Genus Hatitia Brescovit, 1997

Hatitia Brescovit, 1997: 114–115, figs 309–314 (male holotype and female paratype, examined).

Diagnosis

Males of Hatitia resemble those of Hibana Brescovit, 1991, Pippuhana Brescovit, 1997, Tafana Simon, 1903 and Umuara Brescovit, 1997 by having a conical-shaped embolic process (EP) in the expanded copulatory bulb (see Brescovit 1997: figs 221, 229, 247, 301). They differ by the long and spiraled embolus where it rests on a distal truncated region of the tegulum (Figs 1E, 3A–D, 4C, 5E–G, 6E, 7C, 8C, 9B–C, 10C–D, 11D). The EP is short and not totally inserted in the expanded copulatory bulb and with a wide embolus base in Hibana (see Brescovit 1997: fig. 221); massive with insertion near the apex of the tegulum in Pipphuana (see Brescovit 1997: figs 301–302); wide in the middle and totally inserted in the expanded copulatory bulb behind the tegulum in Tafana (see Oliveira & Brescovit 2021: figs 9c–d); narrowed and totally inserted in the expanded copulatory bulb and with apophysis in the apex in Umuara (see Brescovit 1997: figs 247–248).

Additionally, Hatitia males present endites with an almost straight outer margin, a short median tibial apophysis in retrolateral view, a straight prolateral subtegulum prominent in the unexpanded palp, a ventral tegular projection near the median apophysis, a tegulum extremely projected and a rounded or conical cymbial projection in retrolateral and prolateral view (Figs 11C–H, 12C–H, 13C–H). Females of Hatitia resemble those of Aljassa Brescovit, 1997 and Tafana by the sinuous lateral lobes, parallel in the posterior region and posterior region with a cuticle covering the lateral lobes (see Brescovit 1997: fig. 287; Oliveira & Brescovit 2021: figs 15f, 17f, 19f, 22f, 25f). They differ by the wide and curved copulatory ducts in the anterior region in the internal vulva and seminal rounded receptacles in the middle of the copulatory ducts (Figs 1I, 4G, 7G, 8G, 10J, 11J). In Aljassa, the epigynal plate has a hood in the median region, coiled and narrow copulatory ducts, and a slender seminal receptacle in the anterior region of the internal vulva (see Brescovit 1997: fig. 288); in Tafana the copulatory ducts are sinuous with wide seminal receptacles near the spermathecae (see Oliveira & Brescovit 2021: figs 10g, 14g, 15g, 16g).

Description (see Brescovit 1997: 113–115)

