identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03BE8798A1422063FF627C23FE0756FA.text	03BE8798A1422063FF627C23FE0756FA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chrysometa bolivia Levi 1986	<div><p>Chrysometa bolivia Levi, 1986</p><p>Figs 1–3, 4A, 11</p><p>Chrysometa tenuipes Keyserling 1893 (in part, three females, one juvenile, and one male paralectotypes identified as C. bolivia (deposited at NHMUK), see Levi 1986: 196): 335</p><p>Chrysometa bolivia Levi 1986: 203–204, figs 703–710</p><p>Type material. Holotype ♀, Rurrenabaque, departamento El Bení, Bolivia, October/ November 1956, Peña, L. (IRSNB) (not examined)</p><p>Material examined. 1♂, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-78.50789&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-3.914564" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -78.50789/lat -3.914564)">Rio Blanco</a>, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-78.50789&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-3.914564" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -78.50789/lat -3.914564)">parroquia de Paquisha</a>, provincia de Zamora Chinchipe, República del Ecuador (3°54'52.43"S 78°30'28.39"W), 10 August 2024, Peñaherrera-R., P. leg. (ZSFQ-i20626)) ; 1 ♀, same data as previous (ZSFQ-i20627) .</p><p>Diagnosis. Males of C. bolivia resemble those of C. chuchaqui sp. nov. by having the coil of conductor and embolus much wider than tegulum and by the presence of a bifid conductor (Figs 2B, 6B). Chrysometa bolivia is diagnosed from the new species by the embolus without a distal tooth and being wrapped by the conductor at distal section; conductor short and bifid; cymbial ectomedian process square with truncated tip; cymbial ectomedian and ectobasal processes fused; paracymbium lower prong with a single incrassate prolateral process and upper prong with an indentation (Figs 2A–C, 4A, B, 6A–C). Females of C. bolivia resemble those of C. uaza Levi, 1986 by its genitalia with elongated triangular septum and copulatory and fertilisation ducts coiling between each other approximately two times (Figs 3A–C; Levi 1986, figs 602–605). However, it differs from C. uaza by having two triangular weakly sclerotised marks above epigynum; median plate elongated with thinner arms in ventral view and rounded in posterior view; lateral plates straight in posterior view; and copulatory openings sinuous (short and wide arms of median plate in ventral view and triangular in posterior view; lateral plates sinuous in posterior view; copulatory openings rounded; and sclerotised marks above epigynum absent in C. uaza) (Figs 3A–C; Levi 1986, figs 602–605).</p><p>Description. Male (based on specimen ZSFQ-i20626). Carapace and legs overall pale yellow (Fig. 1A, B). Abdomen oval, anteriorly elevated, with lateral portion pale yellow with a dark line on ventral edge and covered with guanine patches, these absent on venter and anterior section of dorsum surface (Fig. 1B); dorsum with yellowish shade (Fig. 1A); venter of abdomen dark brown. Total length 2.78. Carapace 0.85 long, 0.76 wide. Abdomen 1.66 long, 1.09 wide. Left chelicera 0.88 long, 0.22 wide. Leg formula I–II–IV–III. Leg I: 4.16/0.56/5.12/6.42 / 1.16 / 17.42 (femur / patella / tibia / metatarsus / tarsus/ total). Leg II: 2.27 / 0.41 / 2.29 / 2.83 / 0.83 / 8.63. Leg III: 1.32 / 0.36 / 0.85 / 1.09 / 0.60 / 4.22. Leg IV: 2.20 / 0.47 / 1.73 / 1.83 / 0.65 / 6.88. Palpus (Figs 2A–C, 4A): Palpal femur not swollen. Palpal tibia longer than wide. Squat cymbial ectomedian process present (Fig. 2B, C); cymbial ectobasal process small and rounded, fused with cymbial ectomedial process (Fig. 2C). Paracymbium with proximate bifurcated lower prong and an elongated upper prong with distal indentation; lower prong with two processes, one on each side (Fig. 2B). Coil of conductor and embolus much wider and longer than tegulum (Fig. 2B). Conductor bifid and shorter than embolus; upper conductor follows the embolus angle and wrapped the embolus while lower conductor goes downwards (Fig. 2A, B). Embolus without distal tooth (Fig. 4A). Small and rounded embolic basal apophysis present, almost absent due to the weakly developed state (Fig. 4A).