Hypochthonius C. L. Koch
publication ID |
ORI111 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6285260 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/9FCCF81E-DC99-DFE8-2C8C-EFAA30726EB6 |
treatment provided by |
Thomas |
scientific name |
Hypochthonius C. L. Koch |
status |
|
Hypochthonius C. L. Koch View in CoL , 1836
Hypochthonius C. L. Koch, 1836, fasc. 3 (19, 20); 1842, vol. 3, p. 109.
Hypocthonius , Berlese, 1896a, fasc. 79 (11); 1896b, pp. 24, 25.
Hypochthonius , Berlese, 1910, p. 217; 1913a, p. 36.
In the above the development is explained of Berlese's conception of the genus Hypochthonius . Berlese (1913a) finally regarded the following species as representatives: rufulus C. L. Koch (the type of the genus), ventricosus Canestrini (a species of uncertain relationship, possibly Archegozetes ), pallidulus (non C. L. Koch; now Eniochthonius fam. Eniochthoniidae ), crosbyi Ewing (recently redescribed, although insufficiently, by Woolley, 1956, p. 290, figs. 3, 4; the species certainly does not belong to the Hypochthoniidae or the Eniochthoniidae ), and asiaticus Berlese (now Eohypochthonius ).
Berlese dated the genus Hypochthonius at first as 1842, and later as 1835; in fact the correct date is 1836. I remark that for some time Berlese spelt the generic name as Hypocthonius .
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
InfraOrder |
Enarthronota |
Family |
Hypochthonius C. L. Koch
van der Hammen, L. 1959 |
Hypocthonius
Berlese 1882 |