Guaranita munda ( Gertsch, 1982 )

Huber, Bernhard A., Meng, Guanliang, Král, Jiří, Ávila Herrera, Ivalú M. & Izquierdo, Matías A., 2023, Revision of the South American Ninetinae genus Guaranita (Araneae, Pholcidae), European Journal of Taxonomy 900 (1), pp. 32-80 : 46-52

Guaranita munda ( Gertsch, 1982)

Figs 2C – D , 8 – 13 , 32B

Pholcophora munda Gertsch, 1982: 104 , figs 31 – 33, 42 – 44 (♂ ♀).

Guaranita munda – Huber 2000: 100, figs 379 – 380; 2014: 140. — Avalos et al. 2006: 193. — Torres et al. 2016: 11 , figs 16 – 18.

Diagnosis (amendments; see Huber 2000)

Distinguished from known congeners by size and shape of dorsal flap on procursus ( Fig. 9F ; larger than in congeners; distally widened) and by female internal genitalia ( Fig. 10C – D ; large membranous median sac; lateral elements medially curved, creating median posterior indentation also sometimes visible in uncleared epigyna); from G. auadae sp. nov. and G. goloboffi also by narrow distal bulbal sclerite ( Fig. 9G ); from most congeners (except G. dobby ) also by relatively long male palpal femur ( Fig. 8C ; length/width 2.50 – 2.55, most other species 1.85 – 2.25, G. dobby 2.50).

Material examined (new records)

ARGENTINA – Córdoba • 6 ♂♂, 5 ♀♀ (one male and one female used for SEM); ~ 2.5 km E of Nono; 31.8025° S, 64.9762° W; 915 m a.s.l.; 2 Mar. 2019; B.A. Huber and M.A. Izquierdo leg.; ZFMK Ar 24122 • 7 ♀♀, in pure ethanol (three prosomata used for molecular work; one female used for SEM); same collection data as for preceding; ZFMK Arg127 • 3 ♂♂, 2 ♀♀; same collection data as for preceding; LABRE-Ar 877 • 3 ♂♂; same collection data as for preceding; LABRE-Ar 878 • 3 ♀♀, in pure ethanol; same collection data as for preceding; LABRE-Ar 882, 883, 856 • 1 ♀, in pure ethanol; ~ 1.5 km E of Nono; 31.7980° S, 64.9877° W; 895 m a.s.l.; 2 Mar. 2019; B.A. Huber and M.A. Izquierdo leg.; ZFMK Arg126 • 2 ♂♂, 1 ♀, 2 juvs; Villa La Merced ; 31.8397° S, 64.5249° W; 765 m a.s.l.; 17 Dec. 2019; Izquierdo and Palen Pietri leg.; litter and bark of Eucalyptus plantation; LABRE-Ar 873 • 1 ♂; Villa La Merced ; 31.8419° S, 64.5240° W; 775 m a.s.l.; 27 Jan. 2020; Izquierdo, Abregú, and Palen Pietri leg.; LABRE-Ar 874 • 4 ♀♀, some juvs; same collection data as for preceding; LABRE-Ar 626 . – Entre Ríos • 5 ♂♂, 3 ♀♀, 2 juvs (one male used for SEM); Dept. Colón, Parque Nacional El Palmar ; 31.8653° S, 58.2375° W; 20 m a.s.l.; 6 – 8 Aug. 2011; M.J. Ramírez et al. leg.; MACN Ar 32745 • 2 ♂♂, 4 ♀♀, 2 juvs; same collection data as for preceding; MACN Ar 32741 • 1 ♂, 1 ♀; same collection data as for preceding; MACN Ar 32744 • 1 ♂; same collection data as for preceding, with label “muestra de tejido prep. CJG-3350”; MACN Ar 32743 • 1 ♀; Dept. Colón, Parque Nacional El Palmar , Arroyo El Palmar ; 31.8931° S, 58.2385° W; 10 m a.s.l.; 7 Aug. 2011; M.J. Ramírez et al. leg.; MACN Ar 32742 • 1 ♂; Dept. Colón, Parque Nacional El Palmar , Sector Sur ; 31.8877° S, 58.3119° W; 30 m a.s.l.; 7 Aug. 2011; M.J. Ramírez et al. leg.; MACN Ar 32740 • 1 ♀; Parque Nacional El Palmar (no precise locality information); 22 – 23 Nov. 2003; C. Grismado, A. Ojanguren and F. Labarque leg.; MACN Ar 25453 • 1 ♀; Villa Urquiza ; ~ 31.65° S, 60.38° W (no precise locality information); 17 Feb. 1988; P. Goloboff and C. Szumik leg.; MACN Ar 20030 .

