Thelcticopis rufula Pocock, 1901

Sankaran, Pradeep M., Sherwood, Danniella & Jäger, Peter, 2024, On the identity of species of the huntsman spider genus Thelcticopis Karsch, 1884 (Araneae: Sparassidae: Sparianthinae) from India, Myanmar, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, Zootaxa 5463 (3), pp. 301-338 : 323-325

Thelcticopis rufula Pocock, 1901

Figs 17–18 , 27

Thelcticopis rufulus Pocock, 1901: 488 (♂).

Thelcticopis rufula Pocock : Reimoser 1934: 486 (♀, without description and illustration).

Type material. Holotype ♂, INDIA: Nilgiri Hills [ca. 11°22’N, 76°46’E; 1936 m a.s.l.], date unknown, E.W. Oates leg. ( NHMUK, without registration number; examined).

Other material examined. INDIA: Tamil Nadu: 1 ♀, Dindigul, Maryland, Tiger shola [ca. 10°14’N, 77°31’E; 1886 m a.s.l.], 1926–1927, J. Carl & K. Escher leg. (sub. T. rufula ; MHNG, without registration number; examined) .

Diagnosis. Males of T. rufula are similar to those of T. nalandica comb. rest. and T. paripes comb. rest. in having a massive U-shaped embolus with a centrally situated tip and a large conductor situated in retrolateral half of tegulum, but can be distinguished from these two species by the distinctly shorter dRTA and the conductor having a blunt tip ( Figs 17D–E , 18A–B ) vs. long dRTA reaching distally well into proximal half of tegulum and conductor with acuminate tip ( Figs 13A–B , 14A–B , 15A–B ).

Supplementary description. Male (holotype; Figs 17A–B , 18C–E ). Colouration: brown [colour after Pocock 1901: carapace, chelicera castaneous; sternum, legs ochre-yellow, all these clothed with grey-white or yellowish setae; opisthosoma dirty yellow-grey; dorsal opisthosoma with a median band of black spots; laterals provided with black spots; tibia I–II provided with six pairs of ventro-lateral spines]. Thoracic striae evident. Fovea deep, longitudinal, straight. Chelicerae with three promarginal and six retromarginal teeth ( Fig. 18D ). Body length 11.5. Carapace 5.9 long, 5.0 wide. Opisthosoma 5.6 long, 3.59 wide. Chelicerae 0.98 long. Eye sizes and interdistances ( Fig. 18C ): AME 0.35, ALE 0.36, PME 0.28, PLE 0.25; AME–AME 0.49, AME–ALE 0.64, AME–PME 0.46, ALE–PLE 0.35, PME–PME 0.79, PME–PLE 0.81. Palp ( Figs 17C–E , 18A–B ): cymbium with small proximo-retrolateral bulge ( Figs 17D , 18A ), with a brush of cymbial scopula dorsally in distal half ( Fig. 17E ). Tibia short, i.e., half as long as cymbium ( Fig. 18A ), with short RTA; vRTA long, broad, claw-like in ventral view, dRTA short, conical; with a short, triangular VDL ( Figs 17C–E , 18A–B ). Tegular apophysis arising from tegulum in 4.30-o’ clock position, with inwardly directed apex ( Figs 17C–E , 18A–B ). Conductor arising prolaterally, broad, its tip more or less proximad ( Figs 17D–E , 18A–B ). Embolus covered by conductor, visible centrally ( Fig. 18A ).

Female. Unknown.

Distribution. India (Nilgiri Hills) ( Pocock 1901) ( Fig. 27 ).

Remarks. The RTA of the palp of holotype was found detached from the palp ( Figs 17C–E ) when recently recurated by DS, and it is unknown when or how this damage occurred; the palp was previously intact in the early 2000s (PJ pers. obs., Figs 18A–B ). Initially, Pocock (1901) labelled this species with the manuscript name ‘ T. parvulus ’, which was never published. Occasionally, Pocock’s historical spider material carries manuscript names that differ from the valid names he later provided to the species when they were published (DS pers. obs.). Considering the somatic colouration and locality details, T. ajax could be the matching sex of T. rufula , and the female specimen identified as ‘ T. rufula ’ by Reimoser (1934) and stored at MHNG ( Fig. 19 ) could be a misidentified, unknown species of Thelcticopis .

Figures

FIGURES 13A–D. Thelcticopis nalandica (Karsch, 1892) comb. rest., holotype male.A–B Left palp (A ventral, B retrolateral); C Eye arrangement, dorsal; D Left chelicera, ventral. Abbreviations: aE—apical narrow part of embolus; bE—basal broad part of embolus; C—conductor; CT—conductor tip; iT—internal tooth; TA—tegular apophysis; VO—ventral outgrowth of RTA. Drawings by Peter Jäger.

FIGURES 14A–L. Thelcticopis nalandica (Karsch, 1892) comb. rest, holotype male of Stasina nigropicta (A–E), female (F–L). A–B Left palp (A ventral, B retrolateral); C, I Eye arrangement, dorsal; D, J–K Chelicerae, ventral (D, K left, J right); E Habitus, dorsal; F Epigyne, ventral; G Vulva, dorsal. H Schematic course of internal duct system, dorsal. L Opisthosoma, dorsal. Abbreviation: CT—conductor tip. Drawings by Peter Jäger.

FIGURES 15A–D. Thelcticopis paripes (Karsch, 1879) comb. rest., holotype male. A–B Left palp (A ventral, B retrolateral); C Eye arrangement, dorsal; D Left chelicera, ventral. Abbreviations: aE—apical narrow part of embolus; bE—basal broad part of embolus; C—conductor; CT—conductor tip; TA—tegular apophysis; vmB—ventro-medial branch of RTA. Drawings by Peter Jäger.

FIGURES 17A–F. Thelcticopis rufula Pocock, 1901, holotype male. A–B Habitus (A dorsal, B ventral); C–E Left palp (C prolateral, D ventral, E retrolateral); F Labels in the holotype vial. Scale bars:A–E, 1 mm. Photographs by Danniella Sherwood, © The Trustees of the Natural History Museum, London.

FIGURES 18A–E. Thelcticopis rufula Pocock, 1901, holotype male. A–B Left palp (A ventral, B retrolateral); C Eye arrangement, dorsal; D Left chelicera, ventral; E Habitus, dorsal. Abbreviations: C—conductor; dRTA—dorsal part of RTA; TA—tegular apophysis; vRTA—ventral part of RTA. Drawings by Peter Jäger.

FIGURES 19A–C. Thelcticopis spec., female examined and probably misidentified as Thelcticopis rufula Pocock, 1901 by Reimoser (1934). A Habitus, dorsal; B Epigyne, ventral; C Labels in the vial. Scale bar: B, 0.5 mm. Photographs by Lionel Monod, © MHNG, Geneva.

FIGURE 27. Distribution of the genus Thelcticopis Karsch, 1884 in southern India and Sri Lanka.