Eusarcus armatus Perty

Hara, Marcos Ryotaro & Pinto-Da-Rocha, Ricardo, 2010, Systematic review and cladistic analysis of the genus Eusarcus Perty 1833 (Arachnida, Opiliones, Gonyleptidae) 2698, Zootaxa 2698, pp. 1-136 : 31-33

Eusarcus armatus Perty

( Figs. 5, 38E,F, 49B)

Eusarcus armatus Perty 1833: 203 ; Koch 1839a: 9 (cit); 1839b: 3 (rdesc), pl. 217, figs. 541–542; Bertkau 1880: 6 (cit), 106 (com descr); Roewer 1913: 68 (key, rdesc), fig. 31; 1923: 418 (rdesc), fig. 521; Mello-Leitão 1926: 372 (diag); Roewer 1929: 197 (key, cit [pars]); Giltay 1930: 234 (cit); Mello-Leitão 1932: 155 (key), 157 (rdesc), fig. 80; 1940: 6 (key); B. Soares 1945c: 375 (cat [pars]); Soares & Soares 1954b: 259 (cat); Kury 2003a: 168 (cat); (fe type, Zoologische Staatssammlung München, lost).

Eusarcus pumilio Perty 1833: 203 ; (fe holotype, Zoologische Staatssammlung München, lost). Synonymy with E. armatus established by Koch (1839b).

Eusarcus curvispinosus Mello-Leitão 1923b: 122 ; Mello-Leitão 1926: 372 (diag); Roewer 1929: 197 (key), 198 (rdesc); Mello-Leitão 1932: 155 (key), 157 (rdesc), fig. 81; 1940: 6 (key); 1945: 154 (cat), 157 (key), fig. 11; B. Soares 1945c: 375 (cat); Soares & Soares 1954b: 259 (cat); Acosta 1996b: 223 (cat); Kury 2003a: 169 (cat); (ma holotype; “Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro; MNRJ 1438”; examined; 1 ma paratype; “Petrópolis, [Rio de Janeiro], Brazil; SMF, RII/ 954(35)”; not examined). Syn. n.

Enantiocentron montis Mello-Leitão 1936: 23 , 24 (key), fig. 19; (ma holotype; “Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro; R. Arlé leg.; MNRJ 42693 ”; examined), (1 fe “ allotype ”; “Mendes, Rio de Janeiro; M. Eugenio leg.; MZSP 1743 ”, examined). Syn. n.

Eusarcus montis: Mello-Leitão 1945: 155 (cat), 157 (key), fig. 17; B. Soares 1945c: 375 (cat); H. Soares 1946: 385 (dist); Soares & Soares 1946b: 223 (descr “ allotype ”), fig. 2; 1954b: 261 (cat.); H. Soares 1966d: 283 (dist); Kury 2003a: 169 (cat).

Eusarcus sp. : Soares & Soares 1970: 344 (cit).

