The lace-sheet-weavers — a long story (Araneae: Psechridae: Psechrus) Author Bayer, Steffen text Zootaxa 2012 2012-07-04 3379 1 1 170 https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3379.1.1 journal article 20740 10.11646/zootaxa.3379.1.1 8ea1bd82-21db-4726-8d2a-be5866734ea0 1175­5334 6039832 Psechrus senoculatus Yin, Wang & Zhang, 1985 Figs 62a–d , 63a–g , 82q , 86e , 89g , 92g , 93b Psechrus senoculata Yin, Wang & Zhang 1985: 21 , figs 2A–J (Description of ♂ and ♀ , illustration of ♂ and ♀ ). [ Holotype ♀ from CHINA : Hunan Province : Sangzhi; Y.J. Zhang leg. 21.IV.1984 ; HBI; Paratypes : 1 ♂ (SB 537), CHINA : Hunan Province : Daiyong, Zhangjiajian, Mt. Zhengjaijie; Y.J. Zhang leg. 20.IX.1984 ; HBI; 1 ♂ , 1♀ , CHINA : Zhejiang Province : Hangzhou, Huanglongdong; Z.F. Chen leg. 16.V.1983 ; HBI; 2 ♀♀ (one of which SB 538), CHINA : Hunan Province : Chengbu; X.C. Ouyang leg. VII.1982 ; HBI, one paratype ♂ (SB 537) and one paratype ♀ (SB 538) examined, holotype and remaining paratypes not available on request, thus not examined]. Song 1988: 133 (Syn. with P. mimus ). Feng 1990: 33 , figs 8.1–5 (Description of ♂ and ♀ , illustration of ♂ and ♀ ). Wang and Yin 2001: 330 , 336, figs 19–23 (Description of ♂ and ♀ , illustration of ♂ and ♀ , removed from syn. with P. mimus ). Note : The ♂ paratype SB 537 was originally designated as ‘ Allotype’ , a term which is not “vorgesehen” (intended, destined) by the ‘ International Code of Zoological Nomenclature’ , which means the code strongly recommends avoiding its use. It definitely does not consitute a name-bearing type, thus herein it is regarded as paratype . Psechrus argentatus — Lendl 1898: 561 , misidentified. Psechrus mimus — Xu and Wang 1983: 35 , figs 1–7 (Description of ♂ and ♀ , illustration of ♂ and ♀ ). Song 1987: 68 , fig. 34 (Illustration of ♂ and ♀ ). Chen and Zhang 1991: 40 , figs 31.1–4 (Illustration of ♂ and ♀ ). Song et al. 1999: 397 , figs 232E–F, Q–R (Illustration of ♂ and ♀ ). Wang and Yin 2001: 337 (Considered P. mimus as numen dubium). Psechrus sinensis — Hu 1984: 55 , figs 50.1–4 (Description of ♂ and ♀ , illustration of ♂ and ♀ , misidentified). Chen and Gao 1990: 25 , figs 27a–b (Description of ♂ and ♀ , illustration of ♂ and ♀ , misidentified). Psechrus senoculatus — Platnick 1989: 429 (Emendation). Zhang 2011: 106 (Photos of dorsal and ventral habitus of ♀ ). Zhu and Zhang 2011: 333 , figs 241A–B (Description of ♀ , illustration of ♀ in reproducing the respective figures in Wang and Yin [2001: 337 , figs 22–23]). Additional material examined ( 5 ♂♂ , 15 ♀♀ , 5 s.a. ♀♀ , 1 s.a. ♂ ). CHINA : Shaanxi Province : Zhouzhi , Louguantai National Forest Park; X.P. Wang leg. VI.1991 ; 3 ♂♂ ( SB 1164–1166 ) , 3 ♀♀ ( SB 1167–1169 ), AMNH . Sichuan Province : Yachow ( Dazhou ?), 800–2400 m ; D.C. Graham leg. V.1928 ; 1 s.a. ♀ ( SB 605 ), USNM. Mt. on the Shiao Shiang Fisa ( Ziyang ?), 1950–3300 m ; D.C. Graham leg. 22.–23.VII.1928 ; 1 ♀ ( SB 178 ), USNM. Ya’an , Omihsien ( Mt. Omi ), ca. N°29°29'–29°35', E 102°44'–103°02', 1400–3100 m ; IV .– 10.V.1915 ; Coll. Dr. Weigold; 1 ♀ ( SB 886 ), ZMB. Chunqing , Jinyunshan ; X.P. Wang leg. 26.IX.1997 ; 1 ♀ ( SB1170 ), AMNH. Eimei , Eimei Shan , Wannian Temple , N 29°34'53'' , E 103°22'56'' , 1000 m ; P. Jäger leg. by night 20.–21. III .1999 ; 2 s.a. ♀♀ ( SB 840 , 842 ), 1 s.a . ♂ ( SB 841 ), SMF . Shuifu (forest beyond the river), ca. 300 m ; D.C. Graham leg. V.1924 ; 1 ♀ ( SB 189 ), 1 s.a . ♀ ( SB 190 ), USNM. Same data as above but leg. 1923; 1 s.a . ♀ ( SB 604 ), USNM . Hubei Province : Wudangshan , from Zixiao to Nanya ; X.P. Wang leg. 23.IX.1997 ; 1 ♂ ( SB 1148 ) , 4 ♀♀ ( SB 1149 , 1171–1173 ), AMNH . Jiangsu Province : Nanjing ; leg. before 1928; S-No. 25 ; 1 ♀ ( SB 236 ), NHM 1928˙3˙16˙1–34 . Hunan Province : Linwu County , Nanqiang country, Dengjia , Wuming hole, N 25°26'22'' , E 112°59'08.4'' , 282 m ; X. Xu , Z.Q. Zhou , X.P. Tan & X.G. Hu leg. 02.XI.2008 ; 2 ♀♀ ( SB 9–10 ), SMF . Guizhou Province : Zunyi ; X.P. Wang leg. 22.IX.1997 ; 1 ♀ ( SB 1163 ), AMNH. Kaili ; X.P. Wang leg. 03.X.1997 ; 1 ♂ ( SB 1174 ) , 1 ♀ ( SB 1175 ), AMNH . FIGURES 62a–d. Psechrus senoculatus , ♂ paratype SB 537 from China, Hunan Prov. a–c ♂ palp (a prolateral, b ventral, c retrolateral view). d ♂ left palpal femur, retrolateral view. Revised diagnosis (see also diagnosis for sinensis -group above). Males with hemispherical bulge at basal half of conductor (C) ( Fig. 62b ). Dorsal part of embolus base (EB) platform-like ( Fig. 62b ). Females with strongly elongated median septum (MS) (ca. 2 times longer than broad). The latter broadest in the anterior half ( Fig. 63a ). Lateral margins of MS anteriorly not distinctly diverging like in P. jinggangensis (in many specimens even converging). Initial section of copulatory duct (CD) long and straight, central and distal section of CD including (constituting) a voluminous extension ( Fig. 63b ). FIGURES 63a–i. Psechrus spp. , ♀ adult and primordial copulatory organs. a–g Psechrus senoculatus . h–i Psechrus mimus (nomen dubium). a–c ♀ paratype SB 538 of Psechrus senoculatus from China, Hunan Prov. d–e s.a. ♀ SB 190 from China, Sichuan Prov. f–g ♀ SB 236 from China, Jiangsu Prov. h–i p.s.a. ♀ holotype SB 191 of Psechrus mimus from China, Jiangsu Prov. a, g Epigyne, ventral view. b, f Vulva, dorsal view. c Schematic course of internal duct system. d Pre-epigyne, ventral view. e Pre-vulva, dorsal view. h Pre-pre-epigyne, ventral view. i Pre-pre-vulva, dorsal view. Description. Male: Body and eye measurements. Carapace length 7.2, carapace width 5.0, anterior width of carapace 3.0, opisthosoma length 9.2, opisthosoma width 4.2. Eyes: AME 0.36, ALE 0.41, PME 0.44, PLE 0.44, AME–AME 0.18, AME–ALE 0.06, PME–PME 0.29, PME–PLE 0.40, AME–PME 0.58, ALE–PLE 0.52, clypeus height at AME 0.93, clypeus height at ALE 0.90. Cheliceral furrow with three promarginal and four retromarginal teeth. Measurements of palp and legs. Leg formula: 1243. Palp: 9.6 [3.3, 1.6, 1.2, 3.5]; Legs: I 62.6 [16.4, 3.1, 16.8, 18.2, 8.1], II 48.9 [13.3, 3.0, 12.7, 13.8, 6.1], III 32.7 [9.7, 2.3, 7.7, 8.9, 4.1], IV 48.7 [13.2, 2.7, 12.2, 14.3, 6.3]. Spination. Palp: 131, 000, 0000; legs: femur I 625{333}, II 526 {536}, III 535 , IV 534 ; patella I–IV 000; tibia I 3036{4036}, II 3036 {2023}, III 2022 , IV 3034 ; metatarsus I 3037, II– III 3035 , IV 3037 . Palpal femur ventrally modified with rounded bulge ( Fig. 62d ). Copulatory organ (see also diagnosis and general description for sinensis -group). Ventral part of EB dorsally serrated ( Fig. 62b ). Sperm duct with transversal section in retrolateral half of T and with loop in prolateral half. Palpal tibia very short ( Figs 62a–c ). Female: Body and eye measurements. Carapace length 6.0–7.6, carapace width 3.9–5.4, anterior width of carapace 2.6–3.5, opisthosoma length 7.5–11.8, opisthosoma width 2.8–6.3. Eyes: AME 0.31–0.37, ALE 0.37–0.41, PME 0.38–0.43, PLE 0.38–0.40, AME–AME 0.17–0.20, AME–ALE 0.08–0.11, PME–PME 0.20–0.28, PME–PLE 0.36–0.44, AME–PME 0.51–0.66, ALE–PLE 