Runcinioides Mello-Leitão, 1929

Faleiro, Bárbara T. & Santos, Adalberto J., 2019, Revision of the crab-spiders of the genus Runcinioides Mello-Leitão, 1929 (Araneae, Thomisidae), Zootaxa 4567 (1), pp. 25-46 : 26-29

publication ID	https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4567.1.2
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:13DBDF5F-66C4-4A8E-9A97-9F55BC0A59FB
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5936231
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AB87B1-FFD2-C136-84F6-F8847B6C66A5
treatment provided by	Plazi (2019-03-14 07:14:34, last updated 2024-11-28 05:07:09)
scientific name	Runcinioides Mello-Leitão, 1929
status

Treatment

Genus Runcinioides Mello-Leitão, 1929 View in CoL View at ENA

Runcinioides Mello-Leitão, 1929: 211 View in CoL . Mello-Leitão 1944: 319; Mello-Leitão 1947: 276; Caporiacco 1954: 140; Lehtinen 2004: 151; Lehtinen & Marusik 2008: 190.

Misumenops View in CoL ad part. Rinaldi 1988: 20.

Type species: Runcinioides argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929 , by subsequent designation ( Roewer 1955).

Diagnosis. Runcinioides is included in the Misumenini tribe sensu Lehtinen (2004) and shares some characteristics of the group, like the presence of a coupling pocket in the epigyne and male legs I and II with brownish annulations. Males of Runcinioides can be distinguished from all other Misumenini by the presence of a long embolus originating in 4-6 o’clock position in ventral view of the left palp, that runs widely separated from the tegulum in the distal half of the bulb ( Figs 2c View FIGURE 2 , 4e View FIGURE 4 , 6a View FIGURE 6 , 8c View FIGURE 8 , 9c View FIGURE 9 , 11e View FIGURE 11 , 14a View FIGURE 14 ). The female can be distinguished by the presence of a large, non-sclerotized and flexible coupling pocket (= hood sensu Benjamin 2011) ( Figs 2a View FIGURE 2 , 3e View FIGURE 3 , 5 View FIGURE 5 a–c, 9a, 10e, 13a–c), and by the long and coiled stalk of the spermathecae and copulatory ducts ( Figs 2b View FIGURE 2 , 3f View FIGURE 3 , 5 View FIGURE 5 d–e, 9b, 10f, 13d–e).

