Draculoides nosferatu Abrams and Harvey, 2020

Abrams, Kym M., Huey, Joel A., Hillyer, Mia J., Didham, Raphael K. & Harvey, Mark S., 2020, A systematic revision of Draculoides (Schizomida: Hubbardiidae) of the Pilbara, Western Australia, Part I: the Western Pilbara, Zootaxa 4864 (1), pp. 1-75 : 63-65

Draculoides nosferatu Abrams and Harvey , n. sp.

( Figs. 1–8 , 36–37 )

Zoobank Code: http://zoobank.org/NomenclaturalActs/ 51471C86-8899-4E6A-B0DB-8F9F369C05F6

Draculoides SCH 061: Abrams et al. 2019 MPE 106532: 8, fig. 2.

Material examined. Holotype female. AUSTRALIA: Western Australia: 1 ♀, Robe Valley , ca. 27 km ESE. of Pan- nawonica, 21°44’27.72”S, 116°33’24.81”E, 6/06/2015, 8/08/2015, troglofauna trap, J. Alexander ( WAM T138516 ) (DNA: COI, 18S, 28S, ITS2 ).

Other material. AUSTRALIA: Western Australia: 1 juvenile, Robe Valley, ca. 27 km ESE. of Pannawonica , 21°44’31.19”S, 116°33’41.85”E, 6 June–8 August 2015, troglofauna trap, J. Alexander ( WAM T138518 ) (DNA: COI, 18S, ITS2 ) ; 1 juvenile, Robe Valley, ca. 27 km ESE. of Pannawonica , 21°44’37.56”S, 116°33’49.11”E, 6 June–8 August 2015, troglofauna trap, J. Alexander ( WAM T138519 ) (DNA: COI, 18S, ITS2 ) ; 1 juvenile, Robe Valley ca. 27 km ESE. of Pannawonica , 21°44’31.19”S, 116°33’41.85”E, 6 June–8 August 2015, troglofauna trap, J. Alexander ( WAM T139921 ) .

Diagnosis. Males are unknown and the flagellum is missing from the only available female. Draculoides nosferatu is the only Draculoides species known that does not have a guard tooth on the movable finger of the chelicera. Draculoides nosferatu can be diagnosed from all other Draculoides species that were sequenced at COI by the 50bp mini-barcode shown in Figure 3 . Draculoides nosferatu can be diagnosed from all other Draculoides species that were sequenced at ITS2 ( Fig. 7 ) except for D. claudiae , D. carmillae and D. mesozeirus , which are not distinguishable using the ITS2 mini-barcode.

Description (adult female). Colour. Yellow-brown; propeltidium and pedipalps darker.

Cephalothorax. Propeltidium with 2+1 apical setae in a triangular formation on anterior process and 2 + 2 + 2 setae; eye spots absent. Mesopeltidia separated. Metapeltidium divided. Anterior sternum with 14 setae (including 2 sternapophysial setae); posterior sternum triangular with 6 setae.

Chelicera. Fixed finger with 2 large teeth plus 5 smaller teeth between these, proximal and distal teeth without small lateral teeth; membranous area between fixed and movable fingers with 3 large, lanceolate, terminally pilose setae (G1); G2 composed of 6 setae; G3 composed of 4 setae; internal face of chelicera with 5 short whip-like setae (G4); brush at base of fixed finger composed of 7 setae (G5A), each densely pilose in distal half and G5B composed of 10 setae; G6 with one seta; G7 composed of 2 setae. Movable finger serrula composed of ca. 18 long lamellae, guard tooth absent; 3 accessory teeth present, most distal large, most proximal tiny.

Pedipalp. Without apophyses; trochanter with sharply produced ventro-distal extension, ventral margin with ca. 9 stout setae, without mesal spur; tarsus and tibia without spines; tarsal spur present; claw 0.36 × length of tarsus.

Legs. Tarsus I with 6 segments; baso-dorsal margin of femur IV produced at about a 90° angle.

Abdomen. Chaetotaxy of tergite I: 2 macrosetae + 4 microsetae (microsetae diagonal), tergite II:? (damaged) macrosetae + 6 microsetae (microsetae in column), tergites III–IX: 2: 2: 2: 2: 2: 2: 2.

Female genitalia. Two pairs of spermathecae with short, equal-sized lobes, each pair connected basally before connection with bursa ( Fig. 37A ), distally round and smooth; sparsely covered with small pores; gonopod short, rectangular, distally slightly bifurcate.

Flagellum. Collected without flagellum.

