Checklist
Print
Checklist
A synopsis of Estonian myriapod fauna (Myriapoda: Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla and Pauropoda)
expand article infoKaarel Sammet‡, Mari Ivask§, Olavi Kurina‡
‡ Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia
§ Tallinn University of Technology, Tartu, Estonia

Corresponding author: Kaarel Sammet ( kaarel.sammet@gmail.com )

Academic editor: Nesrine Akkari
© 2018 Kaarel Sammet, Mari Ivask, Olavi Kurina.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation: Sammet K, Ivask M, Kurina O (2018) A synopsis of Estonian myriapod fauna (Myriapoda: Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla and Pauropoda). ZooKeys 793: 63-96. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.793.28050
ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0D7B2412-5585-4AEA-81D4-1854A4415128
Open Access

Abstract

The data on Estonian Myriapoda are scattered in various publications and there has been no overview of the fauna up to the present. A critical summary of the previous information on Estonian Myriapoda is given, supplemented by new records and distribution maps. Altogether, 5784 specimens from 276 collecting sites were studied. To the hitherto recorded 14 centipede species are added Lithobius melanops, L. microps, Geophilus carpophagus, G. flavus, Strigamia transsilvanica and Stenotaenia linearis, a probably introduced species. Of the 27 published Estonian millipede species, the data on two species proved erroneous, and two new species were recorded (Craspedosoma raulinsii and Cylindroiulus britannicus). Two previously recorded millipede species – Brachyiulus pusillus and Mastigophorophyllon saxonicum – were not found in the recent samples, the latter may have become more rare or extinct. Pauropoda and Symphyla lack previous reliable records. Combined with published data, the number of myriapod species known from Estonia is now set at 52. Some changes in species distribution and frequencies were detected comparing the published data with new records. Some data about habitat preferences of the more common species are also given. The majority of species have a western Palaearctic distribution, while six species are at the northern limit of their ranges.

Keywords

check list, Chilopoda , Diplopoda , distribution, Estonia, Myriapoda , Pauropoda , soil invertebrates, Symphyla

Introduction

The research of Estonian Myriapoda has been quite unsystematic and sporadic. Very little has been published in English thus much of the information may be currently unavailable to the wider myriapodological community (e.g., Zapparoli 2003, Tuf et al. 2015). The first scant records of Myriapoda in Estonia date back to the second half of the XIX century. The first data are given by E. Haase (Haase 1886: 58), who mentions a “Craspedosoma mutabile v. fasciatum Latzel, 1884” specimen collected by A. E. Grube from Tartu. Subsequently, P. Schmidt reported the presence of Pauropus Huxleyi in the vicinity of Narva (Schmidt 1894) and O. Schubart published the data on two millipede species collected from Estonian bogs (Schubart 1924). W. Mierzeyewski collected in 1912 and 1926 some millipedes in the island Saaremaa, and in the years 1925 to 1929 W. Herold gathered a considerable millipede material from many places in Estonia. That material, containing 20 species, was also identified and published by O. Schubart (Schubart 1930), who repeated the data in his monograph on German Diplopoda (Schubart 1934). Part of the Herold material is currently preserved in the collection of Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin. In the 1930’s, some ecological studies mention millipedes identified to genus level (e.g., Nõmmik 1939) and some species were listed in studies on plant pests (e.g., Zolk 1923, Kaarep et al. 1949). E. Palmén published one new record of Estonian diplopods in his overview of the Finnish fauna (Palmén 1949).

An unpublished collection of myriapods from 1937, preserved currently in the entomological collection of Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu (IZBE, identified by the Swedish zoologist H. Lohmander), has probably served as a basis to the list of ten centipede species in H. Riikoja’s account of Estonian invertebrates (Riikoja 1955; referred to as pers. comm. with J. Vilbaste).

We owe thanks for much of what is known about Estonian Myriapoda to the works of the Estonian entomologist Juhan Vilbaste (1924–1985). His “Keys to Estonian Millipedes” lists 21 species as proven to occur in Estonia at that time (Vilbaste 1953). In addition, he published on Myriapoda in several local faunistic surveys, adding one centipede and five millipede species records and some ecological observations (Vilbaste 1970, Vilbaste 1979, Vilbaste et al. 1985, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993). Unfortunately, only two specimens of Vilbaste have subsisted (in the IZBE collection). The data provided by Schubart (1930) and Vilbaste (1953) have been reproduced by various subsequent authors (e.g., Lang 1954, Stojałowska 1961, Lokshina 1969). Thus, 14 centipede species and 27 millipede species were recorded from Estonia prior to the current study.

Material and methods

As complete as possible, bibliography of historical records of myriapods in Estonia was compiled, reviewing all the available faunistic studies and other records. The main Estonian zoological collections were searched for myriapod material (Estonian Museum of Natural History, Tallinn; Tartu University Museum of Natural history and the private insect collection of Allan Selin, Maardu). Some collections abroad known to house Estonian material were contacted for further information (Finnish Museum of Natural History and Zoologische Staatssammlung München, Germany).

New material was collected using: (1) pitfall traps, (2) Tullgren funnel and Kempson apparatus, (3) sifting moss, leaf litter and detritus with a standard entomological sieve, (4) manual searching in suitable habitats and daytime retreats, and (5) as by-catch of non-target species with window pane traps (attached to tree trunks) and Malaise traps (for particular description of the trapping projects, see Sammet et al. 2016 and Tomasson et al. 2014, respectively).

The material was collected from 276 localities covering all parts of Estonia (see Table 1 and Figure 1 for details). The distribution of Estonian species (Figures 2–5) is presented in 50×50 km UTM grid, also used in the „Atlas of European Millipedes“ (Kime and Enghoff 2011, 2017) (compiled using Adobe Photoshop CS5 Extended). The relative abundances in different habitats of species with at least 25 findings were presented as diagrams (Figures 6–8). The habitats studied repeatedly with different methods were grouped into 14 types:

Figure 1. 

Collecting localities of Myriapoda in Estonia. Key: Dark circles = this study, light circles = literature data. For further details, see Table 1.

1. Coastal meadows and alvars;

2. Broad-leaved (nemoral) forests (dominated by Quercus robur, Tilia cordata, Acer platanoides and herbs in the understory);

3. Boreo-nemoral deciduous forests (dominated by Alnus incana or Salix species);

4. Dry heathland forests (dominated by Pinus sylvestris, with Cladonia sp. or Calluna vulgaris in understory);

5. Drier boreo-nemoral mixed forests (dominated by Pinus sylvestris with Sorbus and Acer and Vaccinium myrtillus in understory);

6. Mesophilic boreal forests (dominated by Picea abies, Oxalis acetosella in understory);

7. Hillock forests (dominated by Corylus avellana, herbs in the understory);

8. Carrs and paludifying forests (dominated by Picea abies, Betula pendula and Pinus sylvestris);

9. Bogs;

10. Fens and waterlogged meadows;

11. Inland mesophilic grasslands;

12. Rural gardens;

13. Urban parks and graveyards;

14. Arable fields.

The barplot diagrams were produced by dividing the number of findings in a habitat type by the proportion of sampling effort in that particular habitat (i.e. the number of “sampling events” consisting of one trapping period or one hand collecting trip with subsequent Tullgren extraction of soil and litter samples) (Figure 6). Other, more rare, habitats that were not studied with all the methods are not included. All studied material is preserved in 70% ethanol or a mix of ethanol and glycerol for Pauropoda. Some gonopods are preserved as microscope slides (using Euparal). The studied material is deposited in the entomological collection of Estonian University of Life Sciences (IZBE) and the soil biology collection of Tallinn University of Technology (TTUSB), both in Tartu, Estonia. Various keys for Central, Northern, and East, European myriapods were used for identification (Schubart 1934, Lokshina 1969, Zalesskaya 1978, Blower 1985, Andersson et al. 2005, Bonato et al. 2005, Barber 2009).

