Rhampsinitus Simon 1879

Taylor, Christopher K., 2017, Notes on Phalangiidae (Arachnida: Opiliones) of southern Africa with description of new species and comments on within-species variation, Zootaxa 4272 (2), pp. 236-250 : 240

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4272.2.5

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:64441FD6-9C26-4765-96D0-858D46BC39D2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6028329

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AC87C5-C973-FF91-FF67-FE1BFBF8F8B6

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Rhampsinitus Simon 1879
status

 

Rhampsinitus Simon 1879 View in CoL

Rhampsinitus Simon 1879 View in CoL : lxxii.

Notes. Rhampsinitus Simon 1879 View in CoL may be the most difficult genus of African Phalangiinae View in CoL , if only because of its high diversity of recognised species. It is widespread in southern Africa with described species as far north as Angola in the western part of the continent and Somalia in the east. However, those species found in the northern part of Rhampsinitus View in CoL ’ range remain unrevised and their assignment to this genus requires confirmation. Over much of the southern part of its range, Rhampsinitus View in CoL is the only genus of Phalangiidae View in CoL known to be present. It has been distinguished from most other African genera of Phalangiidae View in CoL by its cheliceral morphology, in which the male chelicerae are enlarged and usually denticulate in comparison to the female, but not swollen as in Guruia View in CoL . However, as described below for R. conjunctidens View in CoL and R. nubicolus View in CoL , not all males of Rhampsinitus View in CoL have enlarged chelicerae and cheliceral development may vary significantly even within a single species. Rhampsinitus View in CoL can be distinguished from all other Afrotropical phalangiine genera except Dacnopilio View in CoL by its male genital morphology with a hatchet-shaped glans, and with the distal end of the penile shaft broadened and hollowed to form a distinct ‘spoon’. Dacnopilio View in CoL was distinguished from Rhampsinitus View in CoL by the presence of denticles on the supracheliceral lamellae ( Roewer 1911). Dacnopilio View in CoL as currently recognised has a biogeographically unusual distribution, being the only genus of Phalangiidae View in CoL with representatives in both the Afrotropical and Mediterranean regions ( Staręga 1984), and warrants further investigation.

The Rhampsinitus View in CoL species of South Africa were revised by Lawrence (1931) and Kauri (1961), with the latter providing the most recent key for the identification of males. Unfortunately, subsequent studies ( Schönhofer 2008; Staręga 2009) have exposed issues with earlier revisions by demonstrating the presence of a wider range of withinspecies variation than previously recognised. It is possible that a number of species currently recognised in Rhampsinitus View in CoL may prove synonymous. Kauri’s (1961) key draws heavily on characters of the chelicerae that may not prove reliable (it should also be noted that a number of species characterised within the key by ‘unarmed chelicerae’ are in fact described from females only). The genital morphology for a number of species described by earlier authors remains undescribed, further complicating comparisons. Particularly problematic on this front is the type species of the genus, R. lalandei Simon 1879 View in CoL , for which the type specimen has been lost (Muñoz-Cuevas in Crawford 1992) and the type locality is uncertain (it was originally reported as ‘Cafrerie’, possibly corresponding to somewhere in what is now the Eastern Cape province) .

Of particular note is the identification below of minor View in CoL males for at least two species, R. conjunctidens View in CoL and R. nubicolus View in CoL , with the chelicerae not enlarged and mostly unarmed. This represents a more extreme form of the variation within species described by Schönhofer (2008) for R. transvaalicus View in CoL and Staręga (2009) for R. leighi View in CoL . As noted by Schönhofer (2008), variation in cheliceral size also corresponds with variation in pedipalpal length, individuals with longer chelicerae also having longer pedipalps relative to body length. It is likely that other species in the genus will prove to exhibit such variation with further investigation. Kauri (1961) described two species from minor View in CoL males, R. forsteri Kauri 1961 View in CoL and R. qachasneki Kauri 1961 View in CoL , though no corresponding major males are yet known. As described below, R. minor Loman 1898 View in CoL is likely to represent a minor View in CoL form of R. leighi Pocock 1903 View in CoL . The identification of minor View in CoL males is likely to prove problematic; those of R. conjunctidens View in CoL and R. nubicolus View in CoL cannot be readily distinguished except through examination of the genitalia.

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Arachnida

Order

Opiliones

Family

Phalangiidae

Loc

Rhampsinitus Simon 1879

Taylor, Christopher K. 2017
2017
Loc

R. forsteri

Kauri 1961
1961
Loc

R. qachasneki

Kauri 1961
1961
Loc

R. leighi

Pocock 1903
1903
Loc

R. minor

Loman 1898
1898
Loc

Rhampsinitus

Simon 1879
1879
Loc

Rhampsinitus

Simon 1879
1879
Loc

R. lalandei

Simon 1879
1879
GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF