identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
FEA8B5E003565A0D91EC528A6FED6B60.text	FEA8B5E003565A0D91EC528A6FED6B60.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Gephyrellula condeuba Schinelli & Wanderley do Prado & Cerqueira Baptista & Takiya 2025	<div><p>Gephyrellula condeuba sp. nov.</p><p>Figs 1, 2 A, 3, 4 A</p><p>Type-material.</p><p>Holotype: Brazil: • ♂; Bahia, Condeúba, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-42.15639&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-15.063611" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -42.15639/lat -15.063611)">Morro da Feirinha</a>, 950 m altitude; 15°03'49"S, 42°09'23"W; 10–11.xi.2021; H. Schinelli, A. Prado, R. Baptista leg.; UFRJ 2418.</p><p>Paratype: • ♀; Same data as holotype; UFRJ 2419 .</p><p>Etymology.</p><p>The specific name is a noun in apposition referring to the type-locality.</p><p>Diagnosis.</p><p>The male of  G. condeuba sp. nov. can be distinguished from those of  G. violacea by the body covered by abundant dark grey spots and stripes, especially on legs and dorsum of abdomen (Fig. 1 A), with carapace presenting black dots and stripes throughout, without white triangular mark (Fig. 1 A) (vs. fewer dark spots throughout body and carapace with abundant black dots and stripes only on each side, with a wide median almost uniform light brown band and presence of a dirty white triangular marking on the posterior half of the cephalic area in  G. violacea, see Santos and Rheims 2018, fig. 15); RTA wider and bifid, with sclerotized acute tips (Figs 1 D, 2 A) (vs. thin and with only one tip in  G. violacea, Fig. 2 B, also see Santos and Rheims 2018, figs 6, 7, 11, 12, 20, 21); VTA with a clearly convex ventral margin, presenting a basal flap (Figs 1 D, 2 A) (vs. VTA with straight ventral margin, Fig. 2 B, also see Santos and Rheims 2018, figs 7, 12, 21); and PCA larger, distinctly hook-shaped (vs. PCA very small) (Fig. 1 D – F, see Santos and Rheims 2018, figs 6, 8, 11, 12, 20, 21).</p><p>Females of  Gephyrellula condeuba sp. nov. and  G. violacea can be distinguished from  G. lavidabonita (known only from the female holotype) by the MS wider than long (vs. longer than wide); pointed, elevated lobe of LP projecting over MS (vs. no lobe and MS covering posterior portion of LP); and GP present (vs. absent).  Gephyrellula condeuba sp. nov. females can be recognized from those of  G. violacea by the absence of a distinct white triangular mark on the carapace (Fig. 3 A) (vs. present in  G. violacea, see Santos and Rheims 2018, fig. 17); median projection of LP very elevated from the plane of the epigyne as a clearly tridimensional fold, thinner and acute, not surpassing the margins of the MS (Figs 3 D, 4 A); GP longer, deeper and more conspicuous; and GH in a more horizontal position, clearly pointing to the ectal side and not surpassing the anterior margin of spermathecae (Figs 3 D, 4 A) (vs. median projection barely elevated from the plane of the epigyne, wide and rounded, clearly surpassing MS margins; GP shorter and shallow; and GH in a vertical position, pointing anteriorly and clearly surpassing the anterior margin of spermathecae, Fig. 4 B, also see Santos and Rheims 2018, fig. 15, 23).</p><p>Description.</p><p>Male (holotype UFRJ 2418). Total length: 3.04. Carapace 1.26 long, 1.37 wide; brownish yellow; suffused with black to dark gray irregular spots and radial bands extending from fovea to margins; with pair of non-pigmented areas over the cephalic sulcus; lateral margins almost uniformly black; with lateral row of bristles (most fallen, with only sockets left); flattened; wider than long (ca. 1.1 ×), wider at level of leg II, narrowed anteriorly, with maximum width ca. 3 times clypeus width; cephalic region also with black spots and bands, densely packed in eye area and forming a trident in its posterior half, slightly elevated and not distinctly separated by cephalic sulcus from the thoracic region. Clypeus low and vertical; shorter than MOQ; with sockets indicating presence of fallen macrosetae. Chelicerae with same color and pattern as carapace but fewer dark spots; with sparse setae (most lost in alcohol); fangs the same color as paturon; no visible teeth (but chelicerae were not dissected, making difficult the assessment of teeth