Results

All available material consisting of 1656 centipede, 4095 millipede, 29 symphylan, and six pauropod specimens were identified or re-identified and databased. The following list contains all the known published records of Estonian myriapods, followed by numbers of studied specimens and collecting localities. Full details for one finding from each locality are given in “Supplementary information”. Only publications with original data are listed, subsequent ones citing these (e.g., Schubart 1934, Lang 1954, Stojałowska 1961, Lokshina 1969, Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971, Blower 1985, Spuņģis 2010) are omitted. An asterisk (*) marks previously unpublished species. The full list of records with all details will be available through the Estonian eBiodiversity portal (http://elurikkus.ut.ee; Abarenkov et al. 2010) and Global Biodiversity Information Facility (http.//www.gbif.org). The nomenclature and synonymies follow the ChiloBase (Bonato et al. 2016), “Atlas of European millipedes” (Kime and Enghoff 2011, 2017) and McAlpine and Shear (2018) for centipedes and millipedes, respectively, and the “Catalogue of Myriapoda in the Nordic Countries” (Andersson et al. 2008, 2013) for Symphyla and Pauropoda. For each species, a brief overview of its distribution is given (with emphasis on North-Eastern Europe).

Table 1.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

Collecting localities of Estonian myriapods. The localities’ numbers correspond to those on Figure 1. Localities within a range of less than 10 km are presented by one number, the different place names (sub-localities) under one number are designated consecutive letters (the coordinates apply only to the first of them).

No Latitude / Longitude Name
1 58.3300N, 21.9627E a Kuusnõmme, b Eeriksaare, c Atla
2 58.4467N, 21.9391E a Kõruse, b Undva, c Tagamõisa, d Neeme, e Tammese
3 57.9777N, 21.9971E Türju
4 58.2467N, 22.0311E Kipi
5 58.3909N, 22.0051E a Oju, b Vilsandi,
6 57.9095N, 22.0552E Sõrve peninsula
7 58.2833N, 22.1000E a Audaku, b Sutru, c Kivesselja, d Pätsumaa bog, e Pitkasoo, f Suurissoo hill, g Surnuaiamägi, h Nakimetsa, i Suurmägi, j Laasma, k Viidumägi, l Upsi
8 58.3163N, 22.0806E a Kanna, b Viidu
9 58.1234N, 22.1946E Lõu
10 58.5105N, 22.2330E Kugalepa
11 58.3188N, 22.3066E a Mõnnuste, b Paadla
12 58.2209N, 22.2752E Kaalupi
13 58.9414N, 22.4362E Paope
14 58.3986N, 22.1278E Viidumäe, Jürna liivad
15 58.2424N, 22.4246E Suurlaht
16 58.1453N, 22.0570E Abruka
17 58.3005N, 22.6459E a Ilpla, b Kudjape
18 58.2256N, 22.6885E Vanamõisa
19 58.3725N, 22.6697E a near Kaali lake, b Võrsna
20 58.4563N, 22.7076E Tika
21 58.5397N, 22.7307E Õeste
22 58.7962N, 22.7555E a Reigilaid, b Kassari
23 58.8289N, 22.9746E a Suur-Pihlakare, b Öakse, c Saarnaki, d Aruküla, e Heltermaa, f Sarve
24 58.7956N, 23.0063E a Saarnaki, b Hanikatsi, c Langekare
25 58.7421N, 23.1349E Ahelaid
26 58.4828N, 22.9800E a Koigi lake; b Koigi bog
27 58.5846N, 23.0246E Orinõmme
28 58.4394N, 23.0680E Asva
29 58.5506N, 23.1319E Orissaare
30 58.6114N, 23.0911E a Koguva, b Lepanina
31 58.6406N, 23.1588E a Paenase, b Nõmmküla, c Üügu, d Lõetsa
32 58.4568N, 23.2673E a Kahtla, b Kübassaare
33 58.5794N, 23.2709E a Mäla, b Võiküla
34 58.9697N, 23.2058E Vormsi: Kärret
35 59.0347N, 23.3047E Vormsi: Diby
36 57.8062N, 23.2396E Ruhnu
37 58.8377N, 23.3958E Liialaid
38 58.6421N, 23.5167E Hanila
39 58.5609N, 23.5522E a Puhtu, b Laelatu, c Pivarootsi
40 58.6918N, 23.5821E a Salevere Salumägi, b Saastna, c Metsküla
41 58.7440N, 23.6719E a Keemu, b Kirikuküla Tika, c Kirikuküla Allika, d Kirikuküla Ennu, e Viita, f Penijõe
42 58.7531N, 23.8465E a Kloostri, b Kelu, c Rõude, d Kasari, e Kirbla
43 58.8089N, 23.7011E Rannamõisa
44 58.9492N, 23.5681E a Haapsalu, b Linnamäe
45 59.2049N, 23.5988E Noarootsi
46 58.5336N, 23.8299E Paaderma
47 59.0356N, 23.6382E Ingiküla
48 59.0371N, 23.6609E Niibi
49 58.4319N, 24.0003E Tõhela
50 59.2594N, 23.8737E Vihterpalu
51 58.3144N, 23.9850E a Tõstamaa, b Suti
52 58.5380N, 24.0062E Nedrema
53 58.6455N, 24.1254E Kurese
54 58.8075N, 24.0094E Patsu fen
55 58.9020N, 24.0284E a Marimetsa NR, b Kullamaa
56 58.9972N, 24.0562E Risti
57 58.7757N, 24.2498E Vana-Vigala
58 59.0723N, 24.2934E Turba bog
59 59.3315N, 24.3745E Tõmmiku
60 58.8958N, 24.3769E a Sõtke, b Valgu, c Raela
61 58.7805N, 24.5625E Inda
62 58.3884N, 24.5093E Pärnu
63 58.1369N, 24.5141E a Tolkuse bog, b Uulu,
64 58.0996N, 24.4737E a Pulgoja, b Pikla, c Häädemeeste
65 58.0067N, 24.4423E a Kabli b near Ikla
66 57.9947N, 24.5378E Laulaste NR
67 58.2709N, 24.6411E Laadi
68 59.3194N, 24.5581E a Saue, b Pääsküla
69 59.3816N, 24.4628E Vahi küla
70 59.3915N, 24.6434E Vana-Mustamäe
71 59.2661N, 24.6483E Kasemetsa-Kuresoo
72 59.5933N, 24.5025E Naissaar
73 58.0783N, 24.8338E Tali
74 58.0027N, 24.8769E Sookuninga NR
75 58.0711N, 24.8608E Kalita NR
76 58.9549N, 24.7641E a Raela, b Varbola
77 59.0725N, 24.8077E Hagudi
78 58.8879N, 24.6391E Loe
79 58.6328N, 24.7013E Lehu bog
80 58.9742N, 24.7021E Kuusiku; Keo
81 58.8983N, 24.7616E a Kõnnu, b Lellepere
82 59.5297N, 24.8577E Lubja
83 59.2377N, 24.9311E 2km SE of Sõmeru
84 58.9459N, 25.1025E Loosalu
85 58.7080N, 24.8780E a Kõnnu bog, b Luuri bog
86 59.4630N, 24.9377E Maardu
87 59.2781N, 25.6212E Aegviidu
88 59.5084N, 25.5925E Uuri
89 59.5841N, 25.6263E Hara island
90 58.8165N, 25.1625E Käru
91 58.6396N, 25.3039E a Ramussaare, b Pikkmetsa, c Tõrvaaugu
92 58.2719N, 25.1798E Riimaru
93 58.8099N, 25.3394E Lokuta
94 59.0835N, 25.4052E a Mustla, b Mustla Pühajärv
95 58.6333N, 25.5500E a Võhma, b Koksvere
96 58.3593N, 25.5950E Viljandi
97 58.0818N, 25.5253E Viivre
98 59.6991N, 25.0211E Keri island
99 58.7259N, 25.6007E a Retla, b Kabala
100 58.6475N, 25.6717E a Arussaare, b Kirivere, c Järavere
101 59.6049N, 25.9229E Käsmu
102 59.5778N, 25.9556E Võsu
103 59.4481N, 26.0126E Viitna
104 59.4484N, 26.0118E Koljaku-Oandu NR
105 59.5166N, 25.9746E Palmse
106 59.5660N, 26.0880E a Oandu, b Vihula
107 59.5557N, 26.3533E Rutja; Varangu
108 58.9765N, 26.0454E Koeru
109 59.0232N, 26.2443E a Kamariku, b Rakke
110 58.8839N, 26.0433E Sopaalliku
111 58.1413N, 25.6803E Muti NR
112 58.0180N, 25.8794E Helme
113 58.8457N, 26.2919E a Kärde hill, b Kaera, c Pedja
114 58.0063N, 26.0553E Soontaga NR
115 58.2388N, 26.1770E a Rannu, b 2 km SW of Rannu
116 57.9127N, 26.1883E Õru
117 58.1803N, 26.4205E Elva-Vitipalu NR
118 58.2386N, 26.4433E a Peedu, b Vapramäe
119 58.0399N, 26.2073E Prange
120 58.0533N, 26.4898E Otepää
121 58.3808N, 26.6222E a Rahinge, b Tiksoja, c Tähtvere bog, d Õssu, e Tartu Eerika, f Merimetsa, g Tartu Tähtvere, h Kõrveküla
122 58.2301N, 26.7010E Kambja
123 59.1857N, 26.1980E a Porkuni, b Lasila
124 59.0373N, 26.6758E between Venevere and Arukse
125 59.0115N, 26.4265E Karaski
126 58.9092N, 26.5046E a Pedjaääre, b Tudusoo NR
127 59.1527N, 26.8213E Suigu NR
128 57.6878N, 26.1854E Vaitka
129 57.6049N, 26.2749E Koiva wooded meadow, b Koivakonnu, c Taheva
130 57.7522N, 26.4926E a Karula Mähkli, b Küünimetsa
131 57.5727N, 26.6413E Mõisamõtsa NR
132 57.6938N, 26.8850E Saarlasõ küla
133 57.8386N, 27.0505E Võrusoo
134 57.7355N, 27.0627E Haanja NR
135 57.9422N, 27.4058E a Rebasemäe, b Ilumetsa
136 57.8433N, 27.4626E Piusa
137 58.1287N, 27.4990E Räpina
138 57.8168N, 27.5180E Obinitsa
139 58.0911N, 26.9050E Palojärv
140 58.0524N, 27.0286E Puuri
141 58.1514N, 26.8731E a Voorepalu, b Ihamaru NR
142 58.1777N, 27.1467E Mooste
143 58.2781N, 27.3210E Järvselja
144 58.3287N, 26.9892E Melliste
145 58.5170N, 26.9223E Konnamõisa
146 58.5633N, 26.8772E a Välgi NR, b Särgla, c Pataste
147 58.6032N, 27.1301E Alatskivi
148 58.6558N, 26.9469E a Pala, b Padakõrve NR
149 58.7296N, 26.8244E a Odivere, b Maarja-Magdaleena
150 58.7394N, 26.9452E Jõeääre
151 58.7430N, 26.8888E a Ruskavere. b Võtikvere NR
152 58.7841N, 26.9330E Nõmme
153 58.9636N, 26.8294E a Kõveriku, b Avinurme
154 59.0230N, 27.0591E Tudulinna
155 58.9656N, 27.0303E Lohusuu
156 59.1732N, 26.9438E Kaukvere
157 59.4443N, 26.9047E Aseri taga
158 59.3588N, 26.9238E Kiviõli
159 59.1644N, 27.0133E Muraka NR
160 59.3179N, 27.1235E Aidu
161 59.0894N, 27.1550E Muraka NR
162 59.3858N, 27.2218E Kohtla-Järve
163 59.2289N, 27.3247E Mäetaguse NR
164 59.4439N, 27.3350E a Valaste falls, b 5 km W of Toila
165 59.3948N, 27.3408E Kukruse
166 59.4302N, 27.3900E Toila
167 59.1523N, 27.3889E Jõuga
168 59.0711N, 27.6277E Agusalu LKA
169 59.0767N, 27.7033E Permisküla
170 59.2384N, 27.8377E Narva
171 59.1719N, 27.7961E a Poruni, b Gorodenka

