Stenaelurillus arambagensis (Biswas & Biswas, 1992)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2018.430 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5902A879-CD11-4CC3-A802-7C0D2F8059BE |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3793763 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039487C1-166D-775E-FE0B-2E8F50F6FEB6 |
treatment provided by |
Valdenar |
scientific name |
Stenaelurillus arambagensis (Biswas & Biswas, 1992) |
status |
|
Stenaelurillus arambagensis (Biswas & Biswas, 1992) View in CoL
Figs 57–62 View Figs 57–62 , 509
Marpissa arambagensis Biswas & Biswas, 1992: 390 View in CoL , figs 20–22 (D ♀). Holotype in the National Zoological Collection , Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, India; not examined.
Stenaelurillus digitus Prajapati, Murthappa, Sankaran & Sebastian, 2016: 327 View in CoL View Cited Treatment , figs 1C–D, 6A–D, 7A–E, 8A–C, 9A–D (D♂ ♀). Synonymized by Caleb et al. (2017).
Diagnosis
This species can easily be separated from all other species of Stenaelurillus , except for S. albus Sebastian, Sankaran, Malamel & Joseph, 2015 , by the presence of the long, finger-shaped distal projection of the functional tegulum ( Fig. 57 View Figs 57–62 : DP), the unique feature of S. arambagensis and S. albus . The only difference between the two related species is the presence of a more prominent, stout embolus in S. arambagensis ( Fig. 57 View Figs 57–62 ; Caleb et al. 2017: fig. 14), which is not visible in ventral view in S. albus (see Sebastian et al. 2015: fig. 2E, G), provided the latter authors correctly illustrated the embolic division. Females of both species differ in the shape of the primary spermathecae: round in S. arambagensis (see Caleb et al. 2017: fig. 17) and C-shaped in S. albus (see Sebastian et al. 2015: fig. 3B–C).
Material examined
PAKISTAN: 1 ♂, Punjab, Jehlum, 32°04′58.8″ N, 73°04′01.2″ E, 191 m a.s.l., 22 Mar. 2012, S. Din leg. ( CBGO).
Remarks
This species has been (re)described and illustrated in detail by Prajapati et al. (2016: sub. S. digitus ) and Caleb et al. (2017). It is worth mentioning that both Sebastian et al. (2015) and Prajapati et al. (2016) mis-coded sclerites of the embolic division in S. albus and S. arambagensis respectively. What they coded as the ‘embolus’ is actually the distal projection of the functional tegulum; see above under ‘Morphological notes’ for further details. The true embolus is seen in S. arambagensis as the stout, pointed sclerite partly hidden behind the tegular tip (E on Fig. 57 View Figs 57–62 ).
Distribution
India (Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, West Bengal) and Pakistan (Punjab) ( Fig. 509 View Fig ) ( Caleb et al. 2017; present data).
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 |
Stenaelurillus arambagensis (Biswas & Biswas, 1992)
Logunov, Dmitri V. & Azarkina, Galina N. 2018 |
Stenaelurillus digitus
Prajapati D. A. & Murthappa P. S. & Sankaran P. M. & Sebastian P. A. 2016: 327 |