Hortophora transmarina (Keyserling, 1865) Framenau & Baptista & Oliveira & Castanheira, 2021

Framenau, Volker W., Baptista, Renner L. C., Oliveira, Francisca Samia M. & Castanheira, Pedro de S., 2021, Taxonomic revision of the new spider genus Hortophora, the Australasian Garden Orb-weavers (Araneae, Araneidae), Evolutionary Systematics 5 (2), pp. 275-334 : 275

publication ID	https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/evolsyst.5.72474
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:9AC22770-F300-4265-A21F-841EA364FFD5
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/7B0DAC13-D486-5B40-9F7B-DD75C4E0A94E
treatment provided by	Evolutionary Systematics by Pensoft
scientific name	Hortophora transmarina (Keyserling, 1865)
status	comb. nov.

Treatment

Hortophora transmarina (Keyserling, 1865) View in CoL comb. nov.

Figs 1G View Figure 1 , 2H View Figure 2 , 24 View Figure 24 , 25 View Figure 25 , 26 View Figure 26

Epeira transmarina Keyserling 1865: 814-815, plate 18, figs 15-16; Keyserling 1887: 139-141, plate 11, figs. 4, 4a-b.

Epeira producta Koch 1867: 178-180. Koch 1871: 55-58, plate 4, figs 5, 5a, 6, 7, 7a; Thorell 1881: 90-93; Hogg 1899: 139-140, plate 13, figs 4, 4a,b. Synonymy established by Keyserling (1886, p. 141).

Epeira transmarina Not Epeira transmarina Keyserling sensu Koch 1871: 59-61, plate 5, figs 2, 2a (misidentification, this is Backobourkia heroine (L. Koch, 1871) (see Framenau et al. 2010).

Araneus productus (L. Koch).- Rainbow 1909: 222; Chrysanthus 1960: 30-31, figs 34, 47, 64, 71.

Araneus transmarinus (Keyserling).- Rainbow 1911: 195.

Aranea producta Not Aranea producta (L. Koch) sensu Strand 1913: 608-609 (misidentification, the specimens are H. biapicata comb. nov. based on the descriptions provided by E. Strand and the distribution data, central Australia, where H. transmarina comb. nov. does not occur).

Eriophora producta (L. Koch).- Archer, 1951: 21.

Eriophora transmarina (Keyserling).- Archer 1951: 21; Davies 1980: 126-127, figs 1-8, plate I, A-B; Davies 1988: 304, fig. 24.

Araneus transmarinus (Keyserling).- Main 1964: 100, figs B-F.

Eriophora transmarina Not Eriophora transmarina (Keyserling) sensu Dondale 1966: 1164-1166, figs 2D-G (misidentification, this is H. biapicata comb. nov.)

Type material.

Syntypes of Epeira transmarina Keyserling, 1865: Based on original description an unknown number of females, New South Wales (no exact locality), Dr Graeffe leg., Museum Godeffroy (today largely in ZMH). Here assumed to be: 8 females, 3 juveniles in the ZMH without locality data and a label: "e Mus. God.; det. Keys." and a second label handwritten by E. v. Keyserling " Epeira transmarina Keys. = Epeira producta L.K." (ZMH) (2 females in this series are B. heroine and 1 female is H. biapicata comb. nov.). Examined. 4 mature females, 1 juvenile, Godeffroy collection (labelled with Schmeltz (1866, 1869)-catalog species no. “2286” for Epeira producta (NHM). No other specimens examined by us in NHM, ZMH or ZMB match the type data (see Remarks).

Syntypes of Epeira producta L. Koch 1871: Based on original description unknown number of mature females (" Entwickelte Weibchen "), Brisbane (27°28'S, 153°02'E, Queensland), A. Dietrich leg., Museum Godeffroy (today largely in ZMH). Here assumed to be: 1 female, 3 juveniles, Brisbane (27°28'S, 153°02'E, Queensland) (NHM 1915.3.5.986-989). Examined. 1 juvenile, Brisbane (27°28'S, 153°02'E, Queensland) (ZMH, Rack (1961) -catalogue no. 265). No other specimens examined by us in NHM, ZMH or ZMB match the type data (see Remarks below).

