Austrachelas natalensis Lawrence, 1942
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.191594 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6225459 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/038087A2-DA56-450A-FF4F-F96760A2FAE2 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Austrachelas natalensis Lawrence, 1942 |
status |
|
Austrachelas natalensis Lawrence, 1942 View in CoL
( Figs 7, 8 View FIGURES 1 – 15 , 64–67 View FIGURES 60 – 67 )
Austrachelas natalensis Lawrence, 1942: 175 View in CoL , fig. 24. (Ƥ)
Diagnosis. Females of this species can be easily recognised by the broad fine anterior hood of the epigyne and the distinctive C-shaped spermathecal ducts, visible through the integument ( Fig. 64 View FIGURES 60 – 67 ); males can be recognised by the simple structure of the distal margin of the embolus, and the distinctly shaped lobes of the retrolateral tibial apophysis of the palp ( Fig. 67 View FIGURES 60 – 67 ).
Female. Measurements: CL 2.90–2.95, CW 2.00–2.07, FL 0.23–0.25, AL 3.45–3.95, AW 2.00–2.50, SL 1.65–1.70, SW 1.15–1.20, TL 6.15–6.95, AME–AME 0.05, AME–ALE 0.02, ALE–ALE 0.24, PME–PME 0.06, PME–PLE 0.08, PLE–PLE 0.38.
Length of leg segments (sequence from femur to tarsus, and total): I 1.83 + 1.13 + 1.40 + 0.93 + 0.60 = 5.89; II 1.77 + 1.07 + 1.28 + 1.00 + 0.63 = 5.75; III 1.45 + 0.80 + 0.90 + 1.15 + 0.63 = 4.93; IV 2.10 + 1.10 + 1.60 + 1.93 + 0.80 = 7.53.
Carapace yellow-brown, paler along midline ( Fig. 7 View FIGURES 1 – 15 ); AER strongly procurved, laterals larger than medians; AME separated by distance equal to ½ their diameter, AME separated from ALE by distance equal to ¼ AME diameter; clypeus height equal to 1¼ times AME diameter at AME, equal to ½ ALE diameter at ALE; PER very slightly recurved, nearly straight, laterals larger than medians; PME separated by distance equal to ½ their diameter, PME separated from PLE by distance equal to PME diameter. Chelicerae deep redbrown; promargin with four equally spaced teeth; proximal tooth smallest, second tooth largest, third and distal teeth subequal in size; retromargin with single small tooth, situated at third promarginal tooth. Legs all uniform yellow-orange in colour. Leg spination: femora: I pl 1 do 1, II pl 1 do 1, III pl 2 do 2 rl 1, IV do 2; patellae: spineless; tibiae: I & II spineless, III pl 3 rl 2 plv 2 rlv 1 vt 2, IV pl 3 rl 2 plv 2 rlv 1 vt 2; metatarsi: I & II spineless, strongly scopulate, III & IV scopulate in distal half, III pl 6 rl 4 plv 1 rlv 1 vt 2, IV pl 6 rl 5 plv 2 rlv 1 vt 2; palp: femora do 2, patellae spineless, tibiae pl 3 rl 2, tarsus pl 3 rl 2 plv 1 rlv 1. Abdomen grey dorsally, with cream chevron ( Fig. 7 View FIGURES 1 – 15 ), cream laterally and ventrally; dorsum and venter lacking scutum or other sclerites. Epigyne with broad anterior hood; copulatory openings anteriorly situated, entering spermathecae through elongate entrance ducts ( Fig. 64 View FIGURES 60 – 67 ); ST 2 small, sharply bent, situated anteriorly; ST 2 connected by broad C-shaped duct to oval posterior ST 1 ( Figs 64, 65 View FIGURES 60 – 67 ).
Male. Measurements: CL 3.60–3.95, CW 2.70–2.88, FL 0.30–0.40, AL 3.35–3.65, AW 1.95–2.00, SL 2.00–2.10, SW 1.48–1.53, TL 6.90–7.65, AME–AME 0.04, AME–ALE 0.02, ALE–ALE 0.30, PME–PME 0.07, PME–PLE 0.10, PLE–PLE 0.48.
