Neoscotolemon Roewer, 1912
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5563.1.11 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6503A62D-DA9D-447F-A89F-50436E2D522A |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14605642 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/3F08821F-FFEC-FFC2-FF61-BACDFF4F88AA |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Neoscotolemon Roewer, 1912 |
status |
|
Neoscotolemon Roewer, 1912 View in CoL
Neoscotolemon Roewer 1912a: 149 View in CoL ; 1923: 112; 1927: 272; Goodnight & Goodnight 1942b: 13; Rambla 1980: 2; Kury 2003: 26. [Type species: Scotolemon pictipes Banks, 1908 View in CoL , by subsequent designation in Goodnight & Goodnight 1942b: 13]
Citranus Goodnight & Goodnight 1942b: 4 View in CoL . [Type species: Citranus marquesas Goodnight & Goodnight, 1942 View in CoL , by original designation. Junior subjective synonym of Stygnomma Roewer, 1912 View in CoL , by Goodnight & Goodnight 1951: 3] Syn. nov.
Rula Goodnight & Goodnight 1942b: 13 View in CoL . [Type species: Phalangodes spinifera Packard, 1888 , by original designation. Junior subjective synonym of Stygnomma Roewer, 1912 View in CoL , by Goodnight & Goodnight 1951: 3] Syn. nov.
Vlachiolus Šilhavý 1979: 6 View in CoL ; Kury 2003: 224. [Type-species: Vlachiolus vojtechi Šilhavý, 1979 View in CoL , by original designation] Syn. nov.
Synonymy justification. We proposed to remove the genera Citranus View in CoL and Rula View in CoL from synonymy with Stygnomma View in CoL ; Citranus View in CoL and Rula View in CoL are herein treated as junior synonyms of the genus Neoscotolemon View in CoL . The type species of Citranus View in CoL , C. marquesas Goodnight & Goodnight, 1942 View in CoL , is a junior subjective synonym of Phalangodes spinifera Packard, 1888 , the type species of the genus Rula View in CoL . The somatic and genital morphology of Phalangodes spinifera Packard, 1888 , agree with the diagnosis of Neoscotolemon View in CoL (see below). Therefore, according the principle of priority of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature ( ICZN 1999), we consider Neoscotolemon Roewer, 1912 View in CoL as the senior name and Citranus Goodnight & Goodnight, 1942 View in CoL and Rula Goodnight & Goodnight, 1942 View in CoL as junior subjective synonyms.
The genus Vlachiolus is monotypic and the type species, V. vojtechi , is based only on the female holotype. Therefore, the genus diagnosis lacks the male genital morphology. Nevertheless, the somatic characteristics of V. vojtechi fully agree with that of Neoscotolemon females, including the pedipalp spination, basichelicerite without a well-marked bulla, hourglass-shaped scutum magnum with wide separated eyes on the carapace, ocularium barely defined with the inter-ocular area elevated and armed with a median strong spiniform apophysis. All those characteristics support our decision to consider Vlachiolus Šilhavý, 1979 , a junior subjective synonym of Neoscotolemon Roewer, 1912 .
Placement. Neoscotolemon was originally described in Phalangodinae and removed to Grassatores incertae sedis by Kury (2003). We herein transfer it to Samooidea incertae sedis, transl. nov. The transference is based on the combination of the following characteristics: hourglass body, basichelicerite elongated and without a well-marked bulla, males with samooidean-type metatarsus III where the calcaneus largely invades the astragalus ventrally, capsula interna of the penis largely invaginating the truncus and with telescopic hydraulic expansion (i.e., not articulated with the truncus as a jack-knife as in Zalmoxoidea).
