diff --git a/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE415304FF0E5BFDFD40FEB6.xml b/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE415304FF0E5BFDFD40FEB6.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..b11d5861571 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE415304FF0E5BFDFD40FEB6.xml @@ -0,0 +1,301 @@ + + + +Deciphering a Chilean harvestmen enigma: what is Parabalta bicornis (Gervais, 1849) comb. nov. (Opiliones: Gonyleptidae: Pachylinae) + + + +Author + +Acosta, Luis E. + +text + + +Zootaxa + + +2025 + +2025-01-03 + + +5563 + + +1 + + +193 +208 + + + + +https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5563.1.13 + +journal article +307825 +10.11646/zootaxa.5563.1.13 +776811a5-5b12-4352-82aa-00e6f132ab0d +1175-5326 +14595841 +7D773EDB-D1D9-4322-B2E3-3992B54CDA1F + + + + + + + +Gonyleptes planiceps + +and fig. 10 + + + + + + +Confusion on Gervais’ (1854) plate ‘Arachnideos N°1’ affects + +Gonyleptes planiceps + +too, another species that had (taxonomically) ‘crossing destinies’ with + +G. bicornis + +. The original description and illustrations of + +G. planiceps + +are clear ( +Gervais 1842 +) and some early papers demonstrated a good notion of its identity ( +cf. +Simon 1884: 141 +, +1887: 37 +, Pl. 2, fig. 9). Problems emerged with a further mismatch between redescription and figures of +Gervais (1849 +, 1854) that (again) puzzled Sørensen and Roewer. + +Gonyleptes planiceps + +was treated by +Gervais (1849: 24) +and was explicitly referred to a line drawing of a male in dorsal view: fig. 10. The redescription is a verbatim translation to Spanish of the redescription of + +G. planiceps + +previously given by +Gervais (1844) +. + + +Sørensen (1902) +said (translation from Latin): ‘Whether this species [ + +G. planiceps + +] belongs to the genus + +Lycomedes + +or to another genus, I really do not know. Description and figure [fig. 10] given by Gervais do not agree in any way. According to the description areas are divided by length, what the figure does not show – After the figure, five transverse grooves are present. (…) If the species can be determined, the paired eminences of the free dorsal segments and legs IV (male) would indicate species’. In the same publication, +Sørensen (1902) +happened to examine a MNHN male labelled “ + +Pachylus planiceps + +” by E. Simon, concluding that it did not agree ‘with Gervais’ illustration’ [that of 1854 was meant!], but allegedly represented a new species instead, which he described as + +Balta meridionalis +Sørensen, 1902 + +(pp. 21, 23). This puts in evidence that, despite of being aware of the text/drawings mismatch, +Sørensen’s (1902) +concept of + +Gonyleptes planiceps + +remained attached to Gervais’ (1854) fig. 10. + + +Types: +Gervais (1842) +did not explicit the original series of + +G. planiceps + +, but, as he described both sexes, at least +one male +and +one female +were available to him (thus, +Roewer’s 1913: 136 +statement “ +♀ +unbekannt” [female unknown] is mistaken). During a meticulous survey of the “dry collection” in the NHMUK, I discovered +one male +and +one female +, pinned separately, undoubtedly belonging to the type series (as +syntypes +). The original label of the male specifies “ +Gonyleptes planiceps Guer. +ic. R.A. (type), Magellan”, that of the female just “Magellan”. These specimens had some appendages either lost or loose, so I transferred them to vials with 70 % ethanol, along with suitable labels (handwritten by me) to unequivocally indicate their type status. The labels of the male (NHMUK 013376526) are currently available at the NHM Data Portal: https://data.nhm.ac.uk/dataset/collection-specimens/ resource/05ff2255-c38a-40c9-b657-4ccb55ab2feb/record/8287232. + +Pessoa-Silva +et al. +(2020) + +took profit on this unpublished information to formally determine the validity of + +Gonyleptes planiceps + +as senior synonym of + +Balta meridionalis + +, what is in full agreement with my previous observations. + + +Roewer makes it worse: +As purported in Roewer’s labels, this author believed that the specimen SMF RI/795 belonged to the type series of + +Gonyleptes planiceps +( +Acosta 1996a +) + +. The catalog-card in the SMF declares its presumed status too: “Simon ded., ex Museum Paris, +1 ♂ +Paratypus +!”. This is likely the MNHN specimen cited by +Roewer (1913) +as “ + +Lycomedes planiceps +(Guérin) + +”, which he seemingly incorporated later to his own collection ( +Roewer 1923 +). The morphology of this specimen (a male, initially dry preserved, examined) does not match the original description and illustrations of + +G. planiceps + +given by +Gervais (1842) +, neither Gervais’ (1849) redescription; but it does match the male drawn by Gervais (1854) in his fig. 10! That is to say, specimen SMF RI/795 is actually conspecific with + +G. bicornis + +, as restored in this paper (see below). On the one hand, the alleged type status of SMF RI/795 is not supported ( +Acosta 1996a +). On the other hand, Roewer followed Sørensen and gave preference to fig. 10 for identification, over the description. + + +Remarks: +Roewer (1913) +indicated that the MNHN material of + +Gonyleptes planiceps + +comes from around the Strait of Magellan, information seemingly inspired by the original description, not stated on any label. There is a second citation of + +“ +Lycomedicus planiceps +”, + +also by +Roewer (1923) +, where a male from “ +Valparaiso +” (allegedly in his collection) is reported. Over several months I thoroughly revised all tubes of +Pachylinae +and the catalogues of Roewer’s Collection ( +Acosta 1996a +), but just +one specimen +labeled as + +Lycomedicus planiceps + +was located, the already mentioned RI/795. Most probably the two citations refer to the same specimen, and the reference to “ +Valparaíso +” is another of many inaccuracies in Roewer’s work. On the SMF catalog-card the species name was first written + +“ +planiceps +(Guer.) + +, + +Lycomedes + +”, then corrected to + +“ +planiceps +(Roewer) + +, + +Lycomedicus + +” (note the mistaken amendment of the authorship). + + +At this point it is needed to test the correspondence between Gervais’ (1854) fig. 10, and the description of + +Gonyleptes bicornis + +and redescription of + +G. planiceps + +in +Gervais (1849) +; this is accomplished in +Table 3 +, including (when applicable) features of the above mentioned fig. 4b (Gervais 1854) as well, which I also attribute to + +G. bicornis + +. Contrary to the uses of +Gervais (1849) +, +Sørensen (1902) +and +Roewer (1913) +, fig. 10 does not agree with the redescription of + +G. planiceps + +but with the description of + +G. bicornis + +instead. The conclusion of this thorough comparison is straightforward: + +Gonyleptes bicornis + +is to be referred to two mislabeled illustrations in the + +Atlas +(Gervais 1854) + +: fig. 4b and fig. 10. They show without doubt a hitherto undetected member of genus + +Parabalta + +: henceforth named + +Parabalta bicornis + +comb. nov. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE43530EFF0E58C9FF0CFEEA.xml b/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE43530EFF0E58C9FF0CFEEA.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..1771c275f23 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE43530EFF0E58C9FF0CFEEA.xml @@ -0,0 +1,1016 @@ + + + +Deciphering a Chilean harvestmen enigma: what is Parabalta bicornis (Gervais, 1849) comb. nov. (Opiliones: Gonyleptidae: Pachylinae) + + + +Author + +Acosta, Luis E. + +text + + +Zootaxa + + +2025 + +2025-01-03 + + +5563 + + +1 + + +193 +208 + + + + +https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5563.1.13 + +journal article +307825 +10.11646/zootaxa.5563.1.13 +776811a5-5b12-4352-82aa-00e6f132ab0d +1175-5326 +14595841 +7D773EDB-D1D9-4322-B2E3-3992B54CDA1F + + + + + + + +Parabalta bicornis +( +Gervais, 1849 +) + +comb. nov. +, revalidated + + + + + + + +urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: +3353AFE9-7113-4E68-ADD8-01EEF8CFAD5C + + + +Figs. 1A–F +, +2A–C + + + + + + + +Gonyleptes bicornis +Gervais 1849: 21 + + +; + +Butler 1873: 114 + +(species list). +Type +(s) unknown. + + + + + +Gonyleptes acanthops +Gervais 1854 + +(in part):Atlas, Arachnídeos, pl. 1, fig. 4b + +—NEC + +Gervais, 1849: 22 + +(description corresponds to + +G. acanthops + +; only fig. 4b to + +G. bicornis + +). + + + + +Gonyleptes planiceps + +: Gervais 1854: Atlas, Arachnídeos, pl. 1, fig. 10 + +—NEC + +Gervais 1849: 24 + +(description corresponds to the true + +G. planiceps + +; fig. 10 to + +G. bicornis + +). + + + + +Lycomedes +(?) +planiceps + +[sic]: + +Sørensen 1902: 21 + +(in part?—he draws attention to the mismatch between description and fig. 10 of +Gervais, 1849 +: +‘Descriptio enim et figura, a Gervais datae, nullo modo congruunt’ +—unable to identify the species). + + + + + +Lycomedes planiceps + +: + +Roewer 1913: 127 + +, 134, figs. 60, 61 (misidentification, based on a +MNHN +specimen he wrongly believed to be Gervais’ +type +—it matches fig. 10 of Gervais 1854!). + + + +NEC + +Lycomedes bicornis + +: +Sørensen 1902: 20 +[ +‘descriptio G. bicornis fìguris 4 congruit’ += he wrongly assumes that figs ‘ +4♂ +, +4♀ +and 4 +b’ of Gervais 1854 refer to + +L. bicornis + +]; +Roewer, 1913: 136 +, fig. 62 [species considered “unsichere Art”; follows +Sørensen 1902 +, and reproduces fig. +4♂ +of Gervais 1854]. + + + +Lycomedicus planiceps + +: +Roewer 1923: 442 +, 445, figs. 559, 560 (misidentification, probably based on the same specimen, now in Coll. Roewer—although the supposed Gervais’ +type +from MNHN is still cited, both ‘specimens’ may be the same); +Soares & Soares 1954: 271 +(in part; they adopted Roewer’s criteria); +Cekalovic 1968: 8 +(in part; wrong date), 1976: 26 (in part; some mistaken localities), 1985: 19 (in part); +Acosta 1996a: 224 +(SMF, RI/795). + + + + +Lycomedicus bicornis + +: + +Canals 1936: 69 + +[species list]; + +Cekalovic 1968: 8 + +; + +1985: 18 + +(in part) + +—NEC + +Roewer 1923: 445 + +, fig 561 [species listed as “unsichere Art”; figs 4, 4a, 4b of Gervais 1854 are wrongly assumed to correspond to + +L. bicornis + +]; + +Soares & Soares 1954: 270 + +[the same about figs 4, 4a, 4b of Gervais 1854]. + + + + +Sadocus bicornis + +: + +Kury 2003: 191 + +(in part, refers to figs 4, 4a–b) [proposal of new combination]. + + + + + +Sadocus asperatus + +: + + +Pessoa-Silva +et al., +2021: 104 + + +(in part, refers to figs 4, 4a–b) [synonymy proposal]. + + + + + +Type material. + +Neotype +♂ +( +MACN-Ar 46511 +): +CHILE +, +Coquimbo Region +, + +Choapa Province + +, +Cuesta Cavilolén +, + +30 km +NE Los Vilos + +, + +12 November 1987 + +( +E.A. Maury +leg.), hereby designated. + + + + +Qualifying conditions for +neotype +designation + +(as required by the ICZN, Art. 75.3). This designation is purposed to guarantee the nomenclatural stability of the revalidated binomen + +Gonyleptes bicornis + +, considering that the taxon was repeatedly misidentified by all authorities for more than 170 years, and also affected the taxonomic knowledge of other species treated by +Gervais (1849) +. The analysis of the most significant interpretations ( +e.g. +, +Sørensen 1902 +, +Roewer 1913 +, + +Pessoa-Silva +et al. +2021 + +) is given in detail above, where the ‘exceptional need’ for a +neotype +is endorsed. The diagnostic features on which the preceding assessment of the description and figures of + +Parabalta bicornis + +focused (see +e.g., +Tables 2–3 +) are readily recognizable in the material studied and in the redescription below, thus giving ‘evidence that the +neotype +is consistent with what is known of the former namebearing type from the original description’, as ruled in Art. 75.3.5. +Gervais (1849) +did not provide a precise original locality, but merely stated ‘it is found in humid places of the [Chilean] Republic’. However, it is worth noting that one of Claude Gay’s many exploratory trips across the country took him very close to the modern records of + +P. bicornis + +in southern +Coquimbo +( +cf. +Sagredo Baeza 2010 +: xix, xxiii and +Fig. 3 +). No author (not even +Gervais 1849 +) stated the existence of types or the location of original specimens of + +G. bicornis + +, and my own searches in European collections ( +NHMUK +, +MNHN +, +NHMW +, +SMF +, +ZMC +, among the most relevant) also resulted negative. The +neotype +is lodged in +MACN-Ar +, an outstanding biodiversity collection in South America (fulfilling Art. 75.3.7.). + + +Other materials studied. + +CHILE +, +Coquimbo Region +, + +Choapa Province + +: +Cuesta Cavilolén +, + +30 km +NE + +Los Vilos +, + +12 November 1987 + +( +E.A. Maury +), +7 ♂ +, +2 ♀ +, +2 juv. +( +MACN-Ar +46512), +1 ♂ +, +1 ♀ +( +CDA +000.069) + +; + +same loc., + +7 November 1988 + +( +E.A. Maury +), +1 ♂ +, +2 ♀ +, +2 juv. +( +MACN-Ar 46513 +) + +; + +Quebrada Playa Agua Dulce +, + +46 km +N + +Los Vilos +, + +5–6 November 1988 + +( +E.A. Maury +), +1 ♂ +, +1 ♀ +( +MACN-Ar +46514) + +; + +“ +Chile +”, 1 ♂ “Type ex Mus. Paris” ( +SMF RI/795 +) - + +Lycomedes planiceps + +det. +Roewer 1913 +), not a type indeed ( +Acosta 1996a +) + +. + + +Type locality. +Cuesta Cavilolén +, + +30 km +NE Los Vilos + +, +Province Choapa +, +Chile +(ca. +31°46.26’S +71°18.95’W +). + + + + +Distribution. +Chile +, +Coquimbo Region +: Choapa Province. Records of this species represent the northernmost ones in the genus ( +Fig. 3 +). + + + + +Diagnosis and comparisons +. Male + +Parabalta bicornis + +comb. nov. +are recognized by having a bifid apophysis on CxIV; armature of TrIV consisting of an apical prodorsal finger-like apophysis pointing upwards, and a small ax-like one on the prolateral side; a row of small apophyses following the dorsomedial one on FeIV; two large acute ventral apophyses on patella IV, and the absence of large ventral apophyses between the basal one and the distal group on TiIV. A detailed comparison with + +Parabalta reedii + ++ + +P. cristobalia + +is shown in +Table 4 +(these two nominal species are closely allied, if not synonyms, so they are entered together in the table). + + + + +Redescription. +Measurements and meristics. +DS length: +♂ +7.0–8.0 mm (mean= 7.5 mm, n= 11), +♀ +7.0–7.9 mm (x= 7.5 mm, n= 6). Detailed measurements of the +neotype +♂ +and a selected +♀ +: +Table 5 +. Tarsal formula: +♂ +6:8–9:6:6 ( +neotype +with 6:8:6:6), selected +♀ +6:7–8:6:6. + + +Coloration in ethanol 70%. +General color yellowish to brownish cinnamon, CxIV, TrIV and FeIV of males darker (somewhat more reddish). + + +Males: +Dorsum. +DS +type +γR (gamma rotund, coda unrecognizable, embodied by the large, round mid-bulge; +Fig. 1A +). Ocular mound with a pair of tall, acute apophyses ( +Fig. 1E +). Front border with conic granules in a row, scattered on the frontal hump, which is lower than the ocular mound ( +Fig. 1F +); scutum margin with a row of small round granules from the ozopore up to constriction 1, then vanishing towards area I. Lateral areas elevated, practically smooth beyond area I. Otherwise DS unarmed ( +Fig. 1A +), faintly rugose on carapace, smooth and shiny on the rest; area I divided, areas I–IV entire. Area V, FT and dorsal anal plate have a row of flat, very faint granules, the paramedian pair slightly larger than the rest (still flat). In some specimens there is a pair of tiny and inconspicuous paramedian granules on areas III–IV as well. + + +Venter +( +Fig. 1B +). Posterior margin concave; genital and stigmatic segments delimited by faint tegumentary borders, better defined in small specimens and difficult to see in larger ones (as in the +Neotype +); the genital part, smooth, depressed and lighter in color. Free sternites almost smooth, with row of minute granules, except for the last sternite and the ventral anal plate, which bear round granules, larger on the laterals. + + +Chelicerae. +Unarmed, finely rugulose, posterior side of bulla slightly granulous. + + +Pedipalps. +Weak, dorsal tegument tenuously rugose. Ventral setigerous tubercles on Tr (one) and Fe (one basal, followed by a row of blunt ones); Fe with a small medial subapical spine. Pedipalp spination: LAT: Ti i_[Ii•], Ta IiIi – MED: Ti IiIi, Ta IIi. + + +Legs I–III. +Unarmed, tegument finely granulous; only a few large proventral apical granules on FeIII. + + +Leg IV. +CxIV ( +Figs. 1A–C +) smooth to very finely granular, with a strong prolateral apophysis directed diagonally (back– and sideward); it is bifid-tipped, with dorsal branch longer, acute and posteriorly inflected, ventral branch tuberous; on the same ridge as the latter, a ventro-medial basal tuberosity. Minute conic retrolateral apophysis, not easily discernible in some larger specimens. + + +TrIV ( +Figs. 1A, C +) elongated, armed with a strong apical prodorsal apophysis, pointing upwards, S-curved medially and anteriad; a small ax-like prolateral apophysis on the proximal third; retrolateral surface granulous. + + + +FIGURE 1. + +Parabalta bicornis +( +Gervais, 1849 +) + +comb. nov. +A–F: Neotype ♂ (MACN-Ar 46511). A. Dorsal scutum, free tergites, coxae IV (arrow: ventro-medial tuberosity at the base of coxal apophysis), right trochanter and femur IV, dorsal view. B. Venter, with ventral view of coxae IV, genital and stigmatic segments, free sternites, ventral anal plate, right trochanter and femur IV. C. Right coxa, trochanter, femur, patella and tibia IV, prolateral view. D. Right patella, tibia, metatarsus and tarsus IV, retrolateral view. E–F. Ocular mound, E. posterior view, F. lateral view with anterior border of prosoma and frontal hump. Scale lines: 2 mm. + + + + +TABLE 4. +Comparison of diagnostic characters between male + +Parabalta bicornis + +comb. nov. +versus + +P. reedii + +( +cf. +PérezGonzález +et al. +2022: fig. 2) and + +P. cristobalia + +( +cf. +Roewer 1943 +: pl. 2, figs. 14, 14 a). + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ +Parabalta bicornis + + + +Parabalta reedii +/ +Parabalta cristobalia + +
Cx IV: prolateral apophysisbifid, short, diagonally orientedsimple, curved tip, points backwards
TrIV: prolateral apophysissmall, ax-like +bilobate, distal lobe is short and parallel to border ( + +P. reedii + +) or large, finger-like, pointing sideways ( + +P. cristobalia + +) +
TrIV: apical prodorsal finger-like apophysislarge, oriented upwards, inclined medially +oriented sideways, either short ( + +P. reedii + +), or long and parallel to the former apophysis ( + +P. cristobalia + +) +
FeIV: prodorsal basal apophyses1–2, conic + acute granulesnone
FeIV: retrodorsal apophysislarge; followed by small apophyses of decreasing size +either large ( + +P. reedii + +) or small ( + +P. cristobalia + +), it is only followed by granulation on the medial side +
FeIV: proventral row of tubercles / apophysesonly a row of tubercles, no subapical apophysisa large subapical apophysis pointing sideways, either alone or with 2–3 smaller ones in a row
PaIV: ventral acute apophysestwo +one ( + +P. reedii + +) or two ( + +P. cristobalia + +) +
Ti IV: ventral acute apophysesone basal, three distal, a large gap in between (2–3 rudimentary tubercles may exist)one basal, three distal, in between one or two additional
+ + + +TABLE 5. +Measurements (mm) of the neotype ♂ and a selected ♀ of + +Parabalta bicornis +( +Gervais, 1849 +) + +comb. nov. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Neotype ♂ MACN-Ar 46511♀ MACN-Ar 46513
Total length9.79.2
Scutum, length / maximal width8.0 / 7.17.4 / 6.4
Prosoma, length / width2.8 / 3.92.5 / 3.6
Leg I, total length14.512.6
trochanter / femur / patella0.9 / 3.6 / 1.50.7 / 3.3 / 1.3
tibia / metatarsus / tarsus2.7 / 3.6 / 2.22.3 / 3.1 / 1.9
Leg II, total length22.820.3
trochanter / femur / patella1.0 / 5.9 / 1.81.0 / 5.3 / 1.6
tibia / metatarsus / tarsus4.5 / 5.4 / 4.24.1 / 4.7 / 3.6
Leg III, total length19.616.9
trochanter / femur / patella1.2 / 5.6 / 1.91.0 / 4.7 / 1.8
tibia / metatarsus / tarsus3.9 / 4.9 / 2.13.3 / 4.2 / 1.9
Leg IV, total length27.122.3
trochanter / femur / patella2.8 / 6.8 / 2.51.7 / 5.9 / 2.2
tibia / metatarsus / tarsus6.0 / 6.6 / 2.44.7 / 5.8 / 2.0
Pedipalp, total length8.37.9
trochanter / femur / patella0.8 / 2.1 / 1.20.8 / 2.0 / 1.2
tibia / tarsus / claw1.7 / 1.3 / 1.21.5 / 1.2 / 1.2
Chelicera, chela length / width2.5 / 1.02.3 / 0.9
basal part length1.00.9
Ocular mound, width / height1.2 / 1.11.1 / 0.8
+ + +FeIV ( +Figs. 1A–C +) granulous, gradually wider from base to apex; substraight with a slight, abrupt inflection between the first and second third. One large acute apophysis, ventro-proximal, inclined to the median line. A prodorsal row limited to the basal third formed by one (single or bifid) or two upwards pointing, moderate apophyses followed by tall granules. Upon the femur inflection, a large retrodorsal apophysis, somewhat shifted medially and slightly diagonal, either horizontal or gently curved downwards; it is continued after a small gap by a variable row of decreasing apophyses, which turn into granules up to an apical, small conic apophysis. Along the distal two thirds of FeIV, pro- and retroventral rows of tubercles to small apophyses, the former ending in a large apical unciform apophysis, the latter in a smaller one. + +PaIV, ventral side with blunt grains and two apicoventral acute apophyses, the largest one placed on the midline. + +TiIV sigmoid in lateral view (more accentuated and more slender in larger specimens), it bears a strong basal apophysis, slanted medially, and a distal group of three apophyses arranged in a triangle; in between 2–3 minute intermediate tubercles may exist, otherwise there is a large smooth gap ( +Figs. 1C–D +). + +MeIV straight, smooth, fairly thicker than tarsus. + +Penis +( +Figs. 2A–C +). Trunk subterminally swollen (wider than high), with glans articulated in the same axis. VP sub-rectangular, front margin straight; it is quite flat in lateral view. Lateroapical group of 3–4 macrosetae C. Basal group displaced to the swollen sector of trunk, consisting of two large setae (A1–A2) arranged longitudinally and a small B1 more ventrally. D1 and E1–E2 minute. Glans with ‘columnar’ look, it has membranous expansions on the sides; a thick, finger-like DPG curved towards the stylus, as diagnostic for the genus ( +Acosta 1996b +). Stylus simple and straight, diagonal, devoid of any spination; VPS of similar length and orientation, its tip abruptly bent downwards in a spiny flat expansion. + + + +Variability of +♂ + +(condition found in the +neotype +marked as *N). FeIV (n=20): Sub-basal, prodorsal armature with a single conic apophysis (11/20, *N- left), two contiguous (3, *N- right), one bifid (5) or several fused in a tuberous stem (1); the brief row of smaller apophyses/tall granules that follows distad is highly variable, decreasing in size either in regular (*N) or irregular fashion; only rarely (3/20) a few conic grains proximal to the large apophysis. FeIV (n=20): Large retrodorsal apophysis, either slender (16/20, *N), very thick (2) or smaller than the row that follows (2); it is normally simple (18, *N) or may bear a small subapical branch (2); there are seldom (6/20, *N-right) one or more acute granules basal to it. TiIV (n=20): gap between ventro-basal and distal apophyses either smooth (14/20) or with 2–3 vestigial tubercles (6/20, *N). Some specimens examined of + +P. bicornis + +, like SMF RI/795 though likely not that depicted in fig. 10 (Gervais 1854), bear a pair of minute, quite imperceptible paramedian granules on areas III–IV, easier to discover in lateral view (in dorsal view they may appear not much as lighter dots). In *N these granules are overly undersized, only visible with DS completely dried out ( +Fig. 1A +). In +Roewer’s (1913) +redescription and illustration of + +Lycomedes planiceps + +the development of those granules was overstated, showing them as conic tubercles. This was much probably to justify the inclusion of the species in + +Lycomedes + +(later + +Lycomedicus + +), which was diagnosed with area III ‘armed’. + + +Females: +DS +type +α-K (alpha-keyhole, coda with divergent sides), unarmed. Lateral areas with a marginal row of round flat granules up to constriction 2. Granules on area V and FT larger than in male; on FT-I a pair of larger paramedian flat granules, on FT-II–III they become small acute apophyses (larger on FT-III). CxIV with small acute prolateral apophysis, diagonally divergent; a small retrolateral one hinders the coxal base to completely fuse with the stigmatic segment, leaving a gap. Stigmatic and genital segments clearly delimited by a tegumentary ridge. Free sternites with a row of round granules, larger than in male, especially on the laterals. TrIV with retrolateral side covered by granules. FeIV slightly curved, granose, with a small apical proventral apophysis. PaIV unarmed; TiIV straight, club-shaped, with a minute apical retroventral, spine-shaped apophysis. + + + + +On the publication dates. +Following the current use, the date printed on the front page of volume 4 of the + +Historia Física y Política de +Chile + +(1849) is here accepted as valid for + +Gonyleptes bicornis + +. It should be warned that volumes were not printed and delivered to subscribers in full; instead, tomes were issued in parts as soon as these were ready, meaning that every single part has its own effective date of publication. Parts are what Gay called +‘entregas’ +(=livraisons, releases), consisting of a number of successive gatherings under a temporary cover, intended to be bound later in the final volume. Signatures, +i.e. +, the marks printed to aid the binder in arranging the gatherings in the correct order, can be recognized on the bottom of the first page of each sheet. As a rule, covers of +entregas +were removed upon binding, save a few exceptional cases in which they were conserved ( +Johnston 1941 +). Almost all zoological volumes consisted of four +entregas +, except for volumes 2 +and 4 +, each formed by three (N. Evenhuis, unpublished, +in litt. +2024). For the botanical part, +Johnston (1941) +determined that the date on the title page on each volume represents the year when the printer began to work on it, not necessarily the date in which it became available; anyway, in most cases the printed year coincides with the date of at least the first +entrega +( +Johnston 1941 +). This procedure can be generalized to the zoological part as well ( +Evenhuis 2015 +). The description of + +Gonyleptes bicornis + +, published on pages 21–22, falls within the first +entrega +of volume 4, which spans from page 1 to 188 and comprises 12 gatherings (N. Evenhuis, +in litt. +2024). Thus, in this case we can be confident that the date printed on the front matter (1849) is that of + +G. bicornis + +; the year is also endorsed by dates extrapolated from other sources by N. Evenhuis (unpublished, +in litt. +2024). + + + +FIGURE 2. + +Parabalta bicornis +( +Gervais, 1849 +) + +comb. nov. +, distal end of penis (MACN-Ar 46514). A: dorsal view; B: lateral view; C: detail of VPS (rotated). Scale lines: 0.1 mm. + + + +Dating of plates proved to be especially challenging ( +Johnston 1941 +). They were also issued individually, to be bound together at the end, making up the two volumes of the + +Atlas +( +Sagredo Baeza 2010 +) + +. Although plates were delivered together with the +entregas, +they were not necessarily synchronous with their reciprocal part of text ( +Johnston 1941 +). For example, the very first +entrega +, corresponding to the historical section, was delivered in 1844 along with two zoological plates ( +Sagredo Baeza 2010 +), whereas the zoological text itself started being issued just in 1847. As the precise date of plates remains unknown (N. Evenhuis, +in litt. +2024), the only choice is to adopt the date printed on the title page of the + +Atlas + +(1854). It has been emphasized that the + +Atlas + +reveals several inconsistencies, with some copies available in libraries lacking one or more plates, or containing duplicate ones; in some instances, incongruence between the reference in the text and the labels on the plate has been detected ( +Stuardo Ortiz 1953 +), as is the case of Gervais’ (1854) ‘Arachnideos N° 1’. Readers should be also aware of the existence of a second, cheaper edition of the whole work, issued in 1866, in which all plates were printed in black, +i.e. +, no figure was colored. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE465300FF0E5D30FDFBFD02.xml b/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE465300FF0E5D30FDFBFD02.