Cryptocellus chiruisla, Botero-Trujillo, Ricardo & Flórez, Eduardo, 2017

Botero-Trujillo, Ricardo & Flórez, Eduardo, 2017, Two new ricinuleid species from Ecuador and Colombia belonging to the peckorum species-group of Cryptocellus Westwood (Arachnida, Ricinulei), Zootaxa 4286 (4), pp. 483-498: 485-492

publication ID

publication LSID

persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Cryptocellus chiruisla

sp. nov.

Cryptocellus chiruisla  sp. nov.

Figures 1–24View FIGURES 1 – 4View FIGURES 5 – 10View FIGURES 11 – 17View FIGURES 18 – 21View FIGURES 22 – 24, 41View FIGURE 41; Table 1

Type material. Holotype: male from ECUADOR: Orellana: Chiruisla  km 0.2, primary forest, 218 m elev., 00°36′50″ S 75°52′34″ W, 08–13.xii.2005, Winkler trap, J. Viera ( QCAZI 3440)GoogleMaps  . Paratypes: 1 female and 1 tritonymph with same collection data of holotype (QCAZI 3441).

Etymology. The specific epithet is a noun in apposition taken from the type locality: Chiruisla  .

Diagnosis. Cryptocellus chiruisla  sp. nov. most closely resembles C. guaviarensis  sp. nov., among members of the peckorum  species-group to which both belong, in having the following morphological features of male: a large and distinct, flat, triangle-like region with tubercles on the anterior section of cucullus ( Fig. 7View FIGURES 5 – 10), absent in female, on top of which a median elevation is visible on dorsal and ventral aspects ( Figs. 1–2View FIGURES 1 – 4); the anterior and anterolateral margins of carapace smooth ( Fig. 1View FIGURES 1 – 4); the movable finger of the chelicera noticeably widened with respect to the fixed finger ( Fig. 7View FIGURES 5 – 10); leg I tibia with a pronounced ventral “notch” formed by well-developed, ventrally protruding pro- (large) and retrolateral (small) distal lobes, a sub-basal tubercle-like protrusion, and a distinct concavity in the middle ( Figs. 13–14View FIGURES 11 – 17); leg I metatarsus laterally-compressed, prolaterally sunken on basal two thirds, and with a well-developed, proventral distal “elbow-like” expansion ( Figs. 13–14View FIGURES 11 – 17); and leg III metatarsus with disto-ventral tuft of long setae ( Figs. 11–12View FIGURES 11 – 17).

Males of C. chiruisla  sp. nov. can be readily recognized by having the cheliceral movable finger apically truncated ( Fig. 7View FIGURES 5 – 10); suture line of coxae II about half the length of that of coxae III ( Fig. 2View FIGURES 1 – 4); leg I tibia sub-basal, tubercle-like protrusion part of the “notch”, placed pro-ventrally on basal half of segment, such that the “notch” is visible dorsally and prolaterally ( Figs. 13–14View FIGURES 11 – 17); median concavity of the “notch” of leg I tibia is short, approximately one third of the segment’s length ( Fig. 14View FIGURES 11 – 17); apex of the lamina cyathiformis is distinctly rounded ( Figs. 11–12View FIGURES 11 – 17); the tarsal process of the copulatory apparatus is U-shaped, with apex directed dorsally; the retrolateral edge of the tarsal process ventral opening lacks spiniform projections ( Figs. 11, 15–17View FIGURES 11 – 17); and femur of legs, particularly that of leg IV, remarkably bulky ( Fig. 9View FIGURES 5 – 10, Table 1).

Remarks. Cryptocellus chiruisla  sp. nov. most closely resembles C. peckorum  among previously described members of the species-group by having the tegument densely covered with conspicuous tubercles, and similar shape of the male copulatory apparatus and male leg III metatarsus. Unlike the male of the new species referred above, in males of C. peckorum  there is no flat region on cucullus, hence it is undifferentiated from that of female; the carapace is uniformly densely granular on its entire surface; the width of the cheliceral movable finger is similar to that of the fixed finger; leg I tibia bears similarly-developed pro- and retroventral distal lobes but lacks a sub-basal protrusion, making the ventral concavity less evident and the notch is absent; leg I metatarsus is not laterally-compressed and lacks the “elbow-like” expansion; and leg III metatarsal tuft is absent. Furthermore, the posterior genital lip of the female of C. chiruisla  sp. nov. is apically trilobated ( Figs. 22–23View FIGURES 22 – 24), whereas it is not in C. peckorum  .

Description. Male (holotype):

Coloration: Figs. 1–14View FIGURES 1 – 4View FIGURES 5 – 10View FIGURES 11 – 17. Body and appendages immaculately reddish orange, except for, pedipalps, metatarsi and tarsi of legs, and central area of opisthosomal Sternites XI –XII yellowish red. Carapacial translucent areas yellow inside.

