Crassignatha rostriformis Y. Lin & S. Li, 2020

Li, Ya, Lin, Yucheng & Li, Shuqiang, 2020, A review of Crassignatha (Araneae, Symphytognathidae), ZooKeys 988, pp. 63-128 : 63

publication ID	https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.988.56188
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6E64D69B-DD73-4A7E-AE2B-3CD21247A5E3
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/3F86509B-A293-4591-85EF-E84F270C91AB
taxon LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:act:3F86509B-A293-4591-85EF-E84F270C91AB
treatment provided by	ZooKeys by Pensoft
scientific name	Crassignatha rostriformis Y. Lin & S. Li
status	sp. nov.

Treatment

Crassignatha rostriformis Y. Lin & S. Li sp. nov. Figs 24 View Figure 24 , 25 View Figure 25 , 38 View Figure 38

Type material.

Holotype ♂ (NHMSU Ar 036) and paratypes 2♂ 34♀ (NHMSU Ar 037-072), China: Yunnan Province, Wenshan Prefecture, Xichou County, Dongma Township, Xianrendong Village, Xianren Cave (23.50193°N, 104.86810°E; 1326 m), 6.VIII.2010, Z. Yao, X. Wang and C. Wu leg.; 2♂ 16♀ (NHMSU-HA078), 3♂ 2♀ (NHMSU-HA103), same data as holotype; 1♂ (NHMSU-HA079) and 1♀ (NHMSU-HA079) used for sequencing, GenBank: MT991998 and MT991997, same data as for preceding.

Diagnosis.

The male of C. rostriformis sp. nov. is similar to C. nasalis sp. nov. in the form of the palp but differs from the latter by the large, hooked cymbial tooth and the wider embolic base (Fig. 25B View Figure 25 vs. Fig. 17A, B View Figure 17 ). The female is most similar to that of C. mengla sp. nov. in the vulva configuration but can be easily distinguished by spermathecae separated by less than their diameter, and the low second turn of the copulatory duct, rather than wide intervals of spermathecae and the high second turn of the copulatory duct (Fig. 25D-F View Figure 25 vs. Fig. 13F, G View Figure 13 ).

Description.

Male (holotype). Total length 0.64. Carapace 0.28 long, 0.28 wide, 0.32 high. Clypeus 0.10 high. Sternum 0.20 long, 0.20 wide. Abdomen 0.40 long, 0.36 wide, 0.48 high. Length of legs: I 1.04 (0.32, 0.12, 0.24, 0.16, 0.20); II 0.84 (0.22, 0.12, 0.20, 0.12, 0.18); III 0.66 (0.20, 0.10, 0.12, 0.10, 0.14); IV 0.80 (0.26, 0.10, 0.16, 0.12, 0.16).

Somatic characters (Fig. 24A-C View Figure 24 ). Coloration: prosoma dark brown, ventrally darker than dorsally. Legs brown, with black pigmentation. Abdomen dark, laterally and ventrally darker than dorsally, with light brown speckles. Prosoma: carapace sub-rounded, surface sculptured. Cephalic area elevated. Clypeus concave. ALE slightly protruded. PER recurved. Mouthparts distinctly sclerotized. Labium nearly semilunar. Sternum scutiform, surface subtly textured, slightly plump, truncated posteriorly. Legs: tibia II with two clasping spurs. Abdomen: rounded dorsally, abdominal lateral scutum weakly sclerotized, circular plate absent. Spinnerets tiny.

Palp (Fig. 25A-C View Figure 25 ): tibia as long as patella. Cymbium wider than femur, bears some distal setae, with a dorsal hooked tooth near distal margin. Tegulum plump and globular. Disciform median apophysis with an odontoid prolateral process. Embolic membrane arises from behind median apophysis. Embolus short, rigid, basally wide, mesally and distally narrow.

Female (one of paratypes). Total length 0.92. Carapace 0.40 long, 0.36 wide, 0.36 high. Clypeus 0.12 high. Sternum 0.24 long, 0.24 wide. Abdomen 0.60 long, 0.72 wide, 0.68 high. Length of legs: I 1.36 (0.46, 0.12, 0.32, 0.22, 0.24); II 1.12 (0.38, 0.14, 0.26, 0.16, 0.18); III 0.82 (0.22, 0.12, 0.14, 0.16, 0.18); IV 1.02 (0.30, 0.12, 0.24, 0.16, 0.20).

Somatic characters (Fig. 24D-F View Figure 24 ). Coloration: prosoma as in male. Abdomen darker than in male. Prosoma: carapace nearly pear shaped, weakly granular. Cephalic area lower than in male. PER slightly recurved. Mouthparts and sternum as in male. Abdomen: nearly globose, dorsally speckled. Spinnerets weakly sclerotized.

Epigyne (Fig. 25D-F View Figure 25 ): slightly sclerotized, with a few setae at lateral margins. Scape short, slightly protruded. Copulatory openings large, flat, beak shaped, located at the terminus of scape. Internal structures faintly visible via translucent tegument. Spermathecae globose, separated by ~0.8 × their diameter. Fertilization ducts starting at inside posterior margin of spermathecae and bending below the venter of spermathecae. Copulatory ducts relatively long, connected to lower dorsal surface of spermathecae, bypassing around spermathecae, forming three bends, fusing before copulatory openings.

Etymology.

The specific epithet is derived from the Latin adjective rostriformis (rostriform), in reference to the shape of the copulatory openings.

Distribution.

China (Yunnan) (Fig. 38 View Figure 38 ).