132 
Psyche 
[June 
are frequently accidental in caves in the Appalachians, but in the 
midwestern region, the Family Euryuridae is more common. 
Family Polydesmidae 
The limit between this family and the one which follows is not 
well drawn, and a thorough study is needed to determine which of 
our North American genera belong here or in other families. At 
present, none of the North American Polydesmidae seem to be truly 
troglobitic, and only one genus is significant as a troglophile. 
Genus Brachydesmus Heller 
Some of the numerous European members of this genus are true 
troglobites, but the species which American diplopod systematists 
for the present assign to the genus are at most troglophilic. Brachy- 
desmus pallidus Loomis (1939) has been recorded from caves in 
Virginia and West Virginia, but it is a synonym of B. superus Latzel 
(Fig. 5; holotype of pallidus in Museum of Comparative Zoology, 
examined) a European epigean and troglophilic species common in 
cultivated areas of the United States. 
Polydesmus cavicola Packard (1877) was placed arbitrarily in 
Brachydesmus by Chamberlin and Hoffman (1958), who noted that 
the type was not known to exist. A careful search of the collections 
of the Museum of Comparative Zoology resulted in the rediscovery 
of the female holotype. It has 20 segments and three rows of prom- 
inent setigerous tubercles, and is thus excluded from Brachydesmus. 
The general appearance would place it in the ‘Family’ Vanhoefeniidae 
(it will key to Tide sinus in the key above), in which case it will 
probably require a new generic name, but the systematics of the small 
North American polydesmoids are so confused that I hesitate to 
add yet another name to the list. It seems clear, however, that the 
genus Brachydesmus is not well represented in North America. 
Family Vanhoeffeniidae Attems 
Map 1 
Chamberlin and Hoffman (1958) and Loomis (i960) have both 
pointed out that the use of this family name is questionable. How- 
ever, it is generally agreed (Loomis, i960) that the following genera 
belong together, whatever the family name might finally become. 
Causey (1959b) states that Antriadesmus is troglophilic rather than 
troglobitic, but no surface collections of this genus are known to me. 
It is easily confused with the humicolous surface form Chaetaspis , 
of which it may indeed be a synonym. Undoubtedly numerous spe- 