Description. Small to medium sized spiders (total length: males 2.62–5.04; females 2.92–9.74). Males usually smaller than females, the size dimorphism more accentuated in R. litteratus . Carapace and opisthosoma covered with spiniform setae, especially in R. argenteus ( Figs 3 View FIGURE 3 a–c, 4a–c, 10a–c, 11a–c). Male and female with a line of marginal setae on the carapace, more conspicuous in the males ( Figs 4c View FIGURE 4 , 11c View FIGURE 11 ). Leg formula I-II-IV-III. Two tarsal claws, retroclaw with four ( R. litteratus ) to five ( R. argenteus ) large teeth and one small basal tooth ( Figs 6f View FIGURE 6 , 14f View FIGURE 14 ), proclaw with four ( R. litteratus ) to five ( R. argenteus ) larger teeth and numerous small basal teeth ( Fig. 14f View FIGURE 14 ). Distal tarsus with few pseudotenent setae and some twisted setae ( Figs 6f View FIGURE 6 , 14f View FIGURE 14 ). Macrosetae on the lateroventral side of tibia and metatarsus I and II more conspicuous in the female ( Figs 3 View FIGURE 3 a–b, 10a–b,) than in the male ( Figs 4 View FIGURE 4 a–b, 11a–b). Carapace with two longitudinal dark bands ( Figs 1 View FIGURE 1 , 3 View FIGURE 3 a–c, 4a,c, 8b, 10a,c, 11a,c, 12), male legs I–II with dark rings ( Figs 1c View FIGURE 1 ; 4 View FIGURE 4 a–b; 11a–b) and opisthosoma usually with dorsal dark spots ( Figs 1 View FIGURE 1 b–d, 4a, 8b, 10a, 11a, 12c–f). Male palp larger compared to other genera of Misumenini; without ITA; promargin of the RTA with apical, transverse ridges ( Figs 6e View FIGURE 6 , 14e View FIGURE 14 ); retrolateral margin of the cymbium with a large tutaculum, which ends in a transverse groove ( Figs 2 View FIGURE 2 c–d, 4d–e, 6a–b, d, 9d, 11f, 14d); tegulum round, very sclerotized, with a marginal deep slit delimited by a ridge, which is more pronounced prolaterally ( Figs 2 View FIGURE 2 c–d, 4e–f, 6a–b, d, 9c–d, 11e–f, 14a,d); embolus long, originating at 4 o’clock, with clockwise direction in the left palp ( Figs 2c View FIGURE 2 , 4e View FIGURE 4 , 6a View FIGURE 6 , 8c View FIGURE 8 , 9c View FIGURE 9 , 11e View FIGURE 11 , 14a View FIGURE 14 ). Epigyne with two small cavities caudal to the posterior margin of the coupling pocket, henceforth called “anchor openings” ( Figs 2a View FIGURE 2 , 3e View FIGURE 3 , 5a View FIGURE 5 , 9a View FIGURE 9 , 10e View FIGURE 10 , 13 View FIGURE 13 a–b); copulatory openings aside the coupling pocket ( Figs 5 View FIGURE 5 a–c, 13c). spermathecae with large spermathecal glands (= “head of spermathecae”) ( Figs 2b View FIGURE 2 , 3f View FIGURE 3 , 5 View FIGURE 5 d–f, 9b, 10f, 13d–f); copulatory ducts hyaline, with several loops before attachment to the long and tubular stalk of the spermathecae ( Figs 2b View FIGURE 2 , 3f View FIGURE 3 , 5 View FIGURE 5 d–e, 9b, 10f, 13d–e); fertilization ducts adhered to the posterior plate and attached to the base of the spermathecae ( Figs 2b View FIGURE 2 , 3f View FIGURE 3 , 5d View FIGURE 5 , 9b View FIGURE 9 , 10f View FIGURE 10 , 13 View FIGURE 13 d–e). Male spinnerets ( Fig. 7a View FIGURE 7 ): ALS with one major ampullate gland spigot and a nubbin on prolateral margin and numerous piriform gland spigots on retrolateral margin ( Fig. 7b View FIGURE 7 ); PMS with three anterior aciniform gland spigots and one nubbin, one central tartipore and one posterior minor ampullate gland spigot and a nubbin ( Fig. 7c View FIGURE 7 ); PLS with numerous aciniform gland spigots ( Fig. 7d View FIGURE 7 ).

Remarks. We have examined the female type specimens of Runcinioides pustulatus (MNHN 9401) and R. souzai (MZSP 73), and found their genitalia significantly different from the remaining species of the genus. For instance, both are devoid of the characteristic non-sclerotized and flexible coupling pocket mentioned above. In addition, the recently discovered males of both species do not match the genus diagnosis presented above, and their palp morphology is consistent with characters of other thomisid genera (R.A. Teixeira, pers. comm.). Thus, we decided not to include those species in this revision, and provisionally they should be treated as incertae sedis.

Distribution. Eastern Brazil, from the state of Rio Grande do Norte to Rio Grande do Sul ( Figs 15 View FIGURE 15 a–b). There are two literature records outside Brazil, from French Guiana ( Caporiacco 1954), but since we could not find the specimens, these records remain doubtful.

Composition. Two species, R. argenteus and R. litteratus .

References

Benjamin, S. P. (2011) Phylogenetics and comparative morphology of crab spiders (Araneae: Dionycha, Thomisidae). Zootaxa, 3080, 1 - 108.

Caporiacco, L. (1954) Araignees de la Guyane Francaise du Museum d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris. Commentationes Pontificia Academia Scientiarum, 16, 45 - 193.

Lehtinen, P. T. (2004) Taxonomic notes on the Misumenini (Araneae: Thomisidae: Thomisinae), primarily from the Palaearctic and Oriental regions. In: Logunov, D. V. & Penney, D. (Eds.), European Arachnology 2003. Special Issue 1. Proceedings of the 21 st European Colloquium of Arachnology, St. - Petersburg, 4 - 9 August 2003. KMK Scientific Press, Moscow, pp. 147 - 184.

Lehtinen, P. T. & Marusik, Y. M. (2008) A redefinition of Misumenops F. O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1900 (Araneae, Thomisidae) and review of the New World species. Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society, 14, 173 - 198. https: // doi. org / 10.13156 / 100.014.0406

Mello-Leitao, C. F. (1929) Aphantochilidas e Thomisidas do Brasil. Arquivos do Museu Nacional do Rio de Janeiro, 31, 9 - 359.

Mello-Leitao, C. F. (1944) Aranas de la provincia de Buenos Aires. Revista del Museo de La Plata (N. S., Zool.), 3, 311 - 393.

Mello-Leitao, C. F. (1947) Aranhas do Parana e Santa Catarina, das colecoes do Museu Paranaense. Arquivos do Museu Paranaense, 6, 231 - 304.

Rinaldi, I. M. P. (1988) Misumenops Cambridge e Uraarachne Keyserling (Araneae, Thomisidae, Thomisinae): Sinonimias, novas combinacoes e redescricoes. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia, 32, 19 - 30.

Roewer, C. F. (1955) Katalog der Araneae von 1758 bis 1940, bzw. 1954, 2. Band, Abt. a, Institut royal des Sciences naturelles de Belgique, Bruxelles, 923 pp.

Figures

FIGURE 1a–d. Runcinioides spp., live specimens (a–b Runcinioides litteratus (Piza, 1933), c–d Runcinioides argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929). a female from Belo Horizonte, Brazil (UFMG 22089, photo by L.S. Carvalho); b female from Belo Horizonte, Brazil (UFMG 12660, photo by P.H. Martins); c male from Campos do Jordão, Brazil, in Ruellia sp. (Acanthaceae) (UFMG 22095, photo by V.S.R. Diniz); d female from Campos do Jordão, Brazil, in an unidentified Asteraceae, feeding on a Syrphinae fly (UFMG 22093, photo by V.S.R. Diniz).

FIGURE 2a–d. Runcinioides argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929. (a female holotype, b female (UFMG 6508), c–d male (UFMG 22097). a epigynum ventral.; b vulva dorsal; c–d left palp (c ventral, d retrolateral). Abbreviations: AO, anchor openings; CD, copulatory duct; CP, coupling pocket; Cy, cymbium; E, embolus; Eb, embolus base; FD, fertilization duct; RTA, retrolateral tibial apophysis; S, spermatheca; SG, spermatheca gland; SS, spermatheca stalk; T, tegulum; Tu, tutaculum; VTA, ventral tibial apophysis. Scale bars: a–b, 0.1 mm. c–d, 0.2 mm.

FIGURE 3a–f. Runcinioides argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929 (a–e female holotype, f female (UFMG 6508). a–b habitus (a dorsal, b ventral); c–d prosoma (c frontal, d ventral); e epigynum ventral.; f vulva dorsal. Abbreviations: AO, anchor openings; CD, copulatory duct; CP, coupling pocket; FD, fertilization duct; S, spermatheca; SG, spermatheca gland; SS, spermatheca stalk. Scale bars: a–b, 1.0 mm. c–d, 0.6 mm. e–f, 0.1 mm.

FIGURE 4a–f. Runcinioides argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929 (male, UFMG 22097). a–b habitus (a dorsal, b ventral); c–d prosoma (c frontal, d ventral); e–f left palp (e ventral, f retrolateral). Abbreviations: Cy, cymbium; E, embolus; Eb, embolus base; RTA, retrolateral tibial apophysis; T, tegulum; Tu, tutaculum; VTA, ventral tibial apophysis. Scale bars: a–b, 1.0 mm. c, 0.4 mm. d, 0.5 mm. e–f, 0.3 mm.

FIGURE 5a–f. Runcinioides argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929 (female, UFMG 22215). a epigynum ventral; b–c coupling pocket (b posterior, c ventral); d–e vulva (d dorsal, e anterior); f right spermatheca gland. Abbreviations: AO, anchor openings; CD, copulatory duct; CO, copulatory opening; CP, coupling pocket; FD, fertilization duct; S, spermatheca; SG, spermatheca gland; SS, spermatheca stalk; Scale bars: a, d–e, 100 µm. b–c, 50 µm. f, 10 µm.

FIGURE 6a–f. Runcinioides argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929 (male, UFMG 22096). a–e left palp (a ventral, b retrolateral base, c embolus tip detail, d retrolateral, e RTA tip detail retrolateral); f claws retrolateral of left leg I. Abbreviations: E, embolus; EB, embolus base; PS, pseudotenent setae; RTA, retrolateral tibial apophysis; T, tegulum; Tu, tutaculum; TR, tegulum ridge; VTA, ventral tibial apophysis; Scale bars: a, d, 300 µm. b, f, 100 µm. c, 5 µm. e, 30 µm.

