Soesilarishius laticlavus, Ruiz, Gustavo R. S. & Sobrinho, Adriana T., 2016
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4196.2.4 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:3B2AC3D7-D743-4ADB-8C42-5FBFD05E01A1 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6069991 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/038A7A13-FFEE-3B5D-19FD-99E0FC0EFDB1 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Soesilarishius laticlavus |
status |
sp. nov. |
Soesilarishius laticlavus View in CoL sp. nov.
Figs 12‒20 View FIGURES 12 – 15 View FIGURES 16 – 20
Types. Holotype: Ƌ from Rio Acapu , Floresta Estadual do Trombetas , Oriximiná, Pará, Brazil, 01°07'43.04"S, 56°19'53.90"W, 10–18.X.2014, leg. M.B. Aguiar-Neto et al. ( MPEG 32011 View Materials ) GoogleMaps . Paratypes: 1 Ƌ ( INPA) and 2 ♀ ( INPA, MPEG 32012 View Materials ), same data as holotype. GoogleMaps
Additional material examined. BRAZIL: Pará: Oriximiná, Floresta Estadual do Trombetas , Rio Acapu (along about 25 km on the North margin, between 01°06'10.10"S, 56°26'04.00"W and 01°07'30.50"S, 56°19'05.50"W): 91 Ƌ, 46 ♀, 10–18.X.2014, leg. M.B. Aguiar-Neto et al. ( MPEG 31978–32008 View Materials ). GoogleMaps
Etymology. The epithet is to be treated as a noun in apposition derived from the Latin latus (broad) and clavus (nail), referring to the shape of the RTA.
Diagnosis. The male is similar to that of S. muiratinga Ruiz, 2013 by having a similar broad RTA pointing ventrally ( Fig. 17 View FIGURES 16 – 20 ; compare to Ruiz 2013: fig. 31). The embolus is thinner and aligned to the axis of the palp in S. laticlavus sp. nov. ( Fig. 16 View FIGURES 16 – 20 ), while it is thicker and oblique in S. muiratinga ( Ruiz 2013: fig. 29). The female is similar to those of S. micaceus Zhang & Maddison, 2012 and S. paxiuba Ruiz, 2013 for having a wide coupling pocket near the copulatory openings ( Fig. 18 View FIGURES 16 – 20 ), but can be distinguished from that of S. paxiuba by the smaller spermatheca and from that of S. micaceus by the shorter copulatory duct ( Figs 19‒20 View FIGURES 16 – 20 ).
Description. Male holotype (MPEG 32011). Total length: 2.47. Carapace dark brown with tufts of white scales on central region; cephalic region black ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 12 – 15 ); 1.43 long, 1.09 wide, 0.76 high. Ocular quadrangle 0.76 long; anterior eye row 1.14 wide, posterior 1.00 wide. Chelicera, labium, endite and sternum dark brown ( Fig. 13 View FIGURES 12 – 15 ). Palp dark brown, with small projection on distal prolateral tibia and embolus dorsally curved ( Fig. 17 View FIGURES 16 – 20 ). Legs 1342; I‒II: femora, patellae and tibiae dark brown, metatarsi and tarsi yellow; III‒IV: femora, patellae, tibiae and metatarsi dark brown, tarsi yellow; patellae and tibiae III‒IV with tufts of white scales ( Figs 12–13 View FIGURES 12 – 15 ). Length of leg I 2.90 (1.00 + 1.14 + 0.76); II 2.23 (0.76 + 0.76 + 0.71); III 2.85 (0.95 + 0.90 + 1.00); IV 2.81 (0.81 + 0.95 + 1.05). Abdomen dorsally dark brown with two pairs of white areas covered with tuft of white scales, one on anterior and another on posterior part ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 12 – 15 ); laterally with pair of tufts of white scales on posterior part; dark brown ventrally ( Fig. 13 View FIGURES 12 – 15 ). Spinnerets dark brown.
Female paratype (MPEG 32012). Total length: 2.26. Carapace dark drown, with cephalic region black with blueish sheen ( Fig. 14 View FIGURES 12 – 15 ); 1.19 long, 0.90 wide, 0.64 high. Ocular quadrangle 0.67 long; anterior eye row 0.95 wide, posterior 1.07 wide. Chelicera, labium, endite, sternum and palp yellow ( Fig. 15 View FIGURES 12 – 15 ). Legs 4132; I‒IV yellow. Length of leg I 2.21 (0.74 + 0.88 + 0.59); II 1.81 (0.57 + 0.67 + 0.57); III 2.16 (0.69 + 0.76 + 0.71); IV 2.24 (0.62 + 0.76 + 0.86). Abdomen as in male, slightly lighter; yellow ventrally ( Fig. 15 View FIGURES 12 – 15 ). Epigyne: copulatory duct apparently with no glandular modification; spermatheca poorly modified ( Figs 19‒20 View FIGURES 16 – 20 ). Spinnerets yellow.
Distribution. Known only from the type locality ( Brazil, Pará).
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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |