Priscula lagunosa González-Sponga, 1999
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2020.718.1101 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F9E9A91E-488C-4DB1-9361-E788E9AC5BC1 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4343945 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E887AD-FF2C-7B00-FD90-FABDFE63FE5B |
treatment provided by |
Valdenar |
scientific name |
Priscula lagunosa González-Sponga, 1999 |
status |
|
Priscula lagunosa González-Sponga, 1999 View in CoL
Figs 874 View Figs 871–876 , 898–910 View Figs 898–899 View Figs 900–907 View Figs 908–911 , 916–919 View Figs 916–923 , 1061
Priscula lagunosa González-Sponga, 1999: 137 View in CoL , figs 20–28 (♂ only, see Notes below).
Priscula View in CoL sp.1 – Bruvo-Mađarić et al. 2005: 663 (molecular data, partly dubious, see Notes below).
Diagnosis
Easily distinguished from known congeners by shapes of procursus ( Figs 900–901 View Figs 900–907 ; finger-shaped dorsal process, retrolateral ridge, and strong distal spine embedded in membrane), genital bulb ( Figs 905– 907 View Figs 900–907 ; distinctive shape of main apophysis, with large whitish area on retrolateral-ventral side), and by female external and internal genitalia ( Figs 908–910 View Figs 908–911 , 916–919 View Figs 916–923 ; distinctive median process on epigynal plate; smaller than in P. limonensis González-Sponga, 1999 ). From most species also by male chelicerae strongly protruding laterally ( Fig. 902 View Figs 900–907 ; shared by P. paila Huber sp. nov.).
Type material
VENEZUELA – Trujillo • ♂ holotype, 7 juvs paratypes, MIZA 105761 About MIZA ( MAGS 1382 ), near Boconó, near Laguna Negra (“alrededores de la Laguna Negra”) [approximately 9.305° N, 70.175° W], ~ 1850 m a.s.l., 28 Feb. 1993 (A.R. Delgado de G., M.A. González-S.), examined (see Notes below) GoogleMaps .
Other material examined
VENEZUELA – Lara • 9 ♂♂, 6 ♀♀, ZFMK (Ar 22112–13), and 2 ♀♀ in pure ethanol, ZFMK (Ven02/100-59), Yacambú National Park , Sendero Ecológico , at Cascada (9.710° N, 69.582° W), ~ 1580 m a.s.l., 15–16 Dec. 2002 (B.A. Huber, A. Pérez González, O. Villarreal M., B. Striffler, A. Giupponi).– Trujillo GoogleMaps • 1 ♂, ZFMK (Ar 22111) (2 legs transferred to pure ethanol, ZFMK Ven18-214), from type locality, Laguna Negra (9.3054° N, 70.1752° W), 1870 m a.s.l., 21 Nov. 2018 (B.A. Huber, O. Villarreal M.) GoogleMaps .
Notes
The type series was reexamined; it has the number 1382 ( not 1383 as stated in the original description – 1383 is the number of the type series of Queliceria discrepantis González-Sponga, 2003 ). It contains 1 ♂, and 7 juveniles ( not 1 ♂, 5 ♀♀, 3 juvs); thus, González-Sponga’s (1999) description of the female and his figures 27–28 refer to juveniles. In the original description, the coordinates are wrong (~ 25 km W of Laguna Negra), and the altitude is ~ 150 m too high. Contrary to the original description, the male chelicerae have a pair of (tiny) frontal apophyses ( Fig. 902 View Figs 900–907 ).
The molecular data of “ Priscula sp.1” in Bruvo-Mađarić et al. (2005) (12S, 16S, and 28S) are partly dubious. The voucher specimen used in that study was reexamined ( ZFMK, Ven02/100-59) and its identification as P. lagunosa is beyond doubt. Nevertheless, a confusion of sequences seems to have occurred. This was already noted by Astrin et al. (2007: 26) for the 28S sequence, which seems to originate from a species of Mesabolivar González-Sponga, 1998 . The 12S tree in Bruvo-Mađarić et al. (2005: fig. 3) places “ Priscula sp.1” among Mesabolivar , suggesting that the 12S sequence is also from a species of Mesabolivar . The most similar 16S sequence in Genbank is from a Priscula venezuelana Simon, 1893 specimen from Rancho Grande ( ZFMK, Ven02/100-28), suggesting that at least the 16S sequence might indeed originate from P. lagunosa .
