Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020

Huber, Bernhard A., Meng, Guanliang, García, Jimmy Cabra & Carvalho, Leonardo S., 2024, Thriving in dry conditions: on the Neotropical spider genus Galapa (Araneae: Pholcidae), Zootaxa 5419 (3), pp. 301-347 : 322-330

Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020

Figs 2G–I , 3B , 17–24

Galapa spiniphila Huber in Huber & Villarreal 2020: 58, figs 174–175, 178–188 (♂ ♀). Diagnosis (amended; see Huber & Villarreal 2020). Males are distinguished from known congeners by presence of four distal apophyses on genital bulb ( Figs 17 , 21C, D ; pair of ventral apophyses, distal apophysis, and retrolateral-dorsal apophysis) and by simple (not bifid) retrolateral process on procursus directed towards retrolateral (rather than towards dorsal). Females without sclerite in ventral wall of uterus externus (as opposed to G. gabito ) but externally possibly indistinguishable from G. murphyi ; large membranous structure in internal genitalia not bilobed as in G. gabito and G. murphyi , with distinctive median membranous process (arrows in Fig. 24E, G, I ).

Remarks. The Colombian specimens below are assigned tentatively to this species because there are some minor but apparently consistent morphological differences among them and between Colombian and Venezuelan specimens (see Variation below and Figs 17–19 ). They are not described as separate species mainly because of the low CO1 distances among the sequenced Colombian specimens (3.3–4.8%). The distances between the Colombian specimens on one side and the topotypical Venezuelan G. spiniphila specimen on the other side are higher (9.4–10.1%), but the morphological differences between them are of the same degree as those among Colombian specimens. We thus describe the new Colombian specimens as morphs within G. spiniphila , pending further analysis. The topotypical morph is here named ‘Paraguaná morph’.

The specimens from Magdalena are extremely bleached and difficult to study.They seem to share the morphology of the Pueblo Bello morph.

New material examined.

Papayal morph. COLOMBIA: La Guajira • 6 ♂, 3 ♀ (one male and one female used for SEM); near Papayal ; 11.0029°N, 72.7708°W; 150 m a.s.l.; semi-arid roadside; 19 Sep. 2022; B.A. Huber leg.; MUSENUV-Ar 2659 • 1 ♂, one cleared female abdomen; same collection data as for preceding; ZFMK Ar 24221 • 4 ♀, 1 juv., in pure ethanol (one cleared female abdomen transferred to ZFMK Ar 24221); same collection data as for preceding; ZFMK Col 291 .

Riohacha morph. COLOMBIA: La Guajira • 2 ♂, 2 ♀; 5 km S of Riohacha ; 11.4848°N, 72.9051°W; 30 m a.s.l.; semi-arid roadside; 19 Sep. 2022; B.A. Huber leg.; MUSENUV-Ar 2660 • 1 ♂, one cleared female abdomen; same collection data as for preceding; ZFMK Ar 24220 • 4 ♀, in pure ethanol (one prosoma used for molecular work, one abdomen cleared and transferred to ZFMK Ar 24220); same collection data as for preceding; ZFMK Col 286 .

Pueblo Bello morph. COLOMBIA: Cesar • 3 ♂, 1 ♀; 18 km ESE of Pueblo Bello ; 10.3449°N, 73.4349°W; 240 m a.s.l.; semi-arid hill near road; 21 Sep. 2022; B.A. Huber leg.; MUSENUV-Ar 2661 • 1 ♂, one cleared female abdomen; same collection data as for preceding; ZFMK Ar 24222 • 2 ♀, in pure ethanol (one abdomen cleared and transferred to ZFMK Ar 24222); same collection data as for preceding; ZFMK Col 307 .

Uncertain assignment (see Remarks above).

COLOMBIA: Magdalena • 6 ♂, 16 ♀, 10 km E of Santa Marta, near Bonda, Villa Culebra ; 11.23°N, 74.12°W; among hollow blocks of concrete; Oct. 1985; H.-G. Müller leg.; MHNG • 2 ♂, same collection data as for preceding but pitfall traps; MHNG • 1 ♀, Tayrona National Park, Bahia de Gairaca ; 11.316°N, 74.108°W; 12 Jul. 1985; H.G. Müller leg.; MHNG .

