Enna rioja, Cruz Da Silva, Estevam L., 2013

Cruz Da Silva, Estevam L., 2013, A new Peruvian species of Enna (Araneae, Lycosoidea, Trechaleidae), Zootaxa 3701 (4), pp. 467-470: 467-470

publication ID

http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3701.4.6

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D30C8478-F4DB-4820-8080-D760218207EC

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/1D04AF10-E23D-FFC1-DAE3-F9D7FA979632

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Enna rioja
status

new species

Enna rioja  new species

Figs 1–7View FIGURES 1 – 6View FIGURE 7

Type material: Holotype: female from San Martin, Rioja  , Paitoja, Peru [06°03’S, 77 ° 10 ’W], 10.X. 2008, C. Albujar (MUSM 505344). Paratype: one female, same locality, date and collector as holotype, deposited at FMNH.

Etymology. The specific name is a noun in apposition taken from type locality.

Diagnosis. The female of E. rioja  sp. nov. resembles those of E. baeza  (Silva et al., 2008: 93, figs 78, 79) by the small rounded projection on the head of spermathecae (HS) and E. osaensis  (Silva et al., 2012: 57, fig. 6) by the presence of a large accessory spermathecae ( AS) and by the shape of the projected scape (SC) of the middle field of the epigynum (MF), but can be distinguished from both species by the slightly projected lateral lobes (LL) ( Fig. 5View FIGURES 1 – 6) and by the large and conspicuous accessory spermathecae and by the elliptical shape of head of spermathecae (HS) ( Fig. 6View FIGURES 1 – 6).

Note. Ten species of Enna  were described from Peru and Enna huanuco Silva, Lise & Carico, 2008  is the only one with the female still unknown. In this paper, the female from San Martin, Peru is described as separate species and not grouped with E. huanuco  , since the locations where they have been found are not close together (San Martin and Huanuco  , respectively), distant about 400km apart and males and females have not been collected together from the same area. Both species ( E. rioja  sp. nov. and E. huanuco Silva, Lise & Carico, 2008  ) also present some morphological differences: carapace colouration ( E. huanuco  is dark brown with lateral brownish bands and E. rioja  sp. nov. has a dark brown carapace without bands) and carapace dimensions (most Enna  males have a longer and wider carapace than females, but the female of E. rioja  sp. nov. has a longer and wider carapace compared to the male specimen of E. huanuco  ).

Description. Female (Holotype, San Martin, Peru, MUSM 505344). Total length 10.50. Carapace 5.58 long, 4.78 wide, dark brown, fovea marked ( Figs 1, 2View FIGURES 1 – 6). Clypeus dark brown, 0.46 high ( Fig. 4View FIGURES 1 – 6). Anterior eye row straight, 1.51 wide; posterior 2.35 wide ( Fig. 4View FIGURES 1 – 6). Eye diameters, interdistances, and median ocular quadrangle: AME 0.21, ALE 0.18, PME 0.31, PLE 0.18; AME-AME 0.18, AME-ALE 0.16, PME-PME 0.65, PME-PLE 0.49, OQA 0.65, OQP 1.20, OQH 0.71. Chelicerae reddish-brown, bristly ( Fig. 4View FIGURES 1 – 6); promargin and retromargin of fang furrow with three teeth equidistant and equal in size. Sternum yellow, with scattered setae ( Fig. 3View FIGURES 1 – 6); 2.66 long, 2.52 wide. Labium dark brown, yellow distally ( Fig. 3View FIGURES 1 – 6), 1.06 long, 0.93 wide. Legs light brown with dark brown annuli on femora ( Figs 1, 2View FIGURES 1 – 6), relative length: IV-I-II-III, I—femur 6.25 / tibia-patella 8.64 / metatarsus 6.65 / tarsus 2.66 / total 24.20; II— 6.38 / 8.37 / 6.11 / 2.55 / 23.41; III— 5.18 / 5.45 / 4.12 / 2.12 / 16.87; IV— 6.65 / 7.98 / 7.31 / 2.92 / 24.85. Ventral pairs of macrosetae on tibiae: I – 4; II – 3; III – 3; IV – 3. Abdomen 4.92 long, gray with two pairs of sigillae ( Fig. 1View FIGURES 1 – 6). Venter light brown, bristly ( Fig. 3View FIGURES 1 – 6). Epigynum with a projected scape (SC) ( Fig. 5View FIGURES 1 – 6). Head of spermathecae (HS) rounded and with a rounded whitish projection ( Fig. 6View FIGURES 1 – 6, HS). Accessory spermathecae conspicuous and rounded ( Fig. 6View FIGURES 1 – 6, AS).

Distribution. Known only from the type locality ( Peru) ( Fig. 7View FIGURE 7).

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Diana Silva-Dávila (MUSM) for the loan of the material. The images were taken in Petra Sierwald’s lab at the Field Museum, Robin Delapena (FMNH) graciously helped obtaining the photos of the female genitalia.

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Arachnida

Order

Araneae

Family

Trechaleidae

Genus

Enna