Bayana, Pérez-Miles & Costa & Oca, 2014
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00222933.2014.908970 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D5A6D7EA-19DD-4427-9195-E6A41162EE4E |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B887E5-4931-4D4A-1F6C-FC49FDC907DA |
|
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
|
scientific name |
Bayana |
| status |
gen. nov. |
Bayana gen. nov.
( Figures 1 – 7 View Figure 1 View Figure 2 View Figure 3 View Figure 4 View Figure 5 View Figure 6 View Figure 7 )
Type species
B. labordai sp. nov.
Diagnosis
Bayana gen. nov. resembles Neostothis , Pycnothele , Lycinus Thorell, 1894 and Diplothelopsis Mello-Leitão, 1938 by the dense pubescence in the body ( Figure 1 View Figure 1 vs. Figures 8, 18 in Lucas and Indicatti (2010)). Resembles Pycnothele also by the excavation in male palpal tibia and in the supraspermathecal chamber of females but differ from this genus in the palpal bulb morphology with low keels, embolous long and excavation in male palpal tibia less deep; females differ in the tubular morphology of spermathecae and in the absence of apical scopulae on tibiae I – II. Resembles Neostothis in the palpal bulb morphology with a long embolous and in the presence of supraspermathecal chamber in females, but differs from this genus in the presence of palpal bulb keels, male palpal excavation on tibia I and the morphology of spermathecae without fundus differentiated. Bayana differs from Lycinus and Diplothelopsis in the occurrence of thin setae in male cymbium ( Figure 2a View Figure 2 ), absence of prolateral spines on female patella IV ( Figure 2b View Figure 2 ) and PE line recurved ( Figure 2c View Figure 2 ). Differs from Chilelopsis Goloboff, 1995 in the absence of strong, elongated spines on prolateral metatarsus IV; from Flamencopsis Goloboff, 1995 in the presence of scopula on all legs and absence of spines on female patella IV. Resembles Chaco Tullgren, 1905 in the palpal bulb morphology but differ from this genus in the absence of male tibial apophysis bearing spines ( Figure 2d View Figure 2 ) and non-differentiated spermathecae fundus in females ( Figure 6 View Figure 6 ). Bayana differs from Acanthogonathus Karsch, 1880 in the absence of male tibial apophysis and non differentiated spermathecae fundus in females; from Rachias Simon, 1892 in the absence of thickened setae delimiting male scopulae of tarsus IV and non reduced teeth on STC IV; from Stenoterommata Holmberg, 1881 by the dense pubescence in the body, and in the male palpal bulb abruptly tapered to embolus ( Figures 4a, b View Figure 4 ).
Etymology
Bayana is a noun in apposition taken from the Uruguayan argot and makes reference to the habitants of the boundary between Brazil and Uruguay; the gender of Bayana is feminine.
Description
See description of the type-species.
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.