presence). Labium and endites a little darker than sternum; labium wider than long with anterior margin rounded; endites longer than wide, oblong, angled inwards. Sternum pale yellow with dark grey irregular spots, fewer spots present in the anterior region behind the labium; anterior margin slightly concave; posterior margin round and convex, separating coxae IV by ca. 1.5 times their width. Eyes in two recurved rows; median quadrangle wider than long, wider posteriorly; median eyes of each row closer to lateral ones than to the other; white ocular veil present in all eyes. AME: 0.056, ALE: 0.051, PME: 0.048, PLE: 0.060. Interdistances: AME - AME: 0.14, AME - ALE: 0.45, ALE - PLE: 0.15, ALE - ALE: 0.29, PME - PME: 0.20, PME - PLE: 0.13, PLE - PLE: 0.52. MOQ width in anterior margin 0.22, posterior margin 0.29, length 0.24. Clypeus height: 0.118. Clypeus height index: 0.086.</p><p>Several legs missing in specimen, with only left leg II (but lacking tarsus and part of metatarsus) and right legs III and IV remaining. Leg II much longer than III and IV, which are almost of the same size. Trochantera, femora, and distal two-thirds of tarsi light brown; a little lighter ventrally, scattered with dark gray irregular spots. Patellae, tibiae, metatarsi, and basal third of tarsi mostly dark brown, with denser dark grey spots. Tarsus without visible spots at distal two-thirds; claw tufts present. Legs without scopula. Leg macrosetae pattern: Leg I without macrosetae. Femur II: d 0-1 - 0, r 0-1 - 1. Tibia II: v 1-2 - 2, r 0-0 - 1, p 0-0 - 1. Femur III: d 1-1 - 0. Tibia III: v 0-2 - 0. Femur IV: d 1-1 - 0. Tibia IV: v 0-0 - 2. No spines on any patellae.</p><p>Abdomen: dorsum with barely visible pale brown background, covered by densely packed black to dark grey spots and few subtle stripes. Cardiac area without spots delimiting its margins and with fewer spots. Small unpigmented patches spread over the dorsum, mostly at posterior third. Abdomen oval, longer than wide; with a deep notch in anterior margin. Two pairs of conspicuous dorsal sigillae, the second one elongated and subdivided, followed by two pairs of smaller depressions in the end of the median third. Venter pale yellow with abundant dark gray spots, not so dense as in dorsum. Spinnerets pale yellow, conical.</p><p>Palp: patella shorter than tibia, without apophysis. Tibia with 1 prolateral and 1 dorsal macrosetae, and 2 apophyses. VTA lamelliform, with middle and basal areas membranous and whitish yellow and lateral margins more sclerotized and darker; apical margins a little projected like a flap around a median concavity. VTA juxtaposed with RTA, with basal portion of its dorsal margin hidden by ventral crest of RTA. RTA bifid; sclerotized; with single broad base which narrows abruptly, originating two apical darker spiniform projections separated by a V-cleft, ventral one pointing straight up distally and with a thin curved crest connected to its basis, and dorsal one a little larger, slanted and pointing dorsally. Cymbium oblong, ca. 1.8 × longer than wide; with 1 prolateral macroseta and apical scopula of tenent setae. Tegulum elliptic, ca. 1.7 × higher than wide. Sperm duct clearly visible through tegument for most its extension; extending along retrolateral margin of tegulum, rising from proximal margin forming large S-shaped tube with long tight median loop and much wider anterior one, with distal portion tapering and vanishing into embolus near prolateral margin. Tegular suture extending from outside apex of upper loop to inside the median loop. PCA small, but distinctly noticed and clearly hook-shaped, close to apex of median loop. Primary conductor absent. RMC not seen (but it may be small and translucent and visible only on Scanning Electron Microscopy as in  G. violacea). Embolus filiform, describing a crooked curve, with strong reduction in diameter at its base and regularly tapering and getting paler towards its thin tip.