Khorata digitata, Yao & Li, 2010
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.2594.1.1 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5459481 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039A4415-FFC2-3A03-FF77-BA48131FF8EB |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Khorata digitata |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Khorata digitata View in CoL sp. nov.
Figs 1–4, 61
Type material: Holotype: male ( IZCAS), Dawan Cave [24°18.097ʹN, 107°06.932ʹE, alt. 438 m], Poyue Village , Bama County, Hechi, Guangxi, China, 11 March 2007, J. Liu and Y.C. Lin leg. GoogleMaps Paratypes: 6 males, 6 females ( IZCAS), same data as holotype GoogleMaps .
Etymology: The specific name is from Latin digitatus (digitiform), in reference to the shape of distal part of procursus; adjective.
Diagnosis: This species can be easily distinguished from all known congeners by the shape of proximocentral apophyses of male chelicerae (Figs 3B–C), the different distal elements of procursus (Figs 1A–B, D; 3A, D; 4A), and the shape of pore plates of epigynum (Figs 2B, 4C).
Description: Male (holotype): Total length 2.88 (3.01 with clypeus), prosoma 1.03 long, 1.22 wide, opisthosoma 1.85 long, 1.28 wide. Leg I: 35.66 (8.33 + 1.18 + 8.46 + 13.65 + 4.04), leg II: 22.31 (6.35 + 0.58 + 5.32 + 7.88 + 2.18), leg III: 16.34 (4.81 + 0.45 + 3.97 + 5.64 + 1.47), leg IV: 20.93 (6.09 + 0.58 + 5.13 + 7.69 + 1.44); tibia I L/d: 58. Habitus as in Fig. 1C. Dorsal shield of prosoma yellowish, with black margins and dark median stripe behind ocular area; sternum black. Legs yellowish, with slightly darker rings on femora (subdistally) and tibiae (proximally and subdistally). Opisthosoma grey with large black spots dorsally and ventrally. Ocular area slightly elevated and separated from prosoma, thoracic furrow shallow but distinct; distance PME-PME 0.14; diameter PME 0.13; distance PME-ALE 0.03; AME absent. Sternum slightly wider than long (0.75/0.70). Chelicerae as in Figs 3B–C, with pair of long, hooked frontal apophyses (tips close together); pair of strong proximal apophyses provided with scales, without modified hairs; pair of small sclerotized elliptic apophyses proximocentrally; pair of small ledges on frontolateral surface distally. Palps as in Figs 1A–B; 3A, D; trochanter with retrolateral apophysis and small ventral projection, femur with retrolateral apophysis, patella large, procursus simple proximally but complex distally, bulb simple, no other projections except for embolus. Retrolateral trichobothrium of tibia I at 11%; legs with short vertical hairs on all metatarsi (mostly dorsally and laterally), without spines and curved hairs; tarsus I with more than 30 pseudosegments, only about 16 distinct ones distally.
Variation: Tibia I in other males (n=6): 6.73–8.08 (mean: 7.42).
Female: Similar to male, habitus as in Figs 2C–D. Tibia I in females (n=5, leg I lost in the other specimen): 6.28–7.18 (mean: 6.85). Genital area brown (Figs 2A, 4B), with internal structures nearly invisible through cuticle, without distinct pockets. Dorsal view of epigynum (Figs 2B, 4C) with two nearly triangular pore plates.
Distribution: The species is known only from the type locality ( Fig. 61 View FIGURE 61 ).
| 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.