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..57579eca837 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/03/8F/1E/038F1E10BE465300FF0E5D30FDFBFD02.xml @@ -0,0 +1,200 @@ + + + +Deciphering a Chilean harvestmen enigma: what is Parabalta bicornis (Gervais, 1849) comb. nov. (Opiliones: Gonyleptidae: Pachylinae) + + + +Author + +Acosta, Luis E. + +text + + +Zootaxa + + +2025 + +2025-01-03 + + +5563 + + +1 + + +193 +208 + + + + +https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5563.1.13 + +journal article +307825 +10.11646/zootaxa.5563.1.13 +776811a5-5b12-4352-82aa-00e6f132ab0d +1175-5326 +14595841 +7D773EDB-D1D9-4322-B2E3-3992B54CDA1F + + + + + + +Revalidation of + +Gonyleptes bicornis + + + + + + + + +Pessoa-Silva +et al. +(2021: 105) + +proposed the synonymy of + +Gonyleptes bicornis + +under + +Sadocus asperatus + +, seemingly based on +Roewer (1913) +(they cite ‘fig. 4a–b’ in their synonymy; also a non-existing ‘fig. 4–4b’ in the entry for +Sørensen 1902 +). + +Pessoa-Silva +et al. +(2021) + +based their conclusion on both the original description and the supposed drawings of + +G. bicornis + +, +i.e. +, adopting the prevailing usage of considering Gervais’ (1854) fig. 4 as referable to this species. As key features from the original description of + +G. asperatus + +( +cf. +Gervais 1847 +), to support the synonymy + +Pessoa-Silva +et al. +(2021) + +mention (a) ‘the spines on the free tergite’, (b) ‘the two apical apophyses on the TrIV’, and (c) ‘uneven spines in the inner part of the “leg” (referring to FeIV)’. The comparison between the descriptions of + +G. asperatus + +(both the original one, +Gervais 1847 +, and the redescription of +Gervais 1849 +) and that of + +G. bicornis + +( +Table 2 +) yielded the following outcomes: + + +(a) Spines on free tergites are described only for + +G. asperatus + +; just weak tubercles exist in + +G. bicornis + +. + + +(b) The description of +Gervais (1847) +of + +G. asperatus + +does not give enough detail about apophyses on TrIV, and only some resemblance could be extrapolated if Gervais’ (1854) fig. 9 and the description of + +G. bicornis + +were taken into account. + + +(c) About FeIV, Gervais’ (1847) description of + +G. asperatus + +and Gervais’ (1854) fig. 9 agree in the inner border being armed with strong apophyses; but comparison with + +G. bicornis + +is inconclusive. Incidentally, + +Pessoa-Silva +et al. +(2021) + +misinterpreted the word ‘leg’ (‘pierna’ in the Spanish text) assuming that +Gervais (1849) +referred to the femur, when the tibia was actually meant. As a matter of fact, apophyses on ‘leg’ (tibia) IV provide the best diagnostic feature to assess that + +G. bicornis + +is a member of + +Parabalta + +. This feature is only indicated in the description of + +G. bicornis + +and clearly shown on Gervais’ (1854) fig. 10. + + +Many items exhibit a decided mismatch between the descriptions of + +G. asperatus + +and + +G. bicornis + +( +Table 2 +); in other features comparison resulted inconclusive (?), and only the paired armature on the ocular mound and the bifid apophysis of CxIV look similar in both (by the way, both character states are actually quite widespread in the family). In sum, + +G. bicornis + +did not prove to be a junior synonym of + +G. asperatus + +, and has to be revalidated and transferred to + +Parabalta + +instead. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/0A/05/27/0A0527996D675A1697AC0C93C605F54A.xml b/data/0A/05/27/0A0527996D675A1697AC0C93C605F54A.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..f9b8874dd68 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/0A/05/27/0A0527996D675A1697AC0C93C605F54A.xml @@ -0,0 +1,400 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Namaquella + +gen. nov. + + + + + +Type +species. + + + + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. + + + + +Diagnosis. + + +Both sexes of + +Namaquella + +gen. nov. +resemble + +Poachelas +Haddad & Lyle, 2008 + +and + +Rukuluk + +gen. nov. +, with a pale body to support a lifestyle associated with grasses, although the body proportions are less elongate than in these genera. Males of + +Namaquella + +gen. nov. +can be recognized from these and other trachelid genera by the oval tegulum with a simple, slightly curved distal embolus directed retrodistally and the simple sperm duct and +RTA +(Figs +19 B +, +20 B +). The female epigyne is weakly sclerotized and can be distinguished by the central heart-shaped atrium formed by two convex ridges and the laterally looping copulatory ducts (Fig. +19 D, E +), whereas the epigynal atrium of + +Poachelas + +and + +Rukuluk + +gen. nov. +are subrectangular and extend to the epigastric furrow (Fig. +27 D +; +Haddad and Lyle 2008 +: fig. 94) [ + +P. montanus +Haddad & Lyle, 2008 + +has a different epigyne structure and is likely misplaced; +Haddad and Lyle 2008 +: fig. 98]. + + + + +Description. + + +Small spiders, +2.18–3.52 mm +in length; carapace creamy-yellow in + +N. arida + +sp. nov. +to bright yellow-orange in + +N. samanthae + +sp. nov. +; carapace oval, broadest near posterior of coxae II, gradually narrowed towards eye region (Figs +16 A, F +, +17 A +); fovea indistinct, replaced by a shallow depression in + +N. arida + +sp. nov. +, a short shallow slit in + +N. samanthae + +sp. nov. +; posterior carapace margin concave; carapace somewhat flattened, weakly convex in lateral profile, slightly elevated from clypeus to approximately ⅓ carapace length, with steeper slope in posterior quarter (Fig. +16 B, G +); carapace surface finely wrinkled, with scattered short fine straight setae with small weakly tuberculate bases (Fig. +17 B +). All eyes surrounded by black rings (Fig. +16 A, F +); +AER +procurved in anterior view, slightly recurved in dorsal view (Fig. +17 C +), +AME +slightly smaller than +ALE +or subequal in size; +AME +separated by less than their diameter, almost touching +ALE +; +PER +recurved in dorsal view, +PME +smaller than +PLE +or subequal; +PME +- +PME +and +PME +- +PLE +interdistances variable; +MOQ +narrower anteriorly than posteriorly, posterior width slightly larger than length. Chilum distinct, split; cheliceral promargin with three separated teeth, retromargin with three teeth on common base (Fig. +17 D +); fang with distinct serrula; endites with parallel lateral margins, mesal margins with longitudinal depression (Fig. +17 E +), distal margins with distinct serrula comprising short sharp denticles (Fig. +17 G +) and dense maxillar hair tuft on mesal margins (Fig. +17 E +); labium trapezoidal, slightly wider than long, narrower distally than basally (Figs +16 C +, +17 E +). Pleural bars weakly sclerotised, isolated; sternum oval, longer than broad, widest at anterior of coxa II, anterior with two concave excavations at lateral corners of labium, surface smooth, sparsely covered in long curved setae (Fig. +16 C +); precoxal triangles present, intercoxal sclerites present between coxae I and II and II and III only. Leg formula 4123 or 1423, sparsely covered in long fine setae; legs I slightly swollen compared to others, with distinct convex dorsal and ventral surfaces (Fig. +16 D, I +); all femora strongly constricted proximally; patellar indentation on retrolateral side narrow, with lyriform organ at proximal end (Fig. +17 H, I +); tibiae to tarsi I and II densely scopulate ventrally, with ventral cusps in males on metatarsi and tarsi I at least, sometimes also on metatarsi II (Figs +19 A +, +20 A +), absent on tibiae and in females; metatarsi III and IV with distal preening brush and comb ventrally (Figs +16 E, J +, +18 D +); metatarsi with short metatarsal stopper (Fig. +18 D +); tarsi with sparse tactile hairs, few dorsal trichobothria and chemosensory setae, tarsal organ at approximately ¾ tarsus length (Fig. +18 E +), distinctly ovoid and rebordered, slightly elevated from integument, surface smooth, opening oval and distally placed (Fig. +18 F +); tarsal claws quite slender, with five teeth and dense tenant setae forming claw tufts in between (Fig. +18 G, H +); trichobothria with slightly lowered distal plate, distal margin of hood overlapping plate, hood with four curved ridges, roughly concentric (Fig. +18 I +). Abdomen oval, with dorsal scutum absent or present in males, absent in females; dorsum densely covered in long fine setae, with two pairs of distinct sigilla (Fig. +16 A, F +); venter without large sclerites or markings, sparsely covered in fine setae (Fig. +16 C, H +). Spinnerets short, conical, in compact group, spigot detail not studied. Male palpal femora and patellae without apophyses; palpal tibiae with single simple retrolateral apophysis with pointed dorsal tip (Figs +19 C +, +20 C +); tegulum simple, oval in ventral view, slightly narrower than cymbium, with simple slightly curved embolus originating distally (Figs +19 B +, +20 B +). Female epigyne with central heart-shaped atrium, with copulatory openings positioned laterally (Fig. +19 D +); copulatory ducts directed laterally, looping to anterolateral +ST II +, with short connecting ducts leading to ovoid posterolateral +ST I +, with fertilization ducts on their posteromesal surface (Fig. +19 E +). + + + + + + +Digital microscope photographs of somatic morphology of + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A – E +) and female ( +F – J +). +A, F +habitus, dorsal view +B, G +same, lateral view +C, H +same, ventral view +D, I +leg I, prolateral view, arrowheads in +D +indicating ventral cusps +E, J +metatarsus and tarsus IV. Scale bars: 1.0 mm ( +A – C, F – H +); 0.5 mm ( +D, E, I, J +). + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. +, subadult male +A +carapace, dorsal view +B +same, surface texture and setae +C +eye region, dorsal view +D +chelicerae, arrows indicating promarginal teeth +E +mouthparts +F +modified setae on posterior surface of paturon +G +detail of serrula +H +patellar indentation, leg IV +I +same, detail of lyriform organ. + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. +, subadult male +A +tibia I, lateral view +B +metatarsus I, lateral view +C +same, metatarsal stopper +D +metatarsus IV, metatarsal stopper and preening comb +E +tarsus I, lateral view, arrow indicating position of tarsal organ +F +same, detail of tarsal organ +G +same, detail of claw tuft and claws, ventrolateral view +H +same, distolateral view +I +same, base of dorsal trichobothrium. + + + + + + + + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A – C +) and female ( +D, E +). +A +schematic representation of cusp arrangement on legs I and II +B +palp, ventral view +C +same, retrolateral view +D +epigyne, ventral view +E +same, dorsal view. Abbreviations: CD – connecting duct; Cd – copulatory duct; CO – copulatory opening; EM – embolus; FD – fertilization duct; +RTA +– retrolateral tibial apophysis; SD – sperm duct; +ST I +– primary spermatheca; +ST II +– secondary spermatheca. Scale bars: 0.1 mm. + + + + + +Etymology. + + +The name is derived from the Namaqualand region in arid western +South Africa +, from which the +type +species originates. Gender feminine. + + + + +Composition. + + +Two species, + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. +and + +N. samanthae + +sp. nov. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/30/1F/F2/301FF2BAC0185A6AAF635802E403BD69.xml b/data/30/1F/F2/301FF2BAC0185A6AAF635802E403BD69.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..6a9a3deecb1 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/30/1F/F2/301FF2BAC0185A6AAF635802E403BD69.xml @@ -0,0 +1,459 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Foordana flavipoda + +sp. nov. + + + + +Figs 9 A, B, E, I +, +10 + + + + +Material examined. + + + + + +Holotype + +. + +South Africa +• +♂ +; +Free State Province +; +Bloemfontein district +, +Farm Hopefield +; + +28 ° 51.683 ' S +, +26 ° 09.788 ' E + +; + +1275 m +a. s. l. + +; + +28 Oct. 2001 + +; +C. Haddad +leg.; + +Eucalyptus + +bark; + +NMBA +19613 + +. + + + + + +Paratypes + +. + +2 ♀ +; together with +holotype +. + + + + +Other material. + + + +South Africa +• +1 ♀ +; +Free State Province +; +Harrismith +, +Platberg Nature Reserve +, +Platberg +, near cross; + +28 ° 15.136 ' S +, +29 ° 09.958 ' E + +; + +2215 m +a. s. l. + +; + +11 Mar. 2006 + +; +C. Haddad +leg.; under rocks, mountainside; + +NCA +2006 + +/ 863 + +. + + + + +Diagnosis. + + +The male of this species can be recognised from congeners by the lack of ventral leg cusps on the anterior legs and the short broad +dRTA +(Fig. +10 B +), which is longer in + +F. distincta + +sp. nov. +and + +F. kasouga + +sp. nov. +(Figs +8 C +, +11 C +). The female can be separated from + +F. distincta + +sp. nov. +by the strongly spiralled copulatory duct and small anterior secondary spermathecae, which are short and straight, and large, respectively, in the latter species (cf. Figs +10 D +and +8 E +). Furthermore, + +F. flavipoda + +sp. nov. +has a median hood in the epigyne (Fig. +10 C +), whereas + +F. distincta + +sp. nov. +does not (Fig. +8 D +). + + + + +Description. + + +Male ( +holotype +, Hopefield, + +NMBA + +19613): Measurements: +CL +2.27, +CW +1.91, +AL +2.45, +AW +1.77, +TL +4.72, +FL +0.18, +SL +1.20, +SW +1.03, +AME +- +AME +0.07, +AME +- +ALE +0.04, +ALE +- +ALE +0.38, +PME +- +PME +0.14, +PME +- +PLE +0.13, +PLE +- +PLE +0.61, +MOQ +: +AW +0.30, +PW +0.37, L 0.33. Length of leg segments: I 1.90 + 1.02 + 1.53 + 1.20 + 0.62 = 6.27; II 1.57 + 0.78 + 1.56 + 1.03 + 0.60 = 5.54; III 1.21 + 0.64 + 0.88 + 0.98 + 0.45 = 4.16; IV 1.65 + 0.85 + 1.43 + 1.55 + 0.60 = 6.08. Carapace orange-brown, sightly paler on posterior slope (Fig. +9 A +); surface finely wrinkled; fovea short, distinct, at ⅔ +CL +. +AER +very slightly procurved, almost straight; clypeus height equal to 1 ⅛ +AME +diameter; +AME +very slightly larger than +ALE +; +AME +separated by distance equal to ⅗ their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by distance equal to ⅓ +AME +diameter; +PER +recurved, +PLE +slightly larger than +PME +; +PME +separated by distance equal to slightly more than ¾ their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance equal to +PLE +diameter. Chelicerae orange-brown, anterior surface covered with scattered long, fine setae, denser mesally; promargin with three slightly separated teeth, median tooth largest; retromargin with three adjacent teeth on common base, decreasing in size distally; endites and labium slightly