Ramonus conifrons Roewer 1956

Pinto-Da-Rocha, Ricardo & Hara, Marcos Ryotaro, 2009, New familial assignments for three species of Neotropical harvestmen based on cladistic analysis (Arachnida: Opiliones: Laniatores), Zootaxa 2241, pp. 33-46 : 40-42

Ramonus conifrons Roewer 1956 , new family assignment

( Figs. 3 and 4 F,G)

Ramonus conifrons Roewer 1956:434 , Figs. 5 –7 (dor hab; lat ocu; lat ped); Kury 1997:335 (cit), 340 (slist), fig. 3 (lat ocu); 2003:34 (cat). (ma holotype; Peru, [Junín], bei Campañillaya (2600 m); H.W. Koepcke leg.; 6.viii.1953; SMF RII 9698; examined). (fem paratype; ibidem; SMF RII 9699; examined). (ma paratype; ibidem; SMF RII 9700; examined). Note: Although the label of SMF RII 9700 states two male paratypes, there is only one specimen in that vial.

Diagnosis: Prostygninae with unarmed ocularium, developed frontal hump bearing a spine, dorsal scutum densely granulated, areas I–IV each with a pair of paramedian tubercles, trochanter IV unarmed, femora I–IV unarmed.

Redescription: Male (holotype): Dorsum ( Fig. 3 A,C): Measurements: DSL 2.5; OMW 1.8; PL 1.3; PW 1.6; Leg I 5.2; II 7.2; III 5.4; IV 7.0. Dorsal scutum and free tergites densely covered by granules. Dorsal scutum wider at mesotergal area I, constricted near coxa III and coxa IV. Anterior margin with one large median tuberculate eminence, with apical spine frontwards; with three large, conical tubercles in the corners (ectal smallest). Ocularium large (smaller than eminence), rounded, placed in the middle of prosoma. Two larger tubercles behind ocularium and on mesotergal areas I–IV. Prosoma enlarged.

Venter ( Fig. 3 B): Densely granulate, coxa I with slightly larger granules.

Chelicera: Segment I with well-marked bulla, sparse two dorsal tubercles; II with three teeth on fixed finger; III with four teeth.

Pedipalpus ( Fig. 3 F,G): Trochanter with two ventral tubercles (median larger). Femur with six ventral tubercles (basal larger), two dorsal, one mesal subapical, one mesal apical very long. Patella unarmed. Tibia mesal/ectal IiIi. Tarsus mesal IIi, ectal IiIi.

Legs: Coxae–tibiae I–IV covered by large tubercles. Coxa I with one anterior tubercle, one posterior; II with three tubercles; III with one anterior tubercle, one posterior; IV reaching between grooves II–III, with a large, blunt, prolateral tubercle. Trochanter I with three ventral larger tubercles. Femur I with ventro retrolateral row of larger tubercles ( Fig. 3 H); femora III–IV with two ventral rows of larger tubercles; IV slightly curved. Tarsal formula: 5(3), 7(3), 5, 5. Basitarsus I slightly swollen.

Penis ( Fig. 4 F,G): Ventral plate almost rectangular, slightly enlarged at base, distal margin slightly concave; two pairs of curved distal setae (size 1/3 of distal ventral plate width), a pair of median small setae; without basal setae. Stylus thick, long, straight with truncated apex. Ventral process narrower and shorter than stylus with ventroapical projections.

Coloration: Specimen possibly discolored. Body mainly clear brown, with darker spots on prosoma close to groove I; most of mesotergal area I; lateral areas of mesotergal areas II–IV and larger tubercles on areas I– III. Overall with a shiny appearance due to the granules over the body.

Female (paratype; Fig. 3 D,E): Measurements: DSL 2.15; OMW 1.7; PL 0.85; PW 1.1; Leg I 4.1; II 6.1; III 4.65; IV 6.0. Only characteristics different from those of males are described. Dorsal scutum wider at mesotergal area I–II and posterior margin, but width at mesotergal area I–II not conspicuous as male, rendering a subrectangular shape. Anterior margin of dorsal scutum with three large conical tubercles in the corners (ectalmost blunt). Ocularium proportionally smaller and lower than male. Cheliceral segment II not swollen. Pedipalpal femur with 5–6 ventral tubercles (basal larger).

Male variation (n=2): Measurements: PL 1.25–1.3; PW 1.45–1.6; Leg I 4.9–5.2; II 7.1–7.2; III 5.4–5.5; IV 6.85–7.0. Pedipalpal femur with six to seven ventral tubercles (basal larger). Tarsal formula: 5(3), 7–8(3), 5, 5.

Figures

FIGURE 3. Ramonus conifrons Roewer 1956. Male (holotype): A, habitus, dorsal view; B, idem ventral view; C, right lateral view; F, right pedipalp, ectal view; G, idem, distal femur – tarsus, dorso-mesal view; H, right trochanter – femur I, retrolateral view. Female (paratype): D, habitus, dorsal view; E, dorsal scutum, right lateral view. D, E are more schematic illustration, presenting only main structures. A – E at same scale; F – H at same scale. Scale bars: 1 mm.

FIGURE 4. Distal part of penis: A – C: Globibunus rubrofemoratus Roewer, 1912, A, dorsal view; B, ventral view; C, right lateral view. D – E: Rivetinus minutus Roewer, 1919, D, dorsal view; E, right lateral view. F – G: Ramonus conifrons Roewer, 1956, F, dorsal view; G, right lateral view. A – C, at same scale; D and E at same scale; F and G at same scale. Scale bars: 0.1 mm.

FIGURE 5. Hypothesis of relationship among genera of Agoristenidae. Strict consensus tree (L: 118; Ci: 0.44; Ri: 0.69) of 34 equally parsimonious trees (L: 115; Ci: 0.45; Ri: 0.71). Black circles are unique synapomorphies and white circles, homoplastic synapomorphies. Numbers above circles are the character number, and below circles are the character state. Number near the nodes in large font size, bold and underlined is the value of Bremer support.