Ligidium elrodii ( Packard, 1873 )

Ligidium elrodii ( Packard, 1873) View in CoL

Figs 19–20 View Fig View Fig

Euphiloscia elrodii Packard, 1873: 97 View in CoL .

Ligidium longicaudatum Stoller, 1902: 208 View in CoL , fig. 1.

Material examined

USA – West Virginia • 1 ♂; Pocahontas Co., Pocahontas Campground ; 38.1026° N, 79.9666° W; 756 m a.s.l.; 13 Oct. 2022; M.. Caterino and E. Recuero leg.; CUAC000174439 About CUAC GoogleMaps • 1 ♀; Randolph Co., Monongahela N.F. ; 38.5595° N, 79.9262° W; 1135 m a.s.l.; 12 Oct. 2022; M. Caterino and E. Recuero leg.; CUAC000174441 About CUAC GoogleMaps • 2 ♂♂; same data as for preceding; CUAC000174440 About CUAC , CUAC000174442 About CUAC GoogleMaps • 1 imm.; same data as for preceding; CUAC000174443 About CUAC GoogleMaps .

Remarks

The studied specimens from West Virginia have been collected in leaf litter from deciduous and conifer forests at mid-elevations ( Fig. 18 View Fig ). They differ slightly from the ones illustrated from North Carolina ( Schultz 1970, 1982). Particularly, males from North Carolina present ten scale-like spines on the distal margin of the tip of male pleopod 2 endopodite, while those from West Virginia present four ( Fig. 19D– E View Fig ). Also, the illustration of a male pleopod 2 exopodite from North Carolina shows a large spiniform or plumose seta on the inner corner of the caudal margin, not present in the samples from West Virginia ( Fig. 19C View Fig ). These differences could indicate different species, but we refrain from proposing any more new names for this complex, until the true status of Ligidium elrodii and L. longicaudatum may be clarified. This species is not closely related to any of the other taxa included in our analyses ( Fig. 1A View Fig ).

Four subspecies of Ligidium elrodii have been described from caves in the states of Virginia, Tennessee and Georgia, based on differences in the male pleopod 2 endopodite ( Schultz 1970). One of them, L. e. leensis, from Bowling Cave, Lee Co., Virginia (see map in Fig. 18 View Fig ), is relatively similar to our specimens and to those illustrated from North Carolina, differing in a more markedly squarish process on the inner margin of male pleopod 2 endopodite, with only two scale-like spines on its distal margin. Indeed, it could represent a different species, but until L. elrodii is revised we prefer to maintain its status. The other three have more pronounced differences in this particular structure, which are indicative of specific status. We propose to raise them to full species.