Parasyrisca Schenkel, 1963

Marusik, Yuri M., Fomichev, Alexander A. & Omelko, Mikhail M., 2019, New data on Parasyrisca (Araneae: Gnaphosidae) from Mongolia, Zootaxa 4688 (2), pp. 199-212 : 200-201

Parasyrisca Schenkel, 1963

Parasyrisca Schenkel, 1963: 261 ; Ovtsharenko & Marusik 1988: 214; Ovtsharenko et al. 1995: 3; Murphy 2007: 58, f. 484–485; Marusik & Fomichev 2016: 111; Fomichev et al. 2018: 155–168.

Ovtsharenko et al. (1995) while diagnosing Parasyrisca listed the following characters of the copulatory organs that allow this genus to be distinguished from other gnaphosids: “a short embolus supported by a variously shaped conductor; a flat or conical retrolateral tibial apophysis ..., a single, wide anterior atrial hood and elevated posterior ridge or raised median septum on the epigynum; elongated, curved spermathecal ducts with anteriorly situated heads”. In our opinion none of these characters are adequate in allowing the identification of Parasyrisca .

Embolus. Parasyrisca platnicki sp. n. ( Figs 3a, d , 8 ) has long filamentous embolus. Members of P. vinosa - group, as well as P. khubsugul Ovtsharenko et al., 1995 ( Figs 7 c–f) have rather large emboli. The unique characters in Parasyrisca (except for P. vinosa -group) is that the embolus emerges mesally, is directed antero-prolaterally (anticlockwise), and is hidden, at least at the base by a membranous part of the tegulum. Other gnaphosids have the embolus (at least the tip) directed retrolaterally (clockwise), the whole embolus, including its base, well visible (not hidden by tegulum). Odontodrassus sp. (cf. Murphy 2007: 369) also has its embolus directed anticlockwise, but it is not hidden by any sclerite.

Conductor. Many genera of Gnaphosidae possess variously shaped conductors, but none of them have their conductor located both “prolaterally” and “more prolaterally than the embolus”. All gnaphosids known to us have conductor retrolateral to their embolus, and most of these conductors are on retrolateral side of the tegulum.

Tibial apophysis. Most of gnaphosids have a conical apophysis, while in Parasyrisca only one group, guseripli , possesses such a type. A flat tibial apophysis is known at least in Haplodrassus Chamberlin, 1922 (cf. Omelko & Marusik, 2012: figs 16–19) and Phaeocedus Simon, 1893 (cf. Murphy 2007: p. 289), but in these genera the apophysis is an anterior extension of the tibia and adjoins to the cymbium, while in Parasyrisca it is squarrose ( Figs 2 a–c, e–g, 3a–c, e–g).

Anterior hood (=pocket). Parasyrisca vinosa -group and P. platnicki sp. n. each have two hoods mesally fused.

Posterior ridge (=posterior pocket). Posterior ridge is absent in some species of P. guseripli -group, P. golyakovi Marusik & Fomichev, 2016 and P. marusiki Kovblyuk, 2003 .

Endogyne. The homologies of endogynal structures are not absolutely clear, but it seems that the copulatory ducts are very short and lead to each receptacle located anteriorly from copulatory opening (in majority of the gnaphosids the receptacles are located posteriorly from the openings). In addition the “spermathecal ducts” (termed by us as “receptacular ducts”) are very long, wide and heavily sclerotized in P. potanini -group, sometimes as wide as each receptacle, and apparently serve as fertilization ducts (small and membranous in all other gnaphosids).

Such different structures of the male palp and epigyne within the genus most likely indicate that Parasyrisca is not a monophyletic taxon and can be split into several genera (e.g., each species group may be a separate genus.). Different conformations of copulatory organs do not allow us to make a proper diagnosis that will cover all species.

Homology of the bulbal sclerites. Ovtsharenko et al. (1995) recognize four separate sclerites within the bulb: embolus, conductor, terminal and tegular apophyses. The descriptive terms we use are related to: 1) function: transfer of sperm (embolus), support and guiding of embolus (conductor), 2) position (terminal apophysis) and 3) homology (tegular apophysis). Both apophyses have terminal positions, and originate from the same base ( Figs 7 a–f), and seem unrelated to or not belonging to the tegulum. In addition, the embolus originates from the terminal apophysis ( Fig. 7f ). In our view both terminal and the so-called tegular apophyses are part of the embolic division.

The tegular apophysis homologous to that in Gnaphosa Latreille, 1804 , Haplodrassus , Drassodes Westring, 1851 and many other genera is missing in Parasyrisca .

Affiliation of Parasyrisca . Ovtsharenko et al. (1995) placed this genus close to Orodrassus Chamberlin, 1922 due to the somatic characters, although only two of them, “eye position and cheliceral armature”, have been mentioned. Both genera are considered by Ubick et al. (2005) to belong to the ill-defined “Drassodinae”. Murphy (2007) placed the genus in the informal “ Haplodrassus group” together with Haplodrassus , Orodrassus and some other genera. The most recent paper with cladistic analysis of Gnaphosidae (Azevedo et al., 2017) lists Parasyrisca among “unplaced” genera. Judging from the conformation of the copulatory organs, as well as the unusual spination of tibia I and the relatively closely spaced anterior lateral spinnerets, this genus may belong to a separate subfamily or even an entire family.

Comments. Ovtsharenko et al. (1995) recognised in Parasyrisca four species groups: potanini , vinosa , guzeripli and breviceps. These groups are not evenly distributed. On the one hand, the potanini -group is spread almost throughout the Palaearctic and is also known from Western Nearctic. On the other hand, the distribution of the breviceps -group is confined to a small area of the Ghissar-Alai and Pamir Mountains in Central Asia. All species groups with the exception of the breviceps -group have a strongly disjunct ranges. The distribution of all species groups is discussed in detail by Fomichev et al. (2018). Diagnoses of species groups are provided in Ovtsharenko et al. (1995) but they need to be clarified because structures of male palps and epigynes are insufficiently detailed. Ovtsharenko et al. (1995) did not noted that the males of Parasyrisca , at least of the potanini -group, have legs covered by elongated hairs.

Figures

FIGURE 2. Palp of Parasyrisca polchaninovae sp. n. (a–d) and the holotype of P. szinetari sp. n. (e–h). a, e ventral; b, f dorsal; c, g retrolateral; d, h prolateral. Scale = 0.2 mm.

FIGURE 3. Male palp of the holotype of Parasyrisca platnicki sp. n. (a–d) and P. khubsugul (e–g). a, e ventral; b, g dorsal; c, f retrolateral; d prolateral. Scale = 0.2 mm.

FIGURE 7. Male palp and epigyne of Parasyrisca khubsugul. a–b bulb, anterior and prolateral; c–d embolic division, anteroretrolateral and antero-ventral; e–f embolic division, retrolateral and anterior; g–i epigyne, dorsal; caudal and ventral. Scale = 0.1 mm. Abbreviations: Ap anterior pocket, Em embolus, Eo embolic opening, Cd copulatory duct, Co conductor, Ma median apophysis, Pp posterior pocket, Re receptacle, Rd receptacular duct, Te terminal apophysis.

FIGURE 8. Bulb of the holotype of Parasyrisca platnicki sp. n. a ventro-prolateral; b retrolateral; c antero-retrolateral. Scale = 0.1 mm. Abbreviations: Co conductor, Cs conductor spine, Em embolus, Ma median apophysis, Te terminal apophysis.