Leptonetela trispinosa (Yin, Wang & Wang, 1984) Liu & Huang & Xu & Yin, 2020

Liu, Jinxin, Huang, Zongguang, Xu, Xiang & Yin, Haiqiang, 2020, Redescription of types of three species of Leptonetidae Simon, 1890 from China (Arachnida, Araneae), ZooKeys 1000, pp. 1-17 : 1

publication ID	https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1000.57660
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7225F846-0B52-4F4C-BE78-DF14E43D6E25
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/01C43FD9-5A2C-55A0-8606-B51C22AD62FE
treatment provided by	ZooKeys by Pensoft
scientific name	Leptonetela trispinosa (Yin, Wang & Wang, 1984)
status	comb. nov.

Treatment

Leptonetela trispinosa (Yin, Wang & Wang, 1984) comb. nov. Figures 4 View Figure 4 , 5 View Figure 5 , 6 View Figure 6

Leptoneta trispinosa Yin et al. 1984: 364, fig. 1a-f (♂♀); Song 1987: 105, f. 68 (♂♀); Song et al. 1999: 51, figs 20R, 21L-M (♂♀, reproduction of the original figure); Yin et al. 2012: 157, fig. 27a-f (♂♀).

Material examined.

Holotype ♂ ( HNU, Lept- Leptonetela -0001-001 ): China, Hunan Province, Changsha City, Mountain Yuelu , 25.V.1982, Jiafu Wang leg.; paratypes 3♂ 3♀ ( HNU, Lept- Leptonetela -0001-002-007 ), same data as holotype (information on the label of the type) [Mountain Yuelu: 112°58'N, 28°12'E]. GoogleMaps

Diagnosis.

The male of Leptonetela trispinosa ( Yin et al., 1984) comb. nov. is similar to those of Leptonetela hangzhouensis ( Chen et al., 1984) and Leptonetela microdonta (Xu & Song, 1983) in having the median apophysis fork-shaped and a similar arrangement of spines on the retrolateral palpal tibia (compare Figs 4B View Figure 4 , 6D View Figure 6 with Wang and Li 2011: figs 13B, D, 28B, D), but differs from L. hangzhouensis by the shape of the teeth on the median apophysis (the middle two teeth ca half of the lateral two in length in this species vs ca one-third in L. microdonta ) (compare Fig. 4B View Figure 4 with Wang and Li 2011: fig. 13B), and from L. microdonta by the number and shape of teeth on the median apophysis (four teeth, the middle two teeth ca half of the lateral two in length in this species vs five teeth, the middle three teeth very small, shorter than one fourth of the lateral two in L. microdonta ) (compare Figs 4B View Figure 4 , 6D View Figure 6 with Wang and Li 2011: figs 28B, D). The female of Leptonetela trispinosa can be distinguished from that of Leptonetela microdonta by the different twisting of the spermathecae (compare Fig. 5E View Figure 5 with Wang and Li 2011: fig. 29C, D).

Description.

Holotype Male. Body (Fig. 4A View Figure 4 ) length 1.80, carapace 0.80 long, 0.80 wide, abdomen 1.00 long, 0.73 wide (data from original description by Yin et al. 1984: 364). Carapace yellow brown (Fig. 4A View Figure 4 ). Six eyes, ALE, and PLE connected to each other by the black bases, PME separated from ALE and PLE. Thoracic median groove short, brown, needle-shaped. Cervical grooves and radial furrows brown, indistinct. Chelicerae tawny, with eight promarginal (teeth gradually becoming smaller and denser from the distal end to the base of chelicera) and four small retromarginal teeth (Fig. 6D View Figure 6 ). Endites tawny. Labium brown, fused to sternum. Sternum tawny, peltate. Legs yellow; measurements: I 6.80 (2.01, 0.33, 2.33, 0.83, 1.30); II 6.27 (1.70, 0.30, 1.83, 1.43, 1.01); III 5.02 (1.43, 0.23, 1.43, 1.10, 0.83); IV 6.65 (1.93, 0.23, 2.00, 1.39, 1.10) (data from original description by Yin et al. 1984: 364). Abdomen pale brown, oval, lacking distinct patterns (Fig. 4A View Figure 4 ). Male palp as illustrated in Figs 4B-D View Figure 4 , 6A-C View Figure 6 . Femur without strong spines. Patella with a small spine dorsally. Trichobothria not found on the dorsal tibia, although they are usually present in the other congeneric species; it is very possible that trichobothria have detached from the body and been lost. Tibia with one seta and five spines retrolaterally (three very strong spines in longitudinal row, other two near distal end of tibia obviously shorter and thinner). Tarsus slightly sunken and contracted at middle resulting in formation of earlobe-shaped process distally (Fig. 4D View Figure 4 ); one distal spine, one ventral long spine, one long retrolateral spine, and one long prolateral spines present on distal half of tarsus (Figs 4C, D View Figure 4 , 6A, B View Figure 6 ). Palpal bulb oval, smooth. Conductor lamellar, membranous, and slightly wide. Embolus membranous, broad, with the distal part slightly curled towards base (Fig. 6C View Figure 6 ). Median apophysis fork-shaped, with four teeth, lateral two strong and middle two smaller (Figs 4B View Figure 4 , 6C View Figure 6 ). Prolateral lobe medium-sized, elliptical (Fig. 6A View Figure 6 ).

Paratype. Female. Similar to male in general features and body size, but coloration paler (Fig. 5A-D View Figure 5 ). Body length 2.17, carapace 0.90 long, 0.73 wide, abdomen 1.27 long, 0.87 wide (data from original description by Yin et al. 1984: 364). Chelicerae tawny, with eight promarginal and five small retromarginal teeth (Fig. 6E, F View Figure 6 ). Leg measurements: I 7.08 (2.00, 0.26, 2.13, 1.69, 1.00); II 5.55 (1.60, 0.20, 1.69, 1.26, 0.80); III 4.62 (1.20, 0.20, 1.33, 1.20, 0.69); IV 5.86 (1.73, 0.20, 1.80, 1.26, 0.87) (data from original description by Yin et al. 1984: 366). Genital area densely covered with long hairs. Atrium subtriangular, much wider than long. Internal genitalia consists of paired spermathecae and sperm ducts. Spermathecae highly twisted, with distal ends separated slightly far from each other, and also more strongly sclerotized than proximal part (Fig. 5E View Figure 5 ).

Distribution.

Only known from the type locality, Hunan, China (Fig. 9 View Figure 9 ).

Note.

Because of the poor quality of the images in all available references to the female of L. hangzhouensis the females of these two species cannot be compared.