Psechrus singaporensis Thorell, 1894
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3379.1.1 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D0272654-FFA4-586B-FF20-2BE8FC7445D6 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Psechrus singaporensis Thorell, 1894 |
status |
|
Psechrus singaporensis Thorell, 1894 View in CoL
Figs 15a–i View FIGURES 15 , 16a–f View FIGURES 16 , 81e View FIGURES 81 , 84h View FIGURES 84 , 87h View FIGURES 87 , 90h View FIGURES 90
Psechrus singaporensis Thorell 1894: 321 View in CoL (Description of ♀). [Holotype ♀ (SB 90) from SINGAPORE (No further details); 1890–1891; Workman Collection No. 1052; 222; (Returned by Thorell 13.XI.1894); NMI 1901•144, examined]. Workman 1896: 78, figs 78a–g (Illustration of ♀). Thorell 1897: 103 (Sub ‘ singoriensis ’, presumably typo and not on purpose). Flower 1901: 45. Simon 1901: 47. Simon 1906: 287 (Synonymy with P. torvus View in CoL [sub ‘ Nota ’], not considered by subsequent authors). Kulczyṅski 1908: 567. Lehtinen 1967: 261. Levi 1982: 125, description and illustration of ♂♂ and ♀♀, ad part, figs 42–43, 48–53 misidentified, figs 42–43 = Psechrus sp. singaporensis View in CoL -group excluding singaporensis View in CoL [♂ from MALAYSIA: Pahang Province, Genting; deposited in MC] (figs 40–41, 44–47: Illustration of ♂ and ♀♀). Murphy 1986: 66. Koh 1989: 77. Deeleman-Reinhold 2001: 38, fig. 16 (illustration of habitus of s.a. ♀). Song et al. 2002: 373. Bayer and Jäger 2010: 61, figs 24–25 (Illustration of ♀).
Psechrus torvus View in CoL — Simon 1906: 287 (Record of ♀ from Singapore [sub ‘ Nota ’], misidentified).
Psechrus curvipalpis Fage 1929: 358 View in CoL , figs 1–4 (Description and illustration of ♂ and ♀). [Syntypes: 2 ♂♂ (SB 506–507), 3 ♀♀ (SB 499–500, 502), 9 s.a. ♀♀ (SB 493–498, 503–505), 4 juvs (SB 489–492), all from MALAYSIA: Selangor Province: Batu caves (N of Kuala Lumpur); C. Dover leg. VII.1926; MNHN AR174/177, all type material examined]. Lehtinen 1967: 261 (Syn. with P. libelti , rejected by subsequent authors). Robinson and Lubin 1979: 149. Levi 1982: 125 (Syn.).
Additional material examined (1 ♂, 9 ♀♀, 1 s.a. ♂, 2 s.a. ♀♀, 4 juvs). MALAYSIA: Penang Province: Penang ; S.S. Flower leg. 1896 ; 1 ♂ ( SB 223 ), NHM . Pahang Province: Kampung Kuala Tembeling , N 4°04', E 102°19'; V. and B. Roth leg. 21.–24. IV.1990 GoogleMaps ; 2 ♀♀ ( SB 977–978 ), CAS 9032232 . Selangor Province: Batu caves (N of Kuala Lumpur); Clark leg.; Coll. C.F. Roewer (1962) ; 1 ♀ ( SB 83 ), 2 s.a . ♀♀ ( SB 84–85 ), 4 juvs ( SB 866–869 ), SMF 13913. Selangor (no further details); Coll. R. Sherriffs; ‘ Tilg. 27-9-1962 ’; 1 ♀ ( SB 864 ), ZMUC 5731 . Kuala Lumpur Province: Kuala Lumpur ; collected before 1967; ‘4576(a)’; 1 s.a. ♂ (SB 1161, with developed bulb structures visible through the cuticle), AMNH . INDONESIA: Sumatra, Sumatera Utara Province: Sibolga; Acquisition: 1987 ; 1 ♀ ( SB 334 ), NHMW . SINGAPORE: No further details; Workman Collection No. 532; 1901 ; 2 ♀♀ ( SB 132–133 ), NMI 1901˙144. No further details about locality; no data about collector and collecting date ; 1 ♀ ( SB 520 ), MNHN AR172. Bukit Timah Nature Reserve , N 1°21'08'', E 103°46'29''; S. Huber leg. 02. IV.2009 GoogleMaps ; Reared from juvenile, dead 21.VII.2009 ; 1 ♀ ( SB 220 ), SMF .