Other material examined.

See Appendix 1.

Diagnosis.

Males of H. transmarina comb. nov. are, due to the ventral colour pattern and similar body-size, most similar to H. biapicata comb. nov. However, they differ from those of H. biapicata comb. nov. by the absence of coxal hooks on leg II (Fig. 7F View Figure 7 ). Females of H. transmarina comb. nov. are most similar to H. biapicata comb. nov.; however, H. transmarina comb. nov. can be identified by the much larger baso-lateral flaps, best observed in posterior view (Fig. 25E View Figure 25 ).

Description.

Male (WAM T67597): Total length: 17.3. Carapace 8.5 long, 7.3 wide; orange-brown, head region lighter and covered with yellow setae (Fig. 24A View Figure 24 ). Eye diameter AME 0.32, ALE 0.20, PME 0.29, PLE 0.18; row of eyes: AME 1.06, PME 0.79, PLE 3.64. Chelicerae orange-brown, two promarginal teeth connected by a sclerotized ridge, and three retromarginal teeth (similar size). Legs orange-brown and covered by strong setae (Fig. 24A, B View Figure 24 ). Tibiae of leg II bearing conspicuous strong and long setae, but no megaspur (Fig. 2G View Figure 2 ). Leg formula I> IV> II> III; length of segments (femur + patella + tibia + metatarsus + tarsus = total length): I - 8.6 + 7.0 + 4.5 + 6.7 + 2.1 = 28.9, II - 7.5 + 6.6 + 3.9 + 0.9 + 1.8 = 20.7, III - 5.8 + 3.7 + 2.3 + 3.1 + 1.3 = 16.2, IV - 7.0 + 3.4 + 5.3 + 5.5 + 1.8 = 23.0. Labium 0.86 long, 1.13 wide, dark brown; endites brown (Fig. 24B View Figure 24 ). Sternum 3.4 long, 2.2 wide, orange-brown and covered by yellowish setae (Fig. 24B View Figure 24 ). Abdomen 8.3 long, 6.5 wide; dorsum yellow-olive, covered by yellowish setae; venter yellowish brown with broad white banding (Fig. 24B View Figure 24 ). Pedipalp length of segments (femur + patella + tibia + cymbium = total length): 1.6 + 0.7 + 0.6 + 3.3 = 6.2; paracymbium elongated with curved tip (Fig. 24D View Figure 24 ); median apophysis elongate and transverse, basally with large arch over radix, a central pointy protrusion and apically divided tips (Fig. 24C View Figure 24 ); conductor lobe of standard shape and size (Fig. 24C View Figure 24 ); terminal apophysis bubble-shaped, tapering into an elongated, sclerotised tip (Fig. 24C View Figure 24 ); conductor subquadrate, sclerotized apically with membranous central portion, slightly carved out at its tip (Fig. 24C, D View Figure 24 ); elongate and terminally sinuous (Fig. 24C View Figure 24 ).

