Tylorida Simon, 1894

Sankaran, Pradeep M., Malamel, Jobi J., Joseph, Mathew M. & Sebastian, Pothalil A., 2017, On the genus Tylorida Simon, 1894 with the first record of the genus Atelidea Simon, 1895 from India (Araneae: Tetragnathidae, Leucauginae), Zootaxa 4353 (2), pp. 294-326 : 295-296

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4353.2.3

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:05D61D56-6043-4A11-B2B5-CBF864299B4F

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6051862

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03D7A552-F403-082D-ADC4-5EC6C9CCB3C1

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Tylorida Simon, 1894
status

 

Tylorida Simon, 1894 View in CoL View at ENA

Type species: Tylorida striata ( Thorell, 1877) , originally described as Meta striata Thorell, 1877 .

Rediagnosis. Genus Tylorida can be separated from other described tetragnathid genera by the following combination of characters: femora IV with smooth trichobothrial shaft, cymbial dorso-basal process shorter than half the cymbial width and perpendicular to the cymbium longitudinal axis, short, acute embolus with a broad, twisted embolic base, short, lamelliform conductor lying dorsal to embolus, ventrally swollen tegulum with a distomedian triangular process, long, tubular fertilization ducts connected to both copulatory ducts and spermathecal bulb, copulatory and fertilization ducts running parallel before entering into spermathecal bulb ( Álvarez-Padilla & Hormiga 2011: figs 115F, 116C, 117A, B, F; present data: Figs 4H View FIGURE 4 , 8A–H View FIGURE 8 , 10A–H View FIGURE 10 , 11B, D, E–F View FIGURE 11 , 14A–D, F View FIGURE 14 , 17A– D, F–I, K–N View FIGURE 17 , 18 C, F, I, L, O View FIGURE 18 ).

Relationship. Genus Tylorida is closely allied to the genus Orsinome ( Álvarez-Padilla et al. 2009; Álvarez- Padilla & Hormiga 2011; Dimitrov & Hormiga 2011). Members of both these genera are similar in size, colouration (compare Figs 5A–F View FIGURE 5 , 6A–D View FIGURE6 , 15A–F View FIGURE 15 with 20A–F) and web building behaviour ( Álvarez-Padilla & Hormiga 2011: fig. 5C, E), making them misplaced within both the genera. Females of both genera share similar cheliceral dentition: three promarginal and four retromarginal teeth (compare Fig. 12B, D, G, I View FIGURE 12 with K). Male chelicerae of Orsinome spp., however, significantly differ from that of Tylorida spp. In the former, the male chelicerae are massive, nearly as wide as long with cheliceral apophysis and less number of teeth, while in the latter, it is longer than wide with numerous teeth and without any apophysis (compare Fig. 12A, C, F, H View FIGURE 12 with J and Álvarez-Padilla & Hormiga 2011: fig. 101D, H).

Members of both the genera differ significantly in male and female genitalia. Whereas in Tylorida spp., the pedipalp possesses a short embolus, short, lamelliform conductor, that clearly separated from embolus, distomedian triangular process of tegulum and basally placed cymbial dorso-basal process, the pedipalp of Orsinome spp. share features such as long embolus, long conductor, which appears contiguous to embolus, tegulum without disto-median triangular process and a more or less distally placed cymbial dorso-basal process (compare Figs 10A– I View FIGURE 10 , 14A–D View FIGURE 14 , 17A–D, F–I, K–N View FIGURE 17 , with 21A–E, Álvarez-Padilla & Hormiga 2011: fig. 103A, F). In contrast to the epigyna of Tylorida spp., which have prominent epigynal plate, widely separated copulatory openings and very long, tubular fertilization ducts, the epigyna of Orsinome spp. are characterised by less prominent epigynal plate, short, thick fertilization ducts and having closely placed/contiguous copulatory openings placed in a common chamber (genital opening) at the centre of the epigynal plate (compare Figs 11A–F View FIGURE 11 , 14E–F View FIGURE 14 , 18A–O View FIGURE 18 with Fig. 21F– G View FIGURE 21 , Zhu et al. 2003: fig. 164D, E, Álvarez-Padilla & Hormiga 2011: figs 102A, 104E).

Taxonomic significance of male chelicerae of Tylorida . Most tetragnathid males are characterised by conspicuously enlarged chelicerae, often armoured with numerous teeth and specialized cheliceral apophyses, which are used for cheliceral clasp during courtship and mating ( Bristowe 1958; Eberhard & Huber 1998). Like members of the genus Tetragnatha Latreille, 1804 , whose chelicerae are taxonomically significant in systematics, the chelicerae of male Tylorida spp. are useful in species identification and in the case of Tylorida , it is particularly significant as the members are extremely similar to each other in both male ( Figs 8A–H View FIGURE 8 , 14A–D View FIGURE 14 , 17A–D, F–I, K– N View FIGURE 17 ) and female ( Figs 9A–D View FIGURE 9 , 14E–F View FIGURE 14 , 18A–O View FIGURE 18 , Jäger & Praxaysombath 2009: fig. 25) genitalic aspects and exhibiting intense intraspecific variations, both somatic as well as genitalic ( Figs 1E–F View FIGURE 1 , 5A–F View FIGURE 5 , 6A–D View FIGURE6 , 8A–H View FIGURE 8 , 9A–D View FIGURE 9 , 10A–H View FIGURE 10 , 11A–F View FIGURE 11 , 12A–D View FIGURE 12 , 16A–J View FIGURE 16 , 17A–D, F–I, K–N View FIGURE 17 , 18A–O View FIGURE 18 , Jäger & Praxaysombath 2009: figs 24, 28–31, 33, 36–37), which will make species identification hard. We have examined 4 male specimens of T. marmorea , 1 male specimen of T. striata and twenty one male specimens of T. ventralis . Despite the small sample size, it was found that the male chelicerae of all the Indian Tylorida spp. lack specialized apophysis/apophyses, but possess teeth and tubercles that are varying in number, shape, size and mutual spacing from species to species ( Figs 12A, F, H View FIGURE 12 ). Unlike males, females have chelicerae armed with similar number of teeth: three promarginal teeth, which are slightly larger than the four retromarginal teeth ( Figs 4D View FIGURE 4 , 12B, G, I View FIGURE 12 ).

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Arachnida

Order

Araneae

Family

Tetragnathidae

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