Teruelius grandidieri (Kraepelin, 1901) Lowe & Kovařík, 2019

Lowe, Graeme & Kovařík, František, 2019, Review of Grosphus Simon 1880 with description of Teruelius gen n a new buthid genus from Madagascar (Scorpiones Buthidae), Euscorpius 281, pp. 1-128 : 61

Teruelius grandidieri (Kraepelin, 1901) comb. n.

1♂ ( Figs. 17 , 71, 73–74 , 102, 130 , 175 , 190 , 491–494 ), Tuléar, Atsimo-Andrefana, Morombe , Nosy Ambositra , Antevankira , Antevankira forest, near the Antsakabe River , 21°56.753’S 44°02.781’E, 130–160 ft, 3.II.2007, riparian valley along the Antsakabe River , in a rotten tree trunk, leg. H.A. Rakotondravony HER 03685 ( FMNH 73446 ) ; 1♀ ( Figs. 17 , 48 , 102, 142 , 151 ), Toliara Province, Maheleotse 124c River Onilahy , 23°31.600’S 44°05.366’E, 68 m, leg. Achile Rasehmionna ( FMNH) ; 3♂ 1♀ 3juvs ( Figs. 206 , 223 ), Toliara Province, Ankotofotsy, No. 17, 2011 ( FKCP) ; 1♂, Toliara Province, Tsimanampetsotsa, Mitoho camp, 10 m a. s. l., 24°02.838’S 43°45.138’E ( FKCP) .

Figures

Figures 9–20. Position of femur trichobothrium d 2in Grosphus and Teruelius gen. n. Dorsal surfaces of proximal pedipalp femur of adult females (♀, left panels) and adult males (♂, right panels), underUV fluorescence to highlightgranulation,carinae and trichobothrial areolae.Whitearrows indicate positions of trichobothrium d in each image. G. madagascariensis (9, 10; 2 samples from Anjiro (9) and Andasibe (10) show consistency of d 2 2 position),G. hirtus(11), G. voahangyae (12), T. ankarafantsika (13, 15; 2 samples fromAmpijoroa show consistency ofd 2position),T. ankarana (14), T. flavopiceus (16), T. grandidieri (17), T. limbatus (18), T. mahafaliensis (19), and T. olgae (20). Scale bars: 1 mm (9–20♀) or 500 μm (20 ♂).

Figures 71–85. Hemispermatophores and capsule regions of Teruelius gen n. Multi-panel figures show: whole hemispermatophore; whole hemispermatophore and/or capsule with flagellum; capsule region in convex (or convex compressed), anterior and posterior views (panels in left to right sequence). Right hemispermatophores. Figure 71. T. ankarana, whole hemispermatophore. Scale bar: 4 mm. Figure 72. T. ankarana, capsule, left mirrored, Forêt d’Ankavanana, FMNH. Scale bar: 500 μm. Figure 73. T. grandidieri, whole hemispermatophore (flagellum truncated). Scale bar: 4 mm. Figure 74. T. grandidieri, capsule, Antsakabe River, FMNH. Scale bar: 500 μm. Figure 75. T. flavopiceus, whole hemispermatophore. Scale bar: 2 mm. Figure 76. T. flavopiceus, capsule, Madagascar, GLPC, FKCP. Scale bar: 500 μm. Figure 77. T. annulatus, capsule, Tsimanampetsotsa National Park, GLPC, FKCP. Scale bar: 500 μm. Figure 78. T. ankarafantsika, capsule and flagellum. Scale bar: 400 μm. Figure 79. T. ankarafantsika, capsule, Forêt d’Ankavanana, FMNH. Scale bar: 200 μm. Figure 80. T. ankarafantsika, capsule, Réserve Forestière de l’Ankarafantsika, FMNH. Scale bar: 200 μm. Figure 81. T. olgae, capsule, Itampolo village, FMNH. Scale bar: 500 μm. Figure 82. T. limbatus, whole hemispermatophore (flagellum truncated). Scale bar: 2 mm. Figure 83. T. limbatus, capsule, Forêt d’Ianasana, FMNH. Scale bar: 500 μm. Figure 84. T. mahafaliensis, capsule views, Zombitse-Vohibasia National Park, GLPC, FKCP. Scale bar: 500 μm. Figure 85. T. intertidalis, capsule, Madagascar, GLPC, FKCP. Scale bar: 500 μm.

Figures 127–132. Ventral aspect of metasoma and telson of adult males (♂) or females (♀) of representative Teruelius gen. n under UV fluorescence to reveal carination and granulation. T. ankarafantsika (127), T. ankarana (128), T. flavopiceus (129), T. grandidieri (130), T. mahafaliensis (131), and T. olgae (132). Scale bars: 4 mm.

