Telaprocera gen. nov.

Type species. Telaprocera maudae sp. nov., designated here.

Etymology. The genus name Telaprocera is formed by joining the Latin words tela, meaning web, and procerus, meaning long or tall. This name describes the remarkable elongated web built by the two species within this genus. The gender is feminine.

Diagnosis. Telaprocera gen. nov. shares with the Argiopinae ( Argiope, Gea and Neogea) the procurved row of the posterior eyes, although the degree of this curvature ranges from almost straight to noticeably procurved (Figs 18, 20, 28, 30). A distinct, heavily sclerotised dorsal ‘keel’ on the cymbium of the male pedipalp serves as a putative synapomorphy of the genus and differentiates Telaprocera gen. nov. from all other currently known genera within the Argiopinae (and other Araneidae) (Figs 5, 23, 33). Males also differ from the Argiopinae by the presence of a distinct terminal apophysis (Figs 4, 7, 9, 22, 23, 32, 33). Females differ from the Argiopinae in the presence of a scape, although it is very simple, short, and poorly differentiated (Figs 10, 11, 24, 25, 35). In addition, the epigynes lack the transverse rim and lateral depressions of the Argiopinae. In contrast to all other argiopine spiders, which build circular, often decorated, orb-webs, Telaprocera gen. nov. build elongated ladder-webs without decorations (Fig. 3).

Description. Small to medium sized araneids (TL 3.5–7), males of similar size as females but with comparatively longer legs and narrower abdomens (Figs 18–21, 28–31). Carapace moderately domed, pearshaped in dorsal view, and slightly longer than wide; moderately hirsute, particularly around eye region. AE row straight, PE row almost straight to distinctly procurved (Figs 18, 20, 28, 30). Clypeus less than or equal to the diameter of AME. AME larger than PME, PLE larger than ALE. Median ocular area narrower posteriorly than anteriorly. PME with centralised canoe-shaped tapetum. Abdomen in dorsal view approximately round, more tapered posteriorly in T. joanae sp. nov. (Figs 18, 20, 28, 30). Distinct white dorsolateral humeral projections ( T. joanae sp. nov.) or white unraised dorsolateral patches may be present ( T. maudae sp. nov.) (Figs 18, 20, 28, 30). Tibiae I and II with short, very stout spines, arranged linearly in T. maudae sp. nov. Male T. maudae sp. nov. tibiae II with fewer spines. Leg formula I> II> IV> III.

Male pedipalp patellae with one long macroseta. Cymbium of pedipalp with dorsal keel adjacent to paracymbium (Figs 5, 23, 33). Median apophysis smooth without prongs, flagella, spurs, serrations or other modifications, comparatively smaller in T. joanae sp. nov. (Figs 4, 7, 22, 32). Conductor with lobes of variable shape. Embolic division highly variable between both species, simple in T. maudae sp. nov. (Figs 4, 22), but with basoembolic apophysis and digitiform process in T. joanae sp. nov. (Figs 7, 32, 33).

Epigyne heavily sclerotised, as wide as long in T. maudae sp. nov. (Fig. 24) or wider than long in T. joanae sp. nov. (Fig. 34). Scape not well differentiated, forming a blunt, posterior protrusion. Extreme distal portion of scape tapered and folded either anteriorly or posteriorly (Figs 10, 11, 24, 25, 35). Spermathecae globular, copulatory ducts short (Figs 26, 36).