Manzuma, Azarkina, 2020
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2020.611 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:11AF6BE6-D373-406E-B3B8-D97A03C31590 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3705048 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/B418A6A2-FA57-4C61-9F2C-B99F030471A5 |
|
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:B418A6A2-FA57-4C61-9F2C-B99F030471A5 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Manzuma |
| status |
gen. nov. |
Genus Manzuma View in CoL gen. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:B418A6A2-FA57-4C61-9F2C-B99F030471A5
Type species
Saitis nigritibiis Caporiacco, 1941 , designated here.
Etymology
This genus is dedicated to my mother, Manzuma Mavlyut kyzy Azarkina. At the same time, ‘manzuma’ is an Islamic poetry genre from Ethiopia, the area of origin of the type species, Manzuma nigritibia gen. et comb. nov. Gender feminine.
Diagnosis
The body shape of the new genus is very similar to that of Aelurillus Simon, 1884 . Manzuma differs from Aelurillus in the following characters: (1) base of the embolic division (ED) with an apical projection ( Figs 52, 55 View Figs 52–59 , arrowed, ApP), which is absent in Aelurillus ( Fig. 8 View Figs 4–9 ); (2) the terminal apophysis (TA) is membranous and broad, situated on both pro- and retrolateral sides of the embolus, curved inwards prolaterally ( Figs 56–59 View Figs 52–59 ), while in Aelurillus the TA is more sclerotized, and connected to embolus by a membrane only on the retrolateral side ( Fig. 9 View Figs 4–9 and Azarkina & Zamani 2019: figs 5–11); (3) embolic tip wide, with a short apical membranous process ( Figs 56, 58 View Figs 52–59 ), while in Aelurillus the embolus is pointed apically, without a membranous process ( Figs 8–9 View Figs 4–9 ); (4) epigynal wings are always absent, while in Aelurillus they are always present (see e.g. Azarkina 2002, 2003, 2009, etc.); (5) introductory parts of the insemination ducts are fused around the copulatory openings to form a small tube and then bifurcated ( Figs 36 View Figs , 67 View Figs 60–71 , 94 View Figs 83–94 , 115 View Figs 107–116 , 142 View Figs 131–142 , 164 View Figs 161–167 , CD), while in Aelurillus copulatory openings are always separate, even if they lie in the same epigynal depression ( Figs 1–3 View Figs 1–3 ); (6) accessory glands are short, weakly sclerotized and in most cases seen only from an apical view ( Figs 35 View Figs , 67 View Figs 60–71 , 113–115 View Figs 107–116 , 140–141 View Figs 131–142 , 164 View Figs 161–167 , AG), while in Aelurillus accessory glands are strongly sclerotized and in most cases visible from a dorsal view of the spermathecae ( Figs 2–3 View Figs 1–3 , AG).
Manzuma gen. nov. differs from Rafalus in the following characters: (1) palpal tibia without a ventral bulge, ventral RTA triangular and well developed, dorsal RTA small, rounded ( Fig. 12 View Figs 10–19 ), while in Rafalus the palpal tibia has a ventral bulge, ventral RTA triangular at the base and elongated apically, without dorsal RTA ( Fig. 5 View Figs 4–9 ); (2) base of embolic division with apical protuberance ( Fig. 55 View Figs 52–59 , arrowed, ApP) which is absent in Rafalus ( Fig. 6 View Figs 4–9 ); (3) TA broad in Manzuma gen. nov. ( Figs 56–59 View Figs 52–59 ), narrow in Rafalus ( Figs 6–7 View Figs 4–9 ); (4) clypeus relatively high, ca. half of AME’s diameter, while in Rafalus the clypeus low, about ⅓ of AME’s diameter ( Figs 23, 26 View Figs 23–26 ); (5) the carapace is pear-shaped, almost half as wide at AME, while in Rafalus the carapace is rectangular ( Fig. 24 View Figs 23–26 ); (6) the copulatory openings are situated in the apical part of the epigyne, with short (except for M. kenyaensis , Figs 90–91, 93 View Figs 83–94 ) introductory parts of the insemination ducts ( Figs 34, 36 View Figs , 69–71 View Figs 60–71 , 115 View Figs 107–116 , 140–142 View Figs 131–142 , 164, 167 View Figs 161–167 ), while in Rafalus the openings are situated near the epigastric furrow, introductory parts of the insemination ducts are long and tube-shaped (see Prószyński 1999: figs 3–4, 11–12).
