Coenypha nodosa (Nicolet, 1849)

Figs 12 A–F, 13 A–F, 14B

Thomisus nodosus Nicolet, 1849: 397 . Lectotype female, here designated, together with an immature paralectotype from Chile, deposited in MNHN (4194) and other two immatures from Chile, deposited in MNHN (4191), examined. Ramírez 1989: 11.

Thomisus pubescens Nicolet, 1849: 398 . Holotype female from Chile, deposited in MNHN (4179), examined. Roewer 1955 (declared nomen dubium, rejected here); Ramírez, 1989: 11. New Synonymy.

Thomisus spectrum Nicolet, 1849: 400 . Holotype female (together two immatures) from Chile, deposited in MNHN (4177), examined. Roewer 1955 (declared nomen dubium, rejected here); Ramírez 1989: 11. New Synonymy.

Thomisus verrucosus Nicolet, 1849: 398 (female lectotype here designated, and one female paralectotype from Valdivia, Chile, deposited in MNHN 4174, examined; two males found in the vial are misidentified Ozyptila, see below). Ramírez 1989: 11. New Synonymy.

Stephanopis nodosa (Nicolet): Simon 1895: 1054; Machado and Teixeira 2021: 296 (transfer to Coenypha).

Stephanopis verrucosa (Nicolet): Simon 1895: 1054.

Stephanopis hystrix Mello-Leit „o, 1951: 333, fig. 8. Holotype female from Maullín, Llanquihue, Chile, deposited in MNRJ, examined (lost in the fire). New Synonymy.

Note. In the case of T. nodosus, the material was found in two vials: MNHN 4191 with two immatures, and MNHN 4194 with a female and an immature. The female in the vial MNHN 4194 was treated as a holotype by Machado & Teixeira (2021), which was a clear mistake once it was ignoring recommendation 73F (ICZN 2022). The individuals should be treated as syntypes followed by designation of lectotype, what we now do here. Nicolet described Thomisus nosodus based on a female and a male. The adult female examined in the type series fits with the description, but the other specimen is actually a juvenile. It is not clear if the juvenile was interpreted as a male by the author, so we chose to designate only the adult female as lectotype. The type series of T. verrucosus comprises four individuals of two different species. The females are conspecific with the holotype of C. nodosa, but the males belong possibly to the genus Ozyptila Simon, 1864 . Nicolet did not mention the sex of the specimen described, but the original text suggests that the author’s concept and diagnostic features of this species was based on a female: “abdomen (…) terminado en punta” (“pointed abdomen”), and also mentioned its similarity with T. nodosus . Here we settle the priority of T. nodosus over T. pubescens, T. spectrum, and T. verrucosus (ICZN 24.2.1 and 24.2.2.).

Concerning the two males stored together with the lectotype female of T. verrucosus in MNHN 4174, their somatic and genital features correspond with those of the subfamily Thomisinae . The ocular arrangement with the MOQ area wider on its anterior portion, legs I and II short and robust, and tibiae I and II bearing two pairs of ventral macrosetae, match with the updated diagnosis of Ozyptila Simon, 1864, provided by Almquist (2006). The palpal tibiae bearing two apophyses (VTA and RTA) and a tegular apophysis, as well as the prosoma with a whitish dorsal median band and the opisthosoma narrowed anteriorly and wide on its posterior portion, are also similar to those of males of Ozyptila . We are unable to determine their specific identification or even if the material came from Chile since none native Ozyptila was recorded in South America until now. Once the name Thomisus verrucosus has been kept valid for the female, we chose to consider the male specimens wrongly assigned.