</p><p>Female (based on specimen ZSFQ-i20627) (Fig. 1C, D). Body colouration as in male, except for the venter of abdomen pale yellow with a central small brown dot. Total length 3.34. Carapace long 1.64, 1.18 wide. Abdomen 2.58 long, 2.04 wide. Left chelicera 0.68 long, 0.33 wide. Leg formula I–II–IV–III. Leg I: 3.51 / 0.68 / 3.27 / 4.06 / 1.40 / 12.92. Leg II: 2.19 / 0.53 / 2.08 / 2.13 / 0.79 / 7.72 Leg III 1.60 / 0.30 / 0.87 / 1.17 / 0.50 / 4.44. Leg IV 2.28 / 0.34 / 1.51 / 1.67 / 0.60 / 6.4. Genitalia (Fig. 3A–C): two triangular sclerotised marks above the epigynum present (Fig. 3A). Inverted T-shaped median plate, wider than long; anterior section with a laminar extension creating a pocket (Fig. 3A). Sinuous copulatory openings extending the entire length of each arm length of the median plate (Fig. 3A). In posterior view, median plate rounded and slightly protruding (Fig. 3B). Triangular lateral plates, in posterior view (Fig. 3B). Fertilisation ducts originating anteriorly and intersecting over rounded spermathecae (Fig. 3C). Fertilisation ducts with membranous texture and being weakly sclerotised (Fig. 3C). Copulatory ducts with smooth texture and being weakly sclerotised (Fig. 3C). Fertilisation and copulatory ducts coiling between each other, at least two times (Fig. 3C).</p><p>Distribution and natural history. This species is known to be distributed in Colombia (although dubious per Levi (1986)), Bolivia, and Ecuador. In Ecuador it is only known from a single locality (Fig. 11): Rio Blanco, 1700 m, province of Zamora Chinchipe. The examined specimens were collected at a riparian understory area on the banks of the Rio Blanco, at night, in a low montane evergreen forest of the Cordillera del Cóndor-Kutukú; Northern Andes biogeographic province (Morrone 2014).</p><p>Notes. The examined specimens represent the first record of this species from Ecuador, extending this species' distribution approximately 1,670 km from the nearest confirmed locality (Rurrenabaque, Bolivia). Although this distance could support the idea that this is not the species assigned, the morphology of the abdomen as well as the genitalia of the examined specimens agree with those provided by Levi (1986, figs 703–710). Perhaps the provided figure of the examined male disposes the palpus at a different angle and position to that of Levi (1986, figs 708–709), but after carefully comparing any possible angle similar to Levi (1986, figs 708–709) I did not observe differences between both palpi. Even when the distance between each lower prong may appear to differ, this varies depending on the rotational position of the palpus (e.g., Fig. 2B; Levi 1986, figs. 708–709). The female I depict here slightly differs from the female holotype by having a rounded spermatheca while the latter shows a rectangular spermatheca. However, the observed difference could be attributed to unreported intraspecific variation. Another plausible option that could explain the suggested morphological variation on the spermathecae shape of C. bolivia could be the differences on Levi’s (1986) interpretation during the illustration process.</p><p>On the other hand, the only known male of C. bolivia (previous paralectotype of C. tenuipes) matches the male I depict here as both share the same paracymbium with proximate bifurcated lower prong and an elongated upper prong with distal indentation, lower prong with two processes (one on each side), conductor bifurcated, and coil of conductor and embolus much wider and longer than tegulum (Fig. 2, Levi 1986, figs 708, 709). Certainly, the female examined in this study is conspecific with both the male illustrated here and the one which was originally designated as paralectotype of C. tenuipes . However, this raises the question: what is the relationship between these specimens and the female holotype of C. bolivia depicted in Levi (1986, figs 708, 709)? To resolve this uncertainty, a reexamination of the C. bolivia holotype, along with the Colombian females originally designated as paralectotypes of C. tenuipes is needed.