Cybaeus hummeli Bennett, 2021
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4965.3.1 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:94FB89CF-2083-4FAC-AE60-B8CCF1D5FE8E |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4727174 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/038B87C3-190A-BE24-FF3A-6F82FC3B9DD2 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Cybaeus hummeli Bennett |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Cybaeus hummeli Bennett View in CoL spec. nov.
Figs 18–19 View FIGURES 18–19 , 22–26 View FIGURES 20–22 View FIGURES 23–26 , 84 View FIGURE 84
Type material. U.S.A.: California: Holotype female, San Mateo County, Miramar , 5.xii.1953, V. D. Roth ( AMNH) . Paratypes: San Joaquin. 1♀, 10 mi. S of Byron on J4, 29.ix.1974, M. L.S., ( CAS) ; San Mateo . 1♀, no locality, no date, J.C. Chamberlin ( AMNH) ; 3♀, Edgewood Park , 2.i.1987, D. Ubick ( CAS) ; 1♀, NE of Edgewood Park , 16.iv.1992, D. Ubick ( CAS) ; Half Moon Bay Rd, 0.5 mi. W of State Hwy #5, 8.xii.1963, P. R. Craig, D.L. Craig ( CAS) ; 8♀, Miramar , 5.xii.1953, V. D. Roth ( AMNH) ; 2♀, Pacifica , 25.ix.1963, J. Ivie & W. Ivie ( AMNH) ; 1♀, Redwood City , 2.i.1983, D. Ubick ( CAS) ; 1♀, 4 mi. W San Mateo, Hwy. 5, 18.iv.1954, E.E. Gilbert & R. O. Schuster ( AMNH) ; 1♂ Skyline Blvd. at King’s Mtn., 18.viii.1928, J.C. Chamberlin AMNH); San Francisco . 1♀, San Francisco, no date, Marx ( MCZ) .
Notes. The male and females described here are paired on the basis of locality data. It is possible the sexes matched here are not conspecific.
Etymology. The specific name is a patronym honoring Mark Hummel, a world-renowned harmonicist who lives in the San Francisco Bay area; name in the genitive case.
Diagnosis. The unique form of the proximal arm of its tegular apophysis ( Figs 18 View FIGURES 18–19 , 22 View FIGURES 20–22 ) makes the male of C. hummeli spec. nov. unlikely to be confused with any of the other species in the consocius group: in ventral view the proximal arm is broad, somewhat spatulate, with a well-developed longitudinal concave area terminating in a small acuminate tip. The female of C. hummeli spec. nov. is only likely to be confused with the females of C. consocius or C. hesper ; distinguishing the females of these three species is discussed under C. consocius .
Description. Ventral tibia I macrosetae: 2-1p-2-1p-0(or 1p).
Male: (n=1). Male missing entire right palpus and patella and part of tibia of left palpus rendering description of the patellar and retrolateral tibial apophyses impossible. Proximal arm of tegular apophysis ( Figs 18–19 View FIGURES 18–19 , 22 View FIGURES 20–22 ) with rounded keels ventrally on anterior and posterior margins. Measurements (n=1). CL 2.20, CW 1.65, SL 1.13, SW 1.07.
Female: (n=19). Atrium of variable morphology ( Figs 23, 26 View FIGURES 23–26 ) but always with convex medial septum separating pair of longitudinal atrial openings. Copulatory ducts ( Figs 24–25 View FIGURES 23–26 ) broad, somewhat membranous. Spermathecal stalks separate ( Fig. 25 View FIGURES 23–26 ). Measurements (n=12). CL 1.78–2.9 (2.4±0.3), CW 1.20–2.05 (1.62±0.24), SL 0.96–1.45 (1.20±0.14), SW 0.87–1.33 (1.11±0.13). Holotype CL 2.33, CW 1.58, SL 1.20, SW 1.09.
Distribution and natural history. Restricted to San Francisco and northern San Mateo County in the mid and northern San Francisco Peninsula area, California with an outlier in San Joaquin County about 70 kilometers east of San Francisco Bay ( Fig. 84 View FIGURE 84 ). The single known male was collected in August.
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.