Chaetophiloscia levantina (Cruz & Dalens, 1990) comb. nov.

Figs 10, 11, 15 B

Type material.

S yntypes of Parachaetophiloscia levantina Cruz & Dalens, 1990: Spain – Alicante • 1 ♂ (dissected and divided into 10 microscope slides and 1 vial with ethanol); Cova del Perro (Coix); 26. 10. 1986; leg. Alberto Sendra; CRBA 85367 • 1 ♀ (dissected and divided into 3 microscope slides and 1 vial with ethanol); same data as for preceding; CRBA 85368.

Additional material.

• 1 ♂; same locality as the syntypes, 18. 11. 2025; leg. Ferran Palero and Alberto Sendra.

Note.

In the original description of the type species (Cruz and Dalens 1990) a Holotype was not designated. According to article 73.2 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, if a Holotype (or Syntypes) is not designated in a publication prior to the year 2000, all specimens in the type-series automatically become Syntypes.

Remarks.

According to the original diagnosis (Cruz and Dalens 1990), Parachaetophiloscia differs from Chaetophiloscia only in having a smaller number of penicils on right mandible and in pleotelson shape. In Parachaetophiloscia the right mandible bears 1 penicil and the left mandible 2 + 1 penicils; in Chaetophiloscia the right mandible bears 1 + 1 penicils and 2 + 1 on the left one (see Vandel 1962; Strouhal 1968; Shavadze et al. 2023). After examining the type series of Parachaetophiloscia levantina (see below), the genus type species, it was verified that such difference is probably due to an incomplete observation. In one of the preparations (male syntype) the right mandible still preserves, next to the molar process, remains of a second penicil (Fig. 10 D, arrow), which was probably lost; thus, this mouthpart would also be identical to that of Chaetophiloscia. In the slide containing the female syntype mouthparts, the right mandible is incomplete and only pars incisiva remains, making comparison impossible. The remaining mouthparts (maxilla, maxillule, and maxilliped) are identical to those of Chaetophiloscia species (see Fig. 10 C – F). Furthermore, another specimen from the type locality of P. levantina was recently studied, and the examination of the mouthparts of this specimen confirmed the same mandibular morphology, i. e.: 1 + 1 penicils on right mandible and 2 + 1 on the left one (Fig. 10 G). Therefore, the only difference between the two genera would be the shape of the telson: subtriangular with convex sides in Parachaetophiloscia versus triangular in Chaetophiloscia. This difference is considered insufficient to justify separating the genera and here propose Parachaetophiloscia as a subjective junior synonym of Chaetophiloscia.

To facilitate comparison, the appendages preserved in good condition were re-illustrated from the slide-mounted material, including structures not depicted in the original description, as well as the complete right mandible of the newly examined specimen (Figs 10, 11).

Additional remarks.

Recently, the monotypic genus Aracenoscia was erected, with one troglobitic species from southwestern Spain: Aracenoscia cavernicola. According to the original description and illustrations, Aracenoscia differs from Chaetophiloscia only in having non-adpressed versus adpressed pleon-epimera, and in having the noduli laterales d / c maxima on the fifth pereon-tergite versus on the fourth one. The remaining morphological characters fully agree with those of Chaetophiloscia. Despite these similarities, the observed somatic differences (pleon shape and d / c maxima) warrant a more detailed assessment before formally proposing synonymy between the two genera.