Homolophus chemerisi Staręga & Snegovaya, 2008
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4908.3.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F2774810-3C77-426E-A1BC-0F42F21E7F9B |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4450798 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039C113F-0962-FF9C-98EB-DDFBFC34FE78 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Homolophus chemerisi Staręga & Snegovaya, 2008 |
status |
|
Homolophus chemerisi Staręga & Snegovaya, 2008 View in CoL
Figures 14 View FIGURE 14 , 17–18 View FIGURE 17 View FIGURE 18
Homolophus chemerisi Staręga & Snegovaya, 2008: 81–82 View in CoL , figs. 31–37
Diagnosis. This species differs from all others, including the most closely related, H. arcticus Banks, 1893 and H. tibetanus ( Roewer, 1911) , by the following: metatarsi I with characteristic black structures looking like blunt angular denticles, but at higher magnification are thickly packed “brushes” of short thickened setae (see Fig. 1E View FIGURE 1 and insert). With short and thickened legs and with short alae on penis truncus.
Type Locality. Tajikistan, Gissar Mt. Range , Gissar valley, vicinity of Khochiler village (Kishlak), plane tree grove, ca. 38°32’N, 69°21’E GoogleMaps
Distribution. Tajikistan and here newly recorded from Uzbekistan ( Fig. 14 View FIGURE 14 ).
Specimens Examined. UZBEKISTAN, Samarkand Vilayat , neighborhood of Samarkand, March 1896, leg. A. Barschevskiy, field # N45-96 (3 males, 4 females, ZIN) .
Description. Medium-sized harvestmen; male body rectangular, with rounded corners; medium sclerotization of body cuticle, less slender, 1.67 times longer than wide; length 6.0 mm, width 3.6 mm; entire dorsum yellowishtan with some areas variegated with white, whitish-yellow and brown [primarily on cephalothorax; darkest areas just above muscle attachment sites (compare to Fig. 1A View FIGURE 1 )]; tones; covered with middle-sized black-tipped denticles. Ocularium low, round, not large, 1.5 times its length from anterior margin of cephalothorax, with 6–7 smaller denticles on each side. Legs rather short, angular in cross-section, I and II pair thickened (sexually dimorphic), I and III Fe spindle-shaped, all segments with rows of small dark denticles, Mt I with modified (thickly packed) “brushes” of short thickened setae. Leg lengths (mm): I 3.8 + 1.6 + 3.3 + 4.5 + 6.5 = 19.7, II 7.0 + 2.0 + 6.0 + 5.3 + 13.0 = 33.3, III 4.0 + 2.0 + 3.5 + 4.7 + 7.2 = 21.4, IV 6.0 + 1.8 + 4.8 + 6.5 + 10.0 = 29.1. Pedipalps short, slightly enlarged; Fe ventrally densely covered with large and middle-sized black-tipped denticles dorsally with middle-sized denticles and setae; Pa with black-tipped denticles and setae; Ti ventrally densely covered with small black-tipped denticles, other parts denticles and setae; Ta with setae and ventrally on basal ¾ with strip of sensory microdenticles. Pedipalp segment lengths (mm): 1.7 + 1.0 + 1.6 + 2.1 = 6.4. Chelicerae medium to slender-sized, tabby marks not evident, basal segment dorsally with some denticles, distal segment dorso-subapically with some denticles. Cheliceral basal segment ventrally smooth without bulge, length 2.0 mm, distal segment length 2.3 mm. Penis medium-sized, length (mm): truncus 3.5, glans 0.4, stylus 0.13; truncus narrowing gradually towards apex, truncus dorsoventrally flattened, only slightly bowed, recurved in lateral view.Apical portion with small alae directed dorsally. Glans in profile boat-shaped, with lateral incisions, ventrally oval.
Female differs from male in larger size and more elongated body shape, slenderer, 3.75 times longer than wide. Body with longitudinal, light-colored, indistinct dashed stripe running length of body; line only faintly indicated or absent on male. Female body length 7.5 mm, width 2.0 mm. Pedipalp segment lengths (mm): 1.3 + 0.7 + 1.0 + 1.8 = 4.8. Cheliceral basal segment length 1.8 mm, distal segment length 2.1 mm. Leg lengths (mm): I 5.0 + 1.4 + 3.0 + 3.5 + 5.2 = 18.1, II 6.6 + 1.6 + 5.5 + 4.2 + 9.2 = 27.1, III 3.2 + 1.2 + 2.8 + 4.0 + 6.2 = 17.4, IV 4.6 + 1.6 + 4.0 + 5.8 + 7.6 = 23.6.
Comments. Specimens over 100 years old. Colors likely faded.
ZIN |
Russian Academy of Sciences, Zoological Institute, Zoological Museum |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Homolophus chemerisi Staręga & Snegovaya, 2008
Snegovaya, Nataly Yu. & Cokendolpher, James C. 2021 |
Homolophus chemerisi Staręga & Snegovaya, 2008: 81–82
Snegovaya, N. Yu. & Starega, W. 2008: 82 |