Pimoa miandam Zhang & Li, 2021
|
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1029.64080 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:E4AB7004-4633-4051-97DF-E02F1F68CCC4 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/7EE84081-4BB5-4358-A1E8-E05C4BE9E310 |
|
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:7EE84081-4BB5-4358-A1E8-E05C4BE9E310 |
|
treatment provided by |
|
|
scientific name |
Pimoa miandam Zhang & Li |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Pimoa miandam Zhang & Li sp. nov. Figures 26 View Figure 26 , 27 View Figure 27 , 56 View Figure 56 , 59 View Figure 59
Type material.
Holotype: ♂ (IZCAS-Ar41969), Pakistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Swat, Miandam, near river, 35.03°N, 72.57°E, ca. 2242 m, 31.V.2019, A. Ali leg. Paratypes: 1♂2♀ (IZCAS-Ar41970-Ar41972), same data as holotype.
Etymology.
The specific name is a noun in apposition taken from the type locality.
Diagnosis.
The male of Pimoa miandam sp. nov. resembles those of P. duiba Zhang & Li, 2020 (see Zhang et al. 2020: 84, fig. 3A-C) and P. rongxar (see Zhang et al. 2020: 94, fig. 10A-C) but can be distinguished from P. duiba by the pimoid embolic process with a slender and nearly medial spine (Fig. 56A View Figure 56 ) (vs. without a spine) and by the embolus beginning at the 8:00 o’clock position (Fig. 56A View Figure 56 ) (vs. 7:00), and distinguished from P. rongxar by the V-shaped, distally curved pimoid cymbial sclerite, ca. 1/3 of cymbial length (Fig. 56A View Figure 56 ) (vs. large, long, and subdistally wide pimoid cymbial sclerite). The female of P. miandam sp. nov. also resembles those of P. duiba (see Zhang et al. 2020: 84, fig. 4A-D) and P. rongxar (see Zhang et al. 2020: 94, fig. 11A-D) but can be distinguished from P. duiba by the unseparated spermathecae (Fig. 27A View Figure 27 ) (vs. a short distance between the spermathecae) and from P. rongxar by the tongue shaped ventral plate (Fig. 27A View Figure 27 ) (vs. triangular).
Description.
Male (holotype): Total length 8.24. Carapace 4.41 long, 3.25 wide. Abdomen 3.83 long, 2.69 wide. Eye sizes and interdistances: AME 0.17, ALE 0.21, PME 0.20, PLE 0.19; AME-AME 0.04, AME-ALE 0.17, PME-PME 0.15, PME-PLE 0.24. Leg measurements: I: 47.14 (12.69, 15.38, 15.13, 3.94); II: 37.78 (11.53, 11.31, 11.50, 3.44); III: 31.98 (9.55, 10.09, 10.03, 2.31); IV: - (11.63, 12.38, 11.13, -). Habitus as in Fig. 27E View Figure 27 . Carapace yellowish, with black lateral margins; thoracic fovea and radial grooves distinct; sternum brownish. Abdomen black with yellow transverse bands, nearly oval. Legs brownish without annulations. Palp (Figs 26A, B View Figure 26 , 56A View Figure 56 ): patella short, ca. 1/2 of tibial length; tibia long, ca. 1/2 of cymbial length; paracymbium short, ca. 1/3 of cymbial length, hook shaped; pimoid cymbial sclerite V-shaped, distally curved, ca. 1/3 of cymbial length; cymbial denticulate process short and distally blunt, with more than 9 cuspules; median apophysis slender; conductor distinct; pimoid embolic process distally pointed, longer than embolus, with a short slender, nearly medial spine; embolus beginning at the 8:00 o’clock position, with a short, slender spine proximally; embolic tooth absent.
Female (paratype): Total length 11.59. Carapace 4.81 long, 3.78 wide. Abdomen 6.78 long, 6.07 wide. Eye sizes and interdistances: AME 0.15, ALE 0.18, PME 0.16, PLE 0.18; AME-AME 0.13, AME-ALE 0.17, PME-PME 0.16, PME-PLE 0.29. Leg measurements: I: 42.97 (11.81, 14.09, 12.94, 4.13); II: 38.20 (10.63, 12.54, 11.44, 3.59); III: 28.51 (8.63, 9.19, 8.44, 2.25); IV: 34.12 (10.68, 11.19, 9.81, 2.44). Habitus as in Fig. 27F, G View Figure 27 . Carapace yellowish with black lateral margins; sternum brownish. Abdomen black with yellowish transverse bands. Legs brownish without annulations. Epigyne (Fig. 27A-D View Figure 27 ): tongue-shaped; ventral and dorsal plate broad, longer than wide; copulatory openings distinct; spermathecae nearly round, unseparated; fertilization ducts yellowish, laterally oriented.
Distribution.
Known only from the type locality, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan (Fig. 59 View Figure 59 ).
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.