Stenaelurillus lesserti Reimoser, 1934

Logunov, Dmitri V., 2020, Further notes on the genus Stenaelurillus Simon, 1885 from India (Araneae Salticidae), Zootaxa 4899 (1), pp. 201-214 : 205-207

Stenaelurillus lesserti Reimoser, 1934

Figures 10–14

Stenaelurillus lesserti Reimoser, 1934: 504 , figs 25–26 (³ lectotype, here designated, in the Muséum d′histoire naturelle, Gèneve, Switzerland—not examined, but see Wesołowska 2014a: fig. 2B–F); Prószyński 1984: 139; Wesołowska 2014: 248, figs 1A–B, 2B–F, 3A–D (fig. 2A is Stenaelurillus ilesai per Kanesharatnam & Benjamin 2020: 9); Sebastian et al., 2015: 72 , figs 4A–C, 5A–G, 6A–C, 7B, 10A–J, 11A–F; Caleb & Sanap 2016: 83, figs 1–11; Caleb 2020: 15741, figs 19E–J, 29H.

Diagnosis and description. See Sebastian et al. (2015) and Caleb & Sanap (2016)

Comments. This species was described and has been repeatedly recorded from India ( Reimoser 1934; Sebastian et al. 2015; etc.). The male and female were also reported from Sri Lanka by Wesołowska (2014a) and Logunov & Azarkina (2018), respectively. Based only on the published illustrations and without a re-examination of the specimens, both Sri Lankan records of S. lesserti were refuted by Kanesharatnam & Benjamin (2020: 9), who subsequently assigned them to the newly described species, S. ilesai Kanesharatnam & Benjamin, 2020 . Unfortunately, the latter assumption was poorly justified and contradicts the available facts.

Firstly, the male of S. lesserti from Sri Lanka reported and illustrated by Wesołowska (2014a: fig. 2A) clearly differs from that of S. ilesai in having a longer, pointed distal projection of the salticid radix bearing numerous strong, black bristles (short, obtuse projection without bristles in S. ilesai ; cf. figs 5D–F, 7B in Kanesharatnam & Benjamin 2020) and a longer, triangular ventral tibial apophysis directed retrolaterad (low and square apophysis directed apicad in S. ilesai ; cf. figs 5F, 7B in Kanesharatnam & Benjamin 2020). Both of these characters conform to those of S. lesserti (cf. Figs 10–12 ; see also figs 8, 9 in Caleb & Sanap 2016).

Secondly, the female of S. lesserti illustrated by Logunov & Azarkina (2018: figs 336, 337) differs from that of S. ilesai in having a deep epigynal pocket (absent in S. ilesai ) and separate insemination ducts (ducts have a joint entrance chamber in S. ilesai ; cf. figs 7D,E in Kanesharatnam & Benjamin 2020). Thus, this female cannot belong to S. ilesai . Yet, this female also differs from that of true S. lesserti in having larger copulatory openings separated by less than one diameter from each other (separated by two diameters in S. lesserti ; cf. Fig. 13 ) and shorter insemination ducts running parallel to the median line and, more importantly, on the dorsal side of the receptacles (running across the receptacles, ventrally in S. lesserti ; cf. Fig. 14 ; see also figs 10, 11 in Caleb & Sanap 2016). Although the female from Sri Lanka illustrated by Logunov & Azarkina (2018) may not belong to S. lesserti , it is also not S. ilesai . More robust conclusions can be expounded when males and females are collected simultaneously. Nonetheless, it is safe to conclude that based on the male reported by Wesołowska (2014a: fig. 2A) from Hambantota (c. 06°07’N, 81°07’E), S. lesserti indeed occurs in Sri Lanka.

There is confusion regarding the whereabouts of the type series of S. lesserti . According to Wesołowska (2014a: 248), who re-described S. lesserti , the original syntype series is kept in the Museum of Natural History (Gèneve, Switzerland). However, two subsequent papers in which this species was mentioned mistakenly referred to the depositories of the syntypes as the National Museum of Natural History ( France) ( Logunov & Azarkina 2018: 77 ) and the Natural History Museum in Vienna ( Austria) ( Caleb 2020: 15741). The WSC (2020) also lists the repository as the latter, and thus requires correction.

As previously noted by Logunov & Azarkina (2018) , the male and female syntypes of S. lesserti were not collected together, and therefore the syntype ♀ reported by Wesołowska (2014a: fig. 3) belongs to a different species that is close to S. arambagensis . To stabilize the nomenclature of S. lesserti , it is necessary to designate a lectotype. Based on recommendations of the ICZN (1999: article 74.7), “a lectotype should give preference to a syntype of which an illustration has been published”. Therefore, the syntype ³ re-examined, re-described and illustrated by the latest reviser ( Wesołowska 2014a: fig. 2B–F) is here designated as the lectotype of S. lesserti . The lectotype was collected from India, Pollachi (c. 10°40’N, 77°01’E), and is deposited in the Museum of Natural History (Gèneve, Switzerland) with accession number ARTO-23248 (P. Schwendinger pers. comm.). Hence, the syntype ♀ illustrated by Wesołowska (2014a: fig. 3) is to be considered the paralectotype of S. lesserti .

Other material examined. INDIA: Andhra Pradesh: nr. Bapatla , 15.86°N, 80.49°E, leg. K. Tomkovich, 20– 28. II .2014, 1³ 5♀ ( ZMMU) .

Distribution. India: Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu ( Caleb & Sanap 2016; Caleb 2019; present data) and Sri Lanka ( Wesołowska 2014a) ( Map 2 ).

Figures

MAP 2. Collecting localities of Stenaelurillus lesserti Reimoser, 1934.

FIGURES 10–14. Stenaelurillus lesserti Reimoser, 1934 from India (Andhra Pradesh). 10–12 Male palp (10 ventral view, 11 retrolateral view, 12 embolic division, dorsal view); 13 Epigyne, ventral view; 14 Vulva, ventral view. Scale: 0.1 mm. Abbreviations: DP—distal projection, E—embolus, RTA—retrolateral tibial apophysis, T—tegulum, VTA—ventral tibial apophysis.