</p><p>Female (paratype UFRJ 2419). Total length 3.52. General shape as in male, but with a much lighter coloration, lacking black or dark gray spots. Carapace 1.20 long, 1.30 wide; pale orange yellow with vaguely defined pale yellow triangular area at posterior half of the cephalic area; lateral margins with a white stripe, very thin anteriorly but increasing in size towards posterior margin, which lacks white pigment. Only sockets of lateral rows of bristles as in male. Chelicerae, labium, endites, and coxae with color similar to carapace. Sternum pale yellow, with thin dark contour through most of its extension. Eyes sizes: AME: 0.042, ALE: 0.040, PME: 0.038, PLE: 0.045. Interdistances: AME - AME: 0.14, AME - ALE: 0.04, ALE - PLE: 0.17, ALE - ALE: 0.29, PME - PME: 0.18, PME - PLE: 0.10, PLE - PLE: 0.50. MOQ width in anterior margin 0.20, posterior margin 0.25, length 0.21. Clypeus height: 0.114. Clypeus height index: 0.088.</p><p>Legs pale yellow, a little darker on inner side and at distal portion of metatarsi and whole tarsi; bearing small dark spots at macrosetae´s base. Legs without scopula. Leg macrosetae pattern: Tibia I: v 1-2 - 2 - 1 (unaligned), r 1-1 - 0. Metatarsus I: v 2-2 - 2, r 0-1 - 1. Leg II without spines. Tibia III: v 0-2 - 2 - 0, r 1-0 - 0 p 1-0 - 0. Metatarsus III: v 2-2 - 2, r 1-1 - 0, p 1-1 - 0. Tibia IV: v 0-2 - 0. Metatarsus IV: v 2-2 - 2, r 1-0 - 0, p 1-0 - 0. No spines on any patellae or femora. Leg measurements: Leg I: Total: 5.17 [Femur 1.55, Patella 0.63, Tibia 1.28, Metatarsus, 1.13 Tarsus: 0.58]. II: 5.05 [1.59, 0.59, 1.20, 1.01, 0.66]. III: 4.67 [1.50, 0.57, 1.13, 0.98, 0.49]. IV: 4.05 [1.39, 0.38, 0.96, 0.87, 0.45].</p><p>Abdomen 2.44 long, 1.46 wide. Dorsum covered by big white guanine spots, with slightly darker cardiac area, and scattered irregular gray and pale brown dots and streaks. Dorsal sigillae as in male. Venter with beige background covered by less dense guanine spots than dorsum, especially at anterior portion and median line. Spinnerets beige, conical.</p><p>Genitalia: Epigynal plate ca. 1.3 × wider than long; MS as wide as long, wider at anterior margin. CG long, transversely placed, beginning at the anterior area of epigyne and just a bit posteriorly to anterior margin of main spermathecae and pointing ectally. GH in ectal position to spermatheca, not surpassing its anterior margin. Lateral plates projected as a thin, acutely pointed, elevated median lobe, separating the CG and the GP. GP longer than wide, regularly concave, with its anterior margin fused to the margin of the elevated lobe of the lateral plate; bearing a small concave excavation at its middle portion.</p><p>Note.</p><p>Although males of  Gephyrellula display usually more black pigment spread on the body than females, such as in  G. violacea (see Santos and Rheims 2018, figs 1, 15–18), the amount of black pigment on the male holotype of  Gephyrellula condeuba sp. nov. is unusually high (Fig. 1 A – C). It is unclear whether the colour pattern of the holotype is a normal condition of the species or if it is a melanic specimen. Only additional specimens may answer that question.</p><p>Habitat.</p><p>All specimens were collected by beating tree branches in a riparian forest around a small stream at Morro da Feirinha, around 950 m high. These riparian forests are small humid vegetation patches scattered in a large dry Cerrado region.</p><p>Distribution.</p><p>Known only from the type locality in Condeúba, Bahia state, Brazil (Fig. 5).</p><p>Additional material examined.</p><p>Brazil: Bahia: • 4 juv.; Condeúba,  Morro da Feirinha; 15°03"49'S, 42°09"23'W; 24. ii. 2024; H. Schinelli leg.; UFRJ 2438  .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/FEA8B5E003565A0D91EC528A6FED6B60	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Pensoft via Plazi	Schinelli, Hector Baruch Pereira;Wanderley do Prado, André;Cerqueira Baptista, Renner Luiz;Takiya, Daniela Maeda	Schinelli, Hector Baruch Pereira, Wanderley do Prado, André, Cerqueira Baptista, Renner Luiz, Takiya, Daniela Maeda (2025): A new species and the phylogenetic placement of the Neotropical genus Gephyrellula Strand, 1932 (Araneae, Philodromidae). Evolutionary Systematics 9 (1): 87-98, DOI: 10.3897/evolsyst.9.143758
EE3EB86E4F9452168B3D86B702028189.text	EE3EB86E4F9452168B3D86B702028189.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Gephyrellula Strand 1932	<div><p>Gephyrellula Strand, 1932</p><p>Figs 1, 2, 3, 4</p><p>Gephyrella Mello-Leitão, 1918: 121; Mello-Leitão 1929: 107, 259, 261.</p><p>Gephyrellula Strand, 1932: 137 (replacement name for 
Gephyrella Mello-Leitão, preoccupied in 