Redescription of male (type locality; ZFMK Ar 22111)
MEASUREMENTS. Total body length 4.0, carapace width 2.0. Distance PME–PME 100 µm; diameter PME 120 µm; distance PME–ALE 150 µm; diameter AME 25 µm; distance AME–AME 30 µm. ALE and PLE larger than PME (diameter ALE 190 µm). Leg 1: 24.9 (6.6+ 0.8+6.5 +9.5+1.5), tibia 2: 4.6, tibia 3: 3.2, tibia 4: 4.1; tibia 1 L/d: 31.
COLOR (in ethanol). Carapace pale ochre with darker marginal lateral bands and wide median band including ocular area, clypeus also with wide dark band; sternum ochre-yellow with indistinct darker marks; legs ochre-yellow, with darker rings on femora subdistally and on tibiae proximally and subdistally, with light rings on both sides of subdistal rings and on distal side of proximal dark rings on tibiae; abdomen ochre-gray, dorsally and laterally densely covered with small black marks, with small white marks arranged in lines and small groups; ventrally grey with large brown marks in gonopore area and in front of spinnerets.
BODY. Habitus as in Fig. 874 View Figs 871–876 . Ocular area distinctly raised, with small hump on posterior side. Deep thoracic groove. Clypeus unmodified. Sternum wider than long (1.25/0.85), with shallow invagination on posterior side. Abdomen higher than long, dorso-posteriorly pointed.
CHELICERAE. As in Fig. 902 View Figs 900–907 , with short entapophyses, strongly protruding laterally, with pair of tiny frontal apophyses, without stridulatory ridges.
PALPS. As in Figs 898–899 View Figs 898–899 ; coxa unmodified (very low retrolateral hump), trochanter with short ventral process, femur large, with unsclerotized retrolateral process proximally, ventral distal rim slightly projecting; patella ventrally reduced to strongly sclerotized narrow rim; tibia small relative to femur, with both trichobothria in relatively proximal position; procursus ( Figs 900–901 View Figs 900–907 ) with distinctive distal elements: finger-shaped dorsal process, sclerotized retrolateral ridge, and black ventral spine embedded in membranous transparent cuticle; genital bulb ( Fig. 903 View Figs 900–907 ) with small proximal sclerite connecting to tarsus, strong main apophysis with bifid tip and sperm duct opening, transversal ventral sclerite ending on one side in small process, with large whitish area between transversal sclerite and main apophysis.
LEGS. Without spines; with weakly curved hairs on all legs (femora, tibiae, metatarsi); with more than usual short vertical hairs (but not in high density); retrolateral trichobothrium of tibia 1 at 7%; prolateral trichobothrium present on all leg tibiae; tarsi without distinct pseudosegments but rather with many small platelets.
VARIATION. Tibia 1in seven males from Lara: 5.3–6.4 (mean 5.8); males from Lara appear indistinguishable in all relevant aspects (preliminary molecular data show an unusually deep split; J.J. Astrin, B.A. Huber, unpubl. data). Large whitish area on genital bulb collapsed in some males (compare Figs 903 and 905 View Figs 900–907 ; cf. Priscula acarite Huber sp. nov.). AME sometimes in asymmetric position, at slightly varying distances.
Description of female
In general similar to male, posterior invagination of sternum deeper. Tibia 1 in six females from Lara: 3.3–3.6 (mean 3.5). Epigynum ( Figs 908–909 View Figs 908–911 , 916–917 View Figs 916–923 ) large transversal plate with distinctive median process, posterior plate very narrow, barely visible. Internal genitalia ( Figs 910 View Figs 908–911 , 918–919 View Figs 916–923 ) with pair of lateral sclerites connected to heavily sclerotized transversal structures visible in uncleared specimens; simple ‘valve’ and pair of oval pore plates.
Distribution
Known from two localities in the Venezuelan states Trujillo and Lara (Fig. 1061).
Natural history
The type specimens were collected under decaying logs on the ground ( González-Sponga 1999). The single male newly collected at the type locality was found in a sheet web that transformed into a funnel leading to the resting place among dense plant-parts and detritus on a live tree-trunk (exactly the same microhabitat as the larger Priscula andinensis González-Sponga, 1999 at the same locality). In Yacambú, the spiders were found in crevices and under overhangs at a small waterfall.
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 |
Priscula lagunosa González-Sponga, 1999
Huber, Bernhard A. & Villarreal, Osvaldo 2020 |
Priscula
Bruvo-Madaric B. & Huber B. A. & Steinacher A. & Pass G. 2005: 663 |
Priscula lagunosa González-Sponga, 1999: 137
Gonzalez-Sponga M. A. 1999: 137 |