Khorata dupla, Yao, Zhiyuan & Li, Shuqiang, 2013

Yao, Zhiyuan & Li, Shuqiang, 2013, New and little known pholcid spiders (Araneae: Pholcidae) from Laos, Zootaxa 3709 (1), pp. 1-51 : 41

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3709.1.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:496843C1-1D75-4B55-BFF2-370ECBAC11BB
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6158989
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87D2-FF95-FFD2-FF27-FF5713070BE3
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Khorata dupla
status	sp. nov.

Treatment

Khorata dupla View in CoL sp. nov.

Figs 31–33 View FIGURE 31 View FIGURE 32 View FIGURE 33 , 41 View FIGURE 41

Type material. Holotype: Male ( IZCAS), leaf litter, Tad Fane Resort [15°10.944′N, 106°07.606′E, alt. 955 m], Champasak, Laos, 21 November 2012, leg. Z. Yao (Yao-LA 039–044). Paratypes: 1 male and 2 females ( IZCAS), same data as holotype.

Etymology. The specific name is from Latin duplus (double), in reference to the two distal apophyses of procursus; adjective.

Diagnosis. The species resembles K. rongshuiensis ( Yao & Li 2010: 14, figs 49–50 and 61), but can be distinguished by relatively short legs, different shape of anterior arch of vulva ( Figs 32 View FIGURE 32 B and 33F) and different shape of pore plates ( Figs 32 View FIGURE 32 B and 33F).

Description. Male (holotype): Total length 1.94 (2.01 with clypeus), prosoma 0.72 long, 0.84 wide, opisthosoma 1.22 long, 0.75 wide. Leg I: 10.97 (2.77 + 0.31 + 2.75 + 3.69 + 1.45), leg II: 7.12 (2.01 + 0.29 + 1.72 + 2.27 + 0.83), leg III: 5.78 (1.70 + 0.28 + 1.33 + 1.84 + 0.63), leg IV: 8.47 (2.15 + 0.30 + 1.82 + 2.55 + 1.65); tibia I L/d: 32. Habitus as in Fig. 32 View FIGURE 32 C. Dorsal shield of prosoma yellowish, with black margins and a median black stripe behind ocular area; sternum black. Legs yellowish, with slightly darker rings on femora (subdistally) and tibiae (subproximally and subdistally). Opisthosoma grey, with large black spots. Distance PME-PME 0.08, diameter PME 0.11, distance PME- ALE 0.02, AME absent. Ocular area slightly elevated and separated from prosoma. Thoracic furrow shallow but distinct. Sternum slightly wider than long (0.53/0.50). Chelicerae as in Figs 33 View FIGURE 33 C–D, with a pair of long, hooked frontal apophyses provided with scales distally (tips close together), a pair of thumb-shaped proximal apophyses provided with a small, sclerotized angular apophysis each, and a pair of small distal apophyses on frontolateral surface. Pedipalpi as in Figs 31 View FIGURE 31 A–B and 33A–B; trochanter with a short retrolateral apophysis and a small ventral apophysis; femur with a retrolateral apophysis; patella large; procursus simple proximally but complex distally; bulb simple, no other apophyses except for embolus. Retrolateral trichobothrium of tibia I at 15%; legs with short vertical hairs on metatarsi (mostly dorsally and laterally), without spines and curved hairs; tarsus I with about 22 distinct pseudosegments.

Variation: Tibia I in another male: 3.10.

Female: Similar to male, habitus as in Figs 32 View FIGURE 32 D–E. Tibia I (n=2): 2.49, 2.65 (mean: 2.57). One of the specimens measured: Total length 2.24 (2.33 with clypeus), prosoma 0.77 long, 0.80 wide, opisthosoma 1.47 long, 1.24 wide; tibia I: 2.65. Distance PME-PME 0.08, diameter PME 0.11, distance PME-ALE 0.03, AME absent. Epigynum ( Figs 32 View FIGURE 32 A and 33E) brown, with two large protrusions, without pockets. Vulva ( Figs 32 View FIGURE 32 B and 33F) with a bent arch anteriorly and a pair of nearly triangular pore plates.

Distribution. Known only from the type locality ( Fig. 41 View FIGURE 41 ).