Except for Aelurillus and Rafalus , all other aelurilline genera are distinct from Manzuma gen. nov. in basic body form ( Langona , Langelurillus , Phlegra , Proszynskiana , Stenaelurillus ) or composition of copulatory organs (e.g. coiled embolic division in Asianellus , Langona , Langelurillus , some Phlegra and Phanuelus or embolic division without apical projection in Proszynskiana ).
Definition
Small spiders, ranging in body length from 2.80 to 3.75 mm in males and 3.80 to 4.60 mm in females. Sexes similar in general body shape. Males usually smaller and brighter coloured.
CARAPACE. Rather high, highest point located in PLE or just behind PLE. Colour pattern of both sexes usually with two longitudinal stripes running along the ALE–PLE lines (poorly visible or invisible in some females); fovea present and situated between PLEs; the anterior part of the eye field is covered with short erect bristles similar to the ‘rod-hairs’ described for Asianellus Logunov & Heçiak, 1996 (see Logunov & Heçiak 1996: figs 14–16).
CLYPEUS. Medium to high, ranging between 50–83% of the AME diameter in males and 44–63% in females.
CHELICERAE. Medium length, vertical and of usual shape; promargin with two small teeth, basally fused together, retromargin with one tooth ( Figs 10–11 View Figs 10–19 ).
ENDITES. Subparallel, of usual shape, with pale yellow to white apices; in males of all species with small retrolateral “cavity” (EnC) at the base of endites ( Fig. 15 View Figs 10–19 ), while in females this character is absent ( Fig. 14 View Figs 10–19 ).
STERNUM. Ovoid, longer than wide.
PEDICEL. Short, in live specimens not visible in dorsal view ( Figs 46, 50 View Figs 46–51. 46–48 , 182–183 View Figs 182–187 ).
ABDOMEN. Elongate, without scutum; colour markings simple – with white median longitudinal stripe in males ( Figs 37 View Figs 37–45 , 46 View Figs 46–51. 46–48 , 72–73 View Figs 72–82 , 95–96 View Figs 95–106 , 117–119 View Figs 117–130 , 143–144 View Figs 143–153 , 168–169 View Figs 168–181 , 182–183, 185 View Figs 182–187 , 194 View Figs 194–199 ) and usually with two median longitudinal lines of white spots in females ( Figs 42 View Figs 37–45 , 50 View Figs 46–51. 46–48 , 79 View Figs 72–82 , 103 View Figs 95–106 , 150 View Figs 143–153 , 178 View Figs 168–181 ).
BOOK- LUNG COVERS. Not sclerotized.
SPINNERETS. Medium in size.
LEGS. Subequal in length, with femora of legs III longer than others; female metatarsi I without retrolateral spines; in four species ( M. jocquei , M. kenyaensis , M. nigritibia and M. petroae gen. et sp. nov.) femora I of male with long white or yellow-white hairs prolaterally; tarsal claws narrow, on legs I–II of male with 7–8 teeth prolaterally and 4–5 retrolaterally ( Figs 18–19 View Figs 10–19 ), on legs I–II of female with 1 or 3–4 small teeth pro- and retrolaterally. Leg formula: III/IV/II/I or III/IV/I/II in both sexes.
FEMALE PALP. General form, without an apical claw.
MALE PALP. Femora of usual form, densely covered with long white hairs; tibia short, with ventral short membranous apophysis ( Fig. 13 View Figs 10–19 , arrowed) and a well-developed sclerotized ventral apophysis and bulgelike dorsal apophysis ( Figs 12 View Figs 10–19 , 28 View Figs , 61 View Figs 60–71 , 84 View Figs 83–94 , 108 View Figs 107–116 , 132 View Figs 131–142 , 155 View Figs 154–160 , 189 View Figs 188–193 ), in M. kenyaensis gen. et comb. nov. with dorsal bulge ( Fig. 84 View Figs 83–94 ). Cymbium oval, without apical claw; cymbial apex densely covered with short erect hairs and poorly-marked ventral groove. Basal haematodocha is well-developed ( Figs 20–22 View Figs 20–22 , BH) and subtegulum is simple, visible in an expanded palp only ( Figs 21 View Figs 20–22 , 54 View Figs 52–59 , ST). Tegulum is narrow and elongated, with small apical tegular projection ( Fig. 20 View Figs 20–22 , TP), in M. lympha and M. nigritibia poorly visible. The distal haematodocha is well-developed ( Figs 20–22 View Figs 20–22 , DH) and the salticid radix has a small and rounded proximal projection ( Figs 22 View Figs 20–22 , 52, 54 View Figs 52–59 , PP). Sperm duct runs from the subtegulum, down to the tegulum, and around the salticid radix in a clockwise direction to the ED ( Figs 20–22 View Figs 20–22 , SD). The embolic division consists of the embolus with a large embolic base bearing an apical projection ( Figs 20 View Figs 20–22 , 52, 54–55 View Figs 52–59 , ED, E and ApP) and a broad membranous paddle-shaped terminal apophysis curved inside, situated in both pro- and retrolateral sides of the embolus ( Figs 56–59 View Figs 52–59 ). Embolus slightly curved retrolaterally, apex broad, apically with a short membranous process ( Figs 53–54 View Figs 52–59 ). For an explanation of the male palpal composition see Logunov & Azarkina (2018). For an explanation of the embolic division and its complex origin see Logunov (1996b), Azarkina (2002) and Azarkina & Zamani (2019); in the latter paper EO refers to the ED in this paper.
FEMALE COPULATORY ORGANS. The epigyne has a small epigynal depression around the copulatory openings. The epigynal pocket is situated at the edge of epigastric furrow, deep, protruding ventrally, with cavity inside ( Fig. 166 View Figs 161–167 ) but epigynal wings are absent ( Figs 34 View Figs , 69–71 View Figs 60–71 , 90–91, 93 View Figs 83–94 , 113 View Figs 107–116 , 140– 141 View Figs 131–142 , 161–163 View Figs 161–167 ). The introductory part of insemination ducts is weakly sclerotized, fused around the copulatory openings to a small tube and then bifurcated ( Figs 36 View Figs , 67 View Figs 60–71 , 94 View Figs 83–94 , 115 View Figs 107–116 , 142 View Figs 131–142 , 164 View Figs 161–167 , ID). The remaining parts of insemination ducts are heavily sclerotized, complex and consist of two multichamber sections ( Figs 35 View Figs , 68 View Figs 60–71 , 89 View Figs 83–94 , 114 View Figs 107–116 , 141 View Figs 131–142 , 167 View Figs 161–167 ). The accessory glands are short (contra Wesołowska & van Harten 1994), weakly sclerotized and in most cases seen only from an apical view or through the epigynal tegument ( Fig. 164 View Figs 161–167 , AG). Fertilization ducts arise anteriorly at the top of spermathecae, near the copulatory openings ( Fig. 164 View Figs 161–167 , FD).
Composition
Manzuma gen. nov. consists of seven species known from both sexes, except for M. tanzanica gen. et sp. nov. known from the male only. It includes M. botswana gen. et sp. nov. (♂ ♀, from Botswana and Republic of South Africa), M. jocquei gen. et comb. nov. (♂ ♀, from Ivory Coast, Nigeria and Central African Republic), M. kenyaensis gen. et comb. nov. (♂ ♀, from Kenya), M. lympha gen. et comb. nov. (♂ ♀, from Kenya), M. nigritibia gen. et comb. nov. (♂ ♀, from Ethiopia and Yemen), M. petroae gen. et sp. nov. (♂ ♀, from Republic of South Africa), and M. tanzanica gen. et sp. nov. (♂, from Tanzania).
Distribution
Afrotropical Region (sensu Dippenaar-Schoeman & Jocqué 1997) ( Fig. 200 View Fig ).
Natural history
Like other members of the Aelurillina (Prószyński 2017; Logunov & Azarkina 2018), members of Manzuma gen. nov. are ground-dwellers, occurring in different biotopes with high insulation.
Remarks
Females of six Manzuma gen. nov. species show close similarity in coloration and great intraspecific variability in the structure of copulatory organs ( Figs 69–71 View Figs 60–71 , 90–91 View Figs 83–94 , 113 View Figs 107–116 , 140 View Figs 131–142 , 161–163 View Figs 161–167 ) and are almost indistinguishable from each other. Females of M. botswana gen. et sp. nov., M. kenyaensis gen. et comb. nov. and M. petroae gen. et sp. nov. have a short white stripe on the eye field just behind the AMEs and cheeks with two narrow lines of whitish dense scales running from AMEs to the sides of the carapace ( Figs 42, 45 View Figs 37–45 , 49–50 View Figs 46–51. 46–48 , 103, 106 View Figs 95–106 ). Females of M. jocquei , M. lympha and M. nigritibia are almost indistinguishable except that M. jocquei and M. lympha have the cephalic part of the carapace slightly narrower, than that of M. nigritibia . Females of M. kenyaensis are most distinguishable from other species in structure of spermathecae, they have very long introductory parts of the insemination ducts, almost two-three times longer compare to other species ( Figs 90–91, 93 View Figs 83–94 ). For these reasons I was unable to produce a useable key to females.
