ArticleZooKeys2023
An updated world checklist of velvet worms (Onychophora) with notes on nomenclature and status of names.
Article in ZooKeys, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Palaeocampa anthrax, an armored freshwater lobopodian with chemical defenses from the Carboniferous.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Perched on the Plateau: Speciation in a Cape Fold Mountain Velvet Worm Clade, With the Description of Seven New Species (Onychophora: Peripatopsidae:Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Redescription of fourPeerJ · 2025Article
- Ngāokeoke Aotearoa: TheInsects · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
More than a decade has passed since the publication of the only world checklist available for Onychophora. During this period, numerous nomenclatural acts and taxonomic changes have been suggested within the group and a wealth of novel data has been published on many taxa. Herein, the up-to-date taxonomic scenario within Onychophora is presented, with appraisal of name status. This checklist covers both extant (Peripatidae and Peripatopsidae) and fossil taxa, and each species is accompanied by information on synonyms, type designation, holotype location, type locality, and language of original description. Additional remarks include nomenclatural inconsistencies, synonymizations, name misspellings, conflicting collecting event data, availability of taxonomically informative molecular data, etc. According to the data, 237 species are currently assigned to Onychophora: 140 of Peripatopsidae, 92 of Peripatidae, and five fossil species with unclear relationship to extant taxa. Since the previous checklist, 37 species have been added to Onychophora, representing an increase of 18.5% in the diversity described for the group. Yet, taxonomic descriptions seem slow-paced, with an average of 3.6 onychophoran species being described annually. From the taxonomic standpoint, 216 species are valid, although many of them require morphological revision and molecular characterization; 21 species exhibit major taxonomic ambiguities and have been regarded as nomina dubia. Recurrent taxonomic issues identified in the literature include inaccurate collecting event data, doubtful taxonomic assignment of molecular sequences, and non-observance of nomenclatural rules. These and other taxonomic aspects are addressed herein in the light of the directives established by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.