Apheloria Chamberlin 1921

Shelley, Rowland M., Phillips, Gary & Smith, Jamie M., 2017, A contribution on the neglected milliped genus Apheloria Chamberlin 1921 (Diplopoda: Polydesmida: Xystodesmidae / - inae: Apheloriini): Neotype designation and description of Julus virginiensis Drury 1770., Insecta Mundi 2017 (571), pp. 1-12 : 4-5

Genus Apheloria Chamberlin 1921

Type-species. Fontaria montana Bollman 1887 , by original designation.

Diagnosis. Gonopodal acropodite configuration sickle-shaped or an incomplete loop, distal zone (Shelley and Whitehead 1986) bending abruptly (90 o) sublaterad, apically acuminate; prefemoral process substantially shorter, curved/bent/elbowed at midlength and directed toward inner surface of acropodital loop, apically acuminate.

Components. The present concept ( Hoffman 1999), which we are critically reviewing, recognizes the aforementioned three species with A. virginiensis divided into five subspecies.

Distribution. Shelley and McAllister (2007) documented that Apheloria extends from Montréal Island, Québec, and southern Michigan / Wisconsin to northcentral South Carolina, Alabama north of the Tennessee River, and southeastern Oklahoma. East-west, it ranges from the Connecticut River, western Chesapeake Bay, the “inner Coastal Plain” and Bald Head Island, North Carolina, and northeastern South Carolina to eastern Oklahoma and perhaps Nebraska.

Remarks. Chamberlin’s original proposal (1921) is short but accurate – “Erected for a group of species, heretofore included in Fontaria , in which the telopodite of the gonopod of male is a simple, coiled blade with a small spine (prefemoral process) at base.” We cannot detect any feature other than acropodital configuration that unequivocally diagnoses Apheloria . Experienced workers may be able to identify some females from color pattern and/or the presence of tubercles on the ambulatory coxae, but the unique acropodital configuration is the only diagnostic structural feature.

Three components of Apheloriini , as interpreted by Shelley and Whitehead (1986), exhibit broad distributions covering much of eastern North America, and Apheloria is the conservative counterpart to Brachoria and Sigmoria , both authored by Chamberlin. The latter are diverse, speciose, and possess highly variable gonopodal acropodites, whereas those throughout the range of Apheloria are closely similar and specific-level differences are obscure. We are examining subtle aspects of the acropodites and prefemoral processes for differences that may hold taxonomic significance and while no conclusions have been reached, note that the proximal 2/3 of the acropodital loops appear constant throughout the range while the sublinear distal sector seems to vary slightly in length. The “inner” margin (that inside the loop) of this sector also narrows progressively while angling toward the “outer” one, which may be a smooth, continuous taper or an abrupt slant. The length of the “distal zone,” distal to the subapical bend, also varies noticeably as does the overall length and degree of curving/bending of the prefemoral process, which can even be retrorse. Perhaps morphometric studies comparable to those conducted on a Japanese xystodesmid, Parafontaria tonominea (Attems) ( Tanabe et al. 2001) , may aid in elucidating the composition of Apheloria , but for now we accept Hoffman’s (1999) arrangement.