Key to species (males)
1. Eye field with median short longitudinal stripe behind AMEs ( Figs 37–39 View Figs 37–45 , 46, 48 View Figs 46–51. 46–48 , 168–171, 176– 177 View Figs 168–181 , 182–183 View Figs 182–187 ) ................................................................................................................................... 2
– Central area of eye field covered with brown short scales, without such a stripe ( Figs 72–73, 75–77 View Figs 72–82 , 95–96, 99–102 View Figs 95–106 , 117–119, 121–125 View Figs 117–130 , 143–145, 147–148 View Figs 143–153 , 194, 196–199 View Figs 194–199 ) ......................................... 3
2. Clypeus covered with short brown scales, with central transverse stripe of white hairs ( Figs 38–39 View Figs 37–45 , 48 View Figs 46–51. 46–48 ). Cheeks with two stripes of white scales running from ALEs to the lateral sides of carapace ( Fig. 38 View Figs 37–45 ). Fm I prolaterally without dense long yellow-white hairs ..... M. botswana View in CoL gen. et sp. nov.
– Clypeus and cheeks covered with long white hairs; clypeus with diamond-shaped patch of brown hairs between AME and on upper half of clypeus ( Figs 170–171, 176–177 View Figs 168–181 , 186–187 View Figs 182–187 ). Fm I prolaterally with dense long yellow-white hairs .......................................................... M. petroae View in CoL gen. et sp. nov.
3. Clypeus covered with sparse long brownish-white hairs ( Figs 99–102 View Figs 95–106 ). Palpal patella brown or brownish yellow dorsally, flattened, without hairs, iridescent ( Figs 100–102 View Figs 95–106 ). Palpal tibia with dorsal bulge ( Fig. 84 View Figs 83–94 ) ................ M. kenyaensis View in CoL (Dawidowicz & et Wesołowska, 2016) gen. et comb. nov.
– Without these characters ................................................................................................................... 4
4. Clypeus densely covered with long white hairs, without diamond-shaped patch of brown hairs between AMEs; upper half of cheeks under ALEs covered with short brown scales, basal half covered with long white hairs ( Figs 75–77 View Figs 72–82 , 121–125 View Figs 117–130 , 196–197 View Figs 194–199 ) ..................................................... 5
– Clypeus with diamond-shaped patch of brown hairs between AME and on upper half of clypeus; cheeks covered with long white hairs from ALEs to margin of carapace ( Figs 145, 147–148 View Figs 143–153 ) ......... .......................................................................... M. nigritibia ( Caporiacco, 1941) gen. et comb. nov.
5. TA with well developed ApP ( Figs 62, 64 View Figs 60–71 , 111 View Figs 107–116 ); T with poorly visible TP ( Figs 61, 64 View Figs 60–71 , 108, 111 View Figs 107–116 ) ... ........................................................................................................................................................... 6
– TA with poorly developed ApP ( Fig 192 View Figs 188–193 ); T with clearly visible TP ( Figs 189, 192 View Figs 188–193 ). Ts, Mt and Ti I ventrally not dark brown ( Figs 195, 197–199 View Figs 194–199 ) ..................................... M. tanzanica View in CoL gen. et sp. nov.
6. Ts, Mt and Ti I ventrally brown or dark brown ( Figs 74–78 View Figs 72–82 ); tip of ApP pointed dorsally ( Fig. 64 View Figs 60–71 ); tibial apophysis broad ( Fig. 61 View Figs 60–71 ) .......................................................................................................... ................................ M. jocquei (Azarkina, Wesołowska & Russell-Smith, 2011) View in CoL gen. et comb. nov.
– Ts, Mt and Ti I ventrally yellow or brownish ( Figs 116 View Figs 107–116 , 120–122 View Figs 117–130 ); tip of ApP ponted ventrally ( Fig. 111 View Figs 107–116 ); tibial apophysis narrow ( Fig. 108 View Figs 107–116 ) .................................................................................... .......................................................... M. lympha ( Próchniewicz & Heçiak, 1994) gen. et comb. nov.
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.