</p><p>If the morphology of the Colombian females only matches that of the Ecuadorian specimen, it is more likely that a new name should be proposed for these spiders. Conversely, if the Colombian females exhibit intermediate morphology between the holotype of C. bolivia and the Ecuadorian specimen, we can confidently conclude that they all belong to a single species with a large range of distribution until more evidence can be presented (e.g. description of Bolivian males and molecular work). Further research is required to resolve these questions, but this falls beyond the scope of the present study.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE8798A1422063FF627C23FE0756FA	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Peñaherrera-R, Pedro	Peñaherrera-R, Pedro (2025): On some Chrysometa Simon, 1894 species collected from Ecuador: redescription of C. bolivia, description of a new species, and comments on the type locality of C. otavalo (Araneae, Tetragnathidae). Zootaxa 5636 (3): 511-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5636.3.6, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5636.3.6
03BE8798A147206FFF627C07FA79536E.text	03BE8798A147206FFF627C07FA79536E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chrysometa chuchaqui Peñaherrera-R 2025	<div><p>Chrysometa chuchaqui sp. nov.</p><p>Figs 4B, 5–9, 11</p><p>Type material. Holotype ♂, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-78.6845&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-0.012083333" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -78.6845/lat -0.012083333)">near Bellavista Lodge and Tandayapa Cloud Forest Station</a>, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-78.6845&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-0.012083333" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -78.6845/lat -0.012083333)">parroquia de Nanegalito</a>, provincia de Pichincha, República del Ecuador (0°00'43.5"S 78°41'04.2"W), 26 January 2024, Peñaherrera-R., P. leg. (ZSFQ-i20623) . Paratypes 2♀ (ZSFQ-i20624; ZSFQ-i20625), same data as holotype .</p><p>Other material examined. None.</p><p>Etymology. The specific epithet is an apposition taken from the quechuism generally used by Ecuadorians in reference to the hangover. The name is inspired, in part, by the Ecuadorian band Guardarraya, whose music the author has cherished since his teenage years. One of their notable songs bears the same name, and this tribute reflects both a personal and cultural connection.</p><p>Diagnosis. Males of C. chuchaqui sp. nov. resemble those of C. bolivia by the palpus having the coil of conductor and embolus much wider than the tegulum and by the presence of a bifid conductor (Figs 2C, 6B, C). However, C chuchaqui sp. nov. is identified by the embolus with a distal tooth and not wrapped by the conductor at distal section; conductor long and bifid; cymbial ectomedian process more apically projected and more lanceolate; cymbial ectomedian and ectobasal processes not fused; paracymbium with wide bifid prong, prolateral lower prong having two protruding processes, and upper prong without indentation (Figs 2A–C, 4A, B, 6A–C). Females of C. chuchaqui sp. nov. resemble those of C. serachui Levi, 1986 by the genitalia with a square and extremely protruding median plate visible in posterior view; distal constriction and median dilatation at posterior section of the median plate present; and triangular superior border of lateral plates (Fig. 7A, B; Levi 1986, figs 166–168). They differ as C. chuchaqui sp. nov. has wide copulatory openings extending over the anterior section on median plate downwards to almost posterior border section; median plate with median dilatation over its ventral surface; two weakly sclerotised marks above epigynum; and coiled fertilisation ducts (copulatory openings small and restricted to median section of median plate, median dilatation on ventral surface of median plate and marks above epigynum absent, and fertilisation duct with a slight curvature in C. serachui) (Fig. 7A–C, Levi 1986, figs 165–168). Additionally, females of C. chuchaqui sp. nov. differ from C. serachui by the absence of an abdominal pattern, present in the latter (Fig. 5C; Levi 1986, fig. 169).