Neoscotolemon cotilla ( Goodnight & Goodnight, 1945 ) Pérez-González & Mamani & Proud, 2025

Pérez-González, Abel, Mamani, Vanesa & Proud, Daniel N., 2025, On the genus Neoscotolemon (Opiliones: Laniatores: Samooidea incertae sedis) with the description of one new species, Zootaxa 5563 (1), pp. 109-165 : 134-137

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.14605650
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/3F08821F-FFF6-FFDA-FF61-B84CFEF58FE6
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Neoscotolemon cotilla ( Goodnight & Goodnight, 1945 )
status	comb. nov.

Treatment

Neoscotolemon cotilla ( Goodnight & Goodnight, 1945) comb. nov., nom. rest., stat. rest.

( Figs 19–20 View FIGURE 19 View FIGURE 20 )

Rula cotilla Goodnight & Goodnight 1945: 63 View in CoL , Figs 5–7 View FIGURE 5 View FIGURE 6 View FIGURE 7 ; Armas & Alayón 1984: 16; Silva Taboada 1988: 86.

Stygnomma spinifera bolivari [part.]: Goodnight & Goodnight 1951: 11, figs 19–21; 1953: 177.

Stygnomma spiniferum bolivari View in CoL [part.]: Kury 2003: 236.

Remark: Goodnight & Goodnight (1951: 11) considered Rula cotilla as a synonym of the subspecies Stygnomma spinifera bolivari . We reject this decision and reinstate their species status and the name under a new combination. See the diagnosis below for characteristics used to support our statement.

Type material. Holotype: ♂ ( AMNH, examined), CUBA, Mayabeque, San José de las Lajas, Loma de Cotilla, Cueva de Cotilla ; 6-Oct-43, coll. C. Bolívar-Pieltain leg. Paratypes: 1 ♂ and 1 juvenile, same data as the holotype (repository unknown) .

Other material examined. None.

Comparative diagnosis. Differs from major males of N. spinifer and N. tancahensis by the absence of enlarged pointed setiferous tubercles in the lateral regions of free tergite III ( Fig. 19A, B View FIGURE 19 vs. Figs 22A View FIGURE 22 ; 23A View FIGURE 23 ; 24A View FIGURE 24 ; 29A View FIGURE 29 ; 30A View FIGURE 30 ; 31A View FIGURE 31 ). Males of N. cotilla can be separated from N. pictipes by the presence of long medial pointed setiferous tubercles on each free tergite and the anal operculum covered by similar pointed tubercles ( Fig. 19A, B View FIGURE 19 vs. Fig. 2A, D, F, G View FIGURE 2 ). Males of N. cotilla are easily distinguished from N. armasi by the absence of a pseudochela in the enlarged tarsus of the pedipalp ( Fig. 19C, D View FIGURE 19 vs. Fig. 8E View FIGURE 8 ). The most morphologically similar species, N. bolivari , can be diagnosed by the absence of frontal pointed setiferous tubercles on the cheliceral hand of males ( Fig. 19E–G View FIGURE 19 vs. Figs 13F–H View FIGURE 13 ; 15E–G View FIGURE 15 ) and by the absence of two medial pointed setiferous tubercles on mesotergal areas III –IV and one medial pointed setiferous tubercle on mesotergal area V ( Fig. 19A, B View FIGURE 19 vs. Figs 12C View FIGURE 12 ; 13A, B View FIGURE 13 ; 14A View FIGURE 14 ). Additionally, N. cotilla exhibits a smaller body size than N. bolivari . Neoscotolemon cotilla has a highly differentiated male genital morphology with a remarkably narrow calyx and a wide and shallow dorsal neckline ( Fig. 20A View FIGURE 20 ), and the carapace has two anterolateral patches of coarse granulation; these features separate N. cotilla from all other Nesocotolemon species.

Redescription. Male (holotype, AMNH). Body measurements: Total body length 3.54, carapace length 1.24, scutum magnum length 2.70, carapace maximum width 1.68, abdominal scutum maximum width 2.37. Appendage measurements (taken from Goodnight & Goodnight 1945): Legs [Tr–Ta (total)]: I: 0.4, 1.3, 0.5, 0.8, 1.4, 0.8 (5.2); II: 0.4, 1.5, 0.6, 1.5, 1.9, 2.1 (8.0); III: 0.4, 1.4, 0.5, 1.0, 1.4, 0.9 (5.6); 0.4, 1.7, 0.8, 1.4, 2.2, 1.2 (7.7). Pedipalp: Tr: 0.4, Fe: 1.8, Pa: 0.9, Ti: 1.1, Ta: 1.1. total: 5.3.

Dorsum: Outline slightly hourglass-shaped with an Eta (η) shape, with a constriction posterior at eye level ( Figs 19A View FIGURE 19 ). Carapace granulated but with two anterolateral patches of coarse granulation ( Fig. 19A, B View FIGURE 19 ). Carapace wider than long, with a rounded and marked frontal hump; anterior border slightly convex, each lateral corner with a row of small tubercles ( Fig. 19A View FIGURE 19 ). Cheliceral sockets not marked ( Fig. 19A View FIGURE 19 ). Eyes separated, slightly posterior to the medial region of the carapace, located at the base of a poorly defined ocularium with a wide base and apically armed with a long, forward-slanted spiniform apophysis ( Fig. 19B View FIGURE 19 ); ocularium extends from the posterior of the carapace to just before the frontal hump ( Fig. 19B View FIGURE 19 ). Abdominal scutum in lateral view convex ( Fig. 19B View FIGURE 19 ). Sulcus I deep and well-marked, in dorsal view, curved to the posterior body region ( Fig. 19A, B View FIGURE 19 ). Mesotergal areas granulated and defined; sulci II–V shallow and complete ( Fig. 19A, B View FIGURE 19 ). Mesotergal areas I–II with small medial conical setiferous granules; mesotergal areas III–IV with a row of small conical setiferous granules, medial granules longer than lateral granules ( Fig. 19A, B View FIGURE 19 ). Mesotergal area V with a posterior row of conical setiferous granules ( Fig. 19A, B View FIGURE 19 ). Lateral borders with two rows of granules. Free tergites granulated; free tergites I–III with a posterior row of setiferous granules and one medial pointed setiferous tubercle; medial tubercle of free tergite II longer than medial tubercles of free tergite I and III ( Figs 19A, B View FIGURE 19 ).