1. Chilopoda

1.1. Geophilomorpha

1.1.1. Geophilidae

*Geophilus carpophagus Leach, 1814

Fig. 2(1)

Studied material. 2 specimens from 2 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species (Andersson et al. 2005), present also in southern Sweden and south-western Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. The species is rare in Estonia.

Geophilus electricus (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fig. 2(2)

Literature sources.Volkova 2016: 504.

Studied material. 5 specimens from 4 localities.

Distribution. Western Palaearctic species introduced also to North America (Andersson et al. 2005), present also in southern Sweden and south-western Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. The species is rare in Estonia.

*Geophilus flavus (De Geer, 1778)

Figs 2(3), 6

Literature sources.Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 68 specimens from 24 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species introduced also to North America (Andersson et al. 2005), widespread in Scandinavia and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. A common species in different habitats, but absent in wet areas.

Geophilus proximus C.L. Koch, 1847

Figs 2(4), 6

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15, Ivask 2011: 2, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 57 specimens from 26 localities.

General distribution. Central and North European species, (Andersson et al. 2005), widespread in Scandinavia and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. A common species in different habitats, but absent in wet areas.

Geophilus truncorum Bergsoe & Meinert, 1866

Figs 2(5), 6

Literature sources.Vilbaste 1970: 174, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319 [as: Brachygeophilus truncorum Mnr.], Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 66 specimens from 27 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, present also in southern Sweden and south-western Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. A common species in different habitats, especially in soil samples.

*Stenotaenia linearis (C.L.Koch, 1835)

Fig. 2(7)

Studied material. 5 specimens from 1 locality.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, exclusively synanthropic in northern Europe, present also in Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005) and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species was recently shown to comprise several cryptic lineages (Wesener et al. 2015). It is probably an introduced species in Estonia (only found in the Tartu Botanical Garden in Estonia and present also only synanthropically in the neighbouring countries).

Pachymerium ferrugineum (C. L. Koch, 1835)

Figs 2(6), 6

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 31 specimens from 14 localities.

General distribution. Holarctic species (Andersson et al. 2005), widespread in Sweden and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. The species is more common in coastal areas and rare elsewhere. It seems to favour dry habitats.

Figure 2. 

Distribution of Estonian Chilopoda. 1 Geophilus carpophagus 2 G. electricus 3 G. flavus 4 G. proximus 5 G. truncorum 6 Pachymerium ferrugineum 7 Stenotaenia linearis 8 Strigamia transsilvanica 9 Lamyctes emarginatus 10 Lithobius borealis 11 L. curtipes 12 L. crassipes 13 L. erythrocephalus 14 L. forficatus 15 L. lucifugus. Key: Dark circles = original data, light circles = literature data, divided circles = original and literature data.

1.1.2 Linotaeniidae

*Strigamia transsilvanica (Verhoeff, 1928)

Fig. 2(8)

Studied material. 3 specimens from 2 localities.

General distribution. Mainly a Central European species but recently found also in Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005). The species has no published records from north-western Russia (Volkova 2016), but there is a specimen collected from Izborsk (Pskov region, 10 km of Estonian border) in the IZBE collection.

Comments. The species is rare in Estonia. Both findings are from human settlements.

