Novitautes PUBLISHED by the AMERICAN MUSEUM of NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST at 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AMERICAN MUSