Raveniola, Zonstein, 1987
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2024.967.2699 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:C08B8027-50CC-417E-BCD4-5183B9FF6738 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03A8B723-553A-FFA8-FDBF-E401FAC5C9B2 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Raveniola |
| status |
|
Raveniola View in CoL concolor species group
Diagnostic characters
Maxilla with numerous cuspules arranged in a triangular area ( Figs 205–215 View Figs 202–210 View Figs 211–219 , 230–242 View Figs 229–237 View Figs 238–246 ). PLS chiefly medium-sized, sometimes small ( Figs 559–588 View Figs 555–564 View Figs 565–574 View Figs 575–583 View Figs 584–592 ). Apical segment of PLS mostly triangular, though in some species shortly digitiform (as in Figs 577–579, 581 View Figs 575–583 ). Males: tibiae and metatarsi I–II in many species of the group with long, thin and erect hairs ( Figs 262 View Figs 256–264 , 265, 267, 269–272 View Figs 265–273 , 297–302 View Figs 290–309 ); cymbium very short (as in Figs 352–364 View Figs 349–363 View Figs 364–378 ); tapering embolus bent and screwed subapically, with or without subapical keels ( Figs 385–428 View Figs 379–388 View Figs 389–399 View Figs 400–408 View Figs 409–417 View Figs 418–428 ). Females: spermathecae mostly U- or V-shaped with wide bases and with inner and outer branches more or less widely separated apart ( Figs 490–512, 520–525 View Figs 487–503 View Figs 504–521 View Figs 522–536 ), or spermathecae narrow F- or Y-shaped in some species ( Figs 489 View Figs 487–503 , 513–519 View Figs 504–521 ).
Species included
Raveniola afghana sp. nov., R. alajensis sp. nov., R. concolor Zonstein, 2000 , R. cucullata sp. nov., R. dolosa sp. nov., R. hirta sp. nov., R. ignobilis sp. nov., R. insolita sp. nov., R. karategensis sp. nov., R. ornata sp. nov., R. ornatula sp. nov., R. pamira sp. nov. and R. sororcula sp. nov.
Key to the species of the concolor View in CoL group
Males
Males of Raveniola afghana sp. nov., R. karategensis sp. nov. and R. sororcula sp. nov. are unknown.
1. Hairs on tibia and metatarsus IV unmodified. Embolus either subequal to tegulum in length, or considerably longer than the latter ( Figs 385–399 View Figs 379–388 View Figs 389–399 , 403–428 View Figs 400–408 View Figs 409–417 View Figs 418–428 ) ........................................................... 2
– Tibia and metatarsus IV with dense thin and long modified hairs ( Fig. 313 View Figs 310–318 ). Embolus shorter than tegulum ( Figs 400–402 View Figs 400–408 )............................................................................................. R. hirta sp. nov.
2. Embolus approximately as long as tegulum ( Figs 397–399 View Figs 389–399 , 403–408 View Figs 400–408 )............................................. 3
– Embolus considerably longer than tegulum ( Figs 385–396 View Figs 379–388 View Figs 389–399 , 409–428 View Figs 409–417 View Figs 418–428 )............................................. 4
3. Proximal part of embolus (viewed from lateral aspect) with two raised opposite keels ( Figs 403, 406 View Figs 400–408 ) ...................................................................................................................... R. ignobilis sp. nov.
– Proximal part of embolus with two poorly discernible vestigial keels ( Figs 397– 398 View Figs 389–399 ) ........................................................................................................................ R. dolosa sp. nov.
4. Sternum broadly oval ( Figs 205–211, 214–215 View Figs 202–210 View Figs 211–219 ). PMS medium-sized to moderately small; apical segment of PLS triangular ( Figs 560, 563 View Figs 555–564 , 565, 568, 571, 573, 575, 584)........................................ 5
– Sternum subcircular ( Figs 212–213 View Figs 211–219 ). PMS small and thin; apical segment of PLS shortly digitiform ( Figs 577 View Figs 575–583 , 781)................................................................................................................................... 9
5. Abdomen with darker chevron-like pattern ( Figs 4–7, 9–10, 13–14 View Figs 1–9 View Figs 10–18 ) ............................................... 6
– Abdomen uniformly dark coloured ......................................................... R. concolor Zonstein, 2000
6. Palpal tibia very long, 4.7–5.1 times as long as wide ( Figs 352, 360 View Figs 349–363 ). Embolus with long proximal and short distal sections, as in Figs 385–387 View Figs 379–388 , 409–411 View Figs 409–417 ..................................................................... 7
– Palpal tibia shorter, 4–4.5 times as long as wide ( Figs 354–355, 363–364 View Figs 349–363 View Figs 364–378 ). Embolus differs ( Figs 389– 396 View Figs 389–399 , 418–428 View Figs 418–428 ) .................................................................................................................................... 8
7. Palpal tibia longer, 5–5.1 times as long as wide ( Fig. 352 View Figs 349–363 ). Proximal part of embolus stouter and clearly keeled ( Figs 385–387 View Figs 379–388 ) ............................................................................. R. alajensis sp. nov.
– Palpal tibia relatively shorter, 4.7 times as long as wide ( Fig. 360 View Figs 349–363 ). Proximal part of embolus with keel vestige and thinner ( Figs 409–411 View Figs 409–417 )................................................................ R. insolita sp. nov.
8. Tibia and metatarsus I elongate, slender, and covered with very long thin setae ( Figs 271– 272 View Figs 265–273 ). Metatarsus I, viewed from ventral aspect, with narrowed arcuate proximal section ( Figs 301, 302 View Figs 290–309 ). Embolus with almost equally short and low dorsal and ventral keels ( Figs 418– 428 View Figs 418–428 ) ....................................................................................................................... R. pamira sp. nov.
– Tibia and metatarsus I stouter and covered with less modified shorter setae ( Figs 263–264 View Figs 256–264 ). Metatarsus I, viewed from ventral aspect, without certain basal constriction ( Figs 293–294 View Figs 290–309 ). Embolus with long and raised ventral keel; dorsal keel absent ( Figs 389–396 View Figs 389–399 , 469–470 View Figs 466–474 )................ R. cucullata sp. nov.
9. Labium longer and narrower, maxillae with relatively smaller but more numerous cuspules ( Fig. 212 View Figs 211–219 ). Tarsi I–IV apically with relatively dense laterodistal tufts of long setae. Embolus longer and less tapering, with relatively shorter distal part ( Figs 412–414 View Figs 409–417 )....................... R. ornata sp. nov.
– Labium shorter and broader, maxillae with relatively larger but less numerous cuspules ( Fig. 213 View Figs 211–219 ). Tarsi I–IV apically with sparse laterodistal tufts of short setae. Embolus shorter and more tapering, with relatively longer distal part ( Figs 415–417 View Figs 409–417 ) ................................................ R. ornatula sp. nov.
Females
Females of Raveniola insolita sp. nov. are unknown.
1. Anterodistal edge of chelicera with dense brush of stout setae in front of fang base. Tibia and metatarsus IV with dense, evenly thin, long, and more or less uniformly arranged modified hairs ( Figs 310–311, 314, 316–317 View Figs 310–318 )........................................................................................................... 2
– Anterodistal edge of chelicera without dense brush of stout setae. Hairs on tibia and metatarsus IV heterogeneous and unmodified (as in Figs 312, 315, 318 View Figs 310–318 ) ................................................................ 5
2. Clypeus shorter then diameter of ALE; anterior eye row nearly straight ( Fig. 167 View Figs 160–171 ). Spermathecae with short and straight branches ( Figs 491–493 View Figs 487–503 , 504–508, 510–512 View Figs 504–521 )............................................... 3
– Clypeus noticeably wider than diameter of ALE; anterior eye row strictly procurved ( Fig. 167 View Figs 160–171 ). Spermathecae with long twisted branches ( Figs 489–490 View Figs 487–503 ) .................................. R. afghana sp. nov.
3. Abdomen dorsally uniformly dark or with poorly discernible dark chevron-like pattern ( Figs 42, 44 View Figs 36–44 ). Spermathecae with unevenly wide pair of branches: outer branch clearly slenderer than the massive and often multilobate inner branch ( Figs 504–508, 510–512 View Figs 504–521 ) .......................................................... 4
– Abdomen dorsally with distinct, dark chevron-like pattern ( Fig. 38 View Figs 36–44 ). Each spermatheca with almost uniformly slender inner and outer branches ( Figs 491–493 View Figs 487–503 )............................... R. alajensis sp. nov.
4. Abdomen dorsally uniformly dark brown or with almost indistinct paler chevrons ( Fig. 42 View Figs 36–44 ). Tibia and metatarsus IV dorsally with extremely dense modified hairs ( Fig. 314 View Figs 310–318 ). Spermathecae as in Figs 504–508 View Figs 504–521 ............................................................................................................. R. hirta sp. nov.
– Abdomen dorsally medium brown with poorly discernible dark brown chevron-like pattern ( Fig. 44 View Figs 36–44 ). Tibia and metatarsus IV dorsally with moderately dense modified hairs ( Figs 316–317 View Figs 310–318 ). Spermathecae as in Figs 510–512 View Figs 504–521 .................................................................. R. karategensis sp. nov.