Redescription (amendments; see Huber 2000)

Measurements of male from E of Nono: total body length 1.06, carapace width 0.42; distance PME– PME 40 µm; diameter PME 50 µm; distance PME–ALE 15 µm; distance AME–AME 15 µm; diameter

AME 30 µm. Leg 1: 1.98 (0.52 +0.14 +0.50 +0.50 +0.32), tibia 2: 0.42, tibia 3: 0.38, tibia 4: 0.60; tibia 1 L/d: 8; diameters of leg femora 0.09; of leg tibiae: 0.06. Tibia 1 in 25 males (incl. holotype): 0.49 – 0.58 (mean 0.53). Sternum slightly wider than long (0.33/0.29). Chelicerae as in Fig. 9A – C ; stridulatory files ( Fig. 12A ) with ~15 – 17 ridges each; distances between ridges proximally ~1.0 µm, distally ~2.1 µm. Pedipalp as in Fig. 8A – C ; tibia with two trichobothria; palpal tarsal organ capsulate ( Fig. 13A ) with small opening (diameter of opening 1.15 µm); procursus as in Fig. 9D – F , with large transparent ventral membrane, distinctive dorsal flap, and tip bent towards dorsal; genital bulb as in Fig. 9G – I , with simple proximal sclerite, distal sclerite short and simple, not widened in mid-section. Legs without spines and curved hairs; vertical hairs not seen in dissecting microscope but present on tibia 1 ( Fig. 13D ), apparently only one row; prolateral trichobothrium absent on tibia 1, present on other leg tibiae; metatarsi 3 and 4 with few (3 – 5) slender hairs proximally on retrolateral-ventral side ( Fig. 13E ). Gonopore with 4 – 5 epiandrous spigots ( Fig. 11E – F ); spinnerets as in female (see below).

Tibia 1 in 22 females: 0.48 – 0.58 (mean 0.54). Female chelicerae without stridulatory ridges ( Fig. 12B ). Female internal genitalia with strong median structure and membranous sac (receptacle?) ( Fig. 10C – D ); apparently with small pore plates ( Fig. 32B ). Each ALS ( Fig. 11H ) with one strongly widened spigot, one long pointed spigot, and five cylindrical spigots (of which one is much wider than the others); each PMS with two conical spigots; PLS without spigots. Leg tarsal organs with very small openings (diameters of openings 0.8 – 0.9 µm; Fig. 13B ). Metatarsi 3 and 4 with long slender hairs as in male; tarsus 4 with single prolateral comb-hair as in male.

Remarks (notes on type locality)

The type locality of this species has been confused twice. Gertsch (1982) interpreted the label information as referring to Cerro Colorado in Nuevo León, Mexico. Later, Huber (2000), read the handwritten label as “Crro Colorado, Cta., 14.X-61, Col: O. de Ferrariis”, and suggested that this referred to Cerro Colorado in the province of Catamarca (“Cta.”), Argentina, i.e. ~ 28.46° S, 65.85° W. Another interpretation for a label accompanying a specimen of the linyphiid Scolecura propinqua Millidge, 1991 collected by O. de Ferrariis on the same day, was offered by Miller (2007): Cerro Colorado in the province of Córdoba, i.e. ~ 30.10° S, 63.93° W. A new look at both labels confirms Miller’s (2007) interpretation: the label in the type vial of Guaranita munda quite clearly reads “Cba.” rather than “Cta.”, and the machinewritten label accompanying the Scolecura propinqua specimen explicitly says “Prov. Cordoba ”.

Natural history

Near Nono, the spiders were collected by turning the uppermost rocks of a stone wall in a low forest ( Fig. 34B ). The spiders started to run rapidly but did not drop from the rocks. A label accompanying specimens from Parque Nacional El Palmar suggests a very similar habitat: “piedras palmeras con pastizal y bosque bajo”. Two egg-sacs contained 6 and 7 eggs, respectively, and were carried under the prosoma; egg diameter: 0.44.

Distribution

Widely distributed in north-eastern Argentina, reaching Rio Grande do Sul ( Brazil) ( Fig. 33A ). Presumably also present in Uruguay and southern Paraguay. The single record from Jujuy ( Torres et al. 2016) appears dubious (misidentified G. yaculica ?).