FIGURE 7a–d. Runcinioides argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929 (male, UFMG 22096). a spinnerets; b left anterior lateral spinneret; c posterior median spinnerets; d right posterior lateral spinneret. Abbreviations: Ac, aciniform gland spigot; ALS, anterior lateral spinneret; AT, anal tubercle; MaA, major ampullate gland spigot; MiA, mirror ampullate gland spigot; Nu, nubbin; Pi, piriform gland spigot; PLS, posterior lateral spinneret; PMS, posterior median spinneret; Tp, tatipore; Scale bars: a, 100 µm. b, 30 µm. c–d, 10 µm.

FIGURE 8a–d. Metadiaea paranensis Mello-Leitão, 1932 (male holotype). a–b habitus (a dorsal, b ventral); c–d left palp (c ventral, d retrolateral). Scale bars: a–b, 1.0 mm. c–d, 0.3 mm.

FIGURE 9a–d. Runcinioides litteratus (Piza, 1933) (a–b female holotype, c–d male, UFMG 5963). a epigynum ventral; b vulva dorsal; c–d left palp (c ventral, d retrolateral). Abbreviations: AO, anchor openings; BP, embolus bulging process; CD, copulatory duct; CP, coupling pocket; Cy, cymbium; E, embolus; FD, fertilization duct; RTA, retrolateral tibial apophysis; S, spermatheca; SG, spermatheca gland; SS, spermatheca stalk; T, tegulum; Tu, tutaculum; VTA, ventral tibial apophysis. Scale bars: a–b, 0.1 mm. b–c, 0.2 mm.

FIGURE 10a–f. Runcinioides litteratus (Piza, 1933) (female holotype). a–b habitus (a dorsal, b ventral); c–d prosoma (c frontal, d ventral); e epigynum ventral; f vulva dorsal. Abbreviations: AO, anchor openings; CD, copulatory duct; CP, coupling pocket; FD, fertilization duct; S, spermatheca; SG, spermatheca gland; SS, spermatheca stalk. Scale bars: a–d, 1.0 mm. e, 0.3 mm. f, 0.1 mm.

FIGURE 11a–f. Runcinioides litteratus (Piza, 1933) (male, UFMG 5963). a–b habitus (a dorsal, b ventral); c–d prosoma (c frontal, d ventral); e–f left palp (e ventral, f retrolateral). Abbreviations: BP, embolus bulging process; Cy, cymbium; E, embolus; RTA, retrolateral tibial apophysis; T, tegulum; Tu, tutaculum; VTA, ventral tibial apophysis. Scale bars: a–b, 1.0 mm. c, 0.5 mm. d–f, 0.3 mm.

FIGURE 13a–f. Runcinioides litteratus (Piza, 1933) (female, UFMG 4777). a epigynum ventral; b–c coupling pocket (b posterior, c ventral); d–e vulva (d dorsal, e anterior retrolateral); f right spermatheca gland. Abbreviations: AO, anchor openings; CD, copulatory duct; CO, copulatory opening; CP, coupling pocket; FD, fertilization duct; S, spermatheca; SG, spermatheca gland; SS, spermatheca stalk. Scale bars: a–b, d–e, 100 µm. c, 50 µm. f, 10 µm.

FIGURE 14a–f. Runcinioides litteratus (Piza, 1933) (male. UFMG 22102). a–e left palp (a ventral, b ventral base, c embolus tip detail, d retrolateral, e RTA tip detail retrolateral); f claws retrolateral ventral of left leg I. Abbreviations: BP, embolus bulging process; E, embolus; PS, pseudotenent setae; RTA, retrolateral tibial apophysis; T, tegulum; Tu, tutaculum; TR, tegulum ridge; VTA, ventral tibial apophysis. Scale bars: a, d, 300 µm. b, f, 100 µm. c, 5 µm. e, 20 µm.

FIGURE 15a–b. Geographic distribution records of Runcinioides species. a R. argenteus Mello-Leitão, 1929 (large orange triangle indicates the type locality); b R. litteratus (Piza, 1933) (large, light blue circle indicates the type locality).