Carteronius Simon, 1897
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5205.4.3 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A4731737-9899-45BE-B342-E4A6F632E756 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7310953 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FAED38-F038-FF94-56CE-FA4AF5FBF837 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Carteronius Simon |
| status |
|
Mandane Karsch, 1880: 337 , pl. 12, fig. 4
(type species by monotypy, M. sudana View in CoL ). Preoccupied by Kinberg 1866, in Spionidae View in CoL , Annelida: Polychaeta)
Carteronius Simon, 1897: 85 (type species by original designation, C. helluo Simon, 1896 ).
Mandaneta Strand, 1932: 140 View in CoL . Replacement name for Mandane Karsch. syn. nov.
Notes on the identity of Carteronius . Simon (1896) described four species of Carteronius : C. helluo (the type species), C. vittiger , C. scriptus , and C. fuscus . The first three species were described from males only, and C. fuscus from a female. The type locality is Sierra Leone for C. helluo , Madagascar for C. vittiger and C. scriptus , and Mauritius for C. fuscus . Based on Simon’s original Latin descriptions, the male of C. helluo can be considered to differ significantly from the males of C. vittiger and C. scriptus : it has a strongly rugose cephalothorax, granulose chelicerae, anterior tibiae with six short ventral spine pairs, anterior metatarsi with four long ventral spine pairs, a male palpal tibia that is only slightly longer than the patella, a large, lamelliform, bifid retrolateral tibial apophysis and an oval, blunt cymbium. Carteronius vittiger and C. scriptus both have an almost smooth cephalothorax and smooth chelicerae, anterior tibiae with four long ventral spine pairs, anterior metatarsi with two long ventral spine pairs, a male palpal tibia that is longer than the patella, a small, sharp and simple retrolateral tibial apophysis, and a very elongate, curved cymbium that is much longer than the bulbus itself.
Simon (1897) presented the genus description of Carteronius , transferred Cheiracanthium argenticomum Keyserling, 1877 to the new genus (pp. 79–80), and synonymized C. scriptus with C. argenticomus (p. 83). Upon consulting the MNHN collection (Paris) and studying the type specimens of Simon’s four species, it turned out that the vial of the type species C. helluo did not contain the specimen corresponding with Simon’s original description. Instead, this vial, labeled Clubionidae — Carteronius E.S. helluo E.S. 10.611 Sierra Leone: Free town, contained a smooth male specimen with four and two ventral spine pairs on the anterior tibiae and metatarsi, respectively, as well as a male palp with a long tibia and cymbium and a simple retrolateral tibial apophysis, as described in Simon (1896) for C. vittiger and C. scriptus ( Figs 1A–E View FIGURE 1 ; both here transferred to Donuea , the latter under D. argenticoma ). On the other hand, the C. scriptus vial, labeled Clubionidae — Carteronius E.S. scriptus E.S. 14.625 Diego Suares, contained a rugose male specimen with six and four ventral spine pairs on the anterior tibiae and metatarsi, as well a male palp with a short tibia, a blunt cymbium, and a bifid retrolateral tibial apophysis, as described in Simon (1896) for C. helluo ( Figs 1F–J View FIGURE 1 ). It must be concluded that the type specimen of C. helluo has been accidentally switched with the type specimen of C. scriptus . After proper photographic documentation ( Fig 1A–E View FIGURE 1 ), the specimens were re-switched to their original vials to avoid confusion in the future.
The C. vittiger vial, labeled Clubionidae — Carteronius E.S. vittiger E.S. 10.188 Diego Suares, can still be assumed to contain the correct male type specimen, as it has a spider that corresponds in detail with Simon’s original (1896) description of this species. The C. vittiger type specimen is slightly smaller than the C. scriptus type, having a brown cephalothorax, with a darker eye region and two dark dentate bands, brown chelicerae, and a male palpal tibia that is longer than the patella. The abdomen of the C. vittiger type is completely bleached and can no longer be compared with Simon’s description of its markings. The C. scriptus type has lost its coloration over time, but it can be recognized by the more robust chelicerae and the more robust ventral spines on the anterior tibiae and a male palpal tibia that is only slightly longer than the patella.
