Hybosida machondogo Oketch & Li, 2020
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/afrinvertebr.61.54004 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/4F414E6F-5C47-5C2E-AEE0-0472EC4A81FC |
treatment provided by |
|
scientific name |
Hybosida machondogo Oketch & Li |
status |
sp. nov. |
Hybosida machondogo Oketch & Li View in CoL sp. nov. Figs 5 View Figure 5 , 6 View Figure 6
Type material.
Holotype ♂, Kenya, Nyeri County, Naro Moru Town, Mount Kenya National Park, Naro Moru Gate, Forest Valley, 37°10.16'E, 00°10.61'S, 2488 m, 25.VII.2017, Grace Kioko leg.
Other material examined.
2 ♂ subadults, Kenya, Uasin Gishu County, Endebbes Town, Mount Elgon National Park, Mutamaiyo Camp Site , 34°43.07'E, 01°4.02'N, 2824 m, 7.VII.2017, Grace Kioko leg. GoogleMaps
Etymology.
The specific name is a combination of two Swahili words “macho”, meaning eyes, and “ndogo’’, meaning small, referring to the indiscernible posterior median eyes of this species.
Diagnosis.
Like other members of Chediminae , Hybosida machondogo sp. nov. possess contiguous lateral eyes and accessory structures of the male palp (see Zonstein and Marusik 2013, figs 1-9; Zonstein et al. 2018). It closely resembles H. lesserti by having (1) a more compact carapace with the cephalic part narrowed (2) an elevated carapace with a steep posterior slope (3) a strongly convex carapace in lateral view and (4) poorly developed scopula on both the metatarsi and tarsi of legs I (see Berland 1920, figs 128, 131). However, H. machondogo sp. nov. differs from H. lesserti and other members of this genus by having (1) 8 eyes instead of 6, (2) a bulb with relatively long, sharp and less curved apophysis (vs. strongly curved in H. lesserti ).
Description.
Male. Fig. 5A-C View Figure 5 . Total body length 2.05. Carapace, pedicel and sternum reddish orange, 1.11 long, 0.83 wide at leg II, carapace dome-shaped and covered with white setae at the edges, finely rugose. Thoracic region higher than cephalic region, steeply sloping towards pedicel (Fig. 5C View Figure 5 ). Fovea crescent-like, bipartite (Figs 5A View Figure 5 , 6D View Figure 6 ), wide distally (sulci diverging). Sternum with long, gray setae. Eyes: AER strongly recurved, PER slightly procurved (Fig. 6C View Figure 6 ). Eye sizes and interdistances: AME 0.09, PME ≤ 0.01, PLE=ALE=0.04, AME-AME 0.05, AME-ALE 0.08, AME-PLE 0.06, PME-PME 0.09. Clypeus about 2 times higher than diameter of AME. Labium deeply notched (smoothly recurved in all described palpimanids). Endites colored as sternum, depressed proximally, covered with gray setae. Legs: yellowish without spines. Femur I enlarged and longer than patella; scopula on tibia, metatarsus and tarsus weakly developed (compared to Scelidocteus ). Femur II somewhat longer than femora III-IV (Fig. 5C View Figure 5 ), tarsal claws long and unidentate. Metatarsi II-IV with distal preening comb. Generally, leg integument appears rough. Leg and palp measurements as in Table 3 View Table 3 . Abdomen: unsclerotized, uniformly yellowish, oval, narrow towards the pedicel and wide at the middle. Pedicel considerably exposed, lateral and postgastric scutum extensions absent, dorsal portion of scutum present but short. Spinnerets short yellowish and unsegmented.
Palp yellowish, femur longer than tibia, patella about 2 times shorter than femur. Tibia enlarged, almost conical in prolateral view, 1.86 times wider than patella, about 2 times wider than femur. Cymbium about 1.5 times longer than tibia, slightly shorter than apophysis. Tegular region is membranous, apophysis pointed, extends anteriorly. Embolus short, blunt and directed laterally (Fig. 5D-F View Figure 5 ).
Female. Unknown.
Distribution.
This species is currently known only from the type locality.
Notes.
This species is peculiar because it is at odds with the initial description of the type species of the genus Hybosida , which states that the number of eyes is 6. It does, however, resemble Hybosida in the shape of the carapace, the fovea and the general structure of the male palp. It is therefore treated as belonging to this genus.
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 |
|
SubFamily |
Chediminae |
Genus |