Thanks. I thought this was a centipede but I didn't really know the difference between a centipede and a millipede until I followed the link you provided. Any idea to which of the 5 Orders of centipedes this specimen belongs?

Based on 15 pairs of legs (is one missing in the middle?):
Order Lithobiomorpha - Stone Centipedes

Thanks for the feedback. I've replaced the top-down photo with another image that is a bit darker. This makes it eaiser to count the legs. In this new photo, I can count only 13 pair of legs (or maybe 14, depending if the extreme rear appendages are counted as legs.) I can not count 15. In the left side view and the head-on shot, there does appear to be one leg missing on the left side. The top down photos were the first ones that I took, so I suppose it's possilbe that the centipede lost a leg after that shot and before the other shots. I can't see how, however, because he was on a piece of white paper and I was being gentle with him. I did shake the paper a couple of times to keep him from crawling off the edge but I wouldn't have thought that would be enough motion to injure the bug. I'm new at this macro photography. How easy would it be for a bug like this to lose a leg? I hope you'll let me know if you think you can see 15 pairs of legs in the new top-doown photo. I can count 15 in the photo that you posted but not in mine.

You're right, Mardon. I count 14 pairs (including the longer ones in back). The "missing leg" must be an illusion. I think centipedes are pretty rugged. I still think it's Lithobiomorpha, probably an immature with fewer legs than an adult (all the other orders have even more legs).

I took a closer look at #49970 and it's missing one leg from each side.

Thanks Peter! I agree. One leg seems to be missing from each side when viewed in the over-head image.

With the aid of the ideas offered here at BugGuide as a starting point, I've spent a fair bit of time trying to track down what this critter might be. I feel pretty good with a tentative ID of: Lithobius (Sigibius) micropodus (Matic, 1980). This is a recent name for this species that is designed to gather together repeditative names for the same species. See the note below for the names gathered together under this new taxon. Some photos of Lithobius (Sigibius) micropodus (aka Lithobius microps), a Stone Centipede, are here: http://www.bioimages.org.uk/html/R24685.HTM. This species is said to be about 7 mm long, which matches well with my specimen. I've sent emails to a couple of professional entomologists to see if they can offer an opinion.

The taxon is:
Class: CHILOPODA Latreille, 1817 (abt 3,000 species)
Order: Lithobiomorpha (Pocock, 1895)
Family: Lithobiidae (Newport, 1844)
Genus: Lithobius (Leach, 1814)
Subgenus: Sigibius
Species: Lithobius (Sigibius) micropodus (Matic, 1980)

From this http://www.mnhn.fr/assoc/myriapoda/LISTCHIL.HTM, this species has been known under the following names:
Lithobius (Sigibius) micropodus (Matic, 1980) = Lithobius (Sigibius) microps (Meinhart), Lithobius "microps, Auctorum nec Meinert, 1868; Lithobius microps Auct., sensu Brolemann 1930, Lithobius duboscqui Brölemann, 1896; Lithobius duboscqui var. fosteri (Brade-Birks, 1919); Lithobius duboscqui var. exarmatus Brolemann, 1926; Lithobius duboscqui var. olivarum Verhoeff, 1925 ; ?Lithobius sulcatus L. Koch, 1862

This is Lithobius microps, formerly known as Sigibius puritanicus and a few other names. The diagnostic characters are:

- 3-6 ocelli on each side (this one appears to have 3, which lines up with a lot of specimens I've examined from Connecticut)
- small adult size, which you noted
- no triangular productions on the segments
- 25 antennal segments
- some spurs on the legs (the exact configuration is usually important, but here we are just using them to say that this isn't Lamyctes sp., which has no spurs)

Great find! These are fairly common but hard to spot, so they don't turn up in collections as often as they should.

I just looked more closely at the Lithobiomorpha link (image) you posted and I notice that that specimen is listed as ~3 cm in length. My specimen was only 6 mm in length! Do these creatures add legs as they grow? Do you think 6 mm is too short to be just an immature Lithobiomorpha as opposed to another species? I've got to admit that the overall general similarity of my centipede and the image you provide is striking. Thanks again for your help.

Lynette Schimming says they add legs as they grow. 6 mm seems fine for a little one as far as I know, and there must be many(?) species. Interesting: there may be many species in Order Lithobiomorpha, yet the Guide lists not even one Family, no taxa at all!

There are certain areas of the bug taxonomic tree where the gap between the huge number of taxa and the small amount of ID information available to non-specialists means we can only give the vaguest of IDs with any certainty. In some of those areas such as beetles, wasps and flies we're lucky enough to have specialists who've been kind enough to help us. No such luck with the myriapods- yet.

Firstly, Lithobiomorpha is identified by 16 tergits and 16 legs. Secondly, I think that this centiped is Henicopidae (Henicops or Lamyctes)