Diagnosis. Members of the genus Carteronius share with those of Bunyoronius gen. nov. the trilobulated RTA, with an apical spur inserted in the base of the ventral lobe, a sperm duct with a single ventral fold, and the basally widened, curved embolus surrounding the tegular margins. They can be readily recognized by the absence of modifications on the male palpal femur (with a large apical retrolateral apophysis in Bunyoronius gen. nov.); the ventral fold of sperm duct oriented prolaterally (retro-dorsally in Bunyoronius gen. nov.); a hook-shaped median apophysis inserted retro-apically in a deep, wide circular pit (vestigial in Bunyoronius gen. nov.); and embolus inserted retrolaterally with a narrow tip (basally inserted, with a wide tip in Bunyoronius gen. nov.) ( Figs 4A, B View FIGURE 4 , 8A, B View FIGURE 8 , 10A, B View FIGURE 10 ). Females can be recognized by the epigynal plate divided by a single transversal ridge, delimiting posterior and anterior sectors (two lateral longitudinal ridges, delimiting a median atrium in Bunyoronius gen. nov.); epigynal posterior sector with two lateral plates; and copulatory openings oriented posteriorly (oriented anteriorly in Bunyoronius gen. nov.) ( Figs 5A, B View FIGURE 5 , 8C, D View FIGURE 8 ).
Description. Medium to large-sized spiders, 6.03 – 13.45 mm in length. Carapace heavily sclerotized, surface granulate with scarce long setae; very broad, sub-oval, as long as wide, cephalic region well-demarcated posteriorly, swollen anterolaterally, higher than thoracic region; thoracic region abruptly depressed, posteriorly rounded, thoracic fovea present ( Figs 2 View FIGURE 2 , 3A – E View FIGURE 3 , 13B, D View FIGURE 13 ). Clypeus low, height less than AME diameter, generally nearly half AME diameter ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 ). AER straight in frontal view, ALE oblique, eyes equidistant; PER procurved in dorsal view, only slightly wider than AER, eyes equidistant; AME largest, approximately two times ALE diameter, remaining eyes sub-equal in size. Eyes circular. Chilum present, entire, generally bilobed, with two geminated tubercles; with a large median tubercle only in females of C. lumumba sp. nov. and C. simoni sp. nov.. Chelicerae sclerotized, slightly longer than half the length of the carapace, frontal surface granulate, strongly geniculate in females, slightly geniculated in males, heavily modified in males of C. sudanus (frontally with anterior excavation and blunt median tubercle on prolateral surface, Fig. 2A View FIGURE 2 ) and C. lumumba sp. nov. (ventrally with retromarginal proximal tooth modified into a large keel and a proximal constriction on prolateral margin, Fig. 16A View FIGURE 16 ), basal boss evident, promargin usually with three teeth, retromargin with two teeth. Endites convergent, promargin anteriorly protruded, retromargin slightly excavated; labium sub-squared, nearly as long as wide, slightly longer than half an endite’s length, proximal lateral constrictions shallow. Sternum shield-shaped, slightly longer than wide; surface covered by small setae-bearing tubercles, precoxal and intercoxal sclerites present, margins well defined, especially anterolaterally. Leg formula: I.II.IV.III. Legs long, I–II more robust; femur I with one dorsal spine, tibiae I with five to seven pairs of ventral spines ( Fig. 11C View FIGURE 11 ); metatarsus I with two or four pairs of ventral spines. Femora with short setae inserted on tubercles; scopulae sparse, present in all tarsi and distal third of metatarsi I–II, metatarsi III–IV with sparse cluster of long setae. Tarsal trichobothria with lowered distal plate below a transverse ridge (only C. sudanus and C. ashanti sp. nov. surveyed, Figs 6D View FIGURE 6 , 11F View FIGURE 11 ). Abdomen oval, with distinctive chevron markings variable across species ( Figs 3A, B View FIGURE 3 ; 7A, C View FIGURE 7 , 15A, C View FIGURE 15 , 17A View FIGURE 17 , 18A, F View FIGURE 18 ); dorsal and ventral scuta absent. Spinnerets (only female of C. sudanus surveyed with SEM): ALS with two major ampullate gland spigots near the middle of the spinning field and several piriform glands spigots around; PMS with three cylindrical gland spigots, two minor ampullate glands spigots, and 2–3 aciniform gland spigots; PLS with two cylindrical gland spigots and several aciniform glands spigots ( Fig. 6F–I View FIGURE 6 ).
