Draconarius guizhouensis ( Peng, Li & Huang, 2002 ) Peng, Li & Huang, 2002
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.280941 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6179826 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5C0A87C9-FF9E-FFBB-FF73-E64BFD75F9FF |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Draconarius guizhouensis ( Peng, Li & Huang, 2002 ) |
status |
comb. nov. |
Draconarius guizhouensis ( Peng, Li & Huang, 2002) comb. n.
Figs 1–3 View FIGURE 1 View FIGURE 2 View FIGURE 3
Coelotes guizhouensis Huang et al. 2002: 79 , figs 3–4
Draconarius semilunatus Zhu & Chen 2009: 184 , figs 1–2. syn. n.
Material examined. China: Guizhou: 2Ƥ33 ( IZCAS), Anshun County, Qiyanqiao Town, Shanfengqiao Village, Shanfengqiao Cave [26°17.053´N, 106°02.531´E, altitude 1330 m], 5 November 2011, Zuwei Zha & Zhigang Chen leg.; 1Ƥ, holotype ( IZCAS), same locality, 14 January 2001, Daohong Li leg.
Diagnosis. Females of D. guizhouensis can be distinguished from all other Draconarius except D. spirallus ( Xu & Li 2007: 347, fig 7C) by the large, initially elongated longitudinally then spiraled laterally copulatory ducts; but can be distinguished from D. spirallus by the slightly convoluted distal copulatory ducts (while distal copulatory ducts are highly convoluted in D. spirallus ); the separated bases of copulatory ducts (bases of copulatory ducts fused in D. spirallus ). Males of this species can be distinguished from all other Draconarius except D. altissimus , D. anthonyi , D. argenteus , D. aspinatus , D. beloniforis , D. bituberculatus , D. carinatus , D. catillus , D. chaiqiaoensis , D. colubrinus , D. exilis , D. linxiaensis , D. magnarcuatus , D. neixiangensis , D. nudulus , D. papai , D. paraspiralis , D. rufulus , D. spinosus , D. subabsentis , D. tiantangensis , D. zonalis by the absence of a patellar apophysis; but can distinguished from the 22 species by the presence of a small paraconductor ( Figs 1 View FIGURE 1 C, 2A).
Description. Male. Medium sized coelotine. Total body length 6.15. Prosoma 2.90 long, 2.00 wide; opisthosoma 2.85 long, 1.81 wide. Dorsal shield of prosoma yellow, cephalic region narrow. Median furrow distinct, longitudinal. Radial groove clear. Anterior eye row recurved, posterior eye row almost straight from above view. Eye sizes and interdistances: AME 0.05, ALE 0.14, PME 0.16, PLE 0.16; AME–AME 0.04, AME–ALE 0.02, PME– PME 0.08, PME–PLE 0.08. Chelicerae brown, with 3 promarginal and 2 retromarginal teeth. Endites, labium and sternum yellow. Legs light brown, without distinct bands. Leg measurements: I 13.00 (3.30, 1.10, 3.30, 3.20, 2.10); II 11.75 (3.10, 1.00, 2.75, 3.00, 1.90); III 11.05 (2.75, 1.00, 2.40, 3.10, 1.80); IV 14.50 (3.70, 1.00, 3.40, 4.40, 2.00). Leg formula: IV-I-II-III. Opisthosoma yellow, longer than wide, without distinct patterns.
Pedipalpus ( Figs 1–2 View FIGURE 1 View FIGURE 2 ) without patellar apophysis; RTA long, occupying most of tibia, with distal end slightly extended beyond tibia; lateral tibial apophysis small, pointing dorsally; cymbial furrow slightly shorter half of cymbial length, with distinct dorsal edge; conductor moderately long, with small paraconductor between conductor and conductor dorsal apophysis; conductor dorsal apophysis broad; conductor lamella moderately developed; embolus arising posteriorly at approximately 8–o’clock-position, long, linear; median apophysis spoon-shaped, with distal end not sharply pointed.
Female. Total body length 6.20–8.24. Holotype was measured. Prosoma 3.52 long, 2.56 wide; opisthosoma 4.48 long, 2.56 wide. Dorsal shield of prosoma brown. Eye sizes and interdistances: AME 0.07, ALE 0.15, PME 0.14, PLE 0.18; AME–AME 0.06, AME–ALE 0.03, PME–PME 0.15, PME–PLE 0.14. Chelicerae with 3 promarginal and 2 retromarginal teeth. Leg measurements: I 12.47 (3.26, 1.25, 3.00, 2.95, 2.01); II 11.56 (3.10, 1.20, 2.55, 2.83, 1.88); III 10.64 (2.60, 1.14, 2.31, 2.84, 1.75); IV 13.95 (3.40, 1.25, 3.24, 4.13, 1.93). Leg formula: IV-I-II-III. Other characters as in male.
Epigynum ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ) with horn-shaped epigynal teeth, widely separated from atrium; atrium small, situated posteriorly ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 A); spermathecae global, widely separated from each other; copulatory ducts large, with separated bases, initially elongated longitudinally then slightly spiraled laterally ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 B).
Natural history. Draconarius guizhouensis known only inhabit low-light area of the Shanfengqiao Cave and spin webs under stones.
Justification for generic placement. The species is transferred to Draconarius based on the following characters: the presence of two retromarginal teeth (3 retromarginal teeth in Coelotes ); the patellar apophysis absent (broad in Coelotes and most Draconarius ); embolus long and extending posteriorly to at least the distal margin of the tibia (embolus moderately long, prolateral in origin in most Coelotes species); median apophysis elongated (short and round in Coelotes ); copulatory ducts large (short and narrow in Coelotes ) ( Wang 2002). Draconarius guizhouensis might be confused with Eurocoelotes due to the lack of a patellar apophysis but can be distinguished by the anteriorly situated epigynal teeth (posterior in Eurocoelotes ) ( Wang 2002) are consistent with Draconarius , not Eurocoelotes .
Distribution. Known only from the type locality.
IZCAS |
Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences |
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 |
Draconarius guizhouensis ( Peng, Li & Huang, 2002 )
Wang, Xiaoxiao, Wu, San’An & Li, Shuqiang 2012 |
Draconarius semilunatus
Zhu 2009: 184 |
Coelotes guizhouensis Huang et al. 2002 : 79
Huang 2002: 79 |