Complementary data: carapace sub-rectangular, narrow in anterior region, and enlarged near coxae II– III, cephalic region moderately high (Figs 1A, C, 4A, 6C, 7A–B, 8A–B, 10A–B, 11A–B). Eyes, in dorsal view, with anterior row slightly recurved and posterior row straight (Figs 1A, C, 4A–B, 6C–D, 7A–B, 8A–B, 10A–B, 11A–B, 12A, 13A). Chelicerae long and projected, approximately half the length of the carapace in males and, shorter about a third of the carapace length, in females (Figs 1A–D, 2D–E, 6C). Fang base and shaft relative sizes, with shaft longer or base shorter than shaft (Fig. 2D). The fang base contains cheliceral glands in both males and females (Figs 2B–C, F, 5B, D), with 3–5 promarginal teeth and 3–5 retromarginal denticles (Figs 2A–B, D–E, 5A, C, 9A). Endites nearly straight on lateral margin (Figs 11C, 12B, 13B) or furrowed (Fig. 1B, D). Oval sternum, with setae, rounded at the apex, triangular at the base (Figs 1B, D, 13B) or narrow (Fig. 12B). Legs with two rows of trichobothria with striated base on the dorsum of the metatarsi and tarsi I–IV (Fig. 2H). Tarsal organ rounded and, located on the distal region of tarsus (Fig. 2I). Paired tarsal claws with 4–6 teeth (Fig. 2G). Male palp: dorsal patellar apophysis short and unique (Figs 4D–E, 7D, 8D, E, 10F); median tibial apophysis short and triangular or absent in the median region of the tibiae (Figs 3E, G, 4D–E, 5H–I, K, 7D–E, 8D–E, 9D–E, 10E–G); retrolateral tibial apophysis short conical with a wide base, may be present furrow in the middle and with a squamous or rugose texture (Figs 1E–F, 3F–G, 4C–E, 5H–K, 6E–G, 7C–E, 8C–E, 9B–E, 10C–G, 11E–G, 12D–F, 13E–G); prolateral tibial apophysis conical and short (Figs 6H, 12G); cymbium oval (Figs 1F–G, 8D, 10E, 11F, 13C), projected or with the retrolateral region excavated (Figs 12D, G–H, 13C–F), and also has retrolateral and prolateral projection at the base (Figs 4E, 7C, 8C, 9D–E, 12D); cymbial conductor with unique furrow (Figs 1E, 3A–B, 4C, 5E, 6E, 7C, 8C, 9B, 10D) or is bilobed at the apex (Fig. 13C–D); subtegulum prominent straight positioned in prolateral region in the unexpanded palp (Figs 1G, 4C, 6E, 10H, 11H, 12G, 13H); tegulum oval sclerotized (Figs 1E, 3A–B, 4C, 5E, 6E, 7C, 8C, 9B, 10C–D, 12C) or extremely projected (Figs 11D–H, 12C–H, 13C–H) with a retrolaterally projected ventral tegular projection near the median apophysis (Figs 3C–D, 5E–G, 10D) or without a ventral tegular projection (Figs 11D–E, 13C–E); median apophysis sclerotized, long, and laminar with medially furrowed apex that is curved (Figs 3A, C–D, 4C, 5F–G, 6E, 7C, 8C, 9B–C, 10D, 11E–F, 12D, H, 13C, E); sperm duct presenting three or four loops in expanded or unexpanded palp to both, with tegulum projected or not (Figs 1E–G, 6E, 7C, 8C, 10C–D, 11D–H, 12C–H, 13C–H; see Brescovit 1997: figs 311–312); embolus long and filiform (Figs 1E, 3A–D, 4C, 5E–G, 6E, 7C, 8C, 9B–C, 10D, 11D, 12C, 13D). Epigynum with rounded hood (Figs 1H, 3H, 4F, 5L, 6I, 7F, 8F, 11I), or without (Fig. 10I); with sinuous lateral lobes, lobe parallel in the posterior region (Figs 1H, 3H, 4F, 5L, 6I, 7F, 8F, 10I, 11I); atrium short (Figs 1H, 3H, 4F, 6I, 7F); copulatory opening positioned in the anterior region (Figs 1H, 4F, 5L, 6I, 7F, 8F, 10I, 11I). Internally, the copulatory ducts are wide and curved, narrowing to the spermathecae in the posterior region (Figs 1I, 4G, 7G, 8G, 10J, 11J); seminal receptacles rounded in the middle of the copulatory ducts (Figs 1I, 7G, 8G, 10J, 11J) or inconspicuous (Fig. 4G); spermathecae oval, close to each other (Figs 1I, 4G, 8G, 10J, 11J) or separated by almost a third of their diameter (Fig. 7G); fertilization ducts slender, near the epigastric furrow, originating from the base of the spermathecae (Figs 1I, 4G, 7G, 8G, 10J, 11J).

Group yhuaia

Diagnosis

The yhuaia group differs from the canchaque group by the palp lacking a tegular projection and endites with external lateral margin furrowed and by the female epigynum with hood positioned in the anterior region or absent (Figs 1E–I, 3A–H, 4C–G, 5E–L, 6E–I, 7C–G, 8C–G, 9B–E, 10C–J).

Composition

Hatitia yhuaia, H. riveti, H. sericea, H. zarate sp. nov., H. winayhuayna sp. nov. and H. cajuata sp. nov.

Group canchaque

Diagnosis

The canchaque group differs from the yhuaia group by the palp with a projected tegulum and endites with a straight lateral margin; and the female epigynum with hood positioned in the median region and curved copulatory ducts forming an arc (Figs 11C–J, 12C–H, 13C–H).

Composition

Hatitia canchaque, H. oxapampa sp. nov. and H. machiguenga sp. nov.