Savarna tessellata ( Simon, 1901 )

Huber, Bernhard A., Petcharad, Booppa & Bumrungsri, Sara, 2015, Revision of the enigmatic Southeast Asian spider genus Savarna (Araneae, Pholcidae), European Journal of Taxonomy 160, pp. 1-23 : 12-18

Savarna tessellata ( Simon, 1901)

Figs 11–13 , 32–33 , 40–41 , 63–73

Spermophora tessellata Simon, 1901: 50 (♀).

Savarna tessellata – Huber 2005: 78–79, Fgs 129–130, 138–140 (Ƌ).

Diagnosis

Easily distinguished from known congeners by median process on male clypeus ( Fig. 63 ), by morphology of male palp (very long and slender tibia; distinctive bulbal processes; tip of procursus; Fig. 65 and Fgs 138–139 in Huber 2005), and by female external and internal genitalia (epigynal plate with pair of lateral oval humps; shape of posterior rim of epigynal plate; large internal sclerite; Figs 32 , 40 , 72 ). From most species (except S. miser ) also distinguished by absence of black marks laterally on carapace ( Figs 11–12 ).

Type material

THAILAND: ♀, holotype (or ♀♀, syntypes), “Jalor, Biserat” (probably Yala Province, Wat Kuhapimuk ; see below), collected by the Skeat Expedition (1899–1900), not examined (apparently not in MNHN, possibly lost – see Notes below) .

Material examined

THAILAND: 10 ƋƋ, 4 ♀♀, Yala, Wat Kuhapimuk , Tham Meud (6°31.7’ N, 101°13.5’ E), 40 m a.s.l., near ground in cave and among rocks outside cave , 4 Mar. 2015, B.A. Huber & B. Petcharad leg., ZFMK ( Ar 12995, 12996 ) ; 3 ƋƋ, 2 ♀♀, same data ( PSUZC) ; 2 ♀♀, 1 juv., in pure ethanol, same data, ZFMK ( Mal 322 ) .

Notes on type material and type locality

The three specimens (1Ƌ, 1♀, 1 juv.) in MNHN redescribed in Huber (2005) may or may not include the female described by Simon (1901). Simon’s handwritten label just says “12185 Sp. tessellata E.S. Pen. Malayana (C.M)”. In any case, we are now conFdent that these specimens, as well as the new specimens collected at Wat Kuhapimuk (see below), are in fact conspeciFc with Simon’s described specimen(s). All details of Simon’s description Ft the newly collected females, and even the distinctive shape of the epigynum (“…in medio depressa, … utrinque oblique truncata, postice leviter prominula”; Simon 1901: 50) exactly Fts the new specimens.

“Jalor, Biserat” was previously erroneously thought to be in Malaysia ( Huber 2005). Instead, several lines of evidence suggest that this is in Yala Province (=Jalor in the Pattani Malay language) in southern Thailand. We actually suggest that the type locality is precisely what is today Wat Kuhapimuk, near Yala City. First, Laidlaw’s (1900) brief account of the itinerary of the Skeat Expedition shows that “Biserat, a village in a small state called Jalor” was visited on the way between Patani and the Kelantan River in northeastern Malaysia. Yala City is located exactly between Patani (=Pattani) and the Kelantan River. Second, Serat (Pattani Malay language) equals Sap (Thai language), suggesting that the village Ban Tha Sap (Thai for ‘village – riverbank – Sap’), located just 2 km from Wat Kuhapimuk, might be identical to Biserat. Finally, another pholcid species described by Simon (1901) in the same publication ( Pholcus diopsis ) has the type locality “Gua Glap (“Dark Cave”), Biserat, Jalor” ( Simon 1901: 50). We found Pholcus diopsis in the cave Tham Meud at Wat Kuhapimuk. Thus, we assume that what is today called Tham Meud (Thai = Dark Cave) at Wat Kuhapimuk is identical to Simon’s Gua Glap (Malay = Dark Cave). Unlike Pholcus diopsis , Savarna tessellata occurs both inside and outside the cave. The original material was possibly collected outside, explaining the absence of a mention of the cave in the original description.

Description

Male (ZFMK Ar 12995)

MEASUREMENTS. Total body length 2.6, carapace width 1.1. Leg 1: 23.2 (5.8 + 0.4 + 5.8 + 8.9 + 2.3), tibia 2: 3.5, tibia 3: 2.6, tibia 4: 3.4; tibia 1 L/d: 55. Distance PME-PME 245 µm, diameter PME 90 µm, distance PME-ALE 35 µm; AME absent.