Other material examined. ARGENTINA: Chubut: 2 ♀ and 9j, Lago Puelo, 42° 5’50.9”S, 71°36’14.09”W, 11–12 December 2021, M. Pacheco, L. Piacentini & E. Soto (MACN-Ar 42756–427558) ; 4♀ and 29j, 42°5’49.2”S, 71°36’44.2”W, same collector and date of the previous vial (MACN-Ar 42753–42755) . CHILE: Bío-Bío: 1j, Ñuble, 36°42’16.20”S, 71°36’9.60”W, 15 February 2005, M. Ramírez & F. Labarque (MACN-Ar 10865) ; 2♀, Concepción (Chome), 36°42’52.73”S, 73°8’21.39”W, 07 December 1995, T. Cekalovic (AMNH) ; 1♁ and 1♀, Concepción (Hualpén), 36°47’12.03”S, 73°6’35.83”W, 11 January 1989, M. Ramírez (MACN-Ar 18702–18703) ; 1♀, Concepción, 36°49’12.49”S, 73°2’39.80”W, 14 January 1977, T. Cekalovic (MCZ 133404) ; 1♀ and 1j, Concepción (Estero Nonguén), 36°49’41.25”S, 73°0’19.52”W, 02 November 1996, T. Cekalovic (AMNH) ; 1♁ and 1♀, Concepción, 36°50’37.1”S, 73°02’17.6”W, 15 February 2005, M. Ramírez & F. Labarque (MACN-Ar 37308) ; 1♀, Escuadrón, 36°58’55.02”S, 73°9’12.86”W, 15 November 1996, T. Cekalovic (AMNH) . Araucanía: 1♁, Malleco (Monumento Natural Contulmo), 38°00’46.8”S, 73°11’15.4”W, 10–11 February 2005, M. Ramírez & F. Labarque (MACN-Ar 39685) ; 7j, Malleco (Monumento Natural Contulmo), 38°0’51.55”S, 73°10’48.24”W, 19–21 December 1998, M. Ramírez, L. Compagnucci, C. Grismado & L. Lopardo (MACN-Ar 18709) . Los Ríos: 4♀ and 8j, Valdivia, 39°49’6.53”S, 73°14’37.94”W, 1984, E. Krahmer (MHNS) ; 1♁ and 1♀, same locality and collector of the previous vial, December 1982 (MHNS 841); 1♀ and 2j, same locality and collector of the previous vial, 1983 (MHNS 800); 1j, Valdivia (Huachocopihue), 39°50’2.23”S, 73°14’17.32”W, 07 March 1965, H. Levi (MCZ 133400) . Los Lagos: 1♀ and 1j, Osorno (Pucatrihue), 40°32’6.87”S, 73°42’31.82”W, March 1968, L. Peña (MCZ 133406) ; 1♀ and 4j, Osorno (20 Km East of Puyehue), 40°34’34.28”S, 73°6’53.81”W, 25 January 1951, Ross & Michelbacher (CAS 9071270) ; 3j, Osorno (Termas de Puyehue), 40°40’0.00”S, 71°13’60.00”W, 30 November 1994, R. Leschen & C. Carlton (AMNH) ; 2j, Osorno (Parque Nacional Puyehue), 40°43’16.56”S, 72°19’3.87”W, 19–26 December 1982, A. Newton & M. Thayer (AMNH) ; 7j, Osorno (Aguas Calientes), 40°43’43.88”S, 72°18’43.16”W, 13–17 December 1998, M. Ramírez, L. Compagnucci, C. Grismado & L. Lopardo (MACN-Ar 18662) ; 4j, Llanquihue (Los Muermos), 41°23’57.87”S, 73°27’53.97”W, 19 January 1951, Ross & Michelbacher (CAS 9071273) ; 1j, Isla Grande de Chiloé (Cole Cole), 42°25’22.39”S, 74°4’58.62”W, 08–11 February 1991, M. Ramírez (MACN-Ar 18648) ; 2♀ and 2j, Isla Grande de Chiloé, 42°37’26.29”S, 73°55’35.66”W, 22 February 1997, T. Cekalovic (AMNH) ; 1j, Palena (Chaitén), 42°54’41.51”S, 72°42’56.30”W, 04 December 1981, N. Platnick and R.T. Schuh (AMNH) .