Setation: Figs. 1–14View FIGURES 1 – 4View FIGURES 5 – 10View FIGURES 11 – 17. Body and appendages covered with fine bristle-like, predominantly straight to eyelashlike, translucent setae, which are sparse in sternal region.

Carapace: Figs. 1View FIGURES 1 – 4, 6View FIGURES 5 – 10. Trapezoidal in shape, with lateral margins curved and not parallel (narrowing anteriorly); anterior margin straight in dorsal aspect, re-curved in frontal aspect; posterior margin gently re-curved; carapace as long as wide; laterally with moderate protrusion at margins at level between coxae II and III, where widest. Longitudinal translucent areas placed at the level between coxae I and II, glabrous with well-defined borders, elevated, clearly visible on either lateral or dorsal aspects. Carapace densely covered with conspicuous, rounded, iridescent tubercles throughout, except on triangle-like area on anterior third of carapace, and on lateral margins anterior to the translucent areas, where predominantly smooth. Carapace devoid of cuticular pits.

Cucullus: Figs. 1–2View FIGURES 1 – 4, 7View FIGURES 5 – 10. Trapezoidal, with lateral margins notably diverging anteriorly, noticeably wider than long; anterior margin straight on ventral view, with shallow median concavity on frontal view; cucullus with pronounced median elevation (visible on dorsal and ventral aspects), and anterior triangle-like flat section densely covered with tubercles similar to those of carapace; tubercles also in two patches on each side of the midline; front corners smooth. Cucullus devoid of cuticular pits and furrows.

Chelicerae: Fig. 7View FIGURES 5 – 10. Movable finger almost twice longer than fixed finger and more robust; movable fingers apically truncated, armed with seven/nine small and sharp teeth which progressively increase in size distally; fixed fingers with row of five/six teeth, the distalmost greatly enlarged as compared to the others which small and sharp.

Sternal region: Fig. 2View FIGURES 1 – 4. Coxae I not meeting tritosternum; coxae II meeting along their posterior half, III –IV meeting entirely; II –IV progressively decreasing in length; coxae II with anterior and posterior margins subparallel, not perpendicular to the median axis but inclined anteriorly; suture line of coxae II about half the length of that of coxae III and IV (coxae III are larger). Cuticle with scarce tubercles, similar to those of carapace, along coxal margins and without cuticular pits.

Opisthosoma: Figs. 3–4View FIGURES 1 – 4, 5, 8View FIGURES 5 – 10. Oblong truncate, longer than wide, widest at level of tergite XII. Median plates of tergites XI –XIII with paired anterolateral depressions; lateral margins converging posteriorly on XI, approximately parallel on XII, converging anteriorly on XIII; median plate of tergites XI and XII wider than long, that of XIII approximately as wide as long, that of X slit-like trapezoidal. Central region of tergite XI median plate with pronounced, elevated rounded bulge; tergite XIII median plate with rear corners in 90° angle (not protruding laterally). Dorsal and ventral surfaces with tubercles similar to those of carapace and without cuticular pits. Sternites XI –XIII with paired anterolateral depressions similar to those of tergites and containing densely packed tubercles. Basal segment of pygidium with deep notch on dorsal posterior border; ventral border without notch.

Pedipalps: Fig. 10View FIGURES 5 – 10. Without cuticular pits; with few tubercles restricted to trochanters I, II, and base of femur on retrolateral aspect. Femur dorsally convex, widened in basal half. Tibia longer than femur, with dorsal surface straight, slightly widened ventrally in basal third and without tubercles. Movable claw about twice the length of fixed claw and more robust; both claws armed with minute teeth.

Legs: Figs. 9View FIGURES 5 – 10, 11–14View FIGURES 11 – 17. Without cuticular pits; leg segments with tubercles similar to those of carapace. Leg II longest; legs progressively increasing in width (i.e., at femur) in the order II <III <I <IV. Tibia of leg I with pronounced ventral “notch” formed by well-developed, ventrally protruding pro- (large) and retrolateral (small) distal lobes, a tubercle-like protrusion pro-ventrally on basal half of segment, and a deep concavity in the middle; leg I metatarsus laterally-compressed, prolaterally sunken on basal two thirds, and with a well-developed, proventral distal “elbow-like” expansion. Legs I and II, femur ventrally with flat, basal apophyses, absent on legs III and IV; apophyses are projected proximally and fully (leg I) or partially (leg II) cover the articular membranes between femur and trochanter. Leg III metatarsus moderately inflated, deeply excavated, with disto-ventral tuft of long setae and metatarsal process as in Figs. 11–12View FIGURES 11 – 17; lamina cyathiformis higher than long, with apex distinctly rounded. Leg length formula: 2341.