</p><p>Description. Male (based on holotype ZSFQ-i20623). Carapace overall brown with a butterfly-shaped pale yellow mark at the centre (Fig. 5A). Legs overall are pale yellow; distal section of tibia I and metatarsus I dark yellow as well as basal section of femur I and all the coxa I and trochanter I (Fig. 5A, B). Laterals of the abdomen with big silver patches, absent at venter and dorsum surfaces (Fig. 5A, B); dorsum with a black mark from anterior to median section, yellowish shade present over the dorsum (Fig. 5A, B); anterior small abdominal projection present (Fig. 5B). Total length 4.13. Carapace 1.72 long, 1.42 wide. Abdomen 2.43 long, 1.16 wide. Left chelicera 0.88 long, 0.22 wide. Leg formula I–II–IV–III. Leg I: 5.67 / 0.84 / 6.23 / 7.60 / 1.90 / 16.24. Leg II: 3.32 / 0.77 / 2.91 / 3.88 / 1.07 / 11.95. Leg III: 1.48 / 0.39 / 0.94 / 1.44 / 0.54 / 4.79. Leg IV: 2.98 / 0.46 / 1.95 / 2.39 / 0.79 / 8.57. Palpus (Figs 4B, 6A–C): Palpal femur not swollen. Palpal tibia longer than wide. Lanceolate cymbial ectomedian process present (Fig. 6B, C); small and conical cymbial ectobasal process spur present with numerous small macrosetae arranged in a line (Fig. 6B, C). Paracymbium with widely bifurcated lower prong and a elongated upper prong with distal dilatation; lower prong with three processes, two prolateral and one retrolateral (Fig. 6B). Coil of conductor and embolus much wider and longer than tegulum (Fig. 6B). Conductor bifid with same length as embolus; upper conductor follows the embolus angle while lower conductor goes downwards (Fig. 6A, B). Embolus with a distal tooth (Fig. 4B). Small and conical embolic basal apophysis present (Fig. 4B).</p><p>Female (based on paratype ZSFQ-i20624). Carapace and legs overall pale yellow; carapace with a posterior orange mark (Fig. 5C). Legs overall pale yellow, and only the distal section of all leg segments is dark yellow (Fig. 5C, D). Dorsum, venter, and laterals of the abdomen with big silver patches (Fig. 5C, D); yellowish shade present over dorsum (Fig. 5C, D); anterior protruding abdominal projection present (Fig. 5D). Total length 4.57. Carapace 1.64 long, 1.10 wide. Abdomen 3.44 long, 2.04 wide. Left chelicera 0.72 long, 0.32 wide. Leg formula I–II–IV–III. Leg I: 3.34 / 0.71 / 1.95 / 3.96 / 0.85/ 14.6. Leg II: 2.53 / 0.71 / 2.13 / 2.33 /1.05 / 8.75. Leg III 1.45 / 0.39 / 1.05 / 1.04 / 0.64 / 4.57. Leg IV 2.28 / 0.43 / 2.07 / 1.99 / 0.83 / 7.6. Genitalia (Fig. 7A–C): two weakly sclerotised marks present above the epigynum (Fig. 7A). Square median plate with a ventral dilatation at median section (Fig. 7A, B); posterior section being protruding with distal constriction and median dilatation (Fig. 7A, B). Wide copulatory openings extending almost the entire length of median plate (Fig. 7A). Triangular lateral plates, in posterior view (Fig. 7B). Fertilisation ducts originating anteriorly and intersecting over lung-shaped spermathecae, coiling one time, extending towards the centre and expanding into a lanceolate shape (Fig. 7D).</p><p>In vivo colouration. Males and females of C. chuchaqui sp. nov. shows same colouration as in preserved material, perhaps with much brighter tones (Figs 8–9). Males can exhibit carapace colour intensity variation (Fig. 8).</p><p>Distribution and natural history. Known only from the type locality in the Tandayapa valley (Fig. 11): near Bellavista Lodge and Tandayapa Cloud Forest Station, 3000 m, province of Pichincha. This species inhabits a montane evergreen forest of the Cordillera Occidental of the Andes of Ecuador, in the Northern Andes biogeographic province (Fig. 10) (Morrone 2014; Cisneros-Heredia &amp; Yánez-Muñoz 2007; Cisneros-Heredia 2006, 2007, 2019).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE8798A147206FFF627C07FA79536E	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Peñaherrera-R, Pedro	Peñaherrera-R, Pedro (2025): On some Chrysometa Simon, 1894 species collected from Ecuador: redescription of C. bolivia, description of a new species, and comments on the type locality of C. otavalo (Araneae, Tetragnathidae). Zootaxa 5636 (3): 511-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5636.3.6, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5636.3.6