1.1.3. Schendylidae

Schendyla nemorensis (C.L. Koch, 1837)

Fig. 3(5)

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 19 specimens from 12 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species (Barber 2009), introduced to North America, present also in southern Sweden and south-western Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Bonato et al. 2005), and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. More common in western Estonia, found mainly in soil samples.

1.2. Lithobiomorpha

1.2.1. Henicopidae

Lamyctes emarginatus (Newport 1844)

Fig. 2(9)

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15 [as: L. fulvicornis Meinert], Ivask 2011: 1.

Studied material. 7 specimens from 4 localities.

General distribution. A semi-cosmopolitan species widespread also in Scandinavia and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. Locally common in western Estonia, not found elsewhere.

1.2.2. Lithobiidae

Lithobius (Lithobius) borealis Meinert, 1868

Fig. 2(10)

Literature sources.Ivask 2011: 2.

Studied material. 11 specimens from 4 localities.

General distribution. Central and west-European species, present also in Sweden (Andersson et al. 2008), and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. More common in western Estonia, but nowhere abundant.

Lithobius (Lithobius) erythrocephalus C. L. Koch, 1847

Figs 2(13), 6

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15, Vilbaste 1979: 99, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Ivask 2011: 2, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 141 specimens from 48 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, widespread in Scandinavia and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Trautberg 1929) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. A common species in different habitats.

Lithobius (Lithobius) forficatus (Linnaeus, 1758)

Figs 2(14), 6

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15, Vilbaste 1970: 173, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Remm 1988: 128, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319, Ivask 2011: 2, Kalda et al. 2015: 90, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 352 specimens from 89 localities.

General distribution. Holarctic species, widespread in Scandinavia and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Trautberg 1929) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015), present also in Lenigrad region (north-western Russia) (Zalesskaya 1978).

Comments. One of the two most common centipede species in different habitats, but favours more xeric areas than Lithobius curtipes.

Lithobius (Lithobius) lucifugus L. Koch 1862

Fig. 2(15)

Literature sources.Vilbaste 1979: 99, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319.

Studied material. 5 specimens from 4 localities.

General distribution. Central- and south-east European species, present in Latvia (Trautberg 1929), Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015) and on the Swedish islands Öland and Gotland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is widespread but rare in Estonia.

*Lithobius (Lithobius) melanops Newport, 1845

Fig. 3(1)

Studied material. 7 specimens from 7 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species introduced to North America, present also in and Sweden (Andersson et al. 2008), Latvia (Trautberg 1929) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015), synanthropic in southern Finland (Palmen 1949).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent in Estonia.

Lithobius (Lithobius) pelidnus Haase, 1880

Fig. 3(3)

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15, Remm 1988: 128.

Studied material. 27 specimens from 4 localities.

General distribution. Central- and East-European species present also in southern Sweden (Andersson et al. 2008) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent in Estonia, found only in bogs and boreo-nemoral forests.

Lithobius (Lithobius) tenebrosus Meinert, 1872

Figs 3(4), 6

Literature sources. Riikoja, 1955: 15 [as Lithobius nigrifrons], Ivask 2011: 1.

Studied material. 43 specimens from 25 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species common in Finland and Sweden (Andersson et al. 2005), Latvia (Trautberg 1929) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. A common species in different habitats, but avoids human settlements. H. Lohmander (1948) described a subspecies fennoscandicusLohmander 1948 from Scandinavia, the description of which Estonian specimens generally match, but as the main subspecific difference concern colouration, more fresh specimens need to be studied.

Lithobius (Monotarsobius) crassipes C.L. Koch, 1862

Figs 2(12), 6

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15, Vilbaste 1979: 99, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Remm 1988: 128, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 25 specimens from 18 localities.

General distribution. Palaearctic species, present also in southern Finland, Sweden (Andersson et al. 2008) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent in Estonia, avoids wet habitats.

Lithobius (Monotarsobius) curtipes C.L. Koch, 1847

Figs 2(11), 6

Literature sources.Riikoja 1955: 15; Vilbaste 1970: 173; Vilbaste 1979: 99; Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Remm 1988: 128, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319, Ivask 2011: 1, Kalda et al. 2015: 90, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 730 specimens from 106 localities.

General distribution. Mainly a central and East European species, common in Sweden and Finland (Andersson et al. 2005, Palmén 1948), Latvia (Trautberg 1929) and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. One of the two most common centipede species in different habitats, favours more fresh habitats than L. forficatus.

*Lithobius (Sigibius) microps Meinert, 1868

Fig. 3(2)

Literature sources.Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 52 specimens from 17 localities.

General distribution. A western Palaearctic species, introduced to North America, also present in Finland, Sweden (Andersson et al. 2005), and Lithuania (Tuf et al. 2015).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent in Estonia, seems to avoid wet habitats.

2. Diplopoda

2.1. Polyxenida

2.1.1. Polyxenidae

Polyxenus lagurus Linnaeus, 1758

Fig. 3(6)

Literature sources.Palmén 1949: 4, Vilbaste 1953: 16, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Remm 1988: 128, Kime and Enghoff 2011: 21.

Studied material. 27 specimens from 8 localities.

General distribution. Holarctic species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008) and Leningrad region (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is common in soil near seashore in Western Estonia, but rare and saproxylic inland. It may be more widespread, but underdetected due to its small size.

Figure 3. 

Distribution of Estonian Chilopoda (1–5) and Diplopoda (6–15). 1 Lithobius melanops 2 L. microps 3 L. pelidnus 4 L. tenebrosus 5 Schendyla nemorensis 6 Polyxenus lagurus 7 Polyzonium germanicum 8 Craspedosoma raulinsii 9 Mastigophorophyllon saxonicum 10 Nemasoma varicorne 11 Brachydesmus superus 12 Polydesmus complanatus 13 P. denticulatus 14 P. inconstans 15 Blaniulus guttulatus. For symbols see Fig. 2.

2.2. Polyzoniida

2.2.1. Polyzoniidae

Polyzonium germanicum Brandt, 1837

Fig. 3(7)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193, Vilbaste 1953: 45, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Vilbaste 1979: 99, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Remm 1988: 128, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319, Kime and Enghoff 2011: 42.

Studied material. 26 specimens from 16 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Sweden, and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent in different habitats, favours more fresh habitats and has not been found in human-disturbed areas.

2.3. Chordeumatida

2.3.1. Craspedosomatidae

*Craspedosoma raulinsii Leach, 1814

Figs 3(8), 7

Studied material. 277 specimens from 23 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species introduced also to North America, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. This represents the first formal record of the species in Estonia after its mention by Saar and Takkis (2010) in the popular journal GEO. The species is widespread but favours fresh habitats. It seems to have recently colonised Estonia (but see Discussion).

2.3.2 Mastigophorophyllidae

Mastigophorophyllon saxonicum Verhoeff, 1916

Fig. 3(9)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193, Vilbaste 1953: 18.

General distribution. Central European species absent from Scandinavia and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008, 2013), present in Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971) formerly found from Latvia, but not recently recorded (Spuņģis 2010).

Comments. The species was described as frequent in southern Estonia (Schubart 1930) but there are no recent records since Vilbaste 1953. The species may have become more rare or extinct in Estonia. Schubart (1930) mentioned a few exact localities in his work, viz. Sõrve peninsula, Abruka Island, the vicinity of Pärnu and Vilbaste (1953) repeats these data and adds Tartu as the northern boundary of its range. All these localities were studied in the current research but the species was not found. It is possible that the record from Tartu refers instead to Haase’s specimen of Craspedosoma mutabile var. fasciatum, interpreted as a misidentification of M. saxonicum by Schubart (1930). Vilbaste does not mention the species (nor any other Chordeumatids) in any of his later works.