Doubtful material examined. MALAYSIA: Selangor Province: Gombak Forest Reserve , 15 km N of Kuala Lumpur, 245 m; 12.XI.1960 ; H. Exline - W. Peck- Collection (donated to CAS 1985 ); 1 juv. ( SB 979 ), CAS 9032231 . INDONESIA: Sumatra, Sumatera Utara Province: Bohorok (ca. 60 km W of Medan), Gunung Leuser National Park , primary dipterocarp rainforest, riverside; S. Djojosudharmo leg. 15.–17.XI.1983 ; 1 ♀ ( SB 113 ), 2 s.a. ♀♀ ( SB 559 , 561 ), 3 juvs ( SB 560 , 562–563 ), Deeleman Coll. in RMNH .
Revised diagnosis (see also diagnosis for singaporensis -group above). In males embolus (E) in ventral view broader than in P. elachys sp. nov. and its tip not as clearly pointed ( Figs 15b View FIGURES 15 , 16a View FIGURES 16 ) as in P. elachys sp. nov. E erected not as steep as in elachys sp. nov. and thus pointing less distally, but rather prolaterally ( Figs 15b View FIGURES 15 , 16a View FIGURES 16 ). Embolus base (EB) in alignment with retrolateral tegulum (T)-margin ( Figs 15b View FIGURES 15 , 16a View FIGURES 16 ). In retrolateral view E uniformly shaped and continuously converging from basal to distal section ( Figs 15c View FIGURES 15 , 16b View FIGURES 16 ). Females similar to P. elachys sp. nov. in having a rather simple median septum (MS) and medium sized copulatory ducts (CD) with spermathecal heads (SH) located upon distal section of CD ( Figs 15e–f,h–i View FIGURES 15 , 17d–e View FIGURES 17 ). Distinguished by the larger, slightly elongated copulatory openings (CO), leading to a different course of CD ( Fig. 15g View FIGURES 15 cf. Fig. 17f View FIGURES 17 ). CD slightly broader and longer ( Figs 15f,h View FIGURES 15 ) than in P. elachys sp. nov.
Description. Male:
Body and eye measurements. Carapace length 4.4–6.6, carapace width 3.4–4.9, anterior width of carapace 1.7–2.3, opisthosoma length 5.7–9.2, opisthosoma width 2.0–4.0. Eyes: AME 0.26–0.43, ALE 0.31–0.45, PME 0.29–0.46, PLE 0.32–0.42, AME–AME 0.14–0.19, AME–ALE 0.06–0.09, PME–PME 0.16–0.23, PME–PLE 0.25–0.36, AME–PME 0.31–0.44, ALE–PLE 0.33–0.35, clypeus height at AME 0.54–0.72, clypeus height at ALE 0.41–0.55.
Cheliceral furrow with three promarginal and four (five, right) retromarginal teeth.
Measurements of palp and legs. Leg formula: 1423. Palp: 5.4–6.9 [1.9–2.5, 1.0–1.3, 0.8–1.0, 1.7–2.1]; Legs: I 52.5–79.0 [14.6–20.8, 2.1–3.3, 14.4–21.7, 14.7–24.3, 6.7–8.9], II 38.5–60.4 [10.9–16.4, 1.7–3.0, 10.0–15.8, 10.6–18.3, 5.3–6.9], III 25.7–40.3 [7.4–11.7, 1.3–2.1, 6.1–10.2, 7.2–11.5, 3.7–4.8], IV 42.1–63.3 [12.2–17.6, 1.6–2.5, 10.2–16.2, 12.1–19.7, 6.0–7.3].
Spination. Palp: 131 (132), 010, 0010(spine very small); legs: femur I 545 (656), II 556 III 545 (555), IV 544 (554); patella I–IV 000; tibia I–II 3038, III 3236 (3136), IV 3236 (3136); metatarsus I–III 3035, IV 3036 (3035).
