Foveacorpus, Bartel & Dunlop & Giribet, 2023
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5296.3.6 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:59AD1B4F-15B2-4DC0-A57E-2F6B57539D1A |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7984085 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/695BD267-DC04-4076-932D-5D0A81E2CDB5 |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:695BD267-DC04-4076-932D-5D0A81E2CDB5 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Foveacorpus |
status |
gen. nov. |
Genus Foveacorpus View in CoL gen. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:695BD267-DC04-4076-932D-5D0A81E2CDB5
Type species. Foveacorpus cretaceus View in CoL gen. et sp. nov.
Etymology. From the Latin words “fovea” (= pit) and “corpus” (= body). Masculine in gender.
Diagnosis. Body oval, small and completely covered with numerous small pits. Rounded ozophores in type 1 position. Chelicerae moderately long and thin. Pedipalps rather small and unmodified. Legs relatively short and robust, with legs I and II directed forwards. Typical spiracles absent. Anal region with a corona analis (sternites 8, 9 and tergite IX fused and forming an unbroken ring around the anal plate) .
Remarks. The holotype of Foveacorpus cretaceus sp. nov. (GPIH05129; Figs. 11–12 View FIGURE 11 View FIGURE 12 ) is interpreted as an adult female due to the open gonostome ( Fig. 11B, D View FIGURE 11 ) and the absence of an adenostyle on tarsus IV. This very small specimen shows an unusual and potentially unique combination of characters. First, the whole body is completely covered with small pits ( Fig. 11 View FIGURE 11 ), a feature which has not been observed in any modern species, and the dorsum shows no sign of segmentation or of a longitudinal opisthosomal sulcus. There are extant stylocellid species, such as Leptopsalis foveolata Clouse & Schwendinger, 2012 , which feature a few much larger and deeper pits on the opisthosoma. It is possible that these small pits in the cuticle of this fossil are an artefact resulting from the fossilization process where, e.g., a substance coats different parts of the specimen, as seen in many Burmese amber fossils. However, the ventral region around the gonostome ( Fig. 12A View FIGURE 12 ) shows no signs of a coating as many small setae are clearly visible and the pits appear to be open. We conclude that most parts of the fossil are originally preserved, and that the pits on the prosoma and opisthosoma were presumably covered by some substance.
Placement of this fossil in the family Stylocellidae can be excluded with some confidence due to the presence of a corona analis in the fossil were sternites 8, 9 and tergite IX are fused ( Fig. 12B View FIGURE 12 ). In stylocellids, all sternites are fused except sternites 8, 9 and tergite IX that surround the anal plate. Margins between the fused tergites and sternites are completely absent in the amber specimen, whereas most modern Cyphophthalmi show at least a slight change in cuticle texture marking these borders. Besides this, there is an unusual setose region between the anterior coxae ( Fig. 12A View FIGURE 12 ). The legs of the fossil are also untypical when compared to most extant Cyphophthalmi . Legs I and II seem to be directed forwards and the right leg III appears to be modified, as it looks more robust than the other legs. The latter is also covered by numerous thick setae, while the left leg III looks thinner, with normally sized setae ( Fig. 11B, D View FIGURE 11 ). This limb condition (except for the modified leg III) is similar to a peculiar modern species from Kenya, Marwe coarctata Shear, 1985 , whose family assignment (like that of the fossil) is still unclear. Additionally, both species possess a corona analis, type 1 ozophores and dorsal areas without any visible sutures between them. On the other hand, Marwe coarctata has a different habitus with an expanded, disc-like posterior portion of the prosoma, it is larger and has stouter chelicerae. In summary, the new fossil has a unique set of characters and cannot be easily placed within any of the extant families.
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 |
|
SubOrder |
Cyphophthalmi |
Family |