paler. Sternum bright yellow, orange-brown at borders, with faint mottling laterally between coxal pairs; surface smooth, covered with scattered short, fine setae. Abdomen oval, broadest at half its length; dark grey dorsally, with narrow cream stripe along midline in anterior half, fading posteriorly (Fig. +9 A +); dorsal scutum weakly sclerotized, yellow-brown, covering most of dorsum; two pairs of indistinct sigilla present, at ¼ and ½ +AL +; sides dark grey; slightly paler ventrally, with two paired lines of tiny sclerites from epigastric furrow to spinnerets. Legs I pale yellow-brown, II – IV uniform yellow; ventral cusps absent on anterior legs; tibia I and II and all metatarsi and tarsi densely scopulate. Palp (Figs +9 E +, +10 A, B +) yellow-brown; tegulum oval, broadest medially; embolus originating prolaterally and proximally, long and slender, running along prolateral margin of tegulum, with tip directed at 1 o’clock; +vRTA +subtriangular, with sharp tip angled inwards in ventral view; +dRTA +very short and broad, subtriangular in lateral view. + + +Female ( +paratype +, Hopefield, + +NMBA + +19613): Measurements: +CL +1.80, +CW +1.58, +AL +2.10, +AW +1.52, +TL +4.05, +FL +0.13, +SL +1.12, +SW +0.98, +AME +- +AME +0.06, +AME +- +ALE +0.02, +ALE +- +ALE +0.30, +PME +- +PME +0.11, +PME +- +PLE +0.11, +PLE +- +PLE +0.51 +MOQ +: +AW +0.28, +PW +0.32, L 0.29. Length of leg segments: I 1.50 + 0.84 + 1.04 + 0.98 + 0.58 = 4.94; II 1.25 + 0.71 + 0.91 + 0.80 + 0.47 = 4.14; III 0.92 + 0.54 + 0.60 + 0.80 + 0.48 = 3.34; IV 1.75 + 0.80 + 1.42 + 1.52 + 0.59 = 6.08. Carapace yellow-brown, paler on posterior slope (Fig. +9 B +); surface finely wrinkled, sparsely covered in short straight setae; fovea short, distinct, at ⅔ +CL +. +AER +slightly procurved, almost straight; clypeus height equal to distance approximately ¾ +AME +diameter; +AME +very slightly larger than +ALE +; +AME +separated by distance slightly larger than ½ their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by distance equal to ¼ +ALE +diameter; +PER +recurved, +PME +slightly larger than +PLE +; +PME +separated by distance equal to their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance equal to +PME +diameter. Chelicerae yellow-brown, anterior surface covered with scattered long, fine setae; labium and endites slightly paler. Sternum creamy-yellow, with yellow-brown borders; surface finely wrinkled, covered with scattered short, fine setae. Abdomen oval, broadest medially, dark grey dorsally and laterally, slightly paler ventrally; two pairs of brown to grey sigilla, first pair at ¼ +AL +and second pair just posterior to midpoint of abdomen. Legs with all femora creamy-yellow, remaining segments all pale yellow-brown, anterior legs slightly darker. Epigyne (Figs +9 I +, +10 C, D +) with large, back-to-back C-shaped atria, with copulatory openings positioned anteromedially in them; small arched hood between atria; copulatory duct initially directed anteriorly, forming single spiralling loop before entering small transverse finger-shaped +ST II +; connecting ducts running mesally from +ST II +, diverging posteriorly before entering globose +ST I +, with short duct leading to fertilization ducts. + + + + +Etymology. + + +This species is a contraction of the Latin +flavus +(yellow) and +poda +(legs), referring to the colouration of the legs of both sexes. + + + + +Distribution. + + +Only known from two localities in central South African grasslands (Fig. +12 +). + + + + +Remark. + + +The placement of this species in + +Foordana + +gen. nov. +is tentative, as the lack of leg cusps in males, position of the sperm duct in the male palpal tegulum and the presence of a small hood in the female epigyne differ from the +type +species. Furthermore, the condition of the +type +material is not ideal, as the specimens are somewhat damaged and may have lost some of their colouration. As such, finding fresh material and incorporating sequence data into future analyses will be an essential step in resolving its placement. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/31/A6/F7/31A6F7D6081B53F88A57571A26AA459A.xml b/data/31/A6/F7/31A6F7D6081B53F88A57571A26AA459A.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..02007448275 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/31/A6/F7/31A6F7D6081B53F88A57571A26AA459A.xml @@ -0,0 +1,435 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. + + + + +Figs 21 +, +22 +, +23 +, +24 +, +25 +, +26 +, +27 +, +28 + + + + +Material examined. + + + + + +Holotype + +. + +South Africa +• +♂ +; +Northern Cape Province +; +Witsand Nature Reserve +, +Brulsand +; + +28 ° 34.688 ' S +, +22 ° 27.769 ' E + +; + +1210 m +a. s. l. + +; + +23 Mar. 2023 + +; +C. Haddad +& +R. Booysen +leg.; grass tussocks on sand dunes; + +NMBA +18616 + +. + + + + + + +Paratypes + +. + +South Africa + +• + +2 ♀ +; together with +holotype + +NMBA +18616 + + +• + +1 ♂ +1 ♀ +; +Northern Cape Province +; +Witsand Nature Reserve +, +Viewing Point +; + +28 ° 33.584 ' S +, +22 ° 29.568 ' E + +; + +1225 m +a. s. l. + +; + +25 Mar. 2023 + +; +C. Haddad +& +R. Booysen +leg; grass tussocks on sand dunes; + +NMBA +18636 + + +• + +1 ♀ +; +Witsand Nature Reserve +, +Rest Camp +; + +28 ° 33.773 ' S +, +22 ° 29.095 ' E + +; + +1195 m +a. s. l. + +; + +25 Mar. 2023 + +; +C. Haddad +& +R. Booysen +leg.; grass tussocks, woodland; + +NMBA +18661 + + +• + +1 ♀ +; same collection data as for preceding; MACN + +. + + + + +Other material. + + + +South Africa +• +1 ♂ +2 ♀ +; +Northern Cape Province +; +Witsand Nature Reserve +, +Rest Camp +; + +28 ° 33.773 ' S +, +22 ° 29.095 ' E + +; + +1195 m +a. s. l. + +; + +25 Mar. 2023 + +; +C. Haddad +& +R. Booysen +leg.; grass tussocks, woodland; S. E. M. preparations + +. + + + + +Diagnosis. + +As for the genus diagnosis. + + + +Description. + + +Male ( +holotype +, Witsand, + +NMBA + +18616): Measurements: +CL +1.53, +CW +1.20, +AL +1.72, +AW +0.96, +TL +3.06, +FL +0.10, +SL +1.36, +SW +1.05, +AME +- +AME +0.03, +AME +- +ALE +0.02, +ALE +- +ALE +0.23, +PME +- +PME +0.08, +PME +- +PLE +0.05, +PLE +- +PLE +0.38, +MOQ +: +AW +0.24, +PW +0.26, L 0.25. Length of leg segments: I 1.30 + 0.62 + 1.13 + 0.90 + 0.45 = 4.40; II 1.07 + 0.51 + 0.88 + 0.77 + 0.42 = 3.65; III 0.70 + 0.41 + 0.50 + 0.63 + 0.33 = 2.57; IV 1.15 + 0.52 + 1.02 + 1.05 + 0.40 = 4.14. Carapace bright yellow-orange, with black mottled pentagonal marking in front of fovea (Fig. +21 A +); fovea short and broad, distinct, at ⅔ +CL +. For eye arrangement see genus description. Chelicerae pale orange-brown, anterior and lateral surfaces covered with short, fine setae with small tuberculate bases; promargin with two slightly separated teeth, proximal tooth largest; retromargin with two larger subequal teeth placed closed together; endites and labium yellow-brown. Sternum creamy-yellow, yellow-brown at borders; surface smooth, covered with short, fine setae; precoxal triangles present, intercoxal sclerites only between coxae I and II and II and III. Abdomen oval, broadest at ⅖ its length; creamy-grey dorsally, with large scutum covering most of dorsum (Fig. +21 A +); two pairs of distinct sigilla present, at ¼ and ½ +AL +; sides and venter mottled creamy-grey (Fig. +21 B, C +), with two paired lines of indistinct tiny sclerites from epigastric furrow to spinnerets. Legs creamy-yellow, tibiae I with black mottling intensifying distally, metatarsi I black, tarsi I yellow-brown, with faint black mottling; leg II slightly darker than legs III and IV; numerous ventral cusps present on metatarsi and tarsi I and II. Palp (Figs +21 K – N +, +26 A, B +, +27 B, C +) brown; tegulum broadly V-shaped, narrower proximally and broader distally; embolus very long, originating retrolaterally, forming a broad membranous ribbon in its basal section, curving once around tegulum transversely on palpal axis, gradually narrowing to a C-shaped membranous midsection, rapidly narrowing to long, slender, looping whip-like distal section with the tip directed ventrally; ventral +RTA +thumb-like, with rounded tip; dorsal +RTA +long, slender, slightly curved distally, closely associated with retrobasal cymbial groove (Figs +26 A +, +27 C +). + + +Female ( +paratype +, Witsand, + +NMBA + +18661): Measurements: +CL +1.27, +CW +1.06, +AL +1.93, +AW +1.15, +TL +3.20, +FL +0.11, +SL +1.40, +SW +1.05, +AME +- +AME +0.03, +AME +- +ALE +0.02, +ALE +- +ALE +0.21, +PME +- +PME +0.08, +PME +- +PLE +0.05, +PLE +- +PLE +0.37, +MOQ +: +AW +0.22, +PW +0.27, L 0.23. Length of leg segments: I 1.12 + 0.57 + 0.92 + 0.70 + 0.40 = 3.71; II 0.95 + 0.50 + 0.70 + 0.61 + 0.36 = 3.12; III 0.62 + 0.38 + 0.48 + 0.55 + 0.29 = 2.32; IV 1.10 + 0.51 + 0.97 + 0.98 + 0.36 = 3.92. Carapace yellow, with faint black mottled marking in front of fovea (Fig. +21 F +); fovea short and broad, distinct, at ⅔ +CL +. For eye arrangement see genus description. Chelicerae yellow-brown, anterior and lateral surfaces covered with short, fine setae with small tuberculate bases; dentition as in male; endites and labium pale creamy-yellow. Sternum cream, yellow-brown at borders; surface smooth, covered with short, fine setae; precoxal triangles present, intercoxal sclerites only between coxae I and II. Abdomen oval, broadest at ⅖ its length; mottled creamy-grey dorsally, without scutum, with traces of faint medial grey line (Fig. +21 F +); two pairs of indistinct sigilla present, at ¼ and slightly more than ½ +AL +; sides and venter mottled creamy-grey (Fig. +21 G, H +), with two paired lines of indistinct tiny sclerites from epigastric furrow to spinnerets. Legs generally creamy-yellow, tibiae and metatarsi I with dense black mottling, tarsi I yellow-brown, with faint black mottling. Epigyne (Figs +26 E +, +27 D, E +, +28 +) very weakly sclerotized, with large keyhole-shaped atrium; copulatory openings large, situated at anterior of atrium, entering initially broad membranous copulatory ducts, each provided with two accessory glands; copulatory ducts curving laterally in progressively narrowing semicircle, folding back along their interior margin, forming narrow duct running along margin of atrium before entering transverse bilobed +ST II +near midpoint of epigyne, with short duct connecting them to posterior transversely ovoid +ST I +, with fertilization ducts originating posteromesally. + + + + +Etymology. + +This species name is the Latin word meaning “ belonging to grass ”, referring to the microhabitat that the species was collected from. + + + +Distribution. + + +Only known from the +type +locality (Fig. +12 +). + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/42/1B/E8/421BE868546F555C9F720E9966C1A9B8.xml b/data/42/1B/E8/421BE868546F555C9F720E9966C1A9B8.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..f59c8592195 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/42/1B/E8/421BE868546F555C9F720E9966C1A9B8.xml @@ -0,0 +1,601 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Rukuluk + +gen. nov. + + + + + +Type +species. + + + + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. + + + + +Diagnosis. + + +Members of + +Rukuluk + +gen. nov. +share with + +Namaquella + +gen. nov. +and + +Poachelas + +the pale body with adaptations to grass-living but can be distinguished from the former by the very different genitalic morphology and more elongate body, and from the latter by the lack of paired spines ventrally on the anterior legs. Males of + +Rukuluk + +gen. nov. +can be recognized from all other trachelid genera by the distinctive palpal morphology, particularly the presence of retrolateral grooves in the cymbium that correspond to the +RTA +and distal section of the embolus (Figs +26 A +, +27 C +) and the long membranous basal section of the embolus, which gradually narrows to a long, whip-like tip (Figs +21 K – N +, +26 A, B +); the latter trait is most similar to the embolus morphology of + +Poachelas + +( +Haddad and Lyle 2008 +: figs 91, 97). Females are distinguished by the elongate subrectangular atrium that extends almost the entire length of the epigynal plate (Figs +26 E +, +27 D +), with long looping membranous copulatory ducts and small posterolateral spermathecal structures internally (Figs +27 E +, +28 D +). + + + + +Description. + + +Small spiders, +3.06–3.20 mm +in length; carapace bright creamy-yellow to yellow-brown; carapace oval, broadest at posterior of coxae II, gradually narrowed towards eye region (Fig. +21 A, F +); fovea distinct, a short narrow slit (Fig. +22 A +); posterior margin very slightly concave, almost straight (Fig. +22 A +); carapace weakly convex in lateral profile, slightly elevated from clypeus to approximately ½ carapace length, with steeper slope in posterior quarter (Fig. +21 B, G +); carapace surface finely wrinkled, densely covered in short fine curved setae with small tuberculate bases (Fig. +22 A – C +). All eyes surrounded by black rings (Fig. +21 A, F +); +AER +strongly procurved in anterior view (Fig. +22 B +), slightly recurved in dorsal view (Fig. +22 C +); clypeus height slightly larger than ⅘ +AME +diameter at +AME +in males, ⅔ +AME +diameter at +AME +in female, ½ +ALE +diameter at +ALE +in males, slightly less than ⅖ +ALE +diameter at +ALE +in females; +AME +slightly larger than +ALE +; +AME +separated by distance approximately ⅓ their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by narrow sliver, almost touching; +PER +slightly recurved, +PME +and +PLE +equal in diameter in males, +PME +very slightly larger than +PLE +in females; +PME +separated by distance equal to ⅚ their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance approximately ½ +PME +diameter. Chilum distinct, split; cheliceral promargin and retromargin each with two teeth (Fig. +22 D, E +); fang with distinct serrula; endites with lateral margins converging slightly distally, mesal margins with longitudinal groove and dense maxillar hair tuft (Fig. +22 F +), distal margins with distinct serrula comprising sharp straight denticles (Fig. +22 G +); labium trapezoidal, slightly longer than wide, narrower distally than basally (Fig. +22 F +). Pleural bars sclerotised, isolated; sternum oval, with straight anterior margin (Fig. +22 H +), two pairs of slit sensilla present between first two coxal pairs (Fig. +22 I +); longer than broad, broadest at posterior of