Dimensions (mm). Holotype female (WAM T138516): Body length 3.56. Propeltidium 1.21/0.62. Chelicera 0.69. Flagellum broken. Pedipalp: trochanter 0.46, femur 0.50, patella 0.54, tibia 0.44, tarsus 0.27, claw 0.10, total excluding claw 2.21.

Remarks. Draculoides nosferatu is known from three locations within the most southern mesa of the Middle Robe mesas ( Fig. 1D ). The phylogeny suggests that D. nosferatu ’ s closest relatives are the other species from the Middle Robe area including D. minae , D. claudiae , D. carmillae and D. mesozeirus ( Fig. 2 Clade H). The juvenile specimens listed above are associated with this species by locality and, in many cases, by sequence data.

Other names. WAM SCH061 ( Abrams et al., 2019).

Etymology. The specific epithet refers to the seminal 1922 German horror film “Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror,” and relates to the species living in the dark.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Map of an area of the Pilbara described as “West Pilbara” for the purposes of this study, showing the distribution of the named Draculoides species. Inset maps show species distributions in finer detail encompassing areas A: Warramboo, Mesas A, B and C and “BudgieBore”; B: Bungaroo, Mesas G, H, J, K and L; C: Cochrane and Jewell, Kens Bore, Cane and Upper Cane River, Trinity Bore and Catho Well, Mt. Stuart Station; D: Middle Robe, Robe Valley; E: Bungaroo South, West Pit, Buckland Hills and Dragon deposit.

FIGURE 2. Maximum Likelihood tree, based on the reduced dataset. See Methods for details. Each terminal represents a single species or OTU, with named species in bold. Clades are identified using dashed boxes and shaded boxes encompass the species discussed in this study. Nodes with bootstrap support <80 are not shown, except for the common ancestor of the Draculoides radiation.

FIGURE 3. COI mini-barcodes for all Draculoides species including the operational taxonomic units used in Abrams et al. (2019). This barcode is the maximally diagnostic 50 bp fragment of DNA. Genetic variation within species is shown using IUPAC Ambiguity Codes. See Methods for details. The position of the mini-barcode is reported relative to a specimen of Draculoides celatus (WAM T98698, GenBank number MG913085). The blue tree on the left groups minibarcodes which are most similar to each other but does not represent an accurate phylogeny. The coloured bases in the figure are those that differ from the consensus reference sequence.

FIGURE 4. Maximum Likelihood tree based on COI mini-barcodes (Fig. 3) showing similarity of mini-barcode sequences, relative to species identity. This phylogeny does not recover an accurate tree topology, and evolutionary relationships should not be inferred from this figure.

FIGURE 5. 12S mini-barcodes for all Draculoides species including the operational taxonomic units used in Abrams et al. (2019). This barcode is the maximally diagnostic 50 bp fragment of DNA. Genetic variation within species is shown using IUPAC Ambiguity Codes. See Methods for details. The position of the mini-barcode is reported relative to a specimen of Draculoides celatus (WAM T98698, GenBank number MG913012). The blue tree on the left groups minibarcodes which are most similar to each other but does not represent an accurate phylogeny. The coloured bases in the figure are those that differ from the consensus reference sequence.

FIGURE 6. Maximum Likelihood tree based on COI mini-barcodes (Fig. 5) showing similarity of mini-barcode sequences relative to species identity. This phylogeny does not recover an accurate tree topology, and evolutionary relationships should not be inferred from this figure.

FIGURE 7. ITS2 mini-barcodes for all Draculoides species including the operational taxonomic units used in Abrams et al. (2019). This barcode is the maximally diagnostic 50 bp fragment of DNA. Genetic variation within species is shown using IUPAC Ambiguity Codes. See Methods for details. The position of the mini-barcode is reported relative to a specimen of Draculoides celatus (WAM T98698, GenBank number MG913105). The blue tree on the left groups minibarcodes which are most similar to each other but does not represent an accurate phylogeny. The coloured bases in the figure are those that differ from the consensus reference sequence.

FIGURE 8. Maximum Likelihood tree based on ITS2 mini-barcodes (Fig. 7) showing similarity of mini-barcode sequences, relative to species identity. This phylogeny does not recover an accurate tree topology, and evolutionary relationships should not be inferred from this figure.

FIGURE 36. Draculoides nosferatu sp. nov., holotype female (WAM T138516): A. Body, dorsal; B. Body, ventral; C. Body, lateral. The scale bar shown in image A is 1 mm and also applies to B and C.

FIGURE 37. Draculoides nosferatu sp. nov., holotype female (WAM T138516): A. Spermathecae, ventral. Scale bar: 0.1 mm.