Figures

Fig. 2. Guaranita Huber, 2000, live specimens. A–B. G. dobby Torres et al., 2016; females with egg-sacs from NW of Campo Quijano. C–D. G. munda (Gertsch, 1982); male and female with eggsac from E of Nono. E–F. G. yaculica Huber, 2000; male and female from Calilegua National Park. G–H. G. auadae Huber sp. nov.; male and female with egg-sac from between San Salvador and Purmamarca. I–J. G. goloboffi Huber, 2000; male and female from NW of Chumbicha.

Fig. 8. Guaranita munda (Gertsch, 1982); male from E of Nono (ZFMK Ar 24122). Left pedipalp, prolateral (A), dorsal (B), and retrolateral (C) views. Scale bar = 0.2 mm.

Fig. 9. Guaranita munda (Gertsch, 1982); male from E of Nono (ZFMK Ar 24122). A–C. Chelicerae, frontal, lateral, and ventral views. D–F. Left procursus, prolateral, dorsal, and retrolateral views. G–I. Left genital bulb, prolateral, dorsal, and retrolateral views. Scale bars = 0.1 mm.

Fig. 10. Guaranita munda (Gertsch, 1982); females from E of Nono (ZFMK Ar 24122). A. Abdomen, ventral view. B. Cleared epigynum, ventral view. C–D. Cleared epigyna of two specimens, dorsal views. Scale bars: 0.1 mm (B–D at same scale).

Fig. 11. Guaranita munda (Gertsch, 1982); from E of Nono (A–E, G; ZFMK Ar 24122) and Parque Nacional El Palmar (F; MACN Ar 32745). A–B. Male prosoma, oblique frontal and dorsal views. C–D. Female prosomata, oblique frontal and lateral views. E–F. Male gonopores and epiandrous spigots. G. Female abdomen, ventral view. H. Female ALS and PMS. Scale bars: A–D, G = 100 µm; E–F, H =10 µm.

Fig. 12. Guaranita munda (Gertsch, 1982); from E of Nono (A–B; ZFMK Ar 24122) and Parque Nacional El Palmar (C–F; MACN Ar 32745). A. Stridulatory file on male chelicera. B. Right female palp and chelicera (note absence of stridulatory file). C–F. Right male pedipalp in retrolateral, retrolateral-dorsal, and dorsal views. Abbreviations: b = genital bulb; p = procursus. Scale bars: A = 10 µm; B–F = 20 µm.

Fig. 13. Guaranita munda (Gertsch, 1982); from Parque Nacional El Palmar (A, C, D; ZFMK Ar 24122) and E Nono (B, E–G; MACN Ar 32745). A. Male palpal tarsal organ. B. Tarsal organ on female right tarsus 2. C. Tarsal organ on male right tarsus 1. D. Short vertical hairs (and regular hairs) on male tibia 1. E. Slender hairs (arrows) on male metatarsus 4. F. Tip of female right tarsus 1. G. Tip of male left tarsus 3. Scale bars: A–B = 2 µm; C = 1 µm; D–G = 10 µm.

Fig. 32. Guaranita Huber, 2000, female internal genitalia; arrows point at possible pore plates. A. G. dobby Torres et al., 2016; from NW of Campo Quijano. B. G. munda (Gertsch, 1982); from E of Nono. C. G. yaculica Huber, 2000; from Calilegua National Park. D. G. auadae Huber sp. nov., from between San Salvador and Purmamarca. E. G. goloboffi Huber, 2000; from NW of Chumbicha. Scale bar = 0.1 mm (all at same scale).

Fig. 34. Typical habitats of species of Guaranita Huber, 2000 in Argentina. A. NW of Campo Quijano (Salta), G. dobby Torres et al., 2016. B. E of Nono (Córdoba), G. munda (Gertsch, 1982). C. Calilegua National Park (Jujuy), G. yaculica Huber, 2000. D. Between San Salvador and Purmamarca (Jujuy), type locality of G. auadae Huber sp. nov. E. SW of Alemanía (Salta), G. goloboffi Huber, 2000. F. W of Cafayate (Salta), G. goloboffi.

Fig. 33. Known distribution of Guaranita Huber, 2000. Inset: map of South America, showing all known records. A–B. Known distributions of individual species. Question marks denote dubious outliers (Torres et al. 2015, 2016; not restudied) that need confirmation.