information mentioned in Nefediev et al. (2016) came from. The occurrence of this species in Georgia was listed in Fauna Europaea according to information obtained from Pavel Nefediev, which was properly cited in his paper. However, the database Fauna Europaea contained many errors and has not been available for a long time. Therefore, it cannot be verified whether it is the country of Georgia in the Caucasus or the state of Georgia in the USA, although both possibilities are likely for this greenhouse species.

Thus, if the previous checklist documented 56 valid species and two subspecies from Georgia, the presented study extends the list of recorded species to 65 species and two subspecies. However, even though this number is probably not definitive, it can be assumed that even more species occur in this biodiversity-rich country.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Mariam Gogshelidze, Lado Shavadze, Eter Maghradze, Ana Margalitadze, and Naia Modebadze for their help in the material collection. The manuscript was improved by the helpful feedback and corrections from two reviewers, Dalibor Stojanović (Serbia) and an anonymous reviewer, as well as the suggestions from the editor, Dragan Antić (Serbia)

Additional information

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Ethical statement

No ethical statement was reported.

Funding

The investigation was supported by the projects: “Modern state of fauna of Georgia, status, conservation problems” funded by the Ministry of Education and Science of Georgia and “Investigation of soil biodiversity in Saskhori Quarry with the participation of local school pupils” funded by the Quarry Life Award, Heidelberg Cement, Georgia.

Author contributions

LM and EK collected material; EK and IHT identified species; EK drafted the original version of the manuscript. SB and LM provided logistical support. All authors contributed to the final version of the manuscript.

Author ORCIDs

Eleonora Kiria https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1711-2163

Levan Mumladze https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2172-6973

Shalva Barjadze https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8992-4987

Ivan H Tuf https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0250-0482

Data availability

All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text or Supplementary Information.

References

  • Bachvarova D (2011) Myriapoda (Chilopoda, Diplopoda) of Shumen City and Shumen Plateau (NE Bulgaria): Taxonomic Structure and Zoogeographical Analysis. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica 63(3): 245–262.
  • Bonato L, Iorio É, Minelli A (2011) The centipede genus Clinopodes C. L. Koch, 1847 (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha, Geophilidae): reassessment of species diversity and distribution, with a new species from the Maritime Alps (France). Zoosystema 33: 175–205. https://doi.org/10.5252/z2011n2a3
  • Bonato L, Dányi L, Socci AA, Minelli A (2012) Species diversity of Strigamia Gray, 1843 (Chilopoda: Linotaeniidae): a preliminary synthesis. Zootaxa 3593: 1–39. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3593.1.1
  • Bonato L, Minelli A, Lopresti M, Cerretti P (2014) ChiloKey, an interactive identification tool for the geophilomorph centipedes of Europe (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha). ZooKeys 443: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.443.7530
  • Bonato L, Chagas Junior A, Edgecombe GD, Lewis JGE, Minelli A, Pereira LA, Shelley RM, Stoev P, Zapparoli M (2016) ChiloBase 2.0 - A World Catalogue of Centipedes (Chilopoda). https://chilobase.biologia.unipd.it.
  • Dyachkov YuV (2018) Linotaeniidae Cook, 1899 (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha), a new family to the fauna of Kazakhstan. Ukrainian Journal of Ecology 8(4): 255–257.
  • Folkmanová B (1958) Über neue Formen der Chilopoda aus UdSSR. Zoologicheskij Zhurnal 37(2): 183-192. (in Russian)
  • Golovatch SI, Schileyko AA, Mikhailov KG (2022) The myriapodological legacy of Vyacheslav Stepanovich Muralewicz (1881-1942?). Russian Entomological Journal 31: 92–97. https://doi.org/10.15298/rusentj.31.1.19
  • Kanellis A (1959) Die Chilopodenfauna Griechenlands. Scientific Annals of the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics of the University of Thessaloniki 1: 1–56.
  • Korobushkin DI, Semenyuk II, Tuf IH (2016) An annotated checklist of the Chilopoda and Diplopoda (Myriapoda) of the Abrau Peninsula, northwestern Caucasus, Russia. Biodiversity Data Journal 4: e7308. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.4.e7308
  • Matic Z, Darabantu C (1968) Note critique sur quelques espèces du genre Lithobius (Chilopoda, Lithobiidae). Bulletin de l’Institut de Zoologie et Musée 26: 103–117.
  • Matic Z (1969) Contributo alla conoscenza dei Lithobiidae dell’Iran (Chilopoda, Lithobiomorpha). Fragmenta Entomologica 6: 87–114.
  • Matic Z (1980) Chilopodes recueillis dans l'île Créta. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica 15: 99–102.
  • Mumladze L, Japoshvili B, Anderson EP (2020) Faunal biodiversity research in the Republic of Georgia: a short review of trends, gaps, and needs in the Caucasus biodiversity hotspot. Biologia 75(9): 1385–1397. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-019-00398-6
  • Muralevitch WS (1926) Übersicht über die Chilopodenfauna des Kaukasus. II. Mitteilung. Zoologischer Anzeiger 69: 27-44. (in German)
  • Nefediev PS, Farzalieva GS, Tuf IH, Nedoev KK, Niyazov ST (2018) Millipede and centipede assemblages on the northern and southern slopes of the lowland Altais, southwestern Siberia, Russia (Diplopoda, Chilopoda). ZooKeys 741: 219–254. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.741.21936
  • QGIS Development Team (2023) QGIS Geographic Information System (3.22.3) [Computer software]. https://qgis.org
  • Simaiakis S, Minelli A, Mylonas M (2004) The centipede fauna (Chilopoda) of Crete and its satellite islands (Greece, Eastern Mediterranean). Israel Journal of Ecology and Evolution 50(4): 367–418.
  • Sseliwanoff AV (1884) Materials towards the study of Russian myriapods. Trudy Russkago Entomologicheskago obshchestva St. Petersburg 18: 69–121.
  • Tuf IH, Kupka J (2015) The first record of Strigamia pusilla from the Czech Republic (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha). Acta Carpathica Occidentalis 6: 108–110. https://doi.org/10.62317/aco.2015.009
  • Tuf IH, Tajovský K (2016) An annotated checklist of the centipedes (Chilopoda) recorded in the Czech Republic. Acta Societatis Zoologicae Bohemicae 80: 45–50.
  • Verhoeff KW (1928) Geophilomorphen-Beiträge und eine Lithobius-Form. Mitteilungen aus dem Zoologischen Museum in Berlin 14(2): 227-286. (in German)
  • Verhoeff KW (1938) Über einige Chilopoden des zoologischen Museums in München. Zoologischer Anzeiger 123: 123-130. Zalesskaja NT (1978) Key to Centipedes of USSR: (Chilopoda, Lithobiomorpha). Nauka, 213 pp. (in Russian)
  • Zapparoli M (2002) A catalogue of centipedes from Greece (Chilopoda). Fragmenta Entomologica 34: 1–146.
  • Zapparoli M, Iorio E (2012) The centipedes (Chilopoda) of Corsica: catalogue of species with faunistic, zoogeographical and ecological remarks. International Journal of Myriapodology 7: 15–68. https://doi.org/10.3897/ijm.7.3110
login to comment