Material examined: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro: Petrópolis, without name of collector and date, ma holotype & 1 fe of E. curvispinosus (MNRJ 1438) , male here designated as neotype of E. armatus ; idem, R. Arlé leg., without date, ma holotype & 1 ma de E. montis ( MNRJ 42693). BRAZIL. Minas Gerais: Viçosa, without name of collector, 1958, 5 ma & 1 fe ( HEMS 337). Rio de Janeiro: Angra dos Reis (Estrada Lídice-Angra, 22° 51’ 57”S 44° 14’ 50”W), A. Kury, R. Pinto-da-Rocha & L. Mestre leg., 1.ii.1997, 1 fe ( MNRJ 5535); Cachoeiras do Macacu, R. Pinto-da-Rocha & A.B. Kury leg., 8.x.1988, 1 fe ( MHNC 6276); idem (Reserva Estadual Guapiaçu), A. Kury, A. Giupponi & S. Brandão leg., 20–21.xi.2000, 1 ma ( MNRJ 16177); Guapimirim (Estação Ecológica Estadual Paraíso), R. Pinto-da-Rocha & R. Bérnils leg., 4–7.vii.1996, 1 ma ( MZSP 15491); Itatiaia (Repouso Itatiaia), O. Schubart leg., 17.xi.1945, 1 fe ( MNRJ 16170); Macaé (APA SANA), A. Chagas Jr. & B. Segall leg., 18.vii.2002, 2 ma ( MNRJ 11361); Maricá (Praia do Bambuí), E.J. Becker leg., 18.v.1977, 1 fe ( MCNZ 334); Mendes, M. Eugênio leg., 1945, 1 fe “ allotype ”, 5 ma & 4 fe of E. montis (MZSP 1743) ; Nova Friburgo, Wygodzinsky leg., 1946, 1 ma ( MZSP 1724); idem, K. Tanizaki leg., 4.v.1992, 1 ma & 1 fe ( MNRJ 6893); idem, S. Ide leg., 11–12.x.1996, 1 ma ( MZSP 21297); idem, without name of collector, 21.i.2000, 2 ma ( MZSP 19164); idem (Rio Grande de Cima), A. Kury & R. Pinto-da-Rocha leg., 10.x.1988, 1 ma ( MNRJ 6329); idem, A & L. Kury leg., 11.ii.1990, 2 ma & 4 fe ( MNRJ 6587); Petrópolis, without name of collector and date, 2 ma & 2 fe ( SMF 802); idem, 1 ma & 2 fe ( SMF 803); idem, Bresslau leg., 1 fe ( SMF 953, N o. 34); idem, D. Holboun leg., 26.viii.1984, 1 fe & 2 im ( MNRJ 6053); Piraí (Pinheiro), E.de M. Mello leg., without date, 1 ma ( MNRJ 1435); idem, A. Kury & R. Baptista leg., 20.xi.1988, 3 ma & 3 fe ( MNRJ 6371); Rio Claro (estação repetidora da Rede Globo), A.B. Kury, R. Pinto-da- Rocha & L. Mestre leg., 1.ii.1997, 1 fe ( MNRJ 5544); idem, 1 ma ( MNRJ 5547); Rio de Janeiro (Marambaia), B.N. Costa leg., 27.ix.1991, 1 beta male ( MNRJ 11354); idem (Santa Bárbara), without name of collector and date, 1 fe ( MNRJ 11356; old number: MNRJ 268); idem (Tijuca), Izecksohn leg., 28vi.1954, 1 fe ( MNRJ 16143); Teresópolis (Colônia Alpina), Göldi leg., 3 ma ( MNRJ); idem (Itaipava), A. & L. Kury leg., 18.iii.1989, 1 fe & 1 im ( MNRJ 6450); idem (Parque Nacional Serra dos Órgãos), A.P.L. Giupponi & R.L.C. Baptista leg., 27.i.2001, 1 fe ( MNRJ 4481); idem, Izecksohn leg., 28.iv.1964, 1 fe ( MNRJ 16148). São Paulo: Ilha de Búzios, CDZ leg., x.1963, 1 ma ( HEMS 1007); Ilha da Vitória, CDZ leg., iii.1964, 1 ma & 1 fe ( HEMS 947); São José do Barreiro (Serviço de Piscicultura da Serra da Bocaina), O. Roppa leg., 15.iv.1961, 1 ma ( MNRJ 4879); idem (Serra da Bocaina), J.P. de Mattos leg., 5.x.1968, 1 ma ( HEMS 704); Ubatuba (Fazenda Angelin, P.E. da Ilha Anchieta, 23°23’S 45°03’W), Eq. Biota leg., 23–30.vii.2001, 1 fe ( IBSP 3334).

Diagnosis: E. armatus can be distinguished from other species of the genus by the three prolateral apophyses on male trochanter IV, each one of them with a typical size and shape.

Redescription: Male (MZSP 15491): Dorsum ( Fig. 5A,B): Measurements: SL 4.30; SMW 4.00; femur I 2.10; II 4.30; III 3.30; IV 3.70. Median paracheliceral projection smaller than PAM. Ocularium far from anterior scutal margin; low, with 5 tubercles. Carapace with 20 scattered tubercles. Scutal area I with 11–12 scattered tubercles on each side; II with 23; III with 42 and a single sharp median spine, directed obliquely backwards, not surpassing posterior margin of dorsal scutum; IV with 21 tubercles. Posterior margin of dorsal scutum and free tergites I–III with a row of 19, 13, 13, 9 tubercles, respectively. Anal operculum with 19 tubercles.

Venter: Coxa I with 23–25 tubercles, median and distal ones largest; II with 39–42, distal ones largest; III– IV irregularly tuberculate.

Chelicera: Segment I with 4 tubercles.

Pedipalpus: Trochanter dorsally inflated, with 3 tubercles. Femur dorsally with 4–5 aligned tubercles; ventrally with 1 large basal tubercle, 2 small scattered tubercles. Tibial setation: Prolateral and retrolateral IiIi. Tarsal setation: Prolateral IIi, retrolateral IiIi.

Legs ( Fig. 5C–J): Coxa IV densely tuberculate, with 1 oblique prolateral apical apophysis, this conical, long, curved posteriad and ventrad. Trochanters I–IV with scattered tubercles; IV prolaterally with an anterior median apophysis, this short, blunt, conical with large base, and with a posterior median apophysis, this cylindrical and flattened, blunt, more ventrally placed; oblique apical apophysis, this largest, conical, curved posteriad and dorsad; retrolaterally with 1 median and 1 large apical tubercle. Femur I with small PDS, RDS; ventrally with 2 rows of slightly enlarged tubercles; II–III with small PDS, medium RDS; III sinuous, ventrally with 2 rows of tubercles slightly increasing in size distally, prolateral ones more conspicuous, 1 large prolateral apical tubercle; IV sinuous, with medium PDS, RDS; ventrally with 2 rows of tubercles increasing in size distally, 2 apical spines. Tibia III with two ventral rows of tubercles slightly increasing in size subapically, retrolateral ones enlarged. Tarsal segmentation: 6, 8, 6, 6.

Penis ( Fig. 38E,F): Stylus smooth, apex inflated; with angular medio-ventral projection. Ventral process of glans curved, apex with flabelliform projection. Ventral plate with concave sides; with 3 pairs of long, curved distal setae; 1 pair of short, straight median setae; 3–4 pairs of slightly curved basal setae.

Coloration: Brown; dark brown on body edges, legs and palps.

Female (allotype of E. montis, MZSP 1743 ): Dorsum: Measurements: SL 3.60; SMW 3.05; femur I 1.80; II 3.40; III 2.60; IV 3.30. Ocularium with 2 large and 3 small tubercles. Pedipalpus: Tibial setation: Prolateral IiIi, retrolateral iIiIi. Legs: Coxa II with 1 large retrolateral tubercle; IV densely tuberculate, with 1 oblique prolateral apical apophysis, this conical, short, curved backwards. Trochanter IV with scattered tubercles, retrolaterally with 1 large apical tubercle and 1 slightly small median one. Femur IV ventrally with 2 rows of tubercles, prolateral ones enlarged, 2 large apical tubercles, prolateral one moderately enlarged. Tibia III with rows of similar-sized tubercles. Tarsal segmentation: 6, 8, 6, 6. Coloration: Light brown; dark brown on middle areas of legs except matatarsi and tarsi.

Variation in males (n=6): Measurements: SL 3.60–4.30; SMW 3.20–4.00; femur I 1.80–2.10; II 3.60– 4.30; III 2.30–3.30; IV 3.00–3.70. Ocularium unarmed or with two large tubercles. Pedipalpus: Tibial setation: Prolateral IiiIi/IiIi, retrolateral IiIi/IiiIi. Femur I with reduced or small RDS; II with small or medium RDS. Tarsal segmentation: 6, 7–9, 6, 6. Coloration: When alive, orange-brown; dark brown on legs, light brown on tarsi. The beta male form may not show the prolateral posterior median apophysis of trochanter IV developed, thus resembling the male of E. oxyacanthus . However, it is possible to distinguish both species based on the curvature of the prolateral apical apophysis of trochanter IV. Femur IV may show enlarged tubercles in mid-dorsal area and a ventral row of pointed, low tubercles.

Variation in females (n=6): Measurements: SL 3.60–4.10; SMW 3.00–3.60; femur I 1.60–2.00; II 3.10– 3.60; III 2.30–2.80; IV 2.80–3.40. Pedipalpus: Tibial setation: Prolateral IiIi/IiiIi, retrolateral iIiIi/IiiIi. Tarsal setation: Prolateral IiIi/IIi. Femur I with reduced or small PDS, RDS; III with reduced or small PDS. Coloration: When alive, it has the same color as the male, with light brown spots next to the ocularium.

Taxonomical notes: The identity of E. armatus is unclear. The lost holotype is a female, therefore its description and illustration do not allow for proper identification. Koch (1839b) was the only researcher who studied this material again, and he redescribed the species adding three more specimens (including a male) from different museums. Roewer (1913) examined the material studied by Koch except for the holotype. The holotype probably had been lost by that time, and he redescribed the species and added more specimens from Rio de Janeiro (Petrópolis) and São Paulo. Comparing descriptions by Koch and Roewer, we found conspicuous differences: In Koch (1839b), E. armatus shows a rectangular projection on coxa IV and spines on tibia IV, these being absent in the redescription by Roewer. Considering that all the type material is now lost, we can only state that E. armatus , as “redescribed” by Koch, resembles E. nigrimaculatus (or one of the three new species which belong to the clade E. alpinus +), whereas E. armatus as “redescribed” by Roewer, is similar to E. curvispinosus (or E. montis ). The specimens identified as E. armatus in the collection of Roewer belong to the same species as the specimens identified as E. curvispinosus by Mello-Leitão. Considering that: (i) the original description by Perty is insufficient and the corresponding female holotype was lost; (ii) the male of this species was identified in a doubtful manner; (iii) the material examined by Koch is lost; and (iv) that the description by Koch does not allow to identify the species; we decided to accept the redescription by Roewer as valid for the identity of E. armatus in order to keep nomenclatural stability. Since it is a wellestablished genus name in the literature, it is important that a recognizable type species exists. Therefore, we designate the type of E. curvispinosus as the neotype of E. armatus .

Type localities: BRAZIL. Of E. armatus : without further data. Of E. curvispinosus : Rio de Janeiro, Petrópolis. Of E. montis : Rio de Janeiro, Petrópolis.

Geographical distribution ( Fig. 49B): SE Brazil. Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro , and São Paulo.