Hengconarius longpuensis Z. Zhao & S. Li

Li, Bing, Zhao, Zhe, Zhang, Chuntian & Li, Shuqiang, 2018, Nuconarius gen. n. and Hengconarius gen. n., two new genera of Coelotinae (Araneae, Agelenidae) spiders from Southwest China, Zootaxa 4457 (2), pp. 237-263: 258

publication ID

https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4457.2.2

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:14E0CDBB-CB72-4026-979B-E4BAC3CEA62E

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/EE5987B9-FFB1-FF8E-FF6A-FF42FDA7FAC4

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Hengconarius longpuensis Z. Zhao & S. Li
status

sp. n.

Hengconarius longpuensis Z. Zhao & S. Li  sp. n.

Figs 17–18View FIGURE 17View FIGURE 18, 20 View Figure

Type material. Holotype: ♂ (IZCAS-Ar33980), Longpu Village (28.53412°N, 98.451050°E, elev. 2873 m), Cawarong Township, Zayü, Tibet, China, 14 September 2014, J. Liu legGoogleMaps  . Paratypes: 1♀ 1♂ (IZCAS-Ar33981, 33982), same data as holotypeGoogleMaps  .

Etymology. The specific name is derived from the pinyin "Longpu" and refers to its type locality, Longpu Village; adjective.

Diagnosis. The males are similar to H. exilis  but can easily be distinguished from H. exilis  by the palp shorter than the tarsus; the tarsus as long as the tibia (tarsus as twice long as the tibia in H. exilis  ), two branches of conductor that differ in length but in H. exilis  , two branches being of the same length ( Figs 9B View Figure , 17B View Figure ); median apophysis longer than it in H. exilis  ( Figs 9C View Figure , 17C View Figure ). The females can be easily distinguished from H. exilis  by posterior epigynal sclerite broad, the height of it is about ½ the height of epigyne but is twice as its in H. exilis  ( Figs 10A View Figure , 18A View Figure ); the distance between spermathecae is twice as long as the diameter of spermatheca while in H. exilis  , the distance is subequal to the diameter ( Figs 10B View Figure , 18B View Figure ).

Description. Male (holotype): Total length 8.34. Carapace 3.85 long, 2.81 wide. Abdomen 4.49 long, 2.97 wide. Eye sizes and interdistances: AME 0.12, ALE 0.22, PME 0.14, PLE 0.16; AME–AME 0.08, AME–ALE 0.06, AME–PME 0.12, ALE–PLE 0, PME–PME 0.12, PME–PLE 0.13. Leg measurements: I 13.54 (3.53, 4.38, 3.21, 2.42); II 12.37 (3.21, 3.91, 3.06, 2.19); III 10.97 (3.02, 3.38, 3.01, 1.56); IV 15.09 (3.85, 4.25, 4.49, 2.50). Palp: patellar apophysis absent, RTA square slice-shaped; LTA short, approximately ⅓ the length of RTA; cymbial furrow short, less than ½ the length of cymbium; embolic base beginning at 8 o’clock position; conductor short and bifurcate, two branches slice-shaped and pointed; median apophysis thin and straight, not spoon-shaped ( Figs 17A–C View Figure ).

Female (paratype): Total length 9.94. Carapace 4.81 long, 3.25 wide. Abdomen 5.13 long, 3.25 wide. Eye sizes and interdistances: AME 0.14, ALE 0.19, PME 0.16, PLE 0.17; AME–AME 0.15, AME–ALE 0.10, AME– PME 0.23, ALE–PLE 0, PME–PME 0.20, PME–PLE 0.24. Leg measurements: I 11.79 (3.21, 4.24, 2.59, 1.75); II 11.47 (3.48, 3.75, 2.75, 1.49); III 10.16 (3.13, 3.39, 2.13, 1.51); IV 14.44 (3.85, 4.81, 3.75, 2.03). Epigyne: middle septum long but not reaching the posterior edge of epigyne; anterior epigynal sclerite strong, with obvious wrinkles; the height of it is less than ½ of the epigynal height; the height of posterior epigynal sclerite about ½ the epigynal height while in the middle of posterior epigynal sclerite narrow, only about ¼ the epigynal height; atrium slit-shaped; spermathecae separated, the width about ¾ the length, the distance between spermathecae 2½ the diameter of spermatheca at the anterior part and twice as its at the posterior part; spermathecal heads situated anterolaterally; the width about ¼ the length of fertilization duct ( Figs 18A–B View Figure ).

Variation: Total length varies from 8.34 to 9.94.

Distribution. Tibet, China ( Fig. 20 View Figure ).