Copulatory apparatus: Figs. 11–12, 15–17View FIGURES 11 – 17. Tarsal process U-shaped; apex directed dorsally, moderately long and gently curved. Tarsal process with a longitudinal opening on ventral subdistal area; pro- and retrolateral edges of the opening are hyaline, and the internal surface of the opening is apparently striated; retrolateral edge more developed than the prolateral; both edges smooth in lateral aspect, without spiniform projections. Accessory piece short (i.e., compared to the tarsal process), predominantly straight, narrowing apically and single-tipped (nonbifid); accessory piece lying along a shallow longitudinal groove on retrolateral aspect of the tarsal process.

Measurements: See Table 1.

Female. Figs. 18–24View FIGURES 18 – 21View FIGURES 22 – 24. Similar to the male in several aspects, but with sex-related differences. Spermathecae as in Figs. 22–24View FIGURES 22 – 24, wider than long, not touching each other; posterior genital lip with apex sub-triangular, apically trilobated. Leg length formula: 2341.

Measurements: See Table 1.

Distribution. Known only from the type locality in Ecuador ( Fig. 41View FIGURE 41).

Notes. Two other ricinuleid species have been described from Ecuador, Cryptocellus chimaera Botero-Trujillo & Valdez-Mondragón, 2016  and Cryptocellus leleupi Cooreman, 1976  . The former species belongs to the magnus  species-groups, whereas the latter is a nomen dubium of uncertain systematic position ( Platnick & Paz 1979). Even though the adult morphology of C. leleupi  is unknown (it was described from a protonymph), the type locality of this species ( Oriente , Rio Negro, approx. 01°24′32″ S 78°11′28″ W) is located in the Eastern slopes of the Andes , some 270 km South East of that of C. chiruisla  sp. nov. The probability that the holotypes of both species could be conspecific is negligible.GoogleMaps 

Cryptocellus chiruisla  sp. nov. Cryptocellus guaviarensis  sp. nov.

Male Female Male Total body L:1 4.50 4.47 4.50

Cucullus: L: 0.87 0.87 0.83

W:2 1.17 1.13 1.13

Carapace: L: 1.83 1.77 1.70

W:2 1.83 * 1.83 * 1.70 *

Opisthosoma: Total L:1 2.67 2.70 2.80

W:2 2.50 ** 2.57 ** 2.30 ** Median plate XI: L: 0.97 0.97 0.93

W:2 1.23 1.57 1.27

Median plate XII: L: 0.70 0.70 0.77

W: 0.93 1.20 1.00

Median plate XIII: L: 0.80 0.87 0.90

W: 0.93 1.00 0.90

Suture line coxae II: L: 0.10 0.12 0.18

Suture line coxae III: L: 0.18 0.15 0.23

Pedipalp: Femur L: 0.95 0.87 0.75

Femur H:3 0.37 0.40 0.37

Tibia L: 1.18 1.33 1.18

Tibia H:3 0.17 0.18 0.17

Leg I: Total L:4 4.57 3.93 4.31

Trochanter L: 0.33 0.23 0.27

Femur L: 0.90 0.80 0.87

Femur W:2 0.53 0.38 0.52

Patella L: 0.77 0.70 0.80

Tibia L: 1.07 0.73 0.87

Metatarsus L: 1.00 1.00 0.97

Tarsus L: 0.50 0.47 0.53

Leg II: Total L:4 6.84 6.53 7.24

Trochanter L: 0.40 0.33 0.37

Femur L: 1.37 1.33 1.50

Femur W:2 0.42 0.45 0.42

Femur H:3 0.48 0.50 0.48

Patella L: 1.00 0.97 1.07

Tibia L: 1.13 1.17 1.23

Metatarsus L: 1.47 1.40 1.57

Tarsus L: 1.47 1.33 1.50

Leg III: Total L:4 6.03 5.23 6.26

1st trochanter L: 0.30 0.30 0.37

......continued on the next page Cryptocellus chiruisla  sp. nov. Cryptocellus guaviarensis  sp. nov. Male Female Male 2nd trochanter L: 0.43 0.33 0.43 Femur L: 1.20 1.33 1.20 Femur W:2 0.50 0.48 0.43 Patella L: 0.87 0.77 0.93 Tibia L: 0.83 0.70 0.90 Metatarsus L: 1.13 0.93 1.13 Tarsus L: 1.27 0.87 1.30

Leg IV: Total L:4 5.39 5.16 5.70 1st trochanter L: 0.33 0.33 0.40 2nd trochanter L: 0.33 0.43 0.33 Femur L: 1.33 1.10 1.30 Femur W:2 0.77 0.42 0.55 Patella L: 0.87 0.77 0.90 Tibia L: 0.60 0.73 0.77 Metatarsus L: 1.03 0.97 1.00 Tarsus L: 0.90 0.83 1.00