Smeringopus lesnei Lessert, 1936

HUBER, BERNHARD A., 2012, Revision and cladistic analysis of the Afrotropical endemic genus Smeringopus Simon, 1890 (Araneae: Pholcidae), Zootaxa 3461 (1), pp. 1-138 : 55-57

Smeringopus lesnei Lessert, 1936

Figs. 264–265 , 286–287 , 322–326

Smeringopus lesnei Lessert 1936: 234–235 , figs. 29–30.

Type. Male holotype from Mozambique, Manica Province, Vila Pery [=Chimoio, 19°07’S, 33°27’E], date not given, leg. P. Lesne, in MHNG, examined .

Note. The type specimen above is in poor condition. It seems to have been dry at some point and the chelicerae are missing. It originates from the type locality but may not even be the actual type for two reasons: first, there are two left (!) palps in the vial (but no further trace of a second male), suggesting that this may (partly?) be material collected later than the holotype. Second, a female accompanies the male but Lessert did not describe a female specimen. Either he erroneously considered the female a juvenile or the specimen was collected later than the holotype. In any case, Lessert’s (1936) good drawings of the bulb clearly indicate that the specimen above is at least correctly identified.

Diagnosis. Distinguished from similar congeners (other species of the natalensis group, especially S. natalensis , S. florisbad , S. blyde , S. koppies , S. harare , S. badplaas ) by shapes of bulbal processes ( Figs. 324, 325 ); from other close relatives by absence of process near palpal tarsal organ ( Fig. 322 ), relatively straight procursus (ventrally), absence of prolateral process on procursus tip, and three black lines ventrally on abdomen (versus two).

Male (holotype). Total body length ~4.0, carapace width ~1.4. Leg 1: 34.3 (9.1 + 0.5 + 8.8 + 14.0 + 1.9), tibia 2: 5.9, tibia 3: 4.4, tibia 4: 6.3; tibia 1 L/d: 58. Habitus similar S. natalensis (cf. Fig. 243 ). Coloration difficult to see in type specimen but apparently very similar S. natalensis and other close relatives (cf. Figs. 243–246 ). Distance PME-PME 125 µm, diameter PME 140 µm, distance PME-ALE 55 µm, distance AME-AME 25 µm, diameter AME 110 µm. Ocular area slightly elevated, secondary eyes with very indistinct ‘pseudo-lenses’; deep thoracic pit. Chelicerae missing, according to Lessert (1936) as in S. peregrinus (with one pair of distal apophyses; cf. Figs. 614, 615 ). Palps as in Figs. 264 and 265 , coxa without retrolateral apophysis, trochanter barely modified, femur with retrolateral furrow with distinct rim proximally, cymbium without projection near tarsal organ, procursus ventrally almost straight, without prolateral process at tip ( Figs. 322, 323 ), bulb with three distinctively shaped processes ( Figs. 324, 325 ). All hairs missing on legs, retrolateral trichobothrium on tibia 1 at 3.5%; prolateral trichobothrium present on tibia 1.

Female. In general similar to male; tibia 1 in 2 females: 9.0, 11.1. Epigynum a simple plate without pockets ( Fig. 286 ), not clearly distinguishable from close relatives ( S. natalensis , S. florisbad , S. blyde , S. koppies , S. harare , S. badplaas ); females from Nova Choupanga and Zimbabwe are thus assigned tentatively; internal genitalia as in Figs. 287 and 326 (also very similar to close relatives).

Distribution. Known from type locality in central Mozambique and from two females that are assigned tentatively from Mozambique and eastern Zimbabwe ( Fig. 299 ).

Material examined. MOZAMBIQUE: Manica Prov.: Vila Pery [=Chimoio]: 1♂ holotype above, together with 1♀. Sofala Prov.: Nova Choupanga [near Chemba?, ~ 17°10’S, 34°53’E], date not given, leg. P. Lesne, 1♀ in MHNG .

ZIMBABWE: Manicaland: 54 mi S Umtali [= Mutare ] [~ 19°25’S, 32°34’E], 560 m a.s.l., 18.iii.1958 (E.S. Ross, R. E. Leech), 1♀ in CAS .

Figures

FIGURE 299. Known distribution of the natalensis group except S. natalensis (cf. Fig. 298). Squares: further undescribed species.

FIGURES 256–267. Smeringopus natalensis group, left male palps, prolateral and retrolateral views. 256–257. S. natalensis. 258–259. S. koppies. 260–261. S. badplaas. 262–263. S. florisbad. 264–265. S. lesnei. 266–267. S. harare.

FIGURES 278–297. Smeringopus natalensis group, epigyna, ventral views and cleared female genitalia, dorsal views. 278–279. S. natalensis. 280–281. S. koppies. 282–283. S. badplaas. 284–285. S. florisbad. 286–287. S. lesnei. 288–289. S. blyde. 290–291. S. hanglip. 292–293. S. lydenberg. 294–295. S. mlilwane. 296–297. S. ndumo.

FIGURES 317–326. Smeringopus florisbad (317–321) and S. lesnei (322–326). 317, 322. Left cymbia and procursi, retrolateral views (asterisk marks variable detail; see text). 318, 323. Left procursi, prolateral views. 319–320, 324–325. Left bulbal processes, prolateral and dorsal views. 321, 326. Cleared female genitalia, dorsal views. Scale lines: 0.3 mm.

FIGURES 243–255. Smeringopus natalensis group, habitus and male prosomata, oblique frontal views. 243–244. S. natalensis, male, dorsal and ventral views. 245–246. S. koppies, male, dorsal and ventral views. 247–248. S. hanglip, male, dorsal and ventral views. 249–250. S. lydenberg, female, dorsal and ventral views. 251. S. natalensis. 252. S. blyde. 253. S. hanglip. 254. S. lydenberg. 255. S. mlilwane.

FIGURES 609–616. Smeringopus peregrinus. 609. Left cymbium and procursus, retrolateral view. 610. Left procursus, prolateral view. 611–613. Left embolus, prolateral, dorsal, and ventral (slightly prolateral) views (arrow points to variable structure; see text). 614–615. Male chelicerae, frontal and lateral views. 616. Cleared female genitalia, dorsal view. Scale lines: 0.3 mm.