Female (WAM T70164): Total length 18.5. Carapace 9.5 long, 8.4 wide; colouration as in male (Fig. 25A View Figure 25 ). Eye diameter: AME 0.34, ALE 0.23, PME 0.29, PLE 0.22; row of eyes: AME 1.17, PME 0.90, PLE 4.75. Chelicerae, legs, labium and endites as in male but slightly darker (Fig. 25A, B View Figure 25 ). Chelicerae with four promarginal teeth (apical and third largest), and three retromarginal teeth (similar size). Labium 0.99 long, 1.98 wide. Pedipalp length of segments (femur + patella + tibia + cymbium = total length): 2.8 + 1.4 + 1.9 + 3.2 = 9.3. Leg formula I> IV> II> III; length of segments (femur + patella + tibia + metatarsus + tarsus = total length): I - 9.4 + 7.2 + 5.0 + 7.5 + 2.5 = 31.6, II - 8.6 + 7.0 + 4.9 + 0.9 + 2.4 = 23.8, III - 6.0 + 2.9 + 3.8 + 3.2 + 1.8 = 17.7, IV - 8.5 + 4.5 + 6.0 + 6.3 + 2.0 = 27.3. Sternum 4.3 long, 3.3 wide, orange-brown with sparse yellow setae (Fig. 25B View Figure 25 ). Abdomen 12.0 long, 9.5 wide; with distinct humeral humps; dorsum colour similar to male, but with three pairs of white guanine spots posterior to humerals; venter centrally dark brown, with white transverse bands posterior of epigastric furrow and anterior of spinnerets (Fig. 25A, B View Figure 25 ). Epigyne (Fig. 25C-E View Figure 25 ) base ovoid, slightly wider than long; atrium oval, wider than long; scape very elongated; centrally slightly narrower and more sclerotized; in posterior view the central division is very narrow with borders almost touching; baso-lateral flaps large and projected ventrally, also visible in ventral view (Fig. 25C View Figure 25 ).

Variation.

Size variation: total length males 12.2-16.3 (n=10), females 18.1-25.8 (n=7). There was no incidence of a broken scape in the material of H. transmarina comb. nov. examined by us. Abdominal colour patterns varied in similar fashion as in H. biapicata comb. nov. and H. tatianeae sp. nov. with almost uniformly very dark brown specimens to those with distinct folium pattern and a variety of white guanine patterns.

Remarks.

There is ample confusion about the type material of Epeira transmarina Keyserling, 1865 and Epeira producta L. Koch, 1867 which we have tried to resolve here based on an exhaustive examination of material in all institutions where Australian types of these authors are mainly known from, i.e. Hamburg (ZMH), Berlin (ZMB) and London (NHM) in combination with the material listed in the original descriptions.

Epeira transmarina was described based on multiple (in German " mehrere ") (i.e., unknown number of) syntypes collected in New South Wales ( Keyserling 1865, p. 815: " Patria: Neu-Süd-Wales. Mehrere Exemplare in dem Museum Godeffroy in Hamburg, die vom Hrn. Dr. Graeffe gesammelt wurden "). Only females were mentioned in the description, so any specimen lots containing males are unlikely part of the type series.

The NHM has two specimen lots collected in New South Wales potentially being part of the type series, i.e., 1 male and 2 females collected in Sydney with handwritten labels by L. Koch (NHM 1915.3.5.992-994). These are unlikely types of E. transmarina , as identified based on an accompanying label as E. producta , collected in Sydney (and not labelled New South Wales) and as it contains a male. A second lot, also with 1 male and 2 females collected in Sydney and possibly part of the Keyserling collection (NHM 4235-6) is, for the same reasons as above, not considered part of the type series. A third lot of 1 female and 3 immatures in the ZMB (ZMB 22413) cannot be part of the type series. Whilst the locality is "New South Wales", the specimens were collected by Overbeck, not Graeffe based on a label with the spiders. A fourth lot is a vial with 5 females in the ZMH without locality data and a label: "e Mus. God.; det. Keys." and a second label handwritten by E. v. Keyserling " Epeira transmarina Keys. = Epeira producta L.K." is here considered part of the type series (ZMH), but no other vial in that collection. Curiously, that vial also included two females of Backobourkia heroine and one female of H. biapicata comb. nov., which we, however, do not consider part of the type series. A fifth lot in the NHM contains 4 mature females and 1 juvenile and was part of the Godeffroy collection (labelled with Schmeltz (1866, 1869)-catalogue species no. “2286” for E. producta ). The specimens did not have any locality data with it. Although Schmeltz (1866, 1869) did not explicitly name "New South Wales" as the collecting locality, but "New Holland" ( Schmeltz 1866) and Brisbane, Rockhampton an Port Mckay, all in Queensland ( Schmeltz 1869), these spiders cannot be excluded from consideration to be part of the type series based on the criteria above and are here considered syntypes. We here refrain from designating a lectotype from these spiders as Davies (1980) as the first reviser clearly identified the males of this species. Rack (1961) -catalogue no. 282 listed a female syntype from New South Wales and two male paratypes (" Paratypoids ") from Rockhampton (Queensland) in the ZMH. We could not locate a single female from New South Wales in the ZMH (VWF pers. obs.) and the males from Rockhampton cannot be part of the type series, which was described from New South Wales. Davies (1980) also reported these two males from Rockhampton as paratypes in her material examined, likely based on Rack’s (1961) erroneous listing.

