Charmus laneus Karsch, 1879

Kovařík, František, Lowe, Graeme, Ranawana, Kithsiri B., Hoferek, David & Š, V. A., 2016, Scorpions of Sri Lanka (Scorpiones Buthidae, Chaerilidae, Scorpionidae) with description of four new species of the genera Charmus Karsch, 1879 and Reddyanus Vachon, 1972, stat n, Euscorpius 220, pp. 1-133: 20-28

publication ID


publication LSID

persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Charmus laneus Karsch, 1879


Charmus laneus Karsch, 1879  

( Figs. 12, 41–43, 47–83, 85–86, 96–98, 118–119, 194, 423–424, 548, Tables 1–2)

Charmus laneus Karsch, 1879: 104–105   ; Kraepelin, 1899: 39; Pocock, 1900: 32; Kraepelin, 1913: 131; Sreenivasa-Reddy, 1966: 253–254; Moritz & Fischer, 1980: 317; Kovařík, 1998: 108; Fet & Lowe, 2000: 123 (in part).

= Heterocharmus cinctipes Pocock, 1892: 47–48   , pl. IIIB, fig. 2, 2a–b (TL: India or Sri Lanka; BMNH). Syn. by Kraepelin, 1899: 39.

= Charmus minor Lourenço, 2002: 19–24   , figs. 1–14 (TL: Sri Lanka, Mannar District, Wilpattu National Park, 0.5 miles NE Cockmuttai; ZMUH). Syn. n.


TYPE MATERIAL EXAMINED. Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), leg. Hoffmeister, 1♀ holotype ( Figs. 43, 80–82, 96–98), ZMHB No. 3051   .

OTHER MATERIAL EXAMINED. Sri Lanka, North Central Province, Puttalam District, Eluwankulam , 08°12'35.1 "N 079°51'32"E, 52 m a.s.l. (Locality 15CN, Fig. 591), 28.IV.2015, 1♂, FKCP, leg. Kovařík et al GoogleMaps   .; North Central Province, Puttalam District, Eluwankulam , 08°17' 15"N 079°50'38.7"E, 38 m a.s.l. (Locality 15CO, Fig. 5 92), 28.IV.2015, 1♂ ( Figs. 41, 48–55, 60, 62, 74–76, 1 18, 194, 42 3, 548) 1♀ ( Figs. 42, 58–59, 61, 63, 77–79, 8 3, 85, 119, 424) 1juv. ( Figs. 56–57, 86), FKCP, 2♂ ( Figs. 64–73) 1♀, UPSL, leg. Kovařík et al GoogleMaps   .

DIAGNOSIS. Total length 14 mm (male) – 21.3 mm (female). Mesosoma, carapace, metasoma and telson of adults black; pedipalp femur almost entirely black with several small yellow spots; pedipalp patella yellowish with several black spots; legs yellow with black spots; chelicerae brown, with black reticulation. Carapace granular without carinae, anterior edge with epistome present medially. Tergites I–VI granular, obviously with one carina. Sternites without carinae. Metasomal segments IV–V or III–V punctate without developed carinae. Fifth metasomal segment length / width ratio 1.288–1.425 in female. Pectines with or without fulcra. Ratio of pedipalp chela length / fixed finger length in female 1.692–1.791. Movable and fixed fingers of pedipalps bearing 8 rows of granules, apical rows of 4–6 granules, and 3 terminal granules; each row of granules (except last) with one internal and two external accessory granules. Pectinal teeth number 16–18 in both sexes. Telson vesicle punctate, rather bulbous in male.

HEMISPERMATOPHORE ( Figs. 48–53). Trunk very narrow, elongate, capsule region short ( Fig. 48). Flagellum cylindriform, relatively short, robust, coiled. Median lobe broad, distally truncate, with straight dorsal carina near internal margin. Basal lobe well developed, a prominent, blunt, bilobate scoop arising dorsally near base of median lobe carina.

C HELICERA ( Figs. 66–67). Manus with dark reticulated patterns on dorsal and ventral surfaces. Dorsal manus with 9 macrosetae near anterior margin. Movable finger with 2 dorsal macrosetae on anterior half. Ventrointernal aspect of manus and fixed finger with dense brush of microsetae, most if not all appearing fluorescent with intense terminal pinpoint fluorescence (i.e. putative chemoreceptive setae). Microsetae also present but sparse on ventral aspect of movable finger. Fingers with typical buthid dentition (Vachon, 1963). Fixed finger with distal and subdistal denticles, and 2 basal denticles fused into bicusp. Dorsal margin of movable finger with 5 denticles: 1 large distal and 1 large medial, 1 smaller subdistal, and 2 small partially fused basal denticles. Ventral margin of movable finger with 3 denticles: 1 large distal and 2 smaller medial denticles. Ventral surface of fixed finger armed medially and basally with 2 small denticles concealed by dense brush of microsetae ( Fig. 67b).

COMMENTS. Lourenço did not study any specimens of C. laneus   in spite of the fact that he cited six characters for distinguishing C. laneus   from C. minor (Lourenço, 2002: 23)   . Several of these 'character differences' lie within the range of intraspecific variation (e.g. fulcra of pectines), and others are not valid. Lourenço stated that the movable finger of C. laneus   bears 7–8 rows of granules, while that of C. minor   bears 9 rows of granules. However, his own figure (Lourenço, 2002: 18, fig. 1) shows that the male " paratype " of C. minor   has only 8 rows of granules. Another problem is that according to the type material section (Lourenço, 2002: 19) there exist only two types of C. minor   – the male holotype and a juvenile (second instar) female paratype. Neither a male paratype, nor an adult female paratype were listed. Thus, it is surprising that Lourenço claimed that the female of C. minor   has a differently flattened sternum than the male (Lourenço, 2002: 23). If this was a reference to the second instar juvenile female paratype, the diagnostic character needs to specified for adult females. Under "Ecological observations" Lourenço (2002: 23) wrote that "The specimens of C. laneus   studied by Vachon (1982) were all collected in the central-south region of Sri Lanka which is characterised by high altitudes reaching to more than 1000 m ...". In fact, the three specimens studied by Vachon (1982: 81) were collected at altitudes of 250 m, 600 m, and 1350 m a.s.l. and according to Vachon’s opinion they all belong to the same species, ' C. laneus   '. Neither Vachon (1982) nor Lourenço (2002) studied the holotype of C. laneus   , and as we show here, these three Charmus   specimens from central Sri Lanka actually belong to a different species. These three specimens are herein designated as types of C. saradieli   sp. n., and C. minor Lourenço, 2002   is synonymized with C. laneus Karsch, 1879   as there are no significant differences between them at the species level.















Charmus laneus Karsch, 1879

Kovařík, František, Lowe, Graeme, Ranawana, Kithsiri B., Hoferek, David & Š, V. A. 2016

Heterocharmus cinctipes

KRAEPELIN 1899: 39

Charmus laneus

KOVARIK 1998: 108
KRAEPELIN 1913: 131
KRAEPELIN 1899: 39
KARSCH 1879: 105