Aphantochilus

SURESH P. BENJAMIN, 2011, Phylogenetics and comparative morphology of crab spiders (Araneae: Dionycha, Thomisidae), Zootaxa 3080, pp. 1-108 : 10-11

Genus Aphantochilus O. P.-Cambridge, 1870

Figs 7 B, 7H, 10A–E, 11A–F, 12A–D, 13A–F, 14A–F, 15A–D, 16A–F, 17A–F Type species: Aphantochilus rogersi O. P.-Cambridge, 1870 Figs 7 B, 10A–E, 11A–F, 12A–D, 13A–F, 14A–F

Bucranium O. P.- Cambridge, 1881: 772: 66, fig 5. Description of juvenile. Type species Bucranium taurifrons O. P.- Cambridge, 1881, not examined. New synonymy.

Synonymy. The type species of Bucranium is here considered a typical member of the genus Aphantochilus as it fulfills criteria given in the diagnosis below. Bucranium is currently monotypic and thus, taxonomically uninformative. Aphantochilus has priority over Bucranium .

Diagnosis. Separated from other thomisid genera by the hooked-shaped ventral RTA ( Figs 10 A, B, 11B, 15A, 16B, C), lack of VTA and DTA, presence of cymbial peg teeth ( Figs 10 A, 11A–F, 15A, 16A–D), presence of dual spermathecal chambers with a relatively long CD ( Figs 10 D, E), reduced labium, legs I and II not elongated (leg III is the shortest) and spine-like prosomal projections ( Figs 13 A, B, 17A-C). Other characters that distinguish Aphantochilus are the presence of a femoral apophysis (FA, Figs 11 E, 16A), ant mimicking behavior of its members ( Oliveira & Sazima 1984) and cymbial modifications of the male palp (which is closely associated with the RTA).

Composition. Four species, A. cambridgei Canals, 1933 , A. inermipes Simon, 1929 , A. rogersi O. P.-Cambridge, 1870, and A. taurifrons O. P.- Cambridge, 1881 comb. nov.

Figures

FIGURE 7. Tarsi of Thomisidae, tarsi showing trichobothrial number and pattern, dorsal view. A, B, D – H female; C male. A Thomisus granulifrons; B Aphantochilus rogersi, left leg 4; C Pharta gongshan, left leg 1; D Epidius parvati, left leg 4; E Thomisops pupa, left leg 1; F Geraesta hirta, left leg 1; G Stephanopis cambridgei, left leg I; H Aphantochilus taurifrons, left leg 4. Scale bars = 20 µm (D), 100 µm (A – C, E – H).

FIGURE 10. Aphantochilus rogersi. A – B male palp (A retrolateral, B ventral); C epigynum, ventral; D – E vulva (D ventral, E dorsal). Scale bars = 0.2 mm.

FIGURE 11. Scanning electron micrographs of Aphantochilus rogersi. A – E male palp (A prolateral, B ventral, C – E retrolateral); F tip of cymbium. Scale bars = 100 µm.

FIGURE 13. Scanning electron micrographs of Aphantochilus rogersi, female. A, B, F prosoma (A, F dorsal, B lateral); C endites and labium, ventral view; D detail of endites; E palp, ventral view. Scale bars = 100 µm (D – F), 1 mm (A – C).