Lepidoptera).</p><p>Gephyrellula: Soares, 1943: 10; Santos and Rheims 2018: 382.</p><p>Diagnosis.</p><p>Gephyrellula may be recognized by the carapace flat and wider than long, with a marginal row of anteriorly directed bristles, relatively low clypeus, median eyes of both rows closer to lateral ones than to the other, all eyes with white veil, and lack of leg scopula. Males have palps bearing a small hook-shaped PCA, well developed VTA and RTA, with RTA more sclerotized than VTA, small and almost inconspicuous RMC (present in  G. violacea, but doubtful in  G. condeuba sp. nov.), and long curved embolus starting at prolateral margin of bulb, bordering anterior margin and pointing towards the palp tibia. Females have epigyne simple, wider or as wide as long, MS variable, usually wider than long (longer than wide in  G. lavidabonita), wider at anterior margin (wider at middle portion in  G. lavidabonita), and lateral plates projected in a thin, acutely pointed, elevated median lobe (no projected point in  G. lavidabonita), separating the CG and the GP, and the GH stalk inserted near the middle or at the posterior region of spermatheca, not near its anterior margin.</p><p>Description.</p><p>Males: total length: 3.0–4.2; carapace length: 1.1–1.6; females: total length: 3.5–6.2; carapace length: 1.2–2.1. Carapace pale to dark yellow with a lighter triangle pointing to fovea, many suffused with dark dots or irregular spots denser near lateral margins. Males typically darker with bigger and denser spots, females may have white pigments at lateral and / or posterior margin. Carapace wider than long, wider at legs II or III; with rows of strong bristles along lateral margins facing anteriorly (visible in Santos and Rheims 2018, fig. 15). Chelicerae with same color and pattern as carapace, longer than wide; fangs same color as paturon; small teeth. Endites same color or a little darker than sternum; labium a little darker than both. Labium wider than long with anterior margin rounded; endites longer than wide, oblong, angled inwards. Sternum pale yellow with much fewer dark spots than on carapace or none at all; anterior margin slightly concave; posterior margin round and convex, separating coxae IV by 1.0 to 1.5 times their width. Eyes with white veils placed in two recurved rows, posterior more recurved than anterior; PME closer to PLE than to each other; eyes near equal in size but AME and / or PLE a little larger than ALE and PME.</p><p>Legs with spot patterns similar to carapace but often denser, sometimes making areas appear almost uniformly dark, but lighter venter. Leg II almost always the longest, but leg I longer than II at least in female paratype of  G. condeuba sp. nov.; leg IV shortest. Spination pattern variable. Usually tibiae bear 2 or 3 pairs or ventral spines and metatarsi 3 pairs; patellae and tarsi without spines; females usually have almost or none spines on femora.</p><p>Abdomen with guanine spots covering most of dorsum and / or dark spots usually denser near laterals; cardiac mark visible but not strongly delimited or pigmented. Shape oval with acute posterior end and a notch of variable depth on anterior margin. Two pairs of conspicuous dorsal sigillae, the second one elongated and subdivided; followed by two pairs of smaller depressions in the end of the median third. Venter lighter than dorsum; spinnerets pale yellow, conical.</p><p>Male palp with tibia longer than wide; RTA relatively small, well sclerotized, forming a broad rounded or a thin pointed lobe, with 1 to 2 acute tips; VTA relatively large, forming a transversal lobe placed near or closely pressed to the RTA, lightly sclerotized. Tegulum elliptic, weakly projected ventrally; tegular suture clearly seen and long, placed at basal third of tegulum and separating the long median loop of reservoir; PCA small, hook-shaped; primary membranous conductor lacking; RMC small and almost inconspicuous (present in  G. violacea, but doubtful in  G. condeuba sp. nov.); embolus originating from the apical third of the prolateral margin of tegulum; relatively long, semicircular, tapering towards a thinner tip, which is pointed towards palpal tibia. Embolus tip pressed against the RMC at the retrolateral distal margin of cymbium. Female epigyne simple, wider or as wide as long; MS variable, usually wider than long (longer than wide