Geophilus electricus: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
<!-- Inline citations added to your article will automatically display here. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:REFB for instructions on how to add citations. --> |
<!-- Inline citations added to your article will automatically display here. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:REFB for instructions on how to add citations. --> |
||
{{reflist}} |
{{reflist}} |
||
{{AfC submission|||ts=20211024170539|u=Sidreaofthestars|ns=118}} |
|||
Revision as of 17:05, 24 October 2021
 | This article, Geophilus electricus, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |
| Geophilus electricus | |
|---|---|
| File:Geophilus electricus.jpg | |
| Scientific classification | |
| Kingdom: | |
| Phylum: | |
| Subphylum: | |
| Class: | |
| Order: | |
| Family: | |
| Genus: | |
| Species: | G. electricus Linné, 1758
|
Geophilus electricus was the first species described in the genus Geophilus, and is considered by some to be a type species (along with Geophilius carpophagus).[1] It's found in gardens and churchyards across temperate Europe, especially Britain and Ireland. It's yellowish-orange in color and can grow up to 40 millimeters, with between 65-73 leg pairs (more than other similar Geophilus species), a distinct carpophagus fossae on the anterior sternites, and a distinctive arrangement of the coxal pores of the last leg pair.[2]
References
- ^ Crabill, Ralph E. (1954). "A conspectus of the northeastern North American species of Geophilus (Chilopoda Geophilomorpha Geophilidae)". Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington. 56: 172–188.
- ^ "Geophilus electricus (Linné, 1758)". British Myriapod and Isopod Group. Retrieved 24 October 2021.
| This article, Geophilus electricus, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |