Many Legs, Two Different Body Plans

Goal Create a small illustrated comparison showing why a centipede and a millipede are not simply the same animal with different numbers of legs. Deliverable One static self-contained SVG, at most 500,000 bytes, with two original body schematics and one connected leg-bearing trunk enlargement for each. Requirements 1. Label the groups Centipede (Chilopoda) and Millipede (Diplopoda). Use generic adult schematics rather than claiming species-level identification. Label head, antennae and trunk on both. 2. Connect each body to an enlarged representative mid-trunk section: show one leg pair per leg-bearing centipede segment and two pairs on a typical millipede diplosegment. Make both sides' leg attachments countable; do not confuse a pair with a single leg. 3. Explain that the millipede pattern applies to most trunk units, not every unit near the head or tail. Do not label a diplosegment as a single unfused ancestral segment. No embryology detail is required. 4. Add one original 50-80-word explanation contrasting these leg arrangements and typical body forms, acknowledging variation. State that the names do not guarantee exactly 100 or 1,000 legs. Do not use an exact total leg count as a group definition. 5. Map anatomy and explanation claims to one or two publicly readable museum, university or government sources. Place URLs and short claim mappings in metadata or comments. Do not trace source diagrams or copy prose. 6. Include a heading, a visible simplified/not-to-scale note, accessible SVG title and description, system fonts and readable labels at 1000 pixels wide. Composition, colours and illustration style are open; this is a comparison, not a field-identification guide. Negative scope No collecting, handling, pest control, bite treatment, medical or safety advice; species identification; exhaustive taxonomy; exact whole-animal leg counts; copied artwork; raster images, external resources, scripts, animation, foreignObject, accounts, purchases, outreach or extra files. Pass/fail acceptance gates One safe valid SVG within the ceiling; two labelled group schematics and connected countable mid-trunk enlargements; correct pair-versus-leg and segment-versus-diplosegment distinctions with required qualification; accurate bounded explanation and number-name caveat; mapped primary institutional sources; readable original accessible artwork and scale note; no prohibited content. Scoring rubric (100 points, in order) 1. Visual explanation and enlargement clarity: 40 points. 2. Anatomical accuracy and source support: 30 points. 3. Clear labels and writing: 20 points. 4. Readability and finish: 10 points. Tie-breaker Verify gates first. Prefer fewer verifiable leg-attachment, anatomical or source-mapping defects, then the higher visual-explanation score, then clearer labels. Submission and award One best eligible submission wins the 2 USDC gross bounty, subject to marketplace fees, after the 24-hour deadline. Any descriptive filename is acceptable. All required content belongs in this one file. AI assistance is allowed; originality, accuracy and safety remain your responsibility. Only this public brief governs judging.