Diagnosis. C. nodosa resembles C. antennata in the shape of the opisthosoma, with a posterior pair of projections and protruding caudal region (Fig. 12A), but C. nodosa differs from its closest related species in lacking the long pair of macrosetae between the ALE (Fig. 12B); further, the prosoma is as wide as long, with cephalic portion shorter, while the epigynal plate presents a stout and complete MSept that separate the copulatory openings completely (Figs 12C, E). If we can compare the shape of the epigynal plate of C. antennata with a diving mask (Figs 4C, E), the epigynum of C. nodosa resembles a bear snout (Figs 12C, E). Males can be distinguished by their long and thin legs with many needle-shaped setae (Fig. 13A), flattened cymbium in retrolateral view (Fig. 13F) and wide and hyaline pars pendula (Fig. 13E). Unlike in C. antennata males, in which the embolus emerges from the tegulum in a basal position close to the tibia, in C. nodosa the embolus starts apically, and encircles the tegulum clockwise, its first ¼ can be observed in retrolateral view (Figs 13D, F).

Description. Female (MCZ 133404): Anterior eye row strongly recurved and posterior row slightly recurved; ALE have twice the diameter of the AME (Figs 12A, B). Prosoma brown with a median longitudinal darker stain; all legs are predominantly brownish-yellow with dark-brown spots randomly distributed, except for the tibiae and metatarsi I and II, which are almost entirely dark-brown (Fig. 12A). Opisthosoma brownish-yellow with darker spots on the median portion of the dorsum and on the sides of the caudal region (Fig. 12A). Epigynal plate in ventral view resembles a “bear snout” (Figs 12C, E); copulatory ducts are long, coiled and hyaline, leading to a pair of spermathecae with nodose exterior surface (Figs 12D, F). Measurements: eye diameters and interdistances: AME 0.10, ALE 0.20, PME 0.20, PLE 0.22, AME-AME 0.18, AME-ALE 0.14, PME-PME 0.24, PME-PLE 0.16. MOQ length 0.58, MOQ posterior width 0.65, MOQ anterior width 0.40; leg formula: 1243: leg I—femur 3.78/ patella 1.76/ tibia 3.01/ metatarsus 2.17/ tarsus 1.14/ total 11.86; II—3.32/ 1.50/ 2.42/ 2.19/ 0.95/ 10.38; III—1.98/ 1.00/ 1.54/ 1.39/ 0.80/ 6.71; IV—2.57/ 1.10/ 1.88/ 1.66/ 0.83/ 8.04. Prosoma length 3.53, width 3.23, opisthosoma length 3.84, total body length 7.37; clypeus height 0.43, sternum length 1.55, width 1.43, endites length 0.88, width 0.44, labium length 0.53, width 0.63.

Male (MHNS 691): Eyes as in the female; prosoma entirely brown and legs predominantly dark-yellow, with few darker spots randomly distributed (Figs 13A, B). Opisthosoma greyish-brown with a median darker taint on the median area of the dorsum (Fig. 13A). Palpi have a short and obtuse RTA and a strongly sclerotized squared RTAvbr (Fig. 13D); tegulum relatively small, oval-shaped and embolus with well-developed pars pendula (Fig. 13C). Measurements: eye diameters interdistances: AME 0.10, ALE 0.21, PME 0.18, PLE 0.19, AME-AME 0.14, AME-ALE 0.11, PME-PME 0.19, PME-PLE 0.11. MOQ length 0.49, MOQ posterior width 0.45, MOQ anterior width 0.31; leg formula: 1243: leg I—femur 3.81/ patella 1.43/ tibia 3.53/ metatarsus 3.43/ tarsus 1.46/ total 13.66; II—3.38/ 1.25/ 2.90/ 2.71/ 1.35/ 11.59; III—1.76/ 0.80/ 1.49/ 1.28/ 0.81/ 6.14; IV—2.25/ 0.90/ 1.73/ 1.49/ 0.82/ 7.19. Prosoma length 2.61, width 2.41, opisthosoma length 2.73, total body length 5.34; clypeus height 0.27, sternum length 1.20, width 1.15, endites length 0.68, width 0.35, labium length 0.33, width 0.51.

Distribution. ARGENTINA: Chubut; CHILE: Bío-Bío, Araucanía, Los Rios and Los Lagos (Fig. 14B).