in  G. lavidabonita), wider at anterior margin (wider at middle portion in  G. lavidabonita); lateral plates usually projected in a thin, acutely pointed, elevated median lobe (no projected lobe and MS covering the posterior region of the lateral plates in  G. lavidabonita); CG semicircular, anteriorly placed, usually separated from the GP by the lateral plate lobe (CG with posterior portion covered by lateral plates and no GP in  G. lavidabonita); main spermatheca globose to piriform; GH placed ectally and clearly surpassing the anterior margin of spermatheca, globose (except  G. condeuba sp. nov.), with long and curved stalk inserted near the middle or at the posterior region of spermatheca, not near its anterior margin.</p><p>Taxonomic notes.</p><p>A comparative diagnosis of  Gephyrellula and similar genera is included in the Discussion section, with comments on previous works and on the phylogenetic placement of the genus.</p><p>Composition.</p><p>Gephyrellula violacea (Mello-Leitão, 1918) (type-species);  Gephyrellula lavidabonita Galvis et al., 2024 and  Gephyrellula condeuba sp. nov.</p><p>Distribution.</p><p>Gephyrellula is a Neotropical genus, with records known from Colombia (Magdalena), all regions of Brazil, Argentina (Corrientes and Jujuy provinces) and Paraguay (Central, Paraguari e Itapúa) (Fig. 5).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/EE3EB86E4F9452168B3D86B702028189	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Pensoft via Plazi	Schinelli, Hector Baruch Pereira;Wanderley do Prado, André;Cerqueira Baptista, Renner Luiz;Takiya, Daniela Maeda	Schinelli, Hector Baruch Pereira, Wanderley do Prado, André, Cerqueira Baptista, Renner Luiz, Takiya, Daniela Maeda (2025): A new species and the phylogenetic placement of the Neotropical genus Gephyrellula Strand, 1932 (Araneae, Philodromidae). Evolutionary Systematics 9 (1): 87-98, DOI: 10.3897/evolsyst.9.143758
81C6A4530EED53B493F4623C1614B3EB.text	81C6A4530EED53B493F4623C1614B3EB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Gephyrellula violacea (Mello-Leitao 1918)	<div><p>Gephyrellula violacea (Mello-Leitão, 1918)</p><p>Gephyrella violacea Mello-Leitão, 1918: 122; Mello-Leitão 1929: 108 [♀].</p><p>Gephyrellula v.: Strand 1932: 137 (implicit combination through replacement name for genus).</p><p>Gephyrellula paulistana Soares, 1943: 10, figs 8, 9 [♂]. 
Gephyrellula
v.: Santos and Rheims 2018: 382, figs 1–23 [♂ ♀, redescription, synonym with 
G. paulistana].</p><p>New records.</p><p>Argentina: Corrientes: • 1 ♀; Ituzaingó,  Islas Apipé Grande y Apipé Chico; 1945; W. Hanke leg.; MACN 1766  •   1 ♀ 2 J;  Esquina; 1999; L. A. Compagnucci leg; MACN 18574  .   Jujuy: • 1 ♀; Doctor Manuel Belgrano,  Lagunas de Yala; 1949; N. Kormilev leg.; MACN 2751  .</p><p>Brazil: Rio de Janeiro: • 1 J; Rio de Janeiro, Cachoeiras de Macacu,  Reserva Ecológica de Guapiaçu, Trilha São José; 12. vii. 2018; G. Assunção leg.; UFRJ 2421  .   Minas Gerais: • 1 ♂ 1 J; Parque Nacional da Serra do Cipó, Trilha Mirante das Lagoas,  Portaria Retiro; 03. xi. 2021; A. W. do Prado, H. B. P. Schinelli, R. L. C. Baptista leg.; UFRJ 2420 / ENT 6107  .</p><p>Paraguay: Central: • 1 ♀ 2 J;  Villeta; 30. viii. 1984; J. A. Kochalka leg.; IBNP -Invert-JAK-CR 2574  .   Itapúa: • 1 ♀;  Isla Yacyretá; 23. vi. 1994; J. A. Kochalka leg.; IBNP -Invert-JAK-CR 2576  .   Paraguari: • 1 ♀;  Acahay; 21. iv. 1984; J. A. Kochalka leg.; IBNP -Invert-JAK-CR 2575  •   1 ♀; Ybycuí National Park,  Arroyo Corrientes; 4. ix. 1984; J. A. Kochalka leg.; IBNP -Invert-JAK-CR 2577  .</p><p>Distribution.</p><p>G. violacea is known from Argentina (Corrientes and Jujuy provinces), Paraguay (Central, Paraguari e Itapúa) and all regions of Brazil (Fig. 5).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/81C6A4530EED53B493F4623C1614B3EB	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Pensoft via Plazi	Schinelli, Hector Baruch Pereira;Wanderley do Prado, André;Cerqueira Baptista, Renner Luiz;Takiya, Daniela Maeda	Schinelli, Hector Baruch Pereira, Wanderley do Prado, André, Cerqueira Baptista, Renner Luiz, Takiya, Daniela Maeda (2025): A new species and the phylogenetic placement of the Neotropical genus Gephyrellula Strand, 1932 (Araneae, Philodromidae). Evolutionary Systematics 9 (1): 87-98, DOI: 10.3897/evolsyst.9.143758