5. Abdomen with darker chevron-like or reticulate pattern ( Figs 39–41, 43 View Figs 36–44 , 45–49 View Figs 45–53 ). Spermathecae with dissimilar inner and outer branches on low common base ( Figs 495–503 View Figs 487–503 , 509, 520–525 View Figs 504–521 View Figs 522–536 ), or with main trunk and lateral diverticulum ( Figs 513–519 View Figs 504–521 )......................................................................... 6
– Abdomen uniformly dark coloured. Spermathecae with similar inner and outer branches on high common base ( Fig. 494 View Figs 487–503 ) .......................................................................... R. concolor Zonstein, 2000 View in CoL
6. Sternum broadly oval ( Figs 233–235, 237 View Figs 229–237 , 241–242 View Figs 238–246 ). Abdomen without darker ventral pattern or with a few dark marks on ventral side. PMS mostly medium-sized; apical segment of PLS shorter and triangular (as in Figs 566–567, 574 View Figs 565–574 , 585–588)........................................................................... 7
– Sternum subcircular ( Figs 239–240 View Figs 238–246 ). Abdomen with more or less dense maculate pattern on ventral side ( Figs 580, 583 View Figs 575–583 ). PMS small and thin; apical segment of PLS longer and shortly digitiform ( Figs 578–579, 582 View Figs 575–583 )..........................................................................................................................11
7. Habitus as in Figs 39–40 View Figs 36–44 , 48–49 View Figs 45–53 . Each paired spermatheca U-shaped, with outer and inner branches distinctly separated from each other; inner branch often multilobate ( Figs 494–499 View Figs 487–503 , 520–525 View Figs 504–521 View Figs 522–536 ) ..... 8
– Habitus as in Figs 41, 43 View Figs 36–44 . Each paired spermatheca V-shaped, with outer and inner branches arising very close to each other; inner branch entire ( Figs 500–503 View Figs 487–503 , 509 View Figs 504–521 ) ................................................. 10
8. Maxillae with 70–90 cuspules ( Figs 241–242 View Figs 238–246 ). Tarsus II with entire scopula. Spermathecae usually shorter and broader spaced from each other ( Figs 520–525 View Figs 504–521 View Figs 522–536 ). Basal segment of PLS ventrally with denser spigots confined to about posterior 0.35–0.40 of its length ( Figs 585, 587 View Figs 584–592 ).......................... 9
– Maxillae with 35–60 cuspules ( Figs 233–234 View Figs 229–237 ). Scopula on tarsus II widely divided. Spermathecae usually longer and closer spaced from each other ( Figs 495–499 View Figs 487–503 ). Basal segment of PLS ventrally with sparser spigots confined to about posterior 0.20–0.25 of its length ( Figs 564 View Figs 555–564 , 566) .................................................................................................................... R. cucullata sp. nov.
9. Spermathecae with stouter multilobate inner branches ( Figs 520–523 View Figs 504–521 View Figs 522–536 ). Apical segment of PLS longer and about 1.5 times as long as wide ( Figs 585–586 View Figs 584–592 )................................... R. pamira sp. nov.
– Spermathecae with thinner and smaller inner branches ( Figs 524–525 View Figs 522–536 ). Apical segment of PLS shorter and about as long as wide ( Figs 587–588 View Figs 584–592 ) ............................................. R. sororcula sp. nov.
10. PMS smaller; apical segment of PLS longer ( Figs 569–570 View Figs 565–574 ). Inner and outer spermathecal branches shorter ( Figs 500–503 View Figs 487–503 )............................................................................................. R. dolosa sp. nov.
– PMS larger; apical segment of PLS shorter ( Fig. 574 View Figs 565–574 ). Inner and outer spermathecal branches longer ( Fig. 509 View Figs 504–521 ) ............................................................................................................. R. ignobilis sp. nov.
11. Habitus as in Figs 45–46 View Figs 45–53 . Labium longer and narrower, maxillae with relatively smaller but more numerous cuspules ( Fig. 239 View Figs 238–246 ). Spermathecae with entire trunks ( Figs 513–519 View Figs 504–521 ). Ventral abdominal pattern sparser ( Fig. 580 View Figs 575–583 )......................................................................................... R. ornata sp. nov.
– Habitus as in Fig. 47 View Figs 45–53 . Labium shorter and broader, maxillae with relatively larger but less numerous cuspules ( Fig. 240 View Figs 238–246 ). Spermathecae with mostly two- or three-lobate trunks ( Figs 517–519 View Figs 504–521 ). Ventral abdominal pattern denser ( Fig. 583 View Figs 575–583 ).................................................................... R. ornatula sp. 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.