2.4. Polydesmida

2.4.1. Polydesmidae

Brachydesmus superus Latzel, 1884

Fig. 3(11)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193, Vilbaste 1953: 19, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 14 specimens from 8 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced also to many other parts of the world, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is widespread, but infrequent, in different habitats.

Polydesmus complanatus (Linnaeus, 1761)

Figs 3(12), 7

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193, Vilbaste 1953: 20, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Remm 1988: 128, Kime and Enghoff 2011: 62.

Studied material. 59 specimens from 24 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced also to North America, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), and Leningrad region (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread and common, in different habitats.

Polydesmus denticulatus C.L. Koch, 1847

Figs 3(13), 7

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193, Vilbaste 1953: 21, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Vilbaste 1979: 99, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Kime and Enghoff 2011: 63, Kalda et al. 2015: 90, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 796 specimens from 82 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced also to North America, common in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Leningrad, and Pskov regions (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread and common, in different habitats.

Polydesmus inconstans Latzel, 1884

Figs 3(14), 7

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Polydesmus coriaceus], Vilbaste 1953: 22, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Remm 1988: 128, Kime and Enghoff 2011: 65, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 29 specimens from 13 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced also to North America, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent, in different habitats, but prefers woodlands. There has been a confusion of this species with Western European P. coriaceus Porat, 1871 (cf. Vilbaste 1953, Blower 1985, Spuņģis 2010). The record of P. coriaceus in a posthumously published work by J. Vilbaste (Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993) is inexplicable and obviously erroneous. The Estonian specimens identified as P. coriaceus in Zoologische Staatssammlung München, Germany (Verhoeff collection, collected from Tallinn, no date) also belong to P. inconstans (J. Spelda, pers. comm.).

2.5. Julida

2.5.1. Blaniulidae

Blaniulus guttulatus (Fabricius, 1798)

Fig. 3(15)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193, Kaarep et al. 1949: 176, Vilbaste 1953: 29, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 27, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 35 specimens from 6 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced also to many other parts of the world, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008) and Leningrad region (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent, mostly synanthropic.

Boreoiulus tenuis (Bigler, 1913)

Fig. 4(1)

Literature sources.Vilbaste 1953: 29, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 7 specimens from 4 localities.

General distribution. Northern and central European species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), and Leningrad region (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread but rare.

Nopoiulus kochii (Gervais, 1847)

Fig. 4(2)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Nopoiulus armatus], Vilbaste 1953: 26, Vilbaste 1970: 174 [as Nopoiulus venustus], Kime and Enghoff 2017: 33.

Studied material. 7 specimens from 3 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced also to many other parts of the world, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), and Leningrad region (north-wWestern Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is rare, found only in northern and western Estonia.

Proteroiulus fuscus (Am Stein, 1857)

Figs 4(3), 7

Literature sources.Schubart 1924: 57 [as Nopoiulus palmatus caelebs], Schubart 1930: 193, Vilbaste 1953: 27, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Remm 1988: 128, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 34, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 239 specimens from 42 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced also to North America, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Leningrad, and Novgorod regions (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread and common, especially in moist habitats, usually associated with decaying wood.

2.5.2. Nemasomatidae

Nemasoma varicorne C. L. Koch, 1847

Figs 3(10), 7

Literature sources.Vilbaste 1953: 25 [as Isobates varicornis], Kime and Enghoff 2017: 199, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 126 specimens from 28 localities.

General distribution. Central and East-European species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is widespread and common in different types of woodland. Climbs also in trees (as several individuals were found in trunk window traps).

2.5.3. Julidae

Allajulus nitidus (Verhoeff, 1891)

Fig. 4(4)

Literature sources.Ivask 2011: 1, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 38 specimens from 14 localities.

General distribution. Central and northern European species, not found in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010) and Finland, present in Sweden (Andersson et al. 2008, 2013).

Comments. The species is widespread but frequent only in western Estonia, mostly associated with open landscape.

Brachyiulus pusillus (Leach, 1814)

Fig. 4(5)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Brachyiulus littoralis], Vilbaste 1953: 42 [as Brachyiulus littoralis], Kime and Enghoff 2017: 47.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species introduced to many parts of the world, rare in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), present in Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971) and southern Sweden, not found in Finland (Andersson et al. 2008, 2013).

Comments. No specimens were collected during our studies or are preserved in Estonian collections. The current status of the species in Estonia is unclear as it has been reported as rare also in the past. It seems that both Schubart (1930) and Vilbaste (1953) refer to the same single specimen (loc. 20). There appears to be another finding from Hiiumaa Island according to Kime and Enghoff (2017), but we failed to trace the origin of that record (H. Enghoff, pers. comm.). It is not impossible that the record from Hiiumaa is a misinterpretation of the historical place name Tickhof, which is present also on Hiiumaa (Kongo 2016), but Schubart states the locality as “in einem Garten in Tickhof auf Ösel” - “in a garden in Tickhof on Ösel (=Saaremaa island)”, and Vilbaste (1953) repeats that almost literally.

*Cylindroiulus britannicus (Verhoeff, 1891)

Fig. 4(6)

Studied material. 10 specimens from 2 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced to many parts of the world, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is rare, found only on western Estonian islands.

Cylindroiulus caeruleocinctus (Wood, 1864)

Figs 4(8), 7

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Cylindroiulus teutonicus], Kaarep et al. 1949: 176 [as Cylindroiulus teutonicus], Vilbaste 1953: 33 [as Cylindroiulus teutonicus], Kime and Enghoff 2017: 55.

Studied material. 237 specimens from 31 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced to North America, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Leningrad, and Pskov regions (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread and common, especially in or close to human settlements. The records of Ophyiulus pilosus (Newport, 1842) as a pest of potatoes in Estonia (Zolk 1923) probably refer to this species instead (Vilbaste 1953).

Cylindroiulus latestriatus (Curtis, 1845)

Fig. 4(7)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Cylindroiulus frisius], Vilbaste 1953: 35 [as Cylindroiulus frisius], Kime and Enghoff 2017: 63.

Studied material. 44 specimens from 14 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, introduced to many parts of the world, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), and Leningrad region (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent, more common in western Estonia. It seems to prefer drier habitats.

Julus scandinavius Latzel, 1884

Fig. 4(9)

Literature sources.Ivask 2011: 2, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 17 specimens from 7 localities.

General distribution. Central and northern European species, not found in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010) and in Finland, present in southern Sweden (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent, most findings are from Western Estonia.

Julus scanicus Lohmander, 1925

Figs 4(10), 7

Literature sources.Kaarep et al. 1949: 176, Vilbaste 1953: 38, Ivask 2011: 2, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 252 specimens from 22 localities.

General distribution. Mainly a Central European species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), and southern Sweden, not found in Finland (Andersson et al. 2008, 2013).

Comments. The species is common in western Estonia, but not found elsewhere.

Julus terrestris Linnaeus, 1758

Figs 4(11), 7

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193, Vilbaste 1953: 39, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 96, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 304 specimens from 34 localities.

General distribution. Mainly a central European species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is frequent in western Estonia, but rare elsewhere. Clearly prefers open landscapes.

Leptoiulus cibdellus (Chamberlin 1921)

Figs 4(12), 7

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Leptoiulus minutus], Vilbaste 1953: 40 [as Leptoiulus minutus], Ivask 2011: 1, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 101, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 274 specimens from 30 localities.

General distribution. Central European species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, and Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is widespread, but common only in western Estonia. Clearly prefers open landscapes.

Leptoiulus proximus (Němec, 1896)

Figs 4(13), 8

Literature sources.Schubart 1924: 57 [as Leptoiulus buckkensis], Schubart 1930: 193 [as Leptoiulus buekkensis], Vilbaste 1953: 39, Vilbaste 1970: 174, Vilbaste 1979: 99, Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Remm 1988: 128, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 250, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 584 specimens from 81 localities.