Redescription.

Male (near Papayal)

MEASUREMENTS. Total body length 0.98, carapace width 0.43. Distance PME-PME 35 µm; diameter PME 35 µm; distance PME-ALE 10 µm; Distance AME-AME 10 µm; diameter AME 15 µm. Leg 1: 1.90 (0.56 + 0.12 + 0.50 + 0.44+ 0.28), tibia 2: 0.40, tibia 3: 0.36, tibia 4: 0.58; tibia 1 L/d: 10; diameters of leg femora 0.090, of leg tibiae: 0.050.

COLOUR (in ethanol). Prosoma and legs pale ochre-yellow, carapace without pattern, legs without darker rings; abdomen monochromous ochre-grey.

BODY. Habitus as in Fig. 2G, I . Ocular area not raised. Carapace without thoracic groove. Clypeus slightly more protruding than in female, with sclerotized rim. Sternum slightly wider than long (0.30/0.28), with pair of indistinct low anterior processes near coxae 1 (10 µm long, 20 µm diameter at basis). Abdomen globular. Gonopore apparently without epiandrous spigots ( Fig. 20E ). ALS with one strongly widened spigot, one long pointed spigot, and five cylindrical spigots, of which one is much wider than the others ( Fig. 22A, B ); PMS with two conical spigots ( Fig. 22A ); PLS without spigots.

CHELICERAE. In general, very similar to congeners ( Fig. 3B ), with curved process proximally on fang; with stridulatory files consisting of ~30 ridges, distances between ridges proximally 2.0 µm, distally 1.1 µm ( Fig. 20C ), proximal ridges with further fine subdivision.

PALPS. As in Fig. 17 ; coxa unmodified; trochanter with very short ventral protrusion; femur proximally with prolateral stridulatory pick ( Fig. 20D ), distally slightly widened but without modification; femur-patella joints slightly shifted towards prolateral side; tibia oval, with two trichobothria; tibia-tarsus joints barely shifted towards retrolateral side; palpal tarsal organ weakly raised ( Fig. 23D ), diameter 4.1 µm, diameter of opening 1.0 µm; procursus with pointed retrolateral-distal process directed towards retrolateral (and slightly ventral) and with dorsal process curved towards prolateral and lodged in dorsal pocket of genital bulb; genital bulb with strong distal apophysis, straight retrolateral-dorsal process, and pair of pointed ventral processes; sperm duct opening on prolateral-ventral side directly on bulb ( Fig. 21D ).

LEGS. Without spines and curved hairs. With round cuticular plates (cf. Fig. 23F ; diameter 6–7 µm) and rimmed pores (cf. Fig. 23G ; outer diameter 3.5 µm, diameter of opening 0.3 µm) apparently on all leg segments. Sexually dimorphic short vertical hairs present on tibiae 1 and 2 ( Fig. 23A, B ), barely visible in dissecting microscope, length ~17 µm, diameter at basis 1.1 µm. Chemoreceptive hairs similar in size (length ~12 µm, diameter at basis 1.5 µm) but with side branch ( Fig. 22E, F ). Retrolateral trichobothrium of tibia 1 at 64%; prolateral trichobothrium absent on tibia 1. Tarsus 1 with five pseudosegments, fairly distinct; leg tarsal organs capsulate (cf. Fig. 23E ; diameter 3.7 µm, diameter of opening 0.7 µm). Main tarsal claws with ~10–11 tines ( Fig. 22F ).

Female (near Papayal)

In general, similar to male ( Fig. 2H ) but sternum without pair of anterior humps, chelicerae apparently without stridulatory files, cheliceral fangs unmodified, clypeus less protruding and without sclerotized rim. Tibia 1 in five females: 0.40 – 0.44 (mean 0.42). Spinnerets as in male ( Fig. 22C, D ). Epigynum ( Figs 20F , 24A ) with simple semicircular anterior plate, weakly protruding, posteriorly indented medially; posterior plate short and simple, with indistinct median division. Internal genitalia ( Fig. 24D, E ) very simple, apparently without pore plates; membranous structure with long median process (twisted in Fig. 24D, E ), covered by posterior epigynal plate.