COLOR. Carapace pale ochre, without dark lateral margins; ocular area and clypeus dark brown; sternum black; legs light brown, with darker rings on femora (subdistally) and tibiae (proximally and subdistally); abdomen gray, with dark and white marks, large whitish mark above spinnerets ( Fig. 11 ), with distinct ventral pattern consisting of three interconnected black marks.

BODY. Habitus as in Figs 11–12 ; ocular area elevated, each triad on short hump directed toward lateral; carapace with deep median furrow ( Fig. 63 ); clypeus with long median process at rim ( Fig. 63 ); sternum wider than long, unmodiFed. Chelicerae with pair of lateral processes (see Fg. 140 in Huber 2005). ALS with only two spigots ( Fig. 70 ). Gonopore without epiandrous spigots ( Fig. 71 ).

PALPS. See Fgs 138–139 in Huber 2005; trochanter as in Fig. 66 ; procursus tip as in Figs 67–68 ; bulb as in Fig. 65 .

LEGS. With short spines on femur 1 (~30 on distal half); with vertical hairs in higher than usual density on all tibiae; without curved hairs; retrolateral trichobothrium on tibia 1 at 7%; prolateral trichobothrium absent on tibia 1, present on other tibiae; tarsal pseudosegments fairly distinct, ~20 visible on tarsus 1.

Male (variation)

Tibia 1 in 12 other males: 5.4–6.6 (mean: 6.0).

Female (ZFMK Ar 12996)

In general similar to male; eye triads closer together (PME-PME distance: 195 µm); clypeus unmodiFed ( Fig. 64 ); legs without spines and with usual low number of vertical hairs. Tibia 1 in 5 females: 4.9–5.9 (mean 5.4). Epigynum slightly protruding ( Fig. 33 ), with wider than long epigynal plate with pair of lateral oval humps and distinctive shape of posterior rim ( Figs 32 , 40 , 72 ); internal genitalia as in Figs 41 and 73 , with large internal sclerite and long, anteriorly converging pore plates. ALS as in males.

Natural history

Both in and outside Tham Meud cave, spiders built domed webs close to the ground, attached to the rocks or rock walls. Inside the cave, spiders were hanging from the apex of the dome while outside the cave they were sitting Fat on the rock surface at the border of the web. No specimens were found in deeper parts of the cave (beyond about 20 m).

Distribution

Known only from the type locality ( Fig. 1 ).

Figures

Fig 1. Known distribution of the genus Savarna; but see Addendum.

Figs 8 – 13. Live specimens. — 8 – 10. Savarna thaleban Huber, 2005. ƋƋ and ♀ with eggsac; all from Thaleban National Park. — 11 – 13. S. tessellata (Simon, 1901). ƋƋ and ♀ with eggsac; all from Tham Meud.

Figs 28 – 35. Epigyna, ventral and lateral views. — 28 – 29. Savarna kaeo sp. nov. — 30 – 31. S. thaleban Huber, 2005. — 32 – 33. S. tessellata (Simon, 1901). — 34 – 35. S. miser (Bristowe, 1952). At varying scales.

Figs 36 – 43. Cleared and stained female genitalia, ventral and dorsal views. — 36 – 37. Savarna kaeo sp. nov. — 38 – 39. S. miser (Bristowe, 1952). — 40 – 41. S. tessellata (Simon, 1901). — 42 – 43. S. thaleban Huber, 2005. At varying scales.

Figs 63 – 71. Savarna tessellata (Simon, 1901). 63 – 64. Male and female prosomata, frontal views (arrow points at clypeus process). 65. Left genital bulb (b), retrolateral view (bp = bulbal process). 66. Right male palpal trochanter (tr), prolateral view. 67. Right procursus tip, prolateral view. 68. Left procursus tip, retrolateral view. 69. Comb-hair on male right tarsus 4, prolateral view. 70. Male ALS. 71. Male gonopore. Scale bars: 69 – 70 = 10 µm; 71 = 50 µm; 66 – 68 = 100 µm; 63 – 65 = 200 µm.

Figs 72 – 73. Savarna tessellata (Simon, 1901). Cleared female genitalia, ventral and dorsal views. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.