General distribution. present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), and Leningrad region (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread and very common in different habitats, with a slight preference to open landscape. The report of Ophyiulus pilosus in Estonia (Ivask 2011) has proved erroneous after re-examining the material, and belongs also to this species.

Megaphyllum sjaelandicum (Meinert, 1868)

Figs 4(14), 8

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Chromatoiulus sjaelandicus], Vilbaste 1953: 43 [as Chromatoiulus sjaelandicus], Vilbaste et al. 1985: 152, Remm 1988: 128, Lazányi and Vagalinski 2013: 86, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 128.

Studied material. 80 specimens from 25 localities.

General distribution. Central and eastern Palaearctic species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), southern Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008), Leningrad and Novgorod regions (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. The species is widespread and common in different habitats, with a slight preference to fresh forests.

Ommatoiulus sabulosus (Linnaeus, 1758)

Figs 4(15), 8

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Archiulus sabulosus], Vilbaste 1953: 45 [as Schizophyllum sabulosum], Vilbaste 1979: 99 [as Schizophyllum sabulosum], Remm 1988: 128 [as Schizophyllum sabulosum], Kalda et al. 2015: 90, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 276, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 659 specimens from 84 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, common in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Sweden, Finland (Andersson et al. 2008)m and Leningrad region (north-western Russia) (Lokshina 1969).

Comments. A very common species in different habitats. Climbs also in trees (as several individuals were found in trunk window traps). A mass outbreak of the species was observed near Ikla (south-western Estonia) in June 2018, where numerous specimens entered houses (see also Discussion).

Rossiulus vilnensis (Jawlowski, 1925)

Fig. 5(1)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Archiulus vilnense], Vilbaste 1953: 44 [as Schizophyllum (Sarmatiulus) vilnense], Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 155.

Studied material. 16 specimens from 8 localities.

General distribution. Central and east-European species (Lokshina 1969), present in Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971) rare in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), not found in Finland and Sweden (Andersson et al. 2008, 2013).

Comments. The species is widespread but infrequent, not found from northern Estonia.

Unciger foetidus C.L. Koch, 1838

Figs 5(2), 8

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193, Vilbaste 1953: 41, Vilbaste 1979: 99, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 168.

Studied material. 728 specimens from 18 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, present in Latvia (Spuņģis 2010), Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Sweden, southern Finland (Andersson et al. 2008).

Comments. The species is widespread and common, in different habitats, but avoids very wet ones and seems to be favoured by human influence.

Xestoiulus laeticollis (Porat, 1889)

Fig. 5(3)

Literature sources.Schubart 1930: 193 [as Microiulus laeticollis mierzejewskii], Vilbaste et al. 1985: 38 [as Microiulus laeticollis mierzejewskii], Remm 1988: 128, Vilbaste and Vilbaste 1993: 319, Kime and Enghoff 2017: 171, Ivask et al. in press.

Studied material. 19 specimens from 13 localities.

General distribution. Central and east European species, present in Lithuania (Atlavinytė and Lokshina 1971), Latvia (Spuņģis 2010) and southern Sweden, not found in Finland (Andersson et al. 2008, 2013).

Comments. The species is infrequent and found only from Western Estonia.

Figure 4. 

Distribution of Estonian Diplopoda. 1 Boreoiulus tenuis 2 Nopoiulus kochii 3 Proteroiulus fuscus 4 Allajulus nitidus 5 Brachyiulus pusillus 6 Cylindroiulus britannicus 7 C. latestriatus 8 C. caeruleocinctus 9 Julus scandinavius 10 J. scanicus 11 J. terrestris 12 Leptoiulus cibdellus 13 L. proximus 14 Megaphyllum sjaelandicum 15 Ommatoiulus sabulosus. For symbols see Fig. 2.

3. Symphyla

3.1 Scutigerellidae

*Scutigerella immaculata (Newport, 1845)

Fig. 5(4)

Studied material. 14 specimens from 7 localities.

General distribution. Unclear, present in Finland and Sweden (Andersson et al. 2005, 2008, 2013) probably also in Latvia (Eglītis 1954).

3.2 Scolopendrellidae

*Symphylella vulgaris (Hansen, 1903)

Fig. 5(5)

Studied material. 10 specimens from 6 localities.

General distribution. A widespread Holarctic species, present in Finland and Sweden (Andersson et al. 2008), possibly also in Latvia (Symphylella sp. in Eglītis 1954).

*Scolopendrellopsis subnuda (Hansen, 1903)

Fig. 5(6)

Studied material. 5 specimens from 2 localities.

General distribution. Western Palaearctic species, present also in Sweden and Finland (Andersson et al. 2005).

4. Pauropoda

We regard the record of Pauropus huxleyi Lubbock, 1867 near Narva (Schmidt 1894, Andersson et al. 2005: 274) being dubious, as it is unclear from which side of the current Estonian-Russian border it was collected and since several related species were undescribed at the time.

4.1. Pauropodidae

*Decapauropus cuenoti (Remy, 1931)

Fig. 5(7)

Studied material. 5 specimens from 1 locality.

General distribution. Possibly a Holarctic species with predominantly a northern distribution, present also in Sweden and Finland (Andersson et al. 2005).

*Decapauropus gracilis (Hansen, 1902)

Fig. 5(8)

Studied material. 1 specimen from 1 locality.

General distribution. Possibly a Holarctic species with introductions to South Asia and South America, present also in Sweden and Finland (Andersson et al. 2005).

Figure 5. 

Distribution of Estonian Diplopoda (1–3), Symphyla (4–6) and Pauropoda (7–8). 1 Rossiulus vilnensis 2 Unciger foetidus 3 Xestoiulus laeticollis 4 Scutigerella immaculata 5 Symphylella vulgaris 6 Scolopendrellopsis subnuda 7 Decapauropus cuenoti 8 D. gracilis. For symbols see Fig. 2.

Figure 6. 

Proportion of samples from different habitats and habitat preferences of common Estonian Chilopoda. Vertical axis: relative abundances (numbers of findings divided by proportion of sampling effort). Horizontal axis numbers represent habitat types as follows: 1 Coastal meadows and alvars 2 Broad-leaved (nemoral) forests 3 Boreo-nemoral deciduous forests 4 Dry heathland forests 5 Drier boreo-nemoral mixed forests 6 Mesophilic boreal forests 7 Hillock forests 8 Carrs and swamp forests 9 Bogs 10 Fens and waterlogged meadows 11 Inland mesophilic grasslands 12 Rural gardens 13 Urban parks and graveyards 14 Arable fields. For detailed description of habitats see Material and methods.

Figure 7. 

Habitat preferences of common Estonian Diplopoda. For explanation of the vertical axis and numbers denoting different habitats on the horizontal axis see Fig. 6.

Figure 8. 

Habitat preferences of common Estonian Diplopoda. For explanation of the vertical axis and numbers denoting different habitats on the horizontal axis see Fig. 6.

Discussion

The current study adds six centipede and two millipede new country records, while two millipedes, viz. Polydesmus coriaceus and Ophyiulus pilosus are presently removed from the Estonian checklist. All the Symphylan and Pauropod species represent new records. It is unclear whether the new records are due to insufficient previous data (which may well be true for centipedes, except Stenotaenia linearis) or range shifts. The human or climate driven range shifts up to over hundred km northwards in recent decades have been also detected elsewhere (David 2009). The changes in occurrence frequencies of the species that have been observed also in the neighbouring countries, e.g., in Finland by Lehtinen and Terhivuo (1996), concern Cylindroiulus caeruleocinctus and Unciger foetidus. Both species were earlier reported as rare in Estonia (cf. Vilbaste 1953) but proved to be common and widespread after the present study. Mass outbreaks of some julid species have also spread northwards (Kania and Tracz 2005) and were recently seen in Lithuania e.g., O. sabulosus in 2015–2016 (J. Rimšaitė pers. comm.). This type of event is reported here for the first time in Estonia, with a localised outbreak of O. sabulosus in south-western Estonia, occurred in June 2018. The Estonian findings of Lithobius pelidnus, Strigamia transsilvanica, Brachyiulus pusillus, Allajulus nitidus, Xestoiulus laeticollis, and Rossiulus vilnense represent the northernmost records for those species.