Male palp: retrolateral femoral apophysis absent, retrolateral tibial apophysis complex, with three lobes, ventral lobe with apical spur ( Figs 4A View FIGURE 4 , 8A View FIGURE 8 ); cymbium densely covered by setae, with a denser dorso-apical cluster of short chemosensory setae, forming a conspicuous patch ( Fig. 12A View FIGURE 12 ); median apophysis hook-shaped; embolus basally widened, curved, surrounding tegular margins, with membranous tip (tip bifid in C. sudanus and C. lumumba sp. nov.), hyaline conductor present, lamelliform; retrolateral apical tegular process present in, C. arboreus sp. nov., C. ashanti sp. nov. and C. gentilis ( Figs 8A View FIGURE 8 , 10A View FIGURE 10 , 19A View FIGURE 19 ).
Epigynum characterized by the presence of a transverse ridge delimiting anterior and posterior sectors; posterior sector with a pair of rounded plates (inconspicuous in C. lumumba sp. nov.); two copulatory openings located posteriorly ( Figs 4C View FIGURE 4 , 14A, C View FIGURE 14 , 16D View FIGURE 16 , 19C View FIGURE 19 ); CD distinct between primary and secondary spermathecae; ventral sector of CD (distal to ST2 insertion) long, generally thick (narrow in C. gentilis ). Secondary spermathecae generally placed anteriorly to the level of the anterior curve of the ventral sector of CD (posteriorly in C. myene sp. nov. and C. teke sp. nov.), commonly tapering (globose in C. arboreus sp. nov.); dorsal sector of CD (between ST1 and ST2, proximal to ST2 insertion) wide, generally S-shaped (nearly straight in C. arboreous sp. nov. and folded ventrally in C. myene sp. nov. and C. teke sp. nov.). ST1 appendiciform, posteriorly positioned, generally smaller than ST2. Fertilization ducts large in relation to ST1 size ( Figs 4D View FIGURE 4 , 5C, D View FIGURE 5 , 8D View FIGURE 8 , 14B, D View FIGURE 14 , 16E View FIGURE 16 ).
Distribution. West and Central Africa.
Misplaced species. The three species presently included in Carteronius other than the type species belong to the genus Donuea (recently transferred to Corinnidae ). They share with described representatives of the genus (the type species D. decorsei ( Simon, 1903) and D. collustrata Bosselaers & Dierick, 2010 the large, highly modified median apophysis and the long, filiform embolus in the male palp ( Fig. 1B–D View FIGURE 1 ), or the flat epigynal plate with a long, narrow atrium with anchoring lateral ridges that may be present in all representatives of that genus.
- Carteronius argenticomus ( Keyserling, 1877) = Donuea argenticoma ( Keyserling, 1877) comb. nov.
- Carteronius vittiger Simon, 1896 = Donuea vittiger ( Simon, 1896) comb. nov.
- Carteronius fuscus Simon, 1896 = Donuea fusca ( Simon, 1896) comb. nov.
