Thelcticopis birmanica Thorell, 1895
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5463.3.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6E261F38-7196-4C87-AE81-E09996D055F4 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11623280 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/7D6E8786-FFCA-FFB3-FF02-FA39D6FBBDC3 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Thelcticopis birmanica Thorell, 1895 |
status |
stat. nov. |
Thelcticopis birmanica Thorell, 1895 View in CoL stat. rev.
Figs 6–7 View FIGURES 6 View FIGURES 7 , 26 View FIGURE 26
Thelcticopis birmanica Thorell, 1895: 274 View in CoL (♀). Pocock 1900: 271 (♀).
Thelcticopis canescens Simon View in CoL : Gravely 1931: 246, ad part.: fig. 7B [doubtful identity] (♀).
Type material. Holotype ♀, MYANMAR: Tanintharyi: Tenasserim [ca. 12°05’7.3’’N, 99°0’40.95’’E; 47 m a.s.l.], date unknown, E.W. Oates leg., old type number: 1971/212 ( NHMUK 1895.9.21.867; examined). GoogleMaps
Diagnosis. Females of T. birmanica stat. rev. resemble T. canescens Simon, 1887 , T. folia Jäger & Praxaysombath, 2009 : fig. 106, T. karnyi Reimoser, 1929 : fig. 3, T. kirankhalapi Ahmed et al., 2015 : figs 4A–B, T. klossi Reimoser, 1929 : fig.2, T. virescens Pocock, 1901 ( Figs 22D–E View FIGURES 22 , 24C View FIGURES 24 herein) and T.zhengi Liu, Li & Jäger, 2010 ( Liu et al. 2010: fig. 4F) by the continuous anterior epigynal margin ( Figs 6C View FIGURES 6 , 7A View FIGURES 7 ). The species can be distinguished from T. folia , T. karnyi , T. kirankhalapi , T. klossi and T. zhengi by its median septum 1.5 times longer than wide (vs. as long as wide or slightly wider than long in T. folia and T. zhengi , and vs. 2.2 to 4 times longer than wide in T. karnyi , T. klossi and T. virescens ). In T. kirankhalapi , the median septum is 1.75 times longer than wide, but it can be easily distinguished by its vulva having a simple duct system running from anterior to posterior broad over its entire length, and by its median septum roughly of the same width over its entire length, whereas T. birmanica has narrow ducts in the anterior half, a bend posteriorly, and a median septum narrowing abruptly in the posterior half (cf. Figs 6C–D View FIGURES 6 , 7B View FIGURES 7 vs. Ahmed et al. 2015: figs 4A–B). The species can be distinguished from T. canescens by having an abruptly narrowing median septum in posterior half (continuously tapering in T. canescens ).
Supplementary description. Female (holotype; Figs 6A–B View FIGURES 6 , 7D–E View FIGURES 7 ). Colouration: brown. [after Thorell 1895: carapace red-brown, clothed with grey setae (partly rubbed off); opisthosoma yellow-brown]. Thoracic striae indistinct. Fovea deep, longitudinal, straight. Chelicerae with three promarginal and seven retromarginal teeth ( Fig. 7E View FIGURES 7 ). Body length 17.5. Carapace 6.5 long. Opisthosoma 8.0 long, 6.38 wide. Chelicerae 1.76 long. Eye sizes and interdistances ( Fig. 7D View FIGURES 7 ): AME 0.40, ALE 0.33, PME 0.27, PLE 0.26; AME–AME 0.43, AME–ALE 0.57, AME– PME 0.45, ALE–PLE 0.58, PME–PME 0.90, PME–PLE 0.88. Legs: I 16.70 (5.12, 2.21, 4.30, 3.86, 1.21), II 16.31 (5.09, 2.25, 4.10, 3.63, 1.24), III 13.67 (4.41, 2.31, 2.77, 2.78, 1.40), IV 18.54 (5.84, 2.27, 4.35, 4.55, 1.53). Leg formula: 4123. Spination: legs: femur I–III 323, tibia I–II 000(10), III–IV 0006, metatarsus I–II 0002, III–IV 0006. Genitalia ( Figs 6C–D View FIGURES 6 , 7A–C View FIGURES 7 ): epigynal field longer than wide, with tiny, anterior bands attached to the anterior margin and one slit sensillum close to the field on the right side ( Figs 6C View FIGURES 6 , 7A View FIGURES 7 ). Lateral lobes short, i.e., roughly one third of epigynal field length, sclerotized, widely separated, with posteriad posterior projections ( Figs 6C View FIGURES 6 , 7A View FIGURES 7 ). Median septum with truncated posterior part ( Figs 6C View FIGURES 6 , 7A View FIGURES 7 ). Copulatory ducts sclerotized, widely separated and with spherical structures in anterior half ( Figs 6D View FIGURES 6 , 7B–C View FIGURES 7 ). Spermathecae large and almost touching each other in posterior half ( Figs 6D View FIGURES 6 , 7B View FIGURES 7 ). Fertilisation ducts short and narrow, tips laterad to slightly antero-laterad ( Figs 7B–C View FIGURES 7 ).
Male. Unknown.
Distribution. Myanmar (Tanintharyi) ( Thorell 1895; Gravely 1931) ( Fig. 26 View FIGURE 26 ).
Remarks. Thorell (1895) described this species based on a female specimen collected from Tenasserim (= Tanintharyi), Burma (= Myanmar). Gravely (1931), with certain hesitation, suggested a possible synonymy of this species with T. canescens , though he did not formally establish it, but this synonymy was subsequently accepted by Roewer (1955). Examination of the holotype of T. birmanica revealed that its epigyne is different from that of T. canescens (as shown in Gravely 1931: fig. 7C based on a female from Tavoy, the type locality of T. canescens ), a species described from Myanmar by Simon (1887b); as already noted by Pocock (1900) and Gravely (1931) the epigyne of T. birmanica presents an epigynal plate with a broad, median cleft accommodating a middle piece with truncated apex vs. narrow, median cleft accommodating a middle piece with rounded apex (cf. Figs 6C View FIGURES 6 , 7A View FIGURES 7 vs. Gravely 1931: fig. 7B). Moreover, Pocock (1900) mentioned that T. birmanica is smaller in size than T. canescens . As a consequence, we remove T. birmanica stat. rev. from the synonymy of T. canescens and consider it as a valid species.
NHMUK |
Natural History Museum, London |
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 |
Thelcticopis birmanica Thorell, 1895
Sankaran, Pradeep M., Sherwood, Danniella & Jäger, Peter 2024 |
Thelcticopis canescens
Gravely, F. H. 1931: 246 |
Thelcticopis birmanica
Pocock, R. I. 1900: 271 |
Thorell, T. 1895: 274 |