coxa II, surface smooth centrally, densely covered in long, slightly curved setae with small tuberculate bases (Fig. +22 H, I +); precoxal triangles present, intercoxal sclerites present between coxae I and II and II and III only. Leg formula +1423 in +males, +4123 in +females, densely covered in short fine setae with tuberculate bases (Figs +21 D, E, I, J +, +23 A – D, I, J +); legs I swollen, more so in males (Fig. +21 A +) than females (Fig. +21 F +), femora with slightly convex dorsal surface, ventral surface almost straight (Fig. +21 D, I +); all femora strongly constricted proximally; patellar indentation on retrolateral side narrow, with lyriform organ at proximal end (Fig. +23 B, C +); anterior legs of both sexes with dense ventral scopulae in paired strips separated by strip with sparse setae, denser in females (Fig. +23 A, D – J +) than males (Fig. +24 A – F +); tibiae (at least) with ovoid pore-containing sensilla laterally (Fig. +24 G, H +); males with ventral cusps on metatarsi and tarsi I and II (Figs +24 C, E +, +25 A, B +, +27 A +), absent on tibiae and in females; metatarsi with strongly developed metatarsal stopper (Figs +23 H, I +, +24 F, I +), metatarsi III and IV with weak distal preening brush and distinct comb (Figs +21 E, J +, +24 l +); tarsi with numerous long and short dorsal trichobothria and chemosensory setae (Fig. +23 I, J +); trichobothria with slightly lowered distal plate, distal margin of hood overlapping plate, hood with four curved ridges, roughly concentric (Fig. +25 D, E +); tarsal organ at approximately ⅘ tarsus length on anterior tarsi (Fig. +23 J +), ovoid, only very slightly elevated from integument, surface finely wrinkled, opening oval and distally placed (Fig. +25 F, G +), possibly absent on tarsus IV (Fig. +25 C +); tarsal claws short, with nine teeth, of which the basal two are broad and spatulate and the distal seven slender and elongate (Fig. +23 L +), with dense tenant setae forming claw tufts in between (Fig. +23 I – L +). Abdomen oval, clearly larger in females (Fig. +21 F +) than males (Fig. +21 A +), with dorsal scutum in males only (Fig. +25 H +); dorsum covered in fine setae, two pairs of distinct sigilla in both sexes; venter without large sclerites or markings (Fig. +21 C, H +), covered in fine setae (Fig. +25 I +). Spinnerets short, conical, in compact group, only studied in detail in females: ALS with two +MAmp +and 10 +Pi +(Fig. +25 J +); PMS partly obscured, with only two +mAmp +, one +Cy +and three +Ac +distinguished (Fig. +25 K +); PLS partly obscured, with two +Cy +and nine +Ac +distinguished (Fig. +25 L +). Male palpal femora and patellae without apophyses (Fig. +26 A +), patella with retrolateral lyriform organ (Fig. +26 D +); palpal tibiae with retrolateral trichobothrium (Fig. +26 A, C +), thumb-like +vRTA +and long slender +dRTA +that corresponds with retrobasal groove on cymbium (Fig. +26 A +); tegulum V-shaped, narrower proximally and broader distally; embolus very long, originating retrolaterally, with membranous looping base and midsection, narrowing to long slender whip-like tip (Figs +26 B +, +27 B, C +), part of its length corresponding to retrodistal cymbial groove (Fig. +26 A +). Female epigyne very weakly sclerotized, with large subrectangular keyhole-shaped atrium, with median split visible under S. E. M. (Fig. +26 E +) but not light microscopy (Fig. +27 D +), weakly distinguishable under compound microscopy (Fig. +28 +); copulatory openings situated at anterior of atrium; copulatory ducts membranous, entirely translucent, their path only visible after staining, curving anteriorly and laterally, before bending back along their interior margin before looping towards posterior, running along margin of atrium before entering lateral +ST II +near midpoint of epigyne, with short duct connecting them to posterior +ST I +. + + + + + + +Digital microscope photographs of somatic morphology of + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A – E, K – N +) and female ( +F – J, O +). +A, F +habitus, dorsal view +B, G +same, lateral view +C, H +same, ventral view +D, I +leg I, prolateral view +E, J +metatarsus and tarsus IV +K – N +left male palp in prolateral ( +K +), ventral ( +L +), retrolateral ( +M +) and dorsal ( +N +) views; +O +epigyne, ventral view. Scale bars: 1.0 mm ( +A – C, F – H +); 0.5 mm ( +D, E, I, J +); 0.25 mm ( +K – O +). + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. +, female ( +A, C, D, F – I +) and male ( +B, E +). +A +carapace, dorsal view +B +eye region, anterior view +C +same, dorsal view +D +chelicerae, anterior view +E +distal end of chelicerae, ventral view +F +mouthparts, ventral view +G +detail of serrula +H +sternum, arrow indicating slit sensilla +I +same, enlarged. + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. +, female +A +leg I, prolateral view +B +patellar indentation and lyriform organ, leg I +C +same, detail of lyriform organ +D +tibia I, prolateral view +E +same, detail of scopulate setae +F +metatarsus I, prolateral view +G +same, detail of scopulate setae +H +same, detail of metatarsal stopper +I +tarsus I, prolateral view +J +same, retrodistal view, black arrow indicating position of tarsal organ +K +same, enlargement of tarsal claws +L +same, tarsal claws in distal view. + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A – H +) and female ( +I +). +A +tibia I, ventral view +B +same, prolateral view +C +metatarsus I, ventral view +D +same, prolateral view, arrow indicating distal slit sensillium +E +tarsus I, ventral view +F +same, prolateral view +G +tibia II, lateral view, black arrows indicating ovoid sensory pores ( +H +) +I +metatarsus IV, stopper and distal comb / brush. + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A, B, G, H +) and female ( +C – F, I – L +). +A, B +metatarsi I ( +A +) and II ( +B +), ventral cusps, arrows indicating triad of pores at base of cusp on proximal side +C +distal half of tarsus IV, seemingly lacking a tarsal organ +D +tarsus I, lateral trichobothrium base +E +tarsus IV, dorsal trichobothrium +F, G +tarsus I, tarsal organ +H +abdominal dorsum +I +ventral abdominal setae +J +anterior lateral spinneret +K +posterior median spinneret +L +posterior lateral spinneret. Abbreviations: +Ac +: aciniform gland spigot (s); +Cy +: cylindrical gland spigot (s); +mAmp +: minor ampullate gland spigot (s); +MAmp +: major ampullate gland spigot; +Pi +: piriform gland spigot (s). + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A – D +) and female ( +E +). +A +right palp, retrolateral view +B +left palp, ventral view +C +detail of dorsal tibial trichobothrium +D +palpal patella, enlargement of retrolateral lyriform organ +E +epigyne, ventral view. Abbreviations: LO – lyriform organ; RB – retrobasal cymbial groove; RD – retrodistal cymbial groove; Tr – trichobothrium. + + + + + + + + +Rukuluk gramineus + +male ( +A – C +) and female ( +D, E +). +A +schematic representation of cusp arrangement on legs I and II +B +palp, ventral view +C +same, retrolateral view +D +epigyne, ventral view +E +same, dorsal view +F +diagrammatic course of the insemination ducts. Abbreviations: AG – accessory glands; AT – atrium; Cd – copulatory duct; CO – copulatory opening; +dRTA +– dorsal retrolateral tibial apophysis; EM – embolus; FD – fertilization duct; SD – sperm duct; +ST I +– primary spermatheca; +ST II +– secondary spermatheca; +vRTA +– ventral retrolateral tibial apophysis. Scale bars: 0.25 mm. + + + + + + + + +Rukuluk gramineus + +female paratypes, epigynes in ventral ( +A, B +) and dorsal ( +C, D +) views examined under compound microscope +A +intact uncleared epigyne +B +cleared epigyne +C, D +cleared epigyne stained with crystal blue, slightly diluted in D. Scale bars: 0.2 mm. + + + + + +Etymology. + +The name is an arbitrary combination of letters. Gender feminine. + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/4A/3F/92/4A3F929A987F5C9F9DF29B3DF3204263.xml b/data/4A/3F/92/4A3F929A987F5C9F9DF29B3DF3204263.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..7ec936a4da2 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/4A/3F/92/4A3F929A987F5C9F9DF29B3DF3204263.xml @@ -0,0 +1,389 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Foordana kasouga + +sp. nov. + + + + +Figs 9 C, F +, +11 + + + + +Material examined. + + + + + +Holotype + +. + +South Africa +• +♂ +; +Eastern Cape Province +; +Kasouga +, + +16 km +WSW of Port Alfred + +; + +33 ° 39 ' S +, +25 ° 45 ' E + +; + +Jan. 1940 + +; +J. Omer-Cooper +leg.; + +NMSA +5346 + +. + + + + + + +Paratype + +. + +1 ♂ +; +South Africa + +• + +KwaZulu-Natal Province +; + +75 km +WSW of Estcourt + +, +Cathedral Peak Forest Station +, +Meteorology Station +, +Little Berg +; + +28 ° 59 ' S +, +29 ° 11 ' E + +; + +1860 m +a. s. l. + +; + +13–31 Dec. 1979 + +; +S. & J. Peck +leg.; +pan trap +; + +AMNH + +ICZ 00357882 + +. + + + + +Other material. + + + +South Africa +• +8 ♂ +1 ♀ +; +KwaZulu-Natal Province +; + +75 km +WSW of Estcourt + +, +Cathedral Peak Forest Station +, +Meteorology Station +, +Little Berg +; + +28 ° 59 ' S +, +29 ° 11 ' E + +; + +1860 m +a. s. l. + +; + +21–31 Dec. 1979 + +; +S. & J. Peck +leg.; veld, +Malaise trap +; + +AMNH + +ICZ 00357881 + +. + + + + +Diagnosis. + + +The male of this species can be recognised by the distinctive loop of the embolus and the far longer +dRTA +, which extends to more than a quarter of the tegulum length. In comparison, the emboli of + +F. distincta + +sp. nov. +and + +F. flavipoda + +sp. nov. +are only slightly curved, and the +dRTA +is clearly larger than the +vRTA +in lateral view (compare Figs +8 C +, +9 D – F +, +10 B +, +11 C +). Female unknown. + + + + +Description. + + +Male ( +holotype +, Kasouga, + +NMSA + +5346): Measurements: +CL +2.64, +CW +2.11, +AL +2.92, +AW +2.00, +TL +~ 5.56, +FL +0.27, +SL +1.40, +SW +1.10, +AME +- +AME +0.11, +AME +- +ALE +0.05, +ALE +- +ALE +0.45, +PME +- +PME +0.13, +PME +- +PLE +0.17, +PLE +- +PLE +0.79 +MOQ +: +AW +0.40, +PW +0.44, L 0.41. Length of leg segments: I 2.20 + 1.03 + 1.80 + 1.28 + 0.80 = 7.11; II 1.85 + 1.00 + 1.52 + 1.22 + 0.78 = 6.37; III 1.40 + 0.72 + 0.92 + 1.10 + 0.53 = 4.67; IV 1.98 + 0.87 + 1.55 + 1.62 + 0.62 = 6.64. Carapace orange-brown, with faint traces of striae radiating from fovea (Fig. +9 C +); surface finely wrinkled; fovea short, distinct, at ⅔ +CL +. +AER +slightly procurved, almost straight; clypeus height equal to ⅘ +AME +diameter; +AME +and +ALE +subequal in size; +AME +separated by distance equal to ⅔ their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by distance slightly larger than ¼ their diameter; +PER +recurved, +PLE +slightly larger than +PME +; +PME +separated by distance very slightly less than their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance almost equal to +PLE +diameter. Chelicerae orange-brown, anterior surface with long, fine setae, particularly along mesal surface; dentition not examined; endites and labium yellow-brown. Sternum yellow-brown, with orange-brown borders; surface with finely granulate texture, covered with scattered short, fine setae. Abdomen oval, pale grey, with faint dorsal scutum covering entire dorsum; two pairs of faint grey sigilla, at ¼ and ½ +AL +. Legs all creamy-yellow, faded in alcohol, anterior pair slightly darker. Palp (Figs +9 F +, +11 B, C +) yellow, tegulum cream with red-brown sperm duct; embolus originating proximally on the retrolateral side, curving clockwise around almost circular tegulum, with distal section making large S-shaped loop, with tip directed distally; +vRTA +short, finger-like, with tip bent slightly dorsally; +dRTA +long, triangular in ventral view, extending to approximately ¼ tegulum length. + + + + +Etymology. + + +The species is named after the +type +locality; noun in apposition. + + + + +Distribution. + + +Only known from single localities in the +Eastern Cape +and +KwaZulu-Natal +provinces, +South Africa +(Fig. +12 +). + + + + +Remark. + + +At the proof stage I received a loan of +Trachelidae +from the + +AMNH + +including two vials containing + +F. kasouga + +sp. nov +.. The single male is designated as a +paratype +, but unfortunately the second vial must have dried out at some stage and the material is not in an ideal condition to be included as +paratypes +. As this includes the only known female of the species, whose abdomen is badly damaged, description of this sex must wait until alternate material has been sampled. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/4B/60/7F/4B607F4CB0E153D394A5A45B8155BFE1.xml b/data/4B/60/7F/4B607F4CB0E153D394A5A45B8155BFE1.