Figures 165–180. Carapace of representative Grosphus and Teruelius gen. n. G. madagascariensis (165, 168), G. hirtus (166–167), G. voahangyae (169), T. ankarafantsika (170–171), T. ankarana (172), T. flavopiceus (173–174), T. grandidieri (175), T. limbatus (176), T.mahafaliensis (177–178) andT. olgae (179–180).UV fluorescence,♂male, ♀female.Scale bars:2mm (165–171, 176–180),4 mm (172–175).

Figures 181–195. Telson of representativeGrosphus andTeruelius gen. n. G. hirtus (181–182), G. madagascariensis (183–184), G. voahangyae (185), T. ankarafantsika (186–187), T. ankarana (188), T. flavopiceus (189), T. grandidieri (190–191), T. limbatus (192), T. mahafaliensis (193) and T. olgae (194–195). UV fluorescence, ♂ male, ♀ female. Scale bars: 2 mm (181–187, 192–195), 4 mm (188–191).

Figures 491–494. Teruelius grandidieri. Habitus. Male (491–492) and female (493–494), dorsal (491, 493) and ventral (492, 494) views. Scale bar: 10 mm.

Figures 40–51. Female basal pectinal teeth in Grosphus and Teruelius gen. n. Ventral views of proximal left pectine of females shown under UV fluorescence to highlight cuticular surface texture, setation and absence of peg sensillae on basal tooth vs. their presence on other teeth. G. sp. nr hirtus (40), G. madagascariensis (41), G. hirtus (42), G. voahangyae (43), T. ankarafantsika (44–45; 2 samples fromAmpijoroa show variation in tooth shape), T. ankarana (46), T. flavopiceus (47), T. grandidieri (48), T. limbatus (49), T. mahafaliensis (50), and T. olgae (51). Scale bars: 1 mm.

Figures 133–144. Ventral setation of telotarsus III in Grosphus and Teruelius gen. n. Ventral surfaces of right telotarsus III of adult males (♂) or females (♀), shown under UV fluorescence to highlight setation. Macrosetae appear dark with strongly fluorescent cuticular sockets at their base. Putative chemosensory microsetae appear bright. G. hirtus (= G. h. garciai) (133), G. hirtus (134), G. madagascariensis (135, from Anjiro, 136 from Andasibe), G. voahangyae (137), T. ankarafantsika (138), T. limbatus (139), T. mahafaliensis (140), T. ankarana (141), T. grandidieri (142), T. flavopiceus (143), and T. olgae (144). Scale bars: 500 μm (133–140, 144) and 1 mm (141–143).

Figures 145–157. Comparative intensity of UV fluorescence in Grosphus and Teruelius gen. n. Photographic comparison of fluorescence emission intensities of representative species of each genus, including adult males (♂) or females (♀). G. madagascariensis (145 from Anjiro, 148 from Andasibe), G. hirtus (146), G. voahangyae (147), G. hirtus (= G. h. garciai) (149), T. ankarafantsika (150), T. grandidieri (151), T. olgae (152), T. flavopiceus (153), T. ankarana (154–155), T. mahafaliensis (156), and T. limbatus (157). Images acquired under identical intensities of UV excitation (395 nm LED source, 0.35 A current) and camera exposure (Canon EOS 7D Mark II, 100 mm f/13, 0.5 s, ISO 320), with 475 nm longpass filter to block excitation wavelengths. Scale bars: 10 mm (145–150, 152–153, 156–157), 20 mm (151, 154–155).

Figures 196–210. Female basal pectinal teeth of representative Grosphus and Teruelius gen. n. G. hirtus (196–198), G. madagascariensis (199), G. madagascariensis, paratype of G. mandena(200), T. ankarafantsika (201),T. ankarana (202), T. annulatus (203),T. bistriatus (204), T. flavopiceus (205), T. grandidieri (206), T. intertidalis (207), T. limbatus (208), T. mahafaliensis (209), T. feti (210).

Figures 211–226. Ventral tarsal setation of legs III or IV in Grosphus and Teruelius gen. n. G. goudoti (211), G. hirtus (212), G. hirtus (G. garciai) (213), G. madagascariensis (214), G. madagascariensis (G. mandena) (215), Teruelius ankarana (216), T. flavopiceus (217), T. annulatus (218), T. ankarafantsika (219–220), T. bistriatus (221), T. intertidalis (222), T. grandidieri (223), T. mahafaliensis (224), T. limbatus (225), T. feti (226).