Diagnosis. Members of Neoscotolemon Roewer, 1912 , can be distinguished from all other Samooidea genera by the combination of the following morphological characteristics: hourglass-shaped scutum magnum ( Figs 1A View FIGURE 1 ; 2A View FIGURE 2 ) unlike the campaniform (bell-shaped) scutum magnum as in Metalacurbs (e.g., Roewer 1915, fig. 9); eyes widely separated on the carapace, ocularium barely defined, inter-ocular area elevated and armed with a median strong spiniform apophysis ( Figs 1C View FIGURE 1 ; 2D View FIGURE 2 ) as opposed to a well-defined and rounded ocularium as in Maracaynatum (e.g., Colmenares & Tourinho 2016, fig. 1b) or absence of ocularium as in Biantes (e.g., Gong et al. 2018, figs 6–10). Sexual dimorphism is strongly evident with males exhibiting very long and strong pedipalps, with a tarsus remarkably enlarged ( Fig. 3A, B View FIGURE 3 ), in contrast to a thin pedipalp and generally unarmed femur as in biantids (e.g., Kauri 1985, fig. 226) and with a strong but short pedipalp with short tarsus as in Akdalima (e.g., Šilhavý 1979, fig. 29) and a characteristic metatarsus III with a flattened calcaneus ventrally invading a large portion of the astragalus ( Fig. 4B, C View FIGURE 4 ). The modified calcaneus III is covered by uniformly-distributed furcate trichomes with a rounded or paintbrush-shaped tip; distally, there is a group of aggregated pores, surrounded by a dense bundle of fine acuminate trichomes ( Fig. 4D, E View FIGURE 4 ), in contrast to the long lanceolate paintbrush trichomes longitudinally arranged in rows and irregularly arranged pores in the surface as in Manahunca ( Alegre et al. 2019, fig. 4c). Pars distalis of penis with a dorsomedial neckline of variable depth and with a ventral plate ending in a deep calyx and armed with two rows (apical and basal) of macrosetae arranged bilaterally ( Fig. 5F, G View FIGURE 5 ), in contrast to the macrosetae irregularly disposed as in Stygnomma (e.g., González-Sponga 2005, fig. 16) and Kalominua (e.g., González-Sponga 1987, figs 68; 69); capsula externa with follis invaginated, not visible in the resting condition of the penis ( Fig. 5B, F View FIGURE 5 ), unlike the visible follis in resting position as in Maracaynatum (e.g., Colmenares & Tourinho 2016, fig. 2a) or titillators as in Biantes (e.g., Martens 1978, Abb 8; 9) or a rigid stragulum as in Manahunca (e.g., Alegre et al. 2019, figs 12; 13); capsula interna with a pointed stylus flanked by two laminar conductors fused only at the base ( Fig. 27B View FIGURE 27 ), in contrast to the completely fused conductors as in Akdalima (e.g., Šilhavý 1979, fig. 31).
Etymology. Combination of the Greek νέος, Lat. neos, nea [= new] and the pre-existing genus name Scotolemon . Grammatical gender: masculine.
Species included: Neoscotolemon armasi spec. nov., N. bolivari ( Goodnight & Goodnight, 1945) comb. nov., stat. rest., N. cotilla ( Goodnight & Goodnight, 1945) comb. nov., nom. rest., stat. rest., N. pictipes ( Banks, 1908) , N. spinifer ( Packard, 1888) comb. rest., N. tancahensis ( Goodnight & Goodnight, 1951) comb. nov., stat. prom., N. vojtechi ( Šilhavý, 1979) comb. nov.
Geographical distribution: United States of America (Southern Florida), Cuba, Cayman Islands, Mexico (Yucatán Peninsula), and Belize.
Unconfirmed record: Jamaica.
Spurious records. United States of America: Ohio. Walker (1928: 157) recorded Neoscotolemon as one of the genera represented in the fauna of Ohio, but this is a misidentification (see Neoscotolemon spinifer spurious records below).
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 |
|
SubOrder |
Laniatores |
SuperFamily |
Samooidea |
Neoscotolemon Roewer, 1912
Pérez-González, Abel, Mamani, Vanesa & Proud, Daniel N. 2025 |
Vlachiolus Šilhavý 1979: 6
Kury, A. B. 2003: 224 |
Silhavy, V. 1979: 6 |
Citranus
Goodnight, C. J. & Goodnight, M. L. 1951: 3 |
Goodnight, C. J. & Goodnight, M. L. 1942: 4 |
Rula
Goodnight, C. J. & Goodnight, M. L. 1951: 3 |
Goodnight, C. J. & Goodnight, M. L. 1942: 13 |
Neoscotolemon
Kury, A. B. 2003: 26 |
Rambla, M. 1980: 2 |
Goodnight, C. J. & Goodnight, M. L. 1942: 13 |
Goodnight, C. J. & Goodnight, M. L. 1942: 13 |
Roewer, C. F. 1927: 272 |
Roewer, C. F. 1923: 112 |
Roewer, C. F. 1912: 149 |