Architis Simon, 1898
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.1578.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F1CA1CAB-1E51-4029-B0E8-DA9A5D204C66 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B32614-4856-2934-6F98-566498E74484 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Architis Simon, 1898 |
status |
|
Architis Simon, 1898 View in CoL View at ENA
Architis Simon 1898a: 292 View in CoL (type species by monotypy, A. tenuis Simon, 1898 View in CoL ). Carico 1981: 140–141.
Sisenna Simon 1898a: 292 (type species by monotypy, S. helveola Simon, 1898 View in CoL ). Synonymy established by Carico (1993).
Diagnosis. Males of Architis and Staberius differ from all other neotropical pisaurid genera by the copulatory bulb with a wide DTP occupying more than half the width of the cymbial alveolus (e.g. Figs 2A View FIGURES 2 , 4A View FIGURES 4 ), a vestigial median apophysis and the embolus that is mostly hidden under the DTP, with only the apical part exposed at the retrolateral margin of the tegulum ( Figs 4A–D View FIGURES 4 , 20A, C, D View FIGURES 20 ). The former genera can be differentiated by the shape of the VTA, which is variable in Architis but never T-shaped as in Staberius ( Carico 1981; fig. 34). Females of Staberius are also similar to those of some Architis species , but can be recognised by the LL of epigynum medially fused over MF ( Carico 1981: figs 36–37). Female genitalic structures of Architis species are variable, with no single diagnostic character. They can be differentiated from other pisaurids either by the LL of the epigynum that is medially projected over the MF ( A. helveola ; Fig. 12D View FIGURES 12 ) or posterior-ventrally projected ( A. brasiliensis comb. nov.; A. capricorna Carico, 1981 and A. robusta Carico, 1981 ; Figs 16C View FIGURES 16 , 18E View FIGURES 18 , 19D View FIGURES 19 ). The CD of the internal genitalia can present three diagnostic configurations: elongated and medially coiled ( A. brasiliensis comb. nov., A. capricorna , A. erwini sp. nov. and A. robusta ; Figs 13E View FIGURES 13 , 16D View FIGURES 16 , 18F View FIGURES 18 , 19E View FIGURES 19 ); simple and longitudinally oriented ( A. colombo sp. nov., A. fritzmuelleri sp. nov. and A. helveola ; Figs 12E View FIGURES 12 , 14F View FIGURES 14 , 15D View FIGURES 15 ); or encapsulated. In this configuration, the CD can be inside a median sclerotised case ( A. cymatilis , A. maturaca sp. nov., A. dianasilvae sp. nov., A. tenuipes (Simon, 1898) , and A. turvo sp. nov.; Figs 3D View FIGURES 3 , 5E View FIGURES 5 , 8F View FIGURES 8 , 9D View FIGURES 9 , 10C View FIGURES 10 ), inside epigynal wall folds ( A. comaina sp. nov. and A. ikuruwa Carico, 1981 ; Figs 7D View FIGURES 7 , 8B View FIGURES 8 ) or both ( A. altamira sp. nov.; Fig. 8D View FIGURES 8 ). The first configuration can be seen in A. tenuis , although the CD is extremely short and restricted to the posterior end of the stalk of the spermatheca ( Fig. 2D View FIGURES 2 ; Sierwald 1989: fig. 23).
Description. Total length 2.9–6.1 (males), 3.1–11.3 (females). Carapace oval, narrowest anteriorly, widest between coxae II and III. Pars cephalica as high as pars thoracica. Colouration variable, from dark brown to yellow-green, homogeneous or with lateral and median longitudinal pale stripes. Variably covered with dark stout or thin white setae. Ocular area variably darker, eyes surrounded by black rings. Thoracic fovea longitudinal, usually marked. Remaining sulci inconspicuous. Anterior eye row procurved (straight in A. tenuipes ) in frontal view ( Figs 14B View FIGURES 14 , 15B View FIGURES 15 , 18B View FIGURES 18 ; Carico 1981: figs 7–11), relative eye size variable. Posterior eye row recurved in dorsal view, eyes of similar size ( Figs 5A View FIGURES 5 , 10A View FIGURES 10 , 12A View FIGURES 12 , 13A View FIGURES 13 , 14A View FIGURES 14 , 15A View FIGURES 15 , 18A View FIGURES 18 ; Carico 1981: figs 1–6; 1989: fig. 1). Clypeus height approximately 0.5 to 1.7 times anterior median eyes diameter. Chilum present, subtriangular, with a discrete median notch. Chelicerae moderately robust, usually darker than carapace, with three promarginal and three retromarginal teeth. Cheliceral boss small, inconspicuous. Endites rectangular, slightly notched ectally, rounded and with anteromedian scopula apically. Labium longer than wide, truncated distally, notched laterally at proximal half. Sternum as long as wide, posteriorly triangular, with posterior tip projecting between coxae IV. Female pedipalpus with cylindrical tarsus and one pectinate claw. Leg tarsi with apical pseudosegment ( Fig. 19C View FIGURES 19 ) that carries paired pectinate tarsal claws and a smooth inferior claw. Ventral pilosity usually denser than dorsal, without scopula. Leg spination pattern (only surfaces with spines): Femora d1-1-1, l1-1; patellae d1; tibia I and II d1-1, v2-2-2, III and IV d1-1-1, v2-2-2; metatarsus I and II d2 v2-2-2, III and IV d2-2, l1, v2-2-2. Pedipalpus spination: femur d1-1; patella d1-1; tibia d1-1; tarsus d1-2 l1(apical).
Opisthosoma pilose, oval to cylindrical, longer than wide. Colouration dark gray to yellow-green with guanine spots. Venter usually paler than dorsum. Six spinnerets, posterior laterals longer and narrower than anterior laterals. Colulus present, subtriangular, approximately half the length of anterior lateral spinnerets.
Male pedipalp tibia with bifid retrolateral apophysis, with a ventral and a dorsal branch. Ventral tibial apophysis present. Prolateral border with an excavated area in which a posterior cymbial lobe fits. Tegulum curved, elongated transversally, median apophysis fused to tegulum, reduced to a wrinkled area ( Figs 4A, C View FIGURES 4 ). Conductor hyaline, embolus filliform, arising from an extremely enlarged distal tegular projection.
Female epigynum moderately sclerotised, median field and lateral lobes clearly separated. Internal female genitalia with a pair of spermathecae, variable in size and shape; copulatory ducts conspicuous.
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 |
Architis Simon, 1898
Santos, Adalberto J. 2007 |
Architis
Carico, J. E. 1981: 140 |
Simon, E. 1898: 292 |
Sisenna
Simon, E. 1898: 292 |