Key to Carteronius species
1 Males (those of C. teke sp. nov., C. myene sp. nov. and C. simoni sp. nov. unknown)................................ 2
- Females (those of C. ashanti sp. nov. unknown)............................................................. 7
2(1) Chelicerae with anterior surface or teeth modified ( Figs 2A View FIGURE 2 , 16A View FIGURE 16 ); retrolateral apical tegular process absent ( Figs 4A View FIGURE 4 , 16B View FIGURE 16 ). 3
- Chelicerae unmodified, anterior surface and teeth unmodified; retrolateral apical tegular process present ( Figs 8A View FIGURE 8 , 10A View FIGURE 10 )... 4
3(2) Chelicerae with frontal anterior excavation, teeth unmodified ( Fig. 2A View FIGURE 2 ); proximal half of embolus relatively broad ( Fig. 4A View FIGURE 4 )................................................................................... C. sudanus comb. nov.
- Chelicerae without frontal anterior excavation, retromarginal proximal tooth modified into a large keel ( Fig. 16A View FIGURE 16 ); proximal half of embolus relatively narrow ( Fig. 16B View FIGURE 16 )................................................ C. lumumba sp. nov.
4(2) Apical third of embolus with a retrolaterally-directed process interlocking tegular edge ( Figs 8A View FIGURE 8 , 10A View FIGURE 10 )................. 5
- Apical third of embolus without such a process ( Fig. 19A View FIGURE 19 ).................................... C. gentilis comb. nov.
5(4) Median and dorsal lobes of RTA sharing the same base ( Fig. 8B View FIGURE 8 ); embolar apices wide, sub-apical embolar process large ( Fig. 8A View FIGURE 8 )................................................................................. C. arboreus sp. nov.
- Median and dorsal lobes of RTA completely separated at base ( Fig. 10B View FIGURE 10 ); embolar apices not enlarged; sub-apical embolar process small ( Fig. 10A View FIGURE 10 ).................................................................. C. ashanti sp. nov.
7(1) Transversal ridge of epigynum strongly recurved ( Figs. 4C View FIGURE 4 , 8C View FIGURE 8 )................................................ 8
- Transversal ridge otherwise ( Figs 14A, C View FIGURE 14 , 16D View FIGURE 16 )............................................................. 9
8(7) Lateral plates of posterior sector not sclerotized ( Fig. 4C View FIGURE 4 ).................................... C. sudanus comb. nov.
- Lateral plates of posterior sector sclerotized ( Fig. 8C View FIGURE 8 )......................................... C. arboreus sp. nov.
9(7) Lateral plates of posterior sector inconspicuous; central septum not rebordered laterally ( Figs 16D View FIGURE 16 , 17C View FIGURE 17 )............... 10
- Lateral plates of posterior sector well defined, central septum of posterior sector rebordered laterally ( Figs 14A, C View FIGURE 14 )...... 11
10(9) Copulatory duct convergent in ventral view ( Fig. 16D View FIGURE 16 )........................................ C. lumumba sp. nov.
- Copulatory duct divergent in ventral view ( Fig. 17C View FIGURE 17 )............................................ C. simoni sp. nov.
11(9) Epigynal transversal ridge gently recurved ( Figs 14A View FIGURE 14 , 19 View FIGURE 19 ).................................................... 12
- Epigynal transversal ridge straight ( Fig. 14C View FIGURE 14 ).................................................... C. teke sp. nov.
12(11) Posterior sector relatively small, nearly one quarter as long as the anterior sector; spermathecae visible by transparency in anterior sector ( Fig. 19C View FIGURE 19 ).............................................................. C. gentilis comb. nov.
- Posterior sector relatively large, nearly half as long as the anterior sector; spermathecae barely visible by transparency in anterior sector ( Fig. 14A View FIGURE 14 ).................................................................. C. myene sp. nov.
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 |
Carteronius Simon
| Eb. Bonaldo, Ramírez, Martín J., Om. Labarque, Shimano, Yulie, Silva-Junior, Cláudio J. & Haddad, Charles R. 2022 |
Mandaneta
| Strand, E. 1932: 140 |
Carteronius
| Simon, E. 1897: 85 |
Mandane
| Karsch, F. 1880: 337 |