03BE8798A14B206EFF627EB3FAE852E6.text	03BE8798A14B206EFF627EB3FAE852E6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chrysometa otavalo Levi 1986	<div><p>Chrysometa otavalo Levi, 1986</p><p>Chrysometa otavalo Levi, 1986: 200, figs 674–677</p><p>Type material. Holotype ♀, Otavalo, Atuela, 2,200 m, provincia de Pichincha?, Ecuador, 8–9 September 1977, Peña, L. leg. (AMNH) (not examined).</p><p>Notes. According to Levi (1986), C. otavalo was described based on a female from the locality of Otavalo, Atuela, 2200 m, province of Pichincha, in Ecuador. It should be noted that although there are cities and communities with repeated names across the different provinces of Ecuador, the locality of Otavalo is not mentioned in any older or contemporary maps of Ecuador as part of the province of Pichincha (pers. obs.). Likewise, the locality of Atuela does not exist in the province of Pichincha or any other province of Ecuador, thus acknowledging the need to correctly georeferencing this locality. Fortunately, while investigating Levi (1986), a locality with almost the exact information was provided for the distribution record of Chrysometa schneblei Levi, 1986 and is provided as follows “ Prov. Imbabura: Otavalo-Apuela, 2200 m …’’. According to this information, considering that both specimens are deposited in the American Museum of Natural History, were collected by the Chilean entomologist Luis Peña, and have the same date range and year (8–9 September 1977), the type locality of C. otavalo can be inferred as a misspelling of Apuela [possibly in the specimen label] and should refer to the one provided in C. schneblei instead. Additionally, the locality of Apuela can easily be located on contemporary maps (e.g. Google Earth) confirming its placement within the province of Imbabura.</p><p>Following the verbatim locality, these specimens were found at 2,200 m, however, according to the maps this village is located approximately 1,500 –1,600 m. Searching the plausible localities where L. Peña collected the spiders it was found that starting from a central point in the village of Apuela, a 6 km radius provides a realistic area where the altitudinal range matches that of the verbatim locality. In this respect, the author considers it pertinent to propose that the type locality of C. otavalo and the population record of C. schneblei should be temporarily restricted to Apuela, 0°21'22.28"N 78°30'45.71"W (Fig. 11) as a midpoint where these species could be found within a radius of approximately 6 km. Regarding the mention of the city of Otavalo, this may simply be a general reference point set by the collector or it could be that it indicates a route between the two localities. Considering that it was collected in the 70’s, it likely refers to the only road that connects these places and that is currently in use. As a result, if the second option is considered from the proposed area, it is possible that ~ 6 km SSE of the midpoint could be where these specimens were collected. However, this will need to be verified through fieldwork in this area.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE8798A14B206EFF627EB3FAE852E6	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Peñaherrera-R, Pedro	Peñaherrera-R, Pedro (2025): On some Chrysometa Simon, 1894 species collected from Ecuador: redescription of C. bolivia, description of a new species, and comments on the type locality of C. otavalo (Araneae, Tetragnathidae). Zootaxa 5636 (3): 511-522, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5636.3.6, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5636.3.6