Palpal femur modified with rounded ventral bulge ( Fig. 15d View FIGURES 15 ). MC-I and MT-I: present, but not as distinctly developed as in P. himalayanus Simon, 1906 .
Copulatory organ (see also diagnosis and general description for singaporensis -group). Conductor (C) distally broader than proximally ( Fig. 15b View FIGURES 15 ), in lateral view narrow, arising subdistally at medial section of T ( Figs 15a,b View FIGURES 15 ). Palpal tibia in lateral view distally clearly broader than proximally ( Figs 15a,c View FIGURES 15 ).
Female: (Measurements of holotype first, those of other specimens as range in parentheses; in holotype distal limbs of legs I and III missing).
Body and eye measurements. Carapace length 4.3 (4.3–7.0), carapace width 2.9 (2.9–4.9), anterior width of carapace 1.7 (1.7–2.7), opisthosoma length 6.7 (6.7–11.3), opisthosoma width 2.8 (2.6–6.9). Eyes: AME 0.28 (0.27–0.43), ALE 0.38 (0.36–0.49), PME 0.38 (0.36–0.48), PLE 0.38 (0.36–0.47), AME–AME 0.17 (0.14–0.20), AME–ALE 0.10 (0.04–0.10), PME–PME 0.23 (0.15–0.23), PME–PLE 0.26 (0.25–0.38), AME–PME 0.39 (0.36–0.50), ALE–PLE 0.32 (0.26–0.40), clypeus height at AME 0.68 (0.73–0.81), clypeus height at ALE 0.46 (0.48–0.67).
Cheliceral furrow with three promarginal and four retromarginal teeth.
Measurements of palp and legs. Leg formula: 1423. Palp: 5.9 (5.3–7.8) [2.0 (1.8–2.6), 0.8 (0.8–1.1, 1.1 (1.0–1.5), 2.0 (1.8–2.6)]; Legs: I—(34.9–50.1) [10.1 (9.7–13.8), 1.7 (1.7–2.9), 10.3 (9.5–13.7, – (9.2–12.8), – (4.7–6.9)], II 29.5 (27.2–37.4) [7.9 (7.6–10.8), 1.6 (1.6–2.5), 6.8 (6.8–10.0), 8.3 (7.5–9.8), 4.9 (3.6–5.3)], III – (17.4–26.8) [5.7 (5.2–8.0), – (1.1–1.9), – (4.2–6.7), – (4.5–6.8), – (2.4–3.4)], IV 31.7 (27.7–39.9) [8.9 (7.9–11.5), 1.4 (1.4–2.2), 7.6 (7.1–10.2), 8.7 (7.1–10.3), 5.1 (4.5–5.7)].
Palpal claw with 14 (14–15) teeth.
Spination. Palp: 131 (131,141), 110 (110), 1101 (1101), 1014 (1014); legs (—except for patella— variable, only most common states noted): femur I 655 (655,556), II 556 (566,546) III 545 (545,555), IV 554 (554,555,556); patella I–IV 000; tibia I 3038 (3038), II 3036 (3036,3038), III – (3136,3134), IV 3134 (3134,3136); metatarsus I – (3035), II 3035 (3035,3037), III – (3035), IV 3034 (3034).
Copulatory organ (see also diagnosis and general description of singaporensis -group). MS mostly more or less trapeze-like ( Figs 15i View FIGURES 15 , 87h View FIGURES 87 ). Slit sense organs and epigynal muscle sigilla outside epigynal field (EF). CD mostly with ½ winding until reaching receptaculum ( Figs 15h View FIGURES 15 , 90h View FIGURES 90 ), at least two times longer than diameter of receptaculum.
Primordial copulatory organ. Pre-epigyne: Pre-septum ca. 2 times broader than long ( Fig. 16c View FIGURES 16 ), pre-EF separated in two parts. Long and narrow pre-copulatory openings already recognisable ( Fig. 16c View FIGURES 16 ).
Pre-vulva: Pre-copulatory ducts anterio-medially curved ( Fig. 16d View FIGURES 16 ), not larger than pre-receptacula.
Colouration of male and female (see also description for singaporensis -group and Psechrus ). Median bands on carapace not serrated. Width of lateral bands medium-sized (ca. 1.2x diameter of PME) and not (or barely) serrated.