Venter: Anal operculum with setiferous granules and setiferous tubercles ( Fig. 19B View FIGURE 19 ).

Chelicerae: Basichelicerite unarmed, with an elongated and slightly marked bulla ( Fig. 19E, F View FIGURE 19 ). Cheliceral hand with sparse setae and small frontal setiferous granules ( Fig. 19E, F View FIGURE 19 ). Movable finger with a proximal wide tooth followed by a lamina with sub-square teeth; fixed finger with rounded teeth ( Fig. 19G View FIGURE 19 ).

Pedipalps: Trochanter rounded, with two dorsal pointed setiferous tubercles and small dorsal granules, one small mesal tubercle, and two ventral setiferous tubercles ( Fig. 19C View FIGURE 19 ). Femur dorsally convex; ventrally armed with a row of four small ectal setiferous pointed tubercles, the third distal tubercle longest ( Fig. 19D View FIGURE 19 ); ventroproximally with two large spines, fused at the base ( Fig. 19C, D View FIGURE 19 ); ventromesal surface with a proximal longitudinal row of rounded setiferous granules, one medial spine followed by one setiferous pointed tubercle ( Fig. 19C View FIGURE 19 ). Patella short, ventrodistally with one mesal spine and one ectal small setiferous pointed tubercle ( Fig. 19C, D View FIGURE 19 ). Tibia ventromesally with three spines, increasing in size from proximal to distal ( Fig. 19C View FIGURE 19 ); ventroectally with one proximal setiferous tubercle followed by one spine, one setiferous pointed tubercle, and two spines fused at the base, the longest spine featuring a socket with an apical square-shaped projection ( Fig. 19D View FIGURE 19 ); ventral surface with several small granules ( Fig. 19C View FIGURE 19 ). Tarsus remarkably elongated, incrassate, and ventrally flattened ( Fig. 19C, D View FIGURE 19 ); ventromesally with one proximal setiferous pointed tubercle, followed by a row of five spines ( Fig. 19C View FIGURE 19 ); ventroectally with three spines interspersed with three setiferous pointed tubercles ( Fig. 19D View FIGURE 19 ). Claw remarkably short, robust, and triangular ( Fig. 19C, D View FIGURE 19 ).

Legs: Femurs III–IV with one prolateral and one retrolateral longitudinal row of setiferous tubercles ( Fig. 19B View FIGURE 19 ). Metatarsus III swollen at the calcaneus region, in lateral view with a rectangular shape.

Genitalia: General shape of penis tubular tapering distally to a blunt, rectangular tip; boundary not well defined between pars basalis and pars distalis ( Fig. 20A, C View FIGURE 20 ). Pars distalis with a ventral plate ending in a calyx ( Fig. 20B View FIGURE 20 ); dorsally, pars distalis with a wide and shallow dorso-medial neckline ( Fig. 20B View FIGURE 20 ). Pars distalis armed with two groups of macrosetae bilaterally arranged: a basal row of four pairs (B1–B4) extending along the edge, from the dorsal neckline to the ventrolateral region ( Fig. 20B, D View FIGURE 20 ), and an apical row (A1–A3) located on the ventrolateral region of the calyx ( Fig. 20B, D View FIGURE 20 ). Capsula externa with follis invaginated and not visible in resting position ( Fig. 20B View FIGURE 20 ). Capsula interna with two laminar conductors, apically with two lateral projections ( Fig. 21B, D View FIGURE 21 ); conductors flanked by a shorter, pointed, laminar stylus ( Fig. 21B, D View FIGURE 21 ).

Female: unknown

Distribution. Known only from the type locality ( Fig. 39 View FIGURE 39 ).

Natural history. Although this species is known only from a cave, the morphological characteristics do not support the troglobiont condition as proposed for the closely related N. bolivari (see above). Neoscotolemon cotilla exhibits darker body coloration than N. bolivari and other troglobionts. Based on the original species description, the male has a reddish-brown venter and dorsum, some darker spots at the posterior of the dorsum, yellowish spines and tubercles on the dorsum, black eyes, yellowish legs with dark spots, yellowish-orange pedipalps with some darker spots on distal segments, and chelicerae that are concolorous with the dorsum ( Goodnight & Goodnight 1945, p. 64). In contrast, N. bolivari exhibits a lighter, troglomorphic coloration. According to the original species description, the holotype has a yellow-orange body, black eyes, and yellow spines on the free tergites, and the uniform color of the appendages is lighter than the body Goodnight & Goodnight (1945, p. 63). Additionally, N. cotilla has shorter appendages than N. bolivari . For these reasons, we consider N. cotilla a troglophilic species rather than a troglobite.