Variation. Males from different localities show variation in at least three palpal structures ( Figs 17–19 ): (1) retrolateral-dorsal bulbal process, (2) distal bulbal apophysis, and (3) retrolateral-distal process of procursus. The retrolateral-dorsal bulbal apophysis (ra in Fig. 17 ) is curved towards the distal bulbal apophysis in the Riohacha and Pueblo Bello morphs, but straight in the Paraguaná and Papayal morphs. In the Riohacha morph, this apophysis is curved towards the proximal section of the distal bulbal apophysis, while in the Pueblo Bello morph it is curved towards the mid-section of this apophysis. The distal bulbal apophysis (da in Fig. 17 ) is long and slender in the Paraguaná and Riohacha morphs, wider and stronger in the Papayal morph, shorter in the Pueblo Bello morph. The retrolateral-distal process of the procursus (rp in Fig. 17 ) is wider (in lateral view) in the Pueblo Bello morph than in the three other morphs.

Females of the four morphs are apparently indistinguishable. The posterior margin of the anterior epigynal plate is straight in the Pueblo Bello morph ( Fig. 24C ) but undulating in the other morphs ( Fig. 24A, B ; cf. Huber & Villarreal 2020: figs 183, 186); however, this seems to vary within populations and is also slightly dependent on the angle of view and on the degree of opening of the epigynal cleft. The median posterior process in the internal genitalia appears variably long (e.g. longer in the Paraguaná morph than in the Pueblo Bello morph) but this observation rests on a very small sample of cleared specimens and may partly be an artifact (e.g., the process appears short in the Papayal morph but apparently only because it is twisted).

Tibia 1 lengths among the four morphs are widely overlapping and thus pooled here. Tibia 1 in 17 males: 0.47–0.54 (mean 0.50); in 29 females: 0.40–0.50 (mean 0.44).

Natural history. At Riohacha, all specimens were beaten out of dead cactus branches lying on the ground in a degraded roadside environment with bushes and a few small trees. At Papayal, most specimens were also beaten out of dead cacti lying on the ground in a similar roadside environment ( Fig. 5D ). At Pueblo Bello, the spiders were found in a low, dry forest on a roadside hill. They were beaten from old dry branches lying on the ground and hollowed by termites. At all three localities, they shared the used microhabitats with another species of Ninetinae , an undescribed representative of Ibotyporanga ; at Riohacha, also with Modisimus culicinus (Simon, 1893) . Two egg-sacs contained six eggs each, with an egg diameter of 0.38–0.40.

Distribution. This species seems to be widespread in north-western Venezuela and northern Colombia ( Fig. 4 ).

Figures

FIG. 2. Galapa Huber, 2000, live specimens. A–D. G. murphyi Huber sp. n.; male and female with egg sac from W of Cañas; female with egg-sac from near Playa Iguanita, and female in web (in glass vial) from near Playa Iguanita. E–F. G. gabito Huber sp. n.; male and female with egg sac from Santa Marta. G–H. G. spiniphila Huber, 2020; male and female with egg sac from S of Riohacha. I. G. spiniphila; male from ESE of Pueblo Bello.

FIG. 3. Galapa spp., male chelicerae, frontal views. Note unmodified main segments (except for stridulatory files) and processes on fangs (arrows). A. G. murphyi Huber sp. n. from Costa Rica, near Playa Iguanita, ZFMK Ar 24224. B. G. spiniphila Huber, 2020 from Colombia, near Papayal, ZFMK Ar 24221. Scale bar: 0.1 mm.

FIG. 17. Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020; ‘Papayal morph’ from Colombia, Papayal, ZFMK Ar 24221. Left male palp in prolateral (A), dorsal (B), and retrolateral (C) views. Abbreviations: da, distal apophysis of genital bulb; ra, retrolateral-dorsal apophysis of genital bulb; rp, retrolateral-distal process of procursus; va, ventral apophyses of genital bulb. Scale bar: 0.2 mm.