The range of Craspedosoma raulinsii seems to expand north and eastwards. It was apparently first collected in Latvia between 2003 and 2008 (Andersson et al. 2005, Spuņģis 2010), 2010 in Estonia and 2006 in Moscow region of Russia (Golovatch and Matyukhin 2011). The first record(s) from Finland seem to be probably from 2001 to 2005 (reported as present in southern Finland by Andersson et al. 2005, but absent according to Kime 2001). However, we failed to find the original source of the Finnish records (V. Huhta, H. Enghoff, P. Djursvoll, P. Cardoso pers. comm.). The actual appearance of C. raulinsii in the Northern Baltic region can be decades earlier, as the myriapod fauna of Estonia and Latvia was not systematically monitored in the 1980-s and 1990-s. On the other hand, if the record of Craspedosoma mutabile var. fasciatum (if a synonym of C. raulinsii, as in Sierwald and Spelda 2018) from Tartu (Haase 1886) is correct, the species distribution range may have fluctuated also in the past. The name is a synonym of Mastigona bosniense according to Schubart (1934), and the identity with that species is also possible, as a specimen of Mastigona sp. (as Heteroporatia sp.) has been found in Latvia (Becker 1929, Spuņģis 2010).

Four species, viz. Strongylosoma stigmatosum, Cylindroiulus punctatus, Archiboreiulus pallidus and Choneiulus palmatus, occurring in neighbouring Latvia and/or Finland might be found also in Estonia, but more studies, especially in southern Estonia are needed. The species Mastigophorophyllon saxonicum, previously reported from many localities in southern Estonia was not re-found, and appears to have become more rare or extinct (which is also the case in Latvia, Spuņģis 2010). Spuņģis (2010) discusses the possibility that the northern Baltic records of M. saxonicum are misidentifications of C. raulinsii, which seems improbable to us as both species should have been well known for O. Schubart. Several species e.g., Lamyctes emarginatus, Pachymerium ferrugineum, Julus terrestris, Julus scandinavius, Allajulus nitidus, Leptoiulus cibdellus, and Xestoiulus laeticollis are more common in western Estonia or even restricted to this region characterised by milder maritime climate and calcareous soils e.g., Geophilus carpophagus, Boreoiulus tenuis, Julus scanicus, and Cylindroiulus britannicus.

The currently known fauna of Estonian Diplopoda and Chilopoda is quite similar to the neighbouring regions. 79% of the species are shared with Finland and 87.5 % are shared with Latvia. The similarity to Latvian fauna may be in fact even higher, as several species occurring both in Estonia and Lithuania might be present also in Latvia. Estonian Symphyla and Pauropoda deserve further attention. At present, they remain too poorly known to allow for any comparisons.

Acknowledgements

The study was partially funded by institutional research funding (IUT21-1) of the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research. We would like to thank Per Djursvoll, Henrik Enghoff, Lucio Bonato, Pedro Cardoso, Jolanta Rimšaitė and Jörg Spelda for various information. Our gratitude is also due to Mart Meriste, Ilmar Süda, Tõnu Talvi, Allan Selin, Urmas Jürivete, Tõnu Kesküla, Märt Kruus, Heli Kirik, Siiri Jürgenstein, Mati Martin, Erki Õunap, Jaan Viidalepp, Miina Oras and Hannes Järve who collected myriapods for the present study. Peter Decker and Ivan H. Tuf are thanked for their helpful comments and suggestions to the manuscript.