Length of leg segments (sequence from femur to tarsus, and total): I 2.48 + 1.48 + 1.80 + 1.43 + 1.00 = 8.19; II 2.33 + 1.43 + 1.70 + 1.35 + 0.93 = 7.74; III 1.97 + 1.08 + 1.15 + 1.53 + 0.83 = 6.56; IV 2.80 + 1.43 + 2.03 + 2.27 + 1.05 = 9.58.
Carapace deep orange-brown, paler along midline ( Fig. 8 View FIGURES 1 – 15 ); AER strongly procurved, laterals slightly larger than medians; AME separated by distance equal to ½ their diameter, AME separated from ALE by distance equal to ¼ AME diameter; clypeus height equal to 1¼ AME diameter at AME, slightly less than ALE diameter at ALE; PER very slightly recurved, nearly straight, laterals larger than medians; PME separated by distance equal to ½ their diameter, PME separated from PLE by distance equal to PME diameter. Chelicerae pale yellow-orange; promargin with three teeth, proximal tooth smallest, median tooth largest, closer to each other than to distal tooth; retromargin with single small tooth, similar in size to promarginal proximal tooth, closest to fang base of all teeth. Legs all yellow-brown, slightly darker distally. Leg spination: femora: I pl 1 do 1, II pl 1 do 1, III pl 2 do 2 rl 1, IV do 2; patellae: spineless; tibiae: I & II spineless, III pl 3 rl 2 plv 2 rlv 1 vt 2, IV pl 3 rl 2 plv 2 rlv 2 vt 2; metatarsi: I & II spineless, strongly scopulate, III & IV scopulate in distal half, III pl 6 rl 4–5 plv 1 rlv 1 vt 2, IV pl 6 rl 5 plv 2 rlv 2 vt 2. Abdomen grey with paler grey chevron ( Fig. 8 View FIGURES 1 – 15 ), cream laterally and ventrally; dorsum with small anterior scutum, venter without any sclerites. Palp with broad median apophysis; embolus triangular along distal margin ( Fig. 66 View FIGURES 60 – 67 ); palpal tibia with hook-like ventral retrolateral apophysis, and lobed dorsal retrolateral apophysis with two small denticles ( Fig. 67 View FIGURES 60 – 67 ); palpal spination: femora do 2.
Type material: Holotype Ƥ, deposited in NMSA (examined): SOUTH AFRICA, KwaZulu-Natal Province, Estcourt [29°00'S, 29°52'E], X.1937, R.F. Lawrence ( NMSA 1725).
Additional material examined: SOUTH AFRICA: KwaZulu-Natal Province, Durban, dunes north of Durban, 29°51'S, 31°01'E, 22.VII.2002, R. Jocqué (sieved litter), 1Ƥ ( MRAC 212309); La Mercy [29°38'S, 31°08'E], 17.VI.1996, S. Beje (intercropping), 13 (NCA 97/632); Pietermaritzburg, Denison, Golf Road, 29°37'S, 30°23'E, 16-25.VII.1990, M. Alderweireldt & R. Jocqué (pitfall in grassy vegetation), 1Ƥ ( MRAC 171737); Shongweni [29°51'S, 30°42'E], VII.1940, W.O. Rump, 1Ƥ ( NMSA 2988); Umgeni Valley Nature Reserve, 29°29'S, 30°15'E, 22.IX.2003, C. Haddad (leaf litter at tree base), 13 (NCA 2006/1543).
Distribution. Known from the KwaZulu-Natal midlands and coastal regions ( Fig. 82 View FIGURE 82 ).
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 |
Austrachelas natalensis Lawrence, 1942
Haddad, Charles R., Lyle, Robin, Bosselaers, Jan & Ramirez, Martin J. 2009 |
Austrachelas natalensis
Lawrence 1942: 175 |