FIG. 18. Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020; ‘Riohacha morph’ from Colombia, Riohacha, ZFMK Ar 24220. Left male palp in prolateral (A), dorsal (B), and retrolateral (C) views. Arrows point at details that differ among morphs, compare with Figs 17 and 19. Scale bar: 0.2 mm.

FIG. 19. Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020; ‘Pueblo Bello morph’ from Colombia, ESE of Pueblo Bello, ZFMK Ar 24222. Left male palp in prolateral (A), dorsal (B), and retrolateral (C) views. Arrows point at details that differ among morphs, compare with Figs 17 and 18. Scale bar: 0.2 mm.

FIG. 20. Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020, from Colombia, near Papayal. A. Male prosoma, frontal view. B. Female ocular area, frontal-dorsal view. C. Stridulatory file on right male chelicera. D. Stridulatory pick on male palpal femur. E. Male gonopore. F. Epigynum, ventral view.Abbreviations: aep, anterior (main) epigynal plate; pep, posterior epigynal plate. Scale bars: 100 µm (A, F), 20 µm (B, E), 10 µm (C), 2 µm (D).

FIG. 21. Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020, male from Colombia, near Papayal. A–C. Right palp, retrolateral to dorsal views. D–F. Left palp, prolateral-ventral to prolateral-dorsal views. Abbreviations: b, genital bulb; da, distal apophysis of genital bulb; dp, dorsal process of procursus; pr, procursus; ra, retrolateral-dorsal apophysis of genital bulb; rp, retrolateral-distal process of procursus; sd, sperm duct opening; to, tarsal organ; va, ventral apophyses of genital bulb. Scale bars: 100 µm.

FIG. 22. Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020, from Colombia, near Papayal. A, B. Male ALS and PMS. C. Female spinnerets. D. Female ALS and PMS. E. Tip of right female tarsus 1, prolateral view. F. Tip of right male tarsus 3, prolateral view. Abbreviations:ALS, anterior lateral spinneret; PLS, posterior lateral spinneret; PMS, posterior median spinneret. Scale bars: 10 µm (A, B, D–F), 20 µm (C).

FIG. 23. Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020, from Colombia, near Papayal. A. Right male tibia 2, prolateral view, showing regular mechanoreceptors and sexually dimorphic ‘short vertical hairs’. B. Right male tibia 1, prolateral view, showing sexually dimorphic ‘short vertical hairs’ (and basis of regular mechanoreceptor). C. Trichobothrium on left male metatarsus 2. D. Male palpal tarsal organ. E. Tarsal organ on left female tarsus 3. F. Cuticular plate (and basis of regular mechanoreceptor) on female femur 4. G. Rimmed pore (and basis of regular mechanoreceptor) on left female metatarsus 3. Scale bars: 10 µm (A, C, F), 2 µm (B, D, E, G).

FIG. 24. Galapa spiniphila Huber, 2020; female abdomens, ventral views, and cleared female genitalia, ventral and dorsal views; arrows point at distinctive median membranous processes. A, D, E. Papayal morph, from Colombia, Papayal, ZFMK Ar 24221. B, F, G. Riohacha morph, from Colombia, Riohacha, ZFMK Ar 24220. C, H, I. Pueblo Bello morph, from Colombia, ESE of Pueblo Bello, ZFMK Ar 24222. Abbreviations: aep, anterior (main) epigynal plate; pep, posterior epigynal plate. Scale bars: 0.2 mm.

FIG. 5. Typical habitats of Galapa spp. A–B. Galápagos, Santa Cruz, near Garrapatero beach and near Canal de Itabaca (G. bella). C. Colombia, Magdalena, near Santa Marta (G. gabito). D. Colombia, La Guajira, near Papayal (G. spiniphila). E–F. Costa Rica, Guanacaste, NW of Cañas and S of La Cruz (G. murphyi). Photos BAH.

FIG. 4. Known distribution of Galapa Huber, 2000.