References

  • Abarenkov K, Tedersoo L, Nilsson RH, Vellak K, Saar I, Veldre V, Parmasto E, Prous M, Aan A, Ots M, Kurina O, Ostonen I, Jõgeva J, Halapuu S, Põldmaa K, Toots M, Truu J, Larsson K, Kõljalg U (2010) PlutoF – a Web Based Workbench for Ecological and Taxonomic Research, with an Online Implementation for Fungal ITS Sequences. Evolutionary Bioinformatics 6: 189–196. https://doi.org/10.4137/EBO.S6271
  • Atlavinytė O, Lokshina I (1971) [Millipedes of the Lithuanian SSR] Lietuvos TRS Mokslu akademijos darbai, C serja 2(55): 83–92. [in Russian]
  • Andersson G, Meidell B, Scheller U, Djursvoll P, Budd G, Gärdenfors U (2005) Nationalnyckeln till Sveriges flora och fauna. Mångfotingar Myriapoda. Uppsala, ArtDatabanken Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet, 351 pp.
  • Andersson G, Djursvoll P, Scheller U (2008) Katalog över Nordens mångfotingar. Entomologisk Tidskrift 129: 173–190.
  • Andersson G, Djursvoll P, Scheller U (2013) En uppdatering av “Katalog över Nordens mångfotingar. Entomologisk Tidskrift 134(3): 149–152. [in Swedish]
  • Barber AD (2009) Centipedes. Keys and Notes for the Identification of the species. Synopses of the British fauna No. 58 Field Studies Council, London, 215 pp.
  • Becker R (1929) Beiträge zur Diplopoden-Fauna Lettlands. Folia Zoologica et Hydrobiologica 1, 1: 10–52
  • Blower JG (1985) Millipedes: Keys and Notes for the Identification of the Species. Synopses of the British Fauna (New Series) vol 35, Brill/Backhuys, Leiden, 242 pp.
  • Bonato L, Minelli A, Spuņģis V (2005) Geophilomorph Centipedes of Latvia (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha). Latvijas Entomologs 42: 5–17.
  • 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). http://chilobase.biologia.unipd.it [accessed 30.03.2018]
  • David JF (2009) Ecology of millipedes (Diplopoda) in the context of global change. Soil Organisms 81(3): 719–733.
  • Eglītis V (1954) [Fauna of soils of the Latvian SSR]. Rīga, Zinātne, 262 pp. [in Russian]
  • Golovatch SI, Matyukhin AV (2011) New records of millipedes (Diplopoda), mainly from bird nests, in European Russia. Arthropoda Selecta 20(2): 115–116.
  • Haase E (1886) Schlesiens Diplopoden (Erste Hälfte). Zeitschrift für Entomologie, Neue Folge 11: 7–64.
  • Ivask M (2011) Myriapoda of Estonian seminatural grasslands. In: Book of abstracts. 13th Symposium of Nordic Soil Zoologists and PhD course, Lammi, Finland, August 25–29, 2011, 1–2.
  • Ivask M, Kuu A, Meriste M, Kutti S, Raamets J (in press) Chilopoda and Diplopoda of semi-natural flooded meadows in Matsalu. Pedobiologia.
  • Kaarep E, Luhakooder A, Ratt A (1949) Tähtsamad taimehaigused ja kahjurid ning nende tõrje. RK Teaduslik Kirjandus, Tartu, 315 pp. [Major plant diseases and pests and their control; in Estonian]
  • Kalda K, Ivask M, Kutti S, Kuu A, Meriste M, Nei L, Peda J, Raukas A (2015) Soil Invertebrates in Semi-Coke Heaps of Estonian Oil Shale Industry. Oil Shale 32(1): 82–97. https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2015.1.06
  • Kania G, Tracz H (2005) Mass occurrence and migration of Ommatoiulus sabulosus (Linnaeus, 1758) (Diplopoda, Julida: Julidae) in Poland. Peckiana 4: 57–66.
  • Kime RD (2001) The continental distribution of British and Irish millipedes, part 2. Bulletin of the British Myriapod and Isopod Group 17: 7–42.
  • Kime RD, Enghoff H (2011) Atlas of European Millipedes (Class Diplopoda), Vol.1 Orders Polyxenida, Glomerida, Platydesmida, Siphonocryptida, Polyzoniida, Callipodida, Polydesmida. Fauna Europaea Evertebrata No 3, Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow, 282 pp.
  • Kongo L (2016) Saksa-eesti kohanimed. “Abiks loodusevaatlejale” 100, Tartu, 304 pp. [German-Estonian place names; in Estonian]
  • Lang J (1954) Mnohonožky – Diplopoda. 1. vyd. Praha, Nakladatelství Československé akademie věd, 188 pp. (Fauna ČSR; sv. 2). [in Czech]
  • Lazányi E, Vagalinski B (2013) Redefinition of the millipede subgenus Megaphyllum sensu stricto Verhoeff, 1894 and neotype designation for Megaphyllum austriacum (Latzel, 1884) (Myriapoda: Diplopoda: Julida: Julidae). Zootaxa 3741(1): 55–100. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3741.1.2
  • Lehtinen PT, Terhivuo J (1996) Notes and records of five garden millipedes (Diplopoda, Iulida) in Finland. Memorenda Societatis Pro Fauna et Flora Fennica 72: 6–12.
  • Lohmander H (1948) Lithobius nigrifrons fennoscandicus n. ssp. (Chilopoda, Lithobiidae). Annales Entomologici Fennici 14: 97–99.
  • Lokshina IE (1969) Key to millipedes Diplopoda of the plain part of the European USSR. Nauka Publishing, Moscow, 78 pp. [in Russian]
  • McAlpine DF, Shear W (2018) The millipede Craspedosoma raulinsii Leach, 1814 (Chordeumatida: Craspedosomatidae) in North America with comments on the derivation of its binomial name. Zootaxa 4455(2): 389–394. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4455.2.8
  • Nõmmik A (1939) Lagunenud puulehtede ja osakeste lagunemise kiirusest ja neis sisalduvate mõningate elementide kaost. Eesti metsanduse aastaraamat 9: 197–222. [Leaf litter decomposition rate and loss of some elements; in Estonian]
  • Palmén E (1948) The Chilopoda of Eastern Fennoscandia. Annales Zoologici Societatis Zoologicae-Botanicae Fennicae Vanamo 13(4): 1–52.
  • Palmén E (1949) The Diplopoda of Eastern Fennoscandia. Annales Zoologici Societatis Zoo logicae-Botanicae Fennicae Vanamo 13(6): 1–45.
  • Remm K (1988) Koljaku-Oandu reservaadi samblarinde loomastik suve teisel poolel. In: Lahemaa Uurimused III Rahvuspargi looduse inventeerimine. Valgus, Tallinn, 120–141. [Fauna of moss-layer of Koljaku-Oandu nature reserve in the second half of summer; in Estonian]
  • Riikoja H (1955) Eesti NSV selgrootute fauna uurimise küsimusi. Eesti NSV Teaduste Akadeemia juures asuva Loodusuurijate Seltsi aastaraamat 48: 7–26. [Questions of Estonian invertebrate fauna research; in Estonian]
  • Saar L, Takkis K (2010) Teadlased ja õpilased elurikkuse jahil. GEO Estonia 6/10: 8–11. [Scientists and pupils in search of biodiversity; in Estonian]
  • Sammet K, Talvi T, Süda I, Kurina O (2016) Pseudoscorpions (Arachnida: Pseudoscorpiones) in Estonia: new records and an annotated checklist. Entomologica Fennica 27(4): 149−163.
  • Schmidt P (1894) Zur Kenntnis des inneren Baues des Pauropus Huxleyi Lubb. Zoologischer Anziger 17: 189–196.
  • Schubart O (1924) Myriapoda. In: Dampf A (Ed.) Zur Kenntnis der estländischen Moorfauna. II Beitrag. Sitzungsberichte der Naturforscher-Gesellschaft bei der Universität Dorpat 31(1–2): 57.
  • Schubart O (1930) Über die von Dr. Herold im Ost-Baltikum gesammelten Diplopoden, zugleich ein Beitrag zur Diplopodenfauna des Ost-Baltikums. Zoologischer Anzeiger 86(7/8): 189–208.
  • Schubart O (1934) Die Tierwelt Deutschlands. 28. Teil: Tausendfüßler oder Myriapoda: I. Diplopoda. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena, 318 pp.
  • Spuņģis V (2010) Fauna of Millipedes (Diplopoda) in Latvia with Notes on Occurrence, Habitat Preference and Abundance. Latvijas Entomologs 48: 107–115.
  • Stojałowska W (1961) Krocionogi (Diplopoda) Polski. Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Warzawa, 216 pp. [Millipedes of Poland; in Polish]
  • Tomasson K, Tammaru T, Kurina O (2014) Harvestmen (Arachnida: Opiliones) in Estonia: results of the Estonian Malaise Trap Project. Entomologica Fennica 25(3): 142–156.
  • Trautberg O (1929) Beitrag zur Kenntnis einiger in Lettland vorkommender Arten der Gattung Lithobius und Geophilus. Acta Universitatis Latviensis 20: 31–70.
  • Vilbaste J (1953) Eesti NSV tuhatjalgsete (Diplopoda) määraja. Abiks loodusevaatlejale nr.12. Loodusuurijate Selts Eesti NSV TA juures, Tartu, 49 pp. [Keys to Estonian Millipedes; in Estonian]
  • Vilbaste J (1970) Hulkjalgsed. In: Lääne-Eesti rannikualade loodus. Valgus, Tallinn, 165–175. [Myriapods; in Estonian]
  • Vilbaste J (1979) Molluscs and Myriapods of the Vooremaa hardwood-spruce forest. In: Spruce Forest Ecosystem Structure and Ecology. Estonian IBP Report 12, 95–100.
  • Vilbaste J, Haberman H, Krall E, Maavara V, Martin A, Remm E, Remm H, Siitan V, Viidalepp J, Vilbaste A (1985) Matsalu märgala maismaaselgrootud. In: Kumari E (Еd.) Matsalu – rahvusvahelise tähtsusega märgala. Valgus, Tallinn, 44–46. [Terrestrial invertebrates of Matsalu; in Estonian]
  • Vilbaste J, Vilbaste A (1993) Järvselja looduskaitsekvartali selgrootutest. Loodusuurijate Seltsi Aastaraamat 74: 318–319. [Invertebrates of Järvselja Nature Reserve; in Estonian]
  • Wesener T, Voigtländer K, Decker P, Oeyen JP, Spelda J, Lindner N (2015) First results of the German Barcode of Life (GBOL) – Myriapoda project: Cryptic lineages in German Stenotaenia linearis (Koch, 1835) (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha). ZooKeys 510: 15–29. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.510.8852
  • Zalesskaya NT (1978) Key to the Lithobiomorph centipedes of USSR. Nauka, Moscow, 212 pp. [in Russian].
  • Zapparoli M (2003) The present knowledge on the European fauna of Lithobiomorpha (Chilopoda). Bulletin of the British Myriapod and Isopod Group 19: 20–41.
  • Zolk K (1923) Kodumaa kahjulikumad putukad. Riigi Statistika Keskbüroo, Tallinn, 70 pp. [Homeland’s detrimental insects; in Estonian]

Supplementary material

Supplementary material 1 

Full collecting details for one finding from each locality. The locality numbers correspond to those in Table 1 and Figure 1.

Kaarel Sammet, Mari Ivask, Olavi Kurina
This dataset is made available under the Open Database License (http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/). The Open Database License (ODbL) is a license agreement intended to allow users to freely share, modify, and use this Dataset while maintaining this same freedom for others, provided that the original source and author(s) are credited.
Download file (92.41 kb)
login to comment