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..dc7909c7205 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/4B/60/7F/4B607F4CB0E153D394A5A45B8155BFE1.xml @@ -0,0 +1,316 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Mushimane tswibilinki + +sp. nov. + + + + +Figs 13 +, +14 +, +15 + + + + +Material examined. + + + + + +Holotype + +. + +South Africa +• +♂ +; +KwaZulu-Natal Province +; +Ndumo Game Reserve +, +Staff +housing; + +26 ° 54.660 ' S +, +32 ° 17.930 ' E + +; + +130 m +a. s. l. + +; + +5 Dec. 2018 + +; +C. Haddad +, +R. Booysen +& +J. Neethling +leg.; canopy fogging, + +Commiphora neglecta + +; + +NCA +2019 + +/ 757. + + + + + +Paratype + +. + +1 ♀ +; together with +holotype +. + + + + +Other material. + + +1 ♀ +; Same data as +types +; S. E. M. preparations, epigyne cleared and retained preserved with +types +. + + + + +Diagnosis. + +As for the genus diagnosis. + + + +Description. + + +Male ( +holotype +, Ndumo, + +NCA + +2019 / 757): Measurements: +CL +0.97, +CW +0.75, +AL +0.98, +AW +0.59, +TL +1.79, +SL +0.56, +SW +0.41, +AME +- +AME +0.03, +AME +- +ALE +0.01, +ALE +- +ALE +0.16, +PME +- +PME +0.06, +PME +- +PLE +0.05, +PLE +- +PLE +0.27, +MOQ +: +AW +0.14, +PW +0.18, L 0.16. Length of leg segments: I 0.67 + 0.35 + 0.48 + 0.47 + 0.27 = 2.24; II 0.54 + 0.30 + 0.39 + 0.40 + 0.25 = 1.88; III 0.40 + 0.24 + 0.21 + 0.29 + 0.16 = 1.30; IV 0.60 + 0.27 + 0.46 + 0.40 + 0.18 = 1.91. Carapace creamy-yellow, slightly darker in eye region (Fig. +13 A +). For eye arrangement see genus description. Chelicerae yellow-brown, anterior surface coarsely wrinkled, with strongly tuberculate setae proximally on anterior surface and laterally, each with a long, fine seta; dentition not examined; endites and labium cream. Sternum creamy-yellow, with yellow-brown margins; surface smooth, with scattered fine long curved setae, denser near margins. Abdomen elongate-oval, caudal section slightly curved ventrally, broadest just behind ½ its length; creamy-grey dorsally, laterally and ventrally (Fig. +13 A – C +); without dorsal scutum; two pairs of distinct sigilla present, at ⅓ and ⅗ abdomen length. Legs cream, metatarsi I and II and all tarsi yellow-brown, darker on anterior legs. Palp (Fig. +15 A, B +) yellow-brown; tegulum oval, broadest medially, with subtegulum protruding prolaterally; sperm duct broad proximally in tegulum, initially directed distally, forming distinctive looping coil, with distal section narrowed, running above median section; embolus originating prolaterally and distally, short, stout and straight, directed approximately 45 ° to longitudinal axis of palp; +RTA +simple, short and distally rounded in ventral view, in retrolateral view with dorsal surface triangular, with sharp tip directed dorsally. + + +Female ( +paratype +, Ndumo, + +NCA + +2019 / 757): Measurements: +CL +0.83, +CW +0.63, +AL +1.27, +AW +0.75, +TL +1.84, +SL +0.52, +SW +0.37, +AME +- +AME +0.02, +AME +- +ALE +<0.01, +ALE +- +ALE +0.14, +PME +- +PME +0.05, +PME +- +PLE +0.05, +PLE +- +PLE +0.25, +MOQ +: +AW +0.13, +PW +0.17, L 0.16. Length of leg segments: I 0.54 + 0.30 + 0.33 + 0.34 + 0.25 = 1.76; II 0.46 + 0.26 + 0.31 + 0.30 + 0.24 = 1.57; III 0.38 + 0.21 + 0.25 + 0.27 + 0.16 = 1.27; IV 0.54 + 0.25 + 0.44 + 0.38 + 0.17 = 1.78. Carapace yellow-brown (Fig. +13 F +); surface finely wrinkled, glossy, with scattered short straight setae throughout, sparse on posterior slope; fovea reduced to broad shallow depression at ¾ +CL +. For eye arrangement see genus description. Chelicerae deep yellow-brown, anterior surface finely wrinkled, clearly less rugose than male, with tuberculate setae on anterior and lateral surfaces; dentition not examined; endites creamy and labium yellow-brown, paler proximally. Sternum creamy-yellow, with yellow-brown margins; surface smooth, with fine long curved setae throughout. Abdomen elongate oval, caudal section strongly curved ventrally, broadest at midpoint; creamy-grey dorsally and laterally, with grey mottling ventrally (Fig. +13 F – H +), without dorsal scutum; two pairs of indistinct sigilla present, at ¼ and ½ +AL +. All femora cream, patellae to tarsi I and metatarsi and tarsi II – IV yellow-brown, remaining segments cream. Epigyne (Fig. +15 C, D +) weakly sclerotized; copulatory openings small, positioned in lateral corners of atrium; copulatory ducts short, initially curving sharply to enter weakly sclerotized sausage-shaped oblique +ST II +anteriorly; connecting ducts converging towards posterior, entering globose +ST I +, with extension leading to small fertilization ducts. + + + + +Etymology. + + +This species name is a derogatory slang term in the indigenous African Sesotho, mocking a man with a small penis, in reference to the short embolus of the +type +species. + + + + +Distribution. + + +Only known from the +type +locality in northeastern +KwaZulu-Natal +, +South Africa +(Fig. +12 +). + + + + +Remarks. + + +Due to the limited number of specimens available, +one female +was sacrificed for scanning electron microscopy; its epigyne was cleared prior to preparation of the material for S. E. M., used for the illustrations, and has been retained in the same vials as the types. In addition, this female had an even more strongly ventrally curved abdomen than the +paratype +. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/4C/5C/F4/4C5CF4B7DD445FBAAE7681D00171B589.xml b/data/4C/5C/F4/4C5CF4B7DD445FBAAE7681D00171B589.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..a0ffe074d78 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/4C/5C/F4/4C5CF4B7DD445FBAAE7681D00171B589.xml @@ -0,0 +1,348 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Mushimane + +gen. nov. + + + + + +Type +species. + + + + +Mushimane tswibilinki + +sp. nov. + + + + +Diagnosis. + + +This genus includes possibly the smallest known trachelids, with adults only ~ +1.8 mm +in total length. Both sexes superficially resemble + + +Falcaranea + + +Haddad & Lyle, 2024 +but are smaller, lighter in colour and have very different genitalic morphology. Males can be distinguished by from all other trachelids by the distinctive spiralling loop in the distal section of the sperm duct of the palp, close to the base of the embolus, which is short and spike-like (Fig. +15 A +), whereas long, curved and sword-like in + + +Falcaranea + + +( +Haddad and Lyle 2024 +: figs 143, 147). Females can be easily recognized by the broad diamond-shaped epigynal atrium, flanked by sclerotized ridges along its posterior margin (Fig. +15 C +). + + + + +Description. + + +Small spiders, +1.79–1.84 mm +in length; carapace creamy-yellow, yellow-brown in eye region (Fig. +13 A, B, F, G +); carapace oval, broadest near middle of coxae II, gradually narrowed towards eye region, posterior margin straight (Fig. +13 A, F +); fovea absent, reduced to broad shallow depression at ¾ carapace length (Fig. +14 A +); carapace convex in lateral profile, slightly elevated from clypeus, highest just anterior to midpoint, with steeper slope in posterior quarter (Fig. +13 B, G +); carapace surface smooth, with sparse short fine curved setae with small tuberculate bases (Fig. +14 A, B +). All eyes surrounded by black rings (Fig. +13 A, F +); +AER +slightly procurved in males, strongly procurved in females; clypeus height slightly larger than ½ +AME +diameter at +AME +, slightly less than ½ +ALE +diameter at +ALE +in males and slightly less than ⅓ +ALE +diameter in females; +ALE +slightly larger than +AME +in males, clearly larger in females; +AME +separated by distance equal to slightly less than ½ their diameter in males, equal to ⅓ their diameter in females; +AME +separated from +ALE +by narrow sliver, almost touching; +PER +slightly recurved, +PLE +slightly larger than +PME +in males, 1 ⅓ +PME +diameter in females; +PME +separated by distance equal to slightly less than their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance equal to ⅔ +PLE +diameter. Chilum and cheliceral dentition not observed; endites with parallel lateral margins, mesal margins with yellow-brown longitudinal groove, distal margins with distinct serrula and dense maxillar hair tuft on mesal margins; labium hexagonal, slightly longer than wide, with broad base and rounded distal margin. Pleural bars sclerotised, isolated; sternum elongate shield-shaped, longer than broad, broadest between coxae II and III (Fig. +13 C, H +), surface smooth centrally, sparsely covered in short straight setae; precoxal triangles present, intercoxal sclerites only observed between coxae I and II. Leg formula +1423 in +both sexes, sparsely covered in long fine setae; leg I clearly longer and more robust in males (Fig. +13 A +), only slightly more so in females (Fig. +13 F +); ventral cusps absent on anterior legs and scopulate setae and spines absent on all legs in both sexes; femora I very slightly swollen in both sexes, with slightly convex dorsal surface, ventral surface straight (Fig. +13 D, I +); patellar indentation on retrolateral side narrow; metatarsi III and IV with ventral preening comb at distal end (Fig. +13 E, J +); tarsi with sparse tactile hairs, one basal and two medial pairs of trichobothria and numerous chemosensory setae (Fig. +14 C +); trichobothria with slightly lowered distal plate, distal margin of hood overlapping plate, hood with four curved ridges, roughly concentric (Fig. +14 E +); tarsal organ distal, at approximately ⅞ tarsus length (Fig. +14 C, D +), only very slightly elevated from integument, surface finely wrinkled, opening oval and distally placed (Fig. +14 F +); paired tarsal claws long, stout, with at least eight long, broad teeth and numerous tenant setae forming claw tufts in between (Fig. +14 D +). Abdomen oval, cream, with two pairs of indistinct sigilla, with dorsal scutum in neither sex (Fig. +13 A, F +); dorsum with very sparse fine setae; venter without sclerites or markings, sparsely covered in fine setae (Fig. +13 C, H +); abdomen of both sexes with tip directed ventrally (Fig. +13 B, G +), which is especially accentuated in the female studied by S. E. M .. Spinnerets short, conical, in compact group (Fig. +13 C, H +), spigot detail only studied in female + +M. tswibilinki + +sp. nov. +: ALS with one +MAmp +, one +Nu +and six +Pi +(Fig. +14 G +); PMS with single +mAmp +, two +Cy +and six +Ac +(Fig. +14 H +); PLS with two +Cy +and eight +Ac +(Fig. +14 I +). Male palpal femur and patella without apophyses; palpal tibia with simple distal retrolateral apophysis (Fig. +15 A +); tegulum oval in ventral view, with basal section of cymbium covering tegulum retrolaterally (Fig. +15 A, B +), with short spike-like embolus originating prolaterally at distal end of tegulum (Fig. +15 A +); sperm duct unique among +Trachelidae +, forming distinct spiralling loop internally in distal half of tegulum near base of embolus (Fig. +15 A +). Female epigyne weakly sclerotised, occupying half of epigastric plate length (Fig. +13 H +), with broad diamond-shaped atrium (Fig. +15 C +); copulatory openings in lateral corners of atrium, with short copulatory ducts leading to anterolateral +ST II +; connecting ducts initially directed laterally, converging to globose posterolateral +ST I +, with fertilization ducts on their mesal margin (Fig. +15 D +). + + + + + + +Digital microscope photographs of somatic morphology of + +Mushimane tswibilinki + +sp. nov. +male ( +A – E +) and female ( +F – J +). +A, F +habitus, dorsal view +B, G +same, lateral view +C, H +same, ventral view +D, I +leg I, prolateral view +E, J +metatarsus and tarsus IV. Scale bars: 1.0 mm ( +A – C, F – H +); 0.5 mm ( +D, E, I, J +). + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Mushimane tswibilinki + +sp. nov. +female +A +carapace, dorsolateral view +B +eye region, anterodorsal view +C +tarsus I, dorsolateral view, arrow indicating position of tarsal organ +D +same, enlargement of claws, dorsolateral view, arrow indicating tarsal organ +E +same, paired dorsal trichobothria +F +same, enlargement of tarsal organ +G +anterior lateral spinneret +H +posterior median spinnerets +I +posterior lateral spinneret. Abbreviations: +Ac +: aciniform gland spigot (s); +Cy +: cylindrical gland spigot (s); +mAmp +: minor ampullate gland spigot; +MAmp +: major ampullate gland spigot; n: nubbin; +Pi +: piriform gland spigot (s). + + + + + + + + +Mushimane tswibilinki + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A, B +) and female ( +C, D +). +A +palp, ventral view +B +same, retrolateral view +C +epigyne, ventral view +D +same, dorsal view. Abbreviations: CD – connecting duct; Cd – copulatory duct; CO – copulatory opening; EM – embolus; FD – fertilization duct; +RTA +– retrolateral tibial apophysis; SD – sperm duct; +ST I +– primary spermatheca; +ST II +– secondary spermatheca. Scale bars: 0.1 mm. + + + + + +Etymology. + + +The name is a noun in the indigenous African Sesotho language for “ boy ” or “ little man ”, referring to the diminutive size of the +type +species. Gender masculine. + + + + +Composition. + +Monotypic. + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/7F/85/D5/7F85D5E9921052EC9E5B8FE38A5C2374.xml b/data/7F/85/D5/7F85D5E9921052EC9E5B8FE38A5C2374.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..faf8eac166a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/7F/85/D5/7F85D5E9921052EC9E5B8FE38A5C2374.xml @@ -0,0 +1,767 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. + + + + +Figs 1 A – C +, +2 +, +3 +, +4 +, +5 +, +6 +, +7 +, +8 +, +9 D, G, H + + + + +Material examined. + + + + + +Holotype + +. + +South Africa +• +♂ +; +Free State Province +; +Clocolan +, +Amahelo-ho-Spitskop +; + +28 ° 48.561 ' S +, +27 ° 39.255 ' E + +; + +17 Mar. 2010 + +; +C. Haddad +leg.; base of grass tussocks; + +NCA +2010 + +/ 349. + + + + + + +Paratypes + +. + +South Africa + +• +4 ♀ +; together with +holotype +• + +Eastern Cape Province +; +1 ♀ +; +Queenstown +/ +Komani district +, +Farm Arphen +; + +31 ° 51.546 ' S +, +26 ° 34.112 ' E + +; + +1160 m +a. s. l. + +; + +4 Apr. 2021 + +; +C. Haddad +leg.; hand collecting; + +NCA +2021 + +/ 1044 + +• + +1 ♂ +2 ♀ +; +Amatola Mountains +, +Hogsback +, +Amatole Forestry Company +; + +32 ° 33.727 ' S +, +26 ° 54.924 ' E + +; + +1460 m +a. s. l. + +; + +23 Mar. 2013 + +; +C. Haddad +leg.; active search, grass tussocks and fynbos in grassland; + +NCA +2014 + +/ 321 + +• + +Free State Province +: +1 ♂ +2 ♀ +; +Clocolan +, +Amahelo-ho-Spitskop +; + +28 ° 48 ' S +, +27 ° 39 ' E + +; + +9 Mar. 2007 + +; +C. Haddad +leg.; + +Rhus + +litter; + +NCA +2007 + +/ 1334 + +• + +2 ♀ +; same collection data as for preceding; + +8 Mar. 2007 + +; dense grass; + +NCA +2007 + +/ 1336 + +• + +1 ♀ +; same collection data as for preceding; grassy litter near dam; + +NCA +2008 + +/ 2897 + +• + +1 ♀ +; same collection data as for preceding; + +Eucalyptus + +litter; + +NCA +2007 + +/ 1335 + +• + +1 ♀ +; +Clocolan +, +Amahelo-ho-Spitskop +; + +28 ° 48.561 ' S +, +27 ° 39.255 ' E + +; 2010; +A. Jones +leg.; in garden and around house; + +NCA +2010 + +/ 328 + +• + +3 ♀ +; +Wepener district +, +Farm Dereham +, + +29 ° 52.671 ' S +, +27 ° 04.456 ' E + +; + +1520 m +a. s. l. + +; + +31 Mar. 2024 + +; +C. Haddad +leg.; hand collecting in grassland; + +NMBA +19614 + + +• + +KwaZulu-Natal Province +; +3 ♀ +; +Pietermaritzburg +, +Town Bush +; + +29 ° 33 ' S +, +30 ° 21 ' E + +; + +15 Apr. 1976 + +; +F. Wanless +& +A. Russell-Smith +leg.; ground layer in grassland; + +BMNH + + +• + +Western Cape Province +: +1 ♀ +; +Houw Hoek +, +Houw Hoek Inn +; +- 34.2046 +, +19.1537 +; + +275 m +a. s. l. + +; + +25 Nov. 2021 + +; +C. Haddad +leg.; hand collecting in fynbos; + +NMBA +18796 + + +. + + + + +Diagnosis. + + +The male of this species shares with + +F. flavipoda + +sp. nov. +a simple curved embolus in ventral view (Figs +8 B +, +10 A +), whereas it is S-shaped with a distal loop in + +F. kasouga + +sp. nov. +(Fig. +11 B +). Furthermore, it can be recognised by the generally similar size of the dorsal and ventral retrolateral tibial apophyses in lateral view (Fig. +8 C +), whereas the ventral is far larger than the dorsal in + +F. flavipoda + +sp. nov. +(Fig. +10 B +) and the dorsal is larger than the ventral in + +F. kasouga + +sp. nov. +(Fig. +11 C +). Females can be separated from + +F. flavipoda + +sp. nov. +and an undescribed species from +Zimbabwe +by the absence of a median hood (compare Fig. +9 G – J +). + + + + + + + +Foordana flavipoda + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A, B +) and female ( +C, D +). +A +palp, ventral view +B +same, retrolateral view +C +epigyne, ventral view +D +same, dorsal view. Abbreviations: CD – connecting duct; Cd – copulatory duct; CO – copulatory opening; +dRTA +– dorsal retrolateral tibial apophysis; EM – embolus; FD – fertilization duct; SD – sperm duct; +ST I +– primary spermatheca; +ST II +– secondary spermatheca; +vRTA +– ventral retrolateral tibial apophysis. Scale bars: 0.25 mm. + + + + + + + + +Foordana kasouga + +sp. nov. +, male +A +schematic representation of cusp arrangement +B +palp, ventral view +C +same, retrolateral view. Abbreviations: +dRTA +– dorsal retrolateral tibial apophysis; EM – embolus; SD – sperm duct; +vRTA +– ventral retrolateral tibial apophysis. Scale bar: 0.25 mm. + + + + + +Description. + + +Male ( +holotype +, Amahelo-ho-Spitskop, + +NCA + +2010 / 349): Measurements: +CL +2.36, +CW +2.03, +AL +2.77, +AW +1.87, +TL +5.15, +FL +0.14, +SL +1.33, +SW +1.15, +AME +- +AME +0.07, +AME +- +ALE +0.04, +ALE +- +ALE +0.41, +PME +- +PME +0.11, +PME +- +PLE +0.19, +PLE +- +PLE +0.68, +MOQ +: +AW +0.35, +PW +0.36, L 0.40. Length of leg segments: I 2.05 + 0.95 + 1.61 + 1.22 + 0.81 = 6.64; II 1.80 + 0.88 + 1.35 + 1.12 + 0.76 = 5.91; III 1.32 + 0.63 + 0.88 + 1.07 + 0.43 = 4.33; IV 1.92 + 0.85 + 1.60 + 1.78 + 0.63 = 6.78. Carapace deep red-brown, with four pairs of mediolateral mottled markings, corresponding to palps and first three pairs of legs (Fig. +2 A +); surface finely wrinkled, appearing asetose but with very short sparse setae (Fig. +3 B +); fovea short, distinct, at ⅔ +CL +. +AER +slightly procurved, almost straight; clypeus height equal to +AME +diameter; +AME +very slightly larger than +ALE +; +AME +separated by distance equal ½ their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by distance equal to slightly less than ⅓ +AME +diameter; +PER +slightly recurved, +PLE +slightly larger than +PME +; +PME +separated by distance equal to slightly more than ⅘ their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance equal to 1 ½ +PME +diameter. Chelicerae, endites and labium dark orange-brown; anterior surface of cheliceral paturon covered with fairly dense long, fine setae mesally, sparse laterally; promargin with three slightly separated teeth, median tooth largest; retromargin with three adjacent teeth on common base, decreasing in size distally; endites slightly paler. Sternum dark orange, with faint black mottled patches laterally, border dark orange-brown; surface smooth, with scattered erect setae. Abdomen elongate-oval, creamy-grey dorsally, with narrow yellow-brown dorsal scutum, leaving narrow sliver between scutum and black lateral markings (Fig. +2 A +); dorsum with continuous black line from anterior to posterior, with pair of narrow lines in posterior half of abdomen, joined by six faint transverse chevron markings; sides black (Fig. +2 B +); venter creamy-grey, with pair of black mediolateral lines from epigastric fold to spinnerets (Fig. +2 C +). Legs I to IV dark yellow-orange, I darker than others; ventral cusps present on tibiae, metatarsi and tarsi I and II (Fig. +8 A +). Palp (Figs +7 A, B +, +8 B, C +, +9 D +) dark red-brown; tegulum oval, with embolus originating mesally, initially with broad base directed prolaterally, bending sharply before gradually curving to tip, directed at 2 o’clock; +vRTA +slender, subtriangular, with rounded tip pointed inwards in ventral view; +dRTA +slightly smaller with sharp tip, triangular in lateral view. + + +Female ( +paratype +, Amahelo-ho-Spitskop, + +NCA + +2010 / 349): Measurements: +CL +2.48, +CW +2.05, +AL +3.58, +AW +2.35, +TL +5.60, +FL +0.24, +SL +1.32, +SW +1.05, +AME +- +AME +0.06, +AME +- +ALE +0.03, +ALE +- +ALE +0.37, +PME +- +PME +0.13, +PME +- +PLE +0.14, +PLE +- +PLE +0.65, +MOQ +: +AW +0.31, +PW +0.40, L 0.35. Length of leg segments: I 2.12 + 1.02 + 1.52 + 1.20 + 0.86 = 6.72; II 1.90 + 0.92 + 1.35 + 1.02 + 0.80 = 5.99; III 1.47 + 0.77 + 1.00 + 1.12 + 0.55 = 4.91; IV 2.25 + 0.98 + 1.80 + 1.95 + 0.70 = 7.68. Carapace deep orange-brown, with three paired mediolateral mottled grey markings and mottled patch in front of fovea (Fig. +2 F +); +AER +slightly procurved, almost straight; clypeus height equal to +ALE +diameter; +AME +slightly larger than +ALE +; +AME +separated by distance approximately ⅖ their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by distance equal to ⅕ +AME +diameter; +PER +slightly recurved, +PME +and +PLE +subequal; +PME +separated by distance equal to their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance equal to +PME +diameter. Chelicerae, endites and labium orange-brown; cheliceral promargin with three slightly separated teeth, median tooth largest; retromargin with three adjacent teeth on common base, decreasing in size distally. Sternum deep yellow-brown, borders darker, with mottled lateral markings near coxal bases; surface finely wrinkled, covered with scattered short, fine setae. Abdomen without scutum, dorsal, lateral and ventral markings as for male (Fig. +2 F – H +). Legs I to IV creamy-yellow, tibiae, metatarsi and tarsi I and II yellow-brown. Epigyne (Figs +7 F +, +8 D, E +, +9 G, H +) with broad, sharply curved atria mesally, with copulatory openings entering short lateral copulatory ducts before entering large teardrop-shaped anterior +ST II +, each with oval lateral accessory gland; connecting ducts exiting +ST II +posteromesally, curving laterally, making a twist before entering bilobed posterolateral +ST I +, with short channel leading to fertilization ducts. + + + + +Etymology. + +The species name is the Latin for “ distinct, clear ”, referring to the well-defined abdominal markings of this species. + + + +Distribution. + + +Widespread across the southern half of +South Africa +(Fig. +12 +). + + + + + + +Distribution of + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +(black circles), + +F. flavipoda + +sp. nov. +(white circles), + +F. kasouga + +(black triangles), + +Foordana +sp. + +Zimbabwe (white triangle), + +Mushimane tswibilinki + +sp. nov. +(black square), + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. +(white square), + +N. samanthae + +sp. nov. +(black star), + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. +(white star) and + +Rukuluk +sp. + +Tembe (white pentagon) in southern Africa. + + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/9B/3F/15/9B3F15AED72957E092FA039C21D484D3.xml b/data/9B/3F/15/9B3F15AED72957E092FA039C21D484D3.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..8362aa18e85 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/9B/3F/15/9B3F15AED72957E092FA039C21D484D3.xml @@ -0,0 +1,634 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Foordana + +gen. nov. + + + + + +Type +species. + + + + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. + + + + +Diagnosis. + + + +Foordana + +gen. nov. +superficially represent + +Afroceto + +by their size and + +Thysanina +Simon, 1910 + + +sensu stricto + +by the lack of leg spines, but can be recognized from the former by the heavily scopulate tibiae, metatarsi and tarsi of the anterior legs (Figs +2 D, I +, +4 A – F +, +5 A – C, G, H +), the absence of leg spines (Figs +2 A, F +, +9 A – C +), the paired subtriangular +RTA +on the male palps (one dorsal and one ventral; Figs +8 B +, +10 A +, +11 B +), which are generally single or irregularly shaped in + +Afroceto + +(see +Lyle and Haddad 2010 +and +Lyle 2015 +), and the lack of a large median atrium in the female epigyne (cf. Fig. +9 G – J +and +Lyle and Haddad 2010 +). They can be distinguished from + +Thysanina + +by their larger size and the genitalic structure: the male palp has two well-developed subtriangular retrolateral tibial apophyses, one dorsal and one ventral (usually singular or irregularly shaped in + +Thysanina + +when two are present; see +Lyle and Haddad 2006 +) and the female epigynes are quite heavily sclerotized, with central paired curved atria housing the copulatory organs (weakly sclerotized and with atria and copulatory openings usually in the anterior half of the epigyne; see +Lyle and Haddad 2006 +). + + + + +Description. + + +Small spiders, +4.72–5.60 mm +in length; carapace bright orange to deep red-brown; carapace oval, broadest at coxae II, gradually narrowed towards eye region (Figs +1 A – C +, +2 A, F +, +3 A +); fovea distinct, a short narrow slit; posterior margin slightly concave, almost straight (Fig. +3 A +); convex in lateral profile, slightly elevated from clypeus to approximately ⅖ carapace length, with steeper slope in posterior quarter (Fig. +2 B, G +); carapace surface finely wrinkled, with sparse very short fine curved setae with weakly tuberculate bases (Fig. +3 B +). All eyes surrounded by black rings; +AER +slightly procurved in anterior view, slightly recurved in dorsal view; +PER +strongly recurved in dorsal view (Fig. +3 C +); +MOQ +narrower anteriorly than posteriorly, posterior width slightly larger than length. Chilum distinct, a single transverse sclerite; cheliceral promargin and retromargin each with three teeth; fang with distinct serrula; endites with parallel lateral margins, mesal margins with longitudinal groove and dense maxillar hair tuft (Fig. +3 E +), distal margins with distinct serrula comprising elongate, distally rounded denticles (Fig. +3 F +); labium trapezoidal, slightly longer than wide, narrower distally than basally, distal margin with concavity (Fig. +3 E +). Pleural bars sclerotised, isolated; sternum shield-shaped, slightly longer than broad, broadest at coxa II (Fig. +3 G +), surface smooth centrally, covered in long straight setae with more pronounced tuberculate bases towards borders (Fig. +3 G +); precoxal triangles present, intercoxal sclerites present between all coxal pairs. Leg formula 4123 or 1423; all legs densely covered in very short fine setae (Fig. +2 D, E, I, J +); leg I not strongly thickened, very slightly so in males only (Fig. +2 A – C, F – H +); dorsal femoral surface very slightly concave at ½ its length, ventral surface straight (Fig. +2 D, I +); all femora strongly constricted proximally (Fig. +2 D, I +); patellar indentation narrow, on retrolateral side, with lyriform organ at proximal end (Fig. +3 H, I +); anterior legs of males with distinct small ventral cusps on tibiae, metatarsi and tarsi I and II in + +F. distincta + +sp. nov. +(Figs +4 A – I +, +8 A +) and metatarsi and tarsi in + +F. kasouga + +sp. nov. +(Fig. +11 A +), absent in + +F. flavipoda + +sp. nov. +and all females; tibiae, metatarsi and tarsi I and II of both sexes with very dense scopulae (Figs +4 A – F +, +5 A – C, F – H +), with oval pored organs among the scopulate setae (Fig. +5 D +); metatarsi with strongly developed metatarsal stopper, posteriors with ventral preening brush and comb at distal end (Fig. +5 E +); tarsi with sparse tactile hairs, few dorsal trichobothria and chemosensory setae (Fig. +5 G, J +); trichobothria with slightly lowered distal plate, distal margin of hood overlapping plate, hood with three roughly concentric curved ridges (Fig. +5 I +); tarsal organ at approximately ⅚ tarsus length (Fig. +5 G +), flush with integument, surface finely wrinkled, opening oval and distally placed (Fig. +5 J +); paired tarsal claws short, with four teeth and dense tenant setae forming claw tufts in between (Fig. +5 H +). Abdomen oval, with distinct black chevron markings on creamy-grey background (Figs +1 A – C +, +2 A, F +) or without markings (Fig. +9 A – C +); dorsal scutum in males only, covering entire dorsum, absent in females; dorsum covered in scattered short fine setae, with two pairs of sigilla in both sexes; venter without large sclerites, only with markings in + +F. distincta + +sp. nov. +(Fig. +2 C, H +), covered in scattered short fine setae. Spinnerets short, conical, in compact group (Fig. +6 A +), spigot detail only studied in detail in female + +F. distincta + +sp. nov. +: ALS with two +MAmp +and 22 +Pi +(Fig. +6 B +); PMS with single +mAmp +, four +Cy +, 13 +Ac +and one +Ta +(Fig. +6 C +); PLS with two +Cy +and 10 +Ac +(Fig. +6 D +). Male palpal femora and patellae without apophyses, patella with retrolateral lyriform organ (Fig. +7 A +); palpal tibiae with ventral and dorsal retrolateral apophyses (Fig. +7 B, C +), variable in shape and size between species; tegulum generally oval in ventral view, as broad as cymbium (Fig. +9 D – F +), convex in lateral view (Fig. +7 B +); embolus curved, with base flattened and broad, gradually narrowing distally (Fig. +9 D – F +). Female palpal claw simple, straight, with six ridge-like transverse denticles (Fig. +7 D +); palp also with tarsal organ (Fig. +7 E +). Female epigyne quite heavily sclerotized, with copulatory openings near centre of epigyne in C-shaped ridges (Fig. +7 F +); epigyne without (Fig. +9 G, H +) or with (Fig. +9 I, J +) small hood in anterior half; copulatory ducts directed anteriorly, entering anterior +ST II +; connecting ducts leading to posterolateral +ST I +. + + + + + + +General habitus of live + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, female from Komani, Eastern Cape ( +A – C +), + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. +, male from Akkerendam Nature Reserve, Northern Cape ( +D – F +), and + +Rukuluk gramineus + +sp. nov. +, female from Witsand Nature Reserve, Northern Cape ( +G – I +). +A, D, G +Dorsal view +B, E, H +Anterior view +C, F +Lateral view +I +Dorsolateral view. Photos by Ruan Booysen. + + + + + + + +Digital microscope photographs of somatic morphology of + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A – E +) and female ( +F – J +). +A, F +habitus, dorsal view +B, G +same, lateral view +C, H +same, ventral view +D, I +leg I, prolateral view +E, J +metatarsus and tarsus IV. Scale bars: 1.0 mm ( +A – C, F – H +); 0.5 mm ( +D, E, I, J +). + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, female +A +carapace, dorsal view +B +same, surface texture and setae +C +eye region, dorsal view +D +chelicerae, arrows indicating promarginal teeth +E +mouthparts +F +detail of endite serrula +G +sternum +H +patellar indentation, leg IV +I +same, detail of lyriform organ. + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, male +A +tibia I, ventral view +B +same, detail of cusps and scopulae +C +metatarsus I, ventral view +D +same, detail of cusps and scopulae +E +tarsus I, ventral view +F +same, detail of cusps and scopulae +G – I +detail of cusp structure on the tibia ( +G +), metatarsus ( +H +) and tarsus ( +I +), arrows indicating triad of pores at base of cusp on proximal side. + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, female +A +tibia I, ventral view +B +metatarsus I, ventral view +C +same, detail of scopulate setae, arrows indicating ovoid pores between scopulate setae +D +same, detail of ovoid pores +E +metatarsus IV, lateral view +F +tarsus I, ventral view +G +same, lateral view, arrow indicating position of tarsal organ +H +tarsus IV, detail of claw tuft and claws +I +tarsus I, base of dorsal trichobothrium +J +same, detail of tarsal organ. + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, female +A +spinnerets, general view +B +anterior lateral spinnerets +C +posterior median spinnerets +D +posterior lateral spinnerets. Abbreviations: +Ac +– aciniform gland spigot (s); +Cy +– cylindrical gland spigot (s); +mAmp +– minor ampullate gland spigot; +MAmp +– major ampullate gland spigot; +Pi +– piriform gland spigot (s); +Ta +– tartipore. + + + + + + + +Scanning electron micrographs of + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A – C +) and female ( +D – F +) +A +palpal patella, retrolateral view, arrow indicating lyriform organ +B +palpal tibia and tarsus, retrolateral view +C +same, detail of tibia +D +palpal claw +E +palpal tarsal organ +F +epigyne, ventral view. + + + + + + + + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A – C +) and female ( +D, E +). +A +schematic representation of cusp arrangement on legs I and II +B +palp, ventral view +C +same, retrolateral view +D +epigyne, ventral view +E +same, dorsal view. Abbreviations: CD – connecting duct; Cd – copulatory duct; CO – copulatory opening; +dRTA +– dorsal retrolateral tibial apophysis; EM – embolus; FD – fertilization duct; SD – sperm duct; +ST I +– primary spermatheca; +ST II +– secondary spermatheca; +vRTA +– ventral retrolateral tibial apophysis. Scale bars: 0.25 mm. + + + + + + + +Digital microscope photographs of somatic morphology of + +Foordana flavipoda + +sp. nov. +, male ( +A, E +) and female ( +B, I +), + +F. kasouga + +sp. nov. +, male ( +C, F +), + +F. distincta + +sp. nov. +, male ( +D +) and female ( +G, H +), and undescribed + +Foordana +sp. + +from Zimbabwe, female ( +J +). +A – C +habitus, dorsal view +D – F +palps, ventral view +G, J +uncleared epigynes, ventral view +H, I +cleared epigynes, ventral view. Scale bars: 1.0 mm ( +A – C +), 0.5 mm ( +D – F +), 0.25 mm ( +G – J +). + + + + + +Etymology. + + +The genus name is a patronym in honour of the late Stefan Foord, in recognition of his distinguished career and contribution to the development of African arachnology, with the suffix alluding to its superficial resemblance to +Cetonana +. Gender feminine. + + + + +Composition. + + + +Foordana distincta + +sp. nov. +, + +F. flavipoda + +sp. nov. +, + +F. kasouga + +sp. nov. +and an undescribed species from +Zimbabwe +. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/D9/12/A4/D912A4A904FA534584A6EDA31EB07F24.xml b/data/D9/12/A4/D912A4A904FA534584A6EDA31EB07F24.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..bbdef262c1b --- /dev/null +++ b/data/D9/12/A4/D912A4A904FA534584A6EDA31EB07F24.xml @@ -0,0 +1,252 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Namaquella samanthae + +sp. nov. + + + + +Fig. 20 + + + + +Material examined. + + + + + +Holotype + +. + +South Africa +• +♂ +; +South Africa +; +Western Cape Province +; +Fisherhaven +, nr +Hermanus +; + +34 ° 21.430 ' S +, +19 ° 07.557 ' E + +; + +24 Mar. 2008 + +; +S. Oliver +leg.; walking on pathway during day; + +NCA +2008 + +/ 573. + + + + + +Diagnosis. + + +For detailed diagnosis, see + +N. arida + +sp. nov. +above. Female unknown. + + + + +Description. + + +Male ( +holotype +, Fisherhaven, + +NCA + +2008 / 573): Measurements: +CL +1.70, +CW +1.43, +AL +1.73, +AW +1.17, +TL +3.52, +FL +0.12, +SL +0.98, +SW +0.79, +AME +- +AME +0.06, +AME +- +ALE +0.03, +ALE +- +ALE +~ 0.27, +PME +- +PME +0.11, +PME +- +PLE +0.09, +PLE +- +PLE +0.56 +MOQ +: +AW +0.26, +PW +~ 0.32, L 0.27. Length of leg segments: I 1.38 + 0.73 + 1.12 + 0.92 + 0.50 = 4.65; II 1.08 + 0.59 + 0.79 + 0.73 + 0.45 = 3.64; III 0.72 + 0.47 + 0.50 + 0.61 + 0.30 = 2.60; IV 1.15 + 0.57 + 0.91 + 0.98 + 0.40 = 4.01. Carapace deep yellow-brown, with faint grey mottling; surface finely wrinkled; fovea short, distinct, at ⅔ +CL +. +AER +slightly procurved, almost straight; clypeus height equal to approximately ½ +AME +diameter; +AME +and +ALE +subequal in size; +AME +separated by distance approximately ½ their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by distance slightly less than ⅓ +AME +diameter; +PER +recurved, +PME +and +PLE +subequal; +PME +separated by distance approximately equal to their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance equal to their diameter. Chelicerae deep yellow-brown, anterior surface covered with quite dense long, fine setae; promargin with three slightly separated teeth, retromargin with three adjacent teeth on common base; endites and labium orange. Sternum shield-shaped, yellow-brown, with orange-brown borders; surface finely wrinkled, covered with scattered short, fine setae. Abdomen elongate-oval, broadest in posterior half; creamy-yellow dorsally, with yellow dorsal scutum from ¼ +AL +to posterior; broad grey mottled stripe along midline, sides of abdomen also mottled grey, markings separated by pair of cream mediolateral strips; two pairs of distinct round sigilla, first and second pairs respectively just behind ¼ and ½ +AL +. Legs I to IV with yellow femora, remaining segments progressively darker to yellow-brown tarsi; cusps only present on metatarsi and tarsi I (Fig. +20 A +). Palp (Fig. +20 B, C +) yellow-brown; tegulum pear-shaped, with U-shaped sperm duct; embolus simple, straight, with pointed tip directed at 1 o’clock; +RTA +simple, subtriangular, directed slightly dorsally. + + + + + + + +Namaquella samanthae + +sp. nov. +, male +A +schematic representation of cusp arrangement on legs I and II +B +palp, ventral view +C +same, retrolateral view. Abbreviations: EM – embolus; +RTA +– retrolateral tibial apophysis; SD – sperm duct. Scale bars: 0.1 mm. + + + + + +Etymology. + + +This species is named for my wife Samantha, who collected the +holotype +. + + + + +Distribution. + + +Only known from the +type +locality. + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/DA/FF/75/DAFF75AFBC605548B71D4FBFA5AE1195.xml b/data/DA/FF/75/DAFF75AFBC605548B71D4FBFA5AE1195.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..4547d307655 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/DA/FF/75/DAFF75AFBC605548B71D4FBFA5AE1195.xml @@ -0,0 +1,400 @@ + + + +And they just keep coming: four new genera of dark sac spiders from southern Africa (Araneae, Trachelidae) + + + +Author + +Haddad, Charles R. +0000-0002-2317-7760 +Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of the Free State, P. O. Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa + +text + + +African Invertebrates + + +2025 + +2025-01-23 + + +66 + + +1 + + +19 +64 + + + +journal article +10.3897/AfrInvertebr.66.139299 +2D20D0B7-7DF4-42E6-A70C-EB1875BCCD26 + + + + + +Namaquella arida + +sp. nov. + + + + +Figs 16 +, +17 +, +18 +, +19 + + + + +Material examined. + + + + + +Holotype + +. + +South Africa +• +♂ +; +Northern Cape Province +; +Calvinia +, +Akkerendam Nature Reserve +; + +31 ° 24.425 ' S +, +19 ° 46.823 ' E + +; + +1170 m +a. s. l. + +; + +18 Jan. 2021 + +; +C. Haddad +& +R. Booysen +leg.; hand collecting, grass tussocks; + +NCA +2021 + +/ 229. + + + + + +Paratype + +. + +2 ♀ +; together with +holotype +. + + + + +Other material. + + +1 subadult +♂ +2 subadult +♀ +; same data as +types +; S. E. M. preparations. + + + + +Diagnosis. + + +The male of this species can be recognised by the orientation of the embolus, at approximately 45 ° to the longitudinal axis of the palp (approximately 30 ° in + +N. samanthae + +sp. nov. +) and the shape of the +RTA +, which is rounded and more strongly bent distally, with the tip directed dorsally, whereas the tip is directed dorso-distally in + +N. samanthae + +sp. nov. +(compare Figs +19 B, C +with 20 B, C). The sperm duct has a distinct undulation along it prolateral course, while it is almost straight in + +N. samanthae + +sp. nov +.. The female is distinctive amongst Afrotropical trachelids by the weakly sclerotized epigyne with a central heart-shaped atrium formed by opposing curved ridges (Fig. +19 D +). + + + + +Description. + + +Male ( +holotype +, Akkerendam, + +NCA + +2021 / 229): Measurements: +CL +1.45, +CW +1.22, +AL +1.60, +AW +1.07, +TL +3.02, +SL +0.87, +SW +0.64, +AME +- +AME +0.03, +AME +- +ALE +0.03, +ALE +- +ALE +0.25, +PME +- +PME +0.08, +PME +- +PLE +0.10, +PLE +- +PLE +0.44, +MOQ +: +AW +0.20, +PW +0.25, L 0.21. Length of leg segments: I 1.25 + 0.65 + 1.06 + 0.85 + 0.49 = 4.30; II 0.90 + 0.54 + 0.73 + 0.61 + 0.41 = 3.19; III 0.68 + 0.40 + 0.44 + 0.51 + 0.30 = 2.33; IV 0.98 + 0.48 + 0.81 + 0.82 + 0.37 = 3.46. Carapace creamy-yellow (Fig. +16 A +); surface finely wrinkled; fovea absent, replaced by broad shallow depression at ⅔ +CL +. +AER +procurved, clypeus height slightly larger than ½ +AME +diameter at +AME +, slightly more than ¼ +ALE +diameter at +ALE +; +ALE +slightly larger than +AME +; +AME +separated by distance approximately ⅓ their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by distance equal to ⅓ +ALE +diameter; +PER +slightly recurved, +PLE +slightly larger than +PME +; +PME +separated by distance slightly less than their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance slightly larger than +PLE +diameter. Chelicerae yellow-orange, anterior surface covered with scattered long, fine setae; promargin with three widely separated teeth, decreasing slightly in size distally; retromargin with three adjacent teeth on common base, proximal tooth slightly larger than subequal median and distal teeth; endites and labium yellow-orange. Sternum pale creamy-yellow, yellow-brown at borders; surface smooth, sparsely covered with short, fine setae; precoxal triangles present, intercoxal sclerites weakly sclerotised but between all coxal pairs. Abdomen oval, broadest at half its length; cream dorsally, with faint grey mottling in posterior half, without distinct scutum (Fig. +16 A +); two pairs of large oval sigilla present, at ¼ and ½ +AL +; sides faint mottled grey posteriorly (Fig. +16 B +); slightly paler ventrally, with faint grey mottling around spinnerets (Fig. +16 C +); single paired lines of tiny sclerites from epigastric furrow to spinnerets. Legs creamy-yellow, anterior pairs darker than posteriors; patellae to tarsi I with dark grey mottling, darkening distally on each segment, on tibiae with pair of dorsolateral pale lines with reduced mottling; ventral cusps present on metatarsi I and II and tarsus I (Fig. +19 A +); tibia I and II and all metatarsi and tarsi densely scopulate. Palp (Fig. +19 B, C +) yellow-brown; embolus short, originating distally, base broad but narrowing to slender slightly curved distal section at approximately 45 ° to longitudinal axis of palp; single +RTA +present, triangular in ventral view, in retrolateral view short and stout, rounded distally, with short abrupt tip directed dorsally. + + +Female ( +paratype +, Akkerendam, + +NCA + +2021 / 229): Measurements: +CL +1.67, +CW +1.18, +AL +1.96, +AW +3.53, +TL +2.18, +SL +1.05, +SW +0.76, +AME +- +AME +0.06, +AME +- +ALE +0.03, +ALE +- +ALE +0.29, +PME +- +PME +0.10, +PME +- +PLE +0.13, +PLE +- +PLE +0.52, +MOQ +: +AW +0.21, +PW +0.28, L 0.24. Length of leg segments: I 1.30 + 0.70 + 1.05 + 0.87 + 0.48 = 4.40; II 1.03 + 0.61 + 0.80 + 0.69 + 0.44 = 3.57; III 0.78 + 0.50 + 0.52 + 0.60 + 0.30 = 2.70; IV 1.25 + 0.65 + 1.08 + 1.10 + 0.42 = 4.50. Carapace creamy-yellow (Fig. +16 F +); surface finely wrinkled; fovea absent, replaced by broad shallow depression at ⅔ +CL +. +AER +strongly procurved, clypeus height equal to +AME +diameter at +AME +, ⅖ +ALE +diameter at +ALE +; +ALE +diameter 1 ⅖ +AME +diameter; +AME +separated by distance slightly less than their diameter; +AME +separated from +ALE +by distance equal ½ +AME +diameter; +PER +slightly recurved, +PLE +slightly larger than +PME +; +PME +separated by distance equal to 1 ¼ their diameter; +PME +separated from +PLE +by distance approximately 1 ⅗ +PME +diameter. Chelicerae creamy-yellow, anterior surface covered with scattered long, fine setae; dentition as for male; endites and labium pale yellow-brown. Sternum pale creamy-yellow, slightly darker at borders; surface smooth, covered with scattered short, fine setae, particularly marginally. Abdomen oval, broadest at half its length; creamy-grey dorsally, laterally and ventrally (Fig. +16 F – H +), without dorsal scutum; two pairs of indistinct sigilla present, at ¼ and ½ +AL +; two paired lines of indistinct tiny sclerites from epigastric furrow to spinnerets. Legs cream, tibia to tarsus I and tarsus II with grey mottling. Epigyne (Fig. +19 D, E +) weakly sclerotized, with pair of curved central ridges forming heart-shaped atrium containing broad copulatory openings; copulatory duct initially funnel-shaped, narrowing rapidly from broad copulatory opening, looping laterally to enter oval anterolateral +ST II +on their posterolateral margin; connecting ducts short, lateral, entering small oval posterolateral +ST I +, with fertilization ducts forming on short mesal extension of +ST I +. + + + + +Etymology. + +This species name refers to the arid Succulent Karoo environments that it was collected from; adjective. + + + +Distribution. + + +Only known from the +type +locality (Fig. +12 +). + + + + \ No newline at end of file