0.37–0.57, clypeus height at AME 0.59–0.83, clypeus height at ALE 0.58–0.81. Cheliceral furrow with three promarginal and four retromarginal teeth. Measurements of palp and legs. Leg formula: 1423. Palp: 7.5–9.2 [2.5–3.1, 1.1–1.2, 1.4–1.6, 2.5–3.3]; Legs: I 37.0–45.9 [10.2–12.5, 2.5–3.1, 10.4–13.1, 9.3–11.7, 4.6–5.5], II 29.4–36.6 [8.6–10.5, 2.2–2.8, 7.7–9.7, 7.1–9.3, 3.8–4.3], III 20.8–26.9 [6.3–8.0, 1.7–2.1, 5.1–6.3, 4.9–6.3, 2.8–3.2], IV 30.5–38.0 [8.9–10.9, 2.0–2.5, 7.9–10.1, 7.5–9.8, 4.2–4.7]. Palpal claw with 13–15 teeth. Spination. Palp: 131, 110, 1101, 1014; legs (—except for patella— variable, only most common states noted): femur I 526 (536), II 526 (546), III 545 (555), IV 544 (554); patella I–IV 000; tibia I–II 3036 (4035), III 3036 (3024,3035), IV 3034; metatarsus I 3035 (3037), II 3035 (3025), III 3034 (2034), IV 3034 (3024). Copulatory organ (see also diagnosis and general description of sinensis -group). Slit sense organs and epigynal muscle sigilla outside epigynal field (EF) ( Fig. 63a ). Bulbous parts of CD broader than long ( Fig. 63b ) and clearly larger than receptacula. Primordial copulatory organ. Pre-epigyne: Similar to P. clavis sp. nov. in shape of pre-MS. The latter longer than broad and with (almost) parallel margins ( Fig. 63d ). Distinguished by the even longer pre-MS ( Fig. 63d ). Pre-vulva: Similar to P. clavis sp. nov. Distinguished by the longer pre-CD ( Fig. 63e ). Colouration of male and female (see also description for sinensis -group and Psechrus ). Median bands on carapace not serrated. Lateral bands either absent or extremely narrow (if present, at most 0.3 diameter of PME) and not serrated. Light longitudinal line ventrally on opisthosoma mostly broken subdistally, rarely strongly constricted subdistally and medium-sized to broad. If measured centrally on opisthosoma, its width is slightly less than the width of one half of the cribellum (ca. 0.7–0.9 of one half of the cribellum). Distal part (patch) broader than main section. Variation of copulatory organs. The females examined show a few variations in epigynal characters ( Figs 63a,g , 89g ). In vulvae the lengths of CD may vary ( Figs 63b,f , 92g ), as well as the shape of the bulbous sections of CD ( Figs 63b,f , 92g ). Remarks: Song (1988) considered P. senoculatus as junior synonym of P. mimus Chamberlin, 1924 . Wang and Yin (2001) removed P. senoculatus from synonymy and considered P. mimus as nomen dubium. I concur with Wang and Yin (2001) , but to this see also remark below under “Nomen dubium: P. mimus ”. Lendl (1898) reported Psechrus argentatus from “China, Prov. Se-tschuen” [today: CHINA : Sichuan Prov. ] and stated it was a juvenile specimen. Even though I have not checked the respective specimen, which is deposited in HNHM and was not available for the present study, there are no doubts that it once had been misidentified. To date P. argentatus had never been found outside Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. On the other hand, to date no other Psechrus species than P. senoculatus had been found in Sichuan province of China. Zhang (2011 , p. 106) showed photos of dorsal and ventral habitus of a female Psechrus he had identified as P. senoculatus . One should have in mind that an identification only by colouration is not possible as there are no differences to other Psechrus species out of the sinensis -group in this respect. Identification is only possible by checking the specific characters of the copulatory organs. Distribution. China ( Fig. 96 ).