Variation of copulatory organs. Males: E varies slightly in length ( Figs 15b–c View FIGURES 15 , 16a–b View FIGURES 16 ). Orientation of C may slightly differ ( Fig. 16a View FIGURES 16 ). Distal part of T in SB 223 larger (in comparison to basal part) ( Fig. 16a View FIGURES 16 ). In females the shape of MS varies distinctly ( Figs 15e,i View FIGURES 15 , 16e View FIGURES 16 ). In some specimens lateral margins of MS more or less parallel ( Fig. 15e View FIGURES 15 ). Moreover, in some specimens MS posteriorly distinctly broader than anteriorly, in between CO ( Fig. 16e View FIGURES 16 ). Length of EF differs among specimens examined ( Figs 15e,i View FIGURES 15 , 16e View FIGURES 16 , 87h View FIGURES 87 ). CD may have winding for only 1/3 of length until reaching receptaculum ( Fig. 16f View FIGURES 16 ). SH in some specimens somewhat larger ( Fig. 15f View FIGURES 15 ).
Remarks: The species P. libelti , P. annulatus and P. curvipalpis were synonymised with P. singaporensis by Levi (1982). I do not agree with the synonymies of the two former species (see respective species descriptions herein), but with the synonymy of P. curvipalpis . According to copulatory organs the curvipalpis -females from Batu Caves, Malaysia ( Figs 15e,f View FIGURES 15 ) correspond with the females from Singapore, including the holotype of P. singaporensis ( Figs 15h–i View FIGURES 15 ). Differences in MS fall into the range of intraspecific variation (see above). Consequently, Fage (1929) was the first, who (even though unwittingly) described the male of P. singaporensis .
Levi (1982: 124, figs 42–43) illustrated a ♂ from Genting, Pahang Province, Malaysia, which he determined as P. singaporensis . The respective specimen is deposited in the F. & J. Murphy Collection (MC). According to Levi’s very accurate illustrations there are clear differences to the ♂ of P. singaporensis . Such differences can not be explained by intraspecific variation. Unfortunately the respective specimen was not available on request. I assume that it is a representative of the singaporensis -group. As long as there are no females available from the same locality, it is impossible to ascertain if this male belongs to a new species or if it is conspecific with P. norops sp. nov., from which only the female is known.
Deeleman-Reinhold (2001) shows an illustration of the dorsal habitus of a subadult female of Psechrus and identifies it as P. singaporensis (most likely due to the locality it was recorded). However, the colour pattern of carapace and opisthosoma is the same as similar species of the singaporensis -group, so the respective specimen may not necessarily be P. singaporensis . Even species of the annulatus -, mulu - or argentatus -group show a very similar colour pattern (of the carapace and legs). It should also be noted that the colour pattern of the opisthosoma of Psechrus is variable and dependant on its condition (e.g. before or after feeding). In Psechrus an identification to species level (as far as conventional methods are regarded and no other material from the respective locality is available) is only possible by checking the copulatory organs.
Distribution. Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia [Sumatra] ( Fig. 99 View FIGURE 99 ).
SMF |
Forschungsinstitut und Natur-Museum Senckenberg |
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 |
|
Genus |
Psechrus singaporensis Thorell, 1894
Bayer, Steffen 2012 |
Psechrus curvipalpis
Levi, H. W. 1982: 125 |
Robinson, H. & Lubin, Y. D. 1979: 149 |
Lehtinen, P. T. 1967: 261 |
Fage, L. 1929: 358 |
Psechrus torvus
Simon, E. 1906: 287 |
Psechrus singaporensis
Bayer, S. & Jager, P. 2010: 61 |
Song, D. X. & Zhang, J. X. & Li, D. 2002: 373 |
Deeleman-Reinhold, C. L. 2001: 38 |
Koh, J. K. H. 1989: 77 |
Murphy, J. 1986: 66 |
Levi, H. W. 1982: 125 |
Lehtinen, P. T. 1967: 261 |
Simon, E. 1906: 287 |
Flower, S. S. 1901: 45 |
Simon, E. 1901: 47 |
Thorell, T. 1897: 103 |
Thorell, T. 1894: 321 |