Ludwig Koch (1867) described Epeira producta based on an unknown number of mature females (" Entwickelte Weibchen ") collected by Amelie Dieterich in Brisbane (L. Koch, 1867). Koch (1871) when redescribing the species lists specimens from Brisbane, Rockhampton, Sydney (two pinned specimens) and one specimen in ethanol from “Neuholland” (L. Koch, 1871, p. 58: " Exemplare im Museum Godeffroy von Brisbane und Rockhampton, - zwei aufgesteckte Thiere dieser Species von Sydney und eines in Weingeist mit der Bezeichnung „Neuholland“ ohne nähere Angabe im kgl. Museum zu Stuttgart. "). However, only the Brisbane specimens referred to in L. Koch’s (1871) later treatment are part of the type series. Only two specimen lots examined by us were collected in Brisbane and fulfil the criteria of the original description as in the type listing above. Although both include juvenile specimens this does not surprise as sometimes penultimate females were considered mature by the early authors.

Dondale (1966, p. 1164) synonymised Epeira thyridota Thorell, 1870 with H. transmarina comb. nov. based on the " study of original description and of Koch’s (1871, p. 52) redescription of Thorell’s types." This synonymy is rejected here. We were not able to examine the syntype specimens of this species (1 male, 1 juvenile female, "Celeberrimo R., Nova Hollandia", Coli. Dom Pessler" (possibly in NRM)). However, L. ( Koch 1871) redescribed these type specimens, including a detailed illustration of the male pedipalp (L. Koch, 1871, plate 7, fig. 1a). This clearly shows the basal flange of the median apophysis characteristic for Backobourkia . We therefore transfer Epeira thyridota to Backobourkia , B. thyridota (Thorell, 1870), comb. nov. It is likely, that this species is a senior synonym of either B. brounii (Urquhart, 1885) or B. heroine (L. Koch, 1871) but a detailed examination of the male pedipalp conductor of the E. thyridota male syntype is required for a taxonomic decision on this synonymy (see Framenau et al. 2010). Unfortunately, the NRM was not accessible when our current study was completed (T. Kronestedt, pers. comm. to VWF).

Life history and habitat preferences.

Mature males of H. transmarina comb. nov. have largely been found between December and March, with few records in other months, but none in September and October. Mature females were found largely between December and May, with very few records between June to November. Therefore, the species is largely summer mature (or in the northern latitudes wet season). Within its range, H. transmarina comb. nov. is found in open woodlands, from dry sclerophyll to rainforest, wherever it can fix its large orb-webs between shrubs and trees. It is also common in suburban parks and gardens.

Distribution.

Hortophora transmarina comb. nov. has been found along the east coast of Australia from southern New South Wales to the Top End, but also into the northern parts of the Northern Territory and Western Australia (Fig. 26 View Figure 26 ). The species has also been found in Papua New Guinea ( Chrysanthus 1960).

Kingdom	Animalia
Phylum	Arthropoda
Class	Arachnida
Order	Araneae
Family	Araneidae
Genus	Hortophora

Hortophora transmarina (Keyserling, 1865)

Framenau, Volker W., Baptista, Renner L. C., Oliveira, Francisca Samia M. & Castanheira, Pedro de S. 2021

2021