Cebrennus tunetanus Simon, 1885
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3790.2.4 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:BDA1931C-FEDB-4142-8A63-2765593621A9 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6124575 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DA87EF-FF83-3950-FF69-FAD683061CED |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Cebrennus tunetanus Simon, 1885 |
status |
|
Cebrennus tunetanus Simon, 1885 View in CoL
Figs 162–171 View FIGURES 162 – 171 , 173 View FIGURE 173
Cebrennus tunetanus Simon, 1885: 14 View in CoL (Description of male; holotype male, Tunisia, Enfida or El Kef, MNHN 1613-6491, examined). Fage 1921: 163, figs 2d–f (illustration of male, description of female); Jäger 2000: 185, figs 86–88 (illustration of male and female).
Note. Jäger (2000) considered the two specimens from MNHN syntypes. This cannot be true, since Simon described only the male sex ( Simon 1885). Most likely the female was added from Fage when he described the female ( Fage 1921). Simon (1885) mentioned "quelque femelles jeunes" (several female juveniles) which are not present in this series.
Additional material examined. 1 female, no data given by Fage (1921) ( MNHN 1613-6491; see note above).
Extended diagnosis. Males can be recognised by their proximal tegular hump (i.e. proximal tegulum in lateral view distinctly wider than cymbium) in combination with the short and simple tapering embolus ( Figs 162–164 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ). Females with median field triangular similar to that in C. mayri Jäger 2000 , but distinguished by the two light “windows” at the anterior end ( Fig. 167 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ), and uniquely anteriorly situated glandular appendages covering atria in dorsal view ( Fig. 169 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ).
Description. See Simon (1885) and Fage (1921). Here, some additional data are given.
Male (holotype): PL 7.5, PW 6.2, AW 4.0, OL 6.7, OW 5.4. Anterior eye row straight, posterior eye row recurved, AME largest ( Fig. 166 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ). Spination: Palp: 130, 0 0 0, 1000; legs: femur I 323, II 324, III 323(4), IV 322; patella 000; tibia 2024; metatarsus I–II 2024, III 3024, IV 3036(7). Cheliceral furrow with 2 anterior, 4 adnate posterior teeth and 1 small single tooth distally, without denticles ( Fig. 165 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ). For further description see Simon (1885).
Palp as in diagnosis ( Figs 162–164 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ). Tibia distinctly shorter than cymbium, RTA ventrad. Embolus arising in an 8- to 9-o’clock-position, distal tip situated in a 12-o’clock-position, retrolatero-distad.
Female: PL 8.0, PW 6.5, AW 5.1, OL 8.0, OW 7.5. Anterior eye row straight, posterior eye row recurved, AME largest ( Fig. 171 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ). Spination: Palp: 130, 0 0 0, 1000, 1000; legs: femur I–III 323, IV 321; patella 000; tibia 2024; metatarsus I–III 2024, IV 3036. Cheliceral furrow with 2 anterior, 5 adnate posterior teeth and 2 small single teeth distally, without denticles ( Fig. 170 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ).
Copulatory organ as in diagnosis ( Figs 167–169 View FIGURES 162 – 171 ). Epigynal field wider than long. Epigyne with narrow ridge between anterior “windows” and with posterior margin of median part convex and slightly extending beyond epigastric furrow. Posterior part of internal duct system with several windings. Fertilisation ducts narrow, anteriad. Distribution. Only known from the type locality ( Fig. 173 View FIGURE 173 ).
Biology. According to Simon (1885) spiders of this species build their burrows in plain sandy or slightly clayey habitats. The burrows may be five to eight centimetres deep and three to four centimetres wide. They fix this cavity with a strong and dense tissue of silk and close the entrance completely with a drumhead-like lid. For hunting they leave the tube via a semi-circular slit in the lid (cf. C. rechenbergi spec. nov. and Figs 135–140 View FIGURES 135 – 140 ).
MNHN |
Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle |
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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Cebrennus tunetanus Simon, 1885
Jäger, Peter 2014 |
Cebrennus tunetanus
Jager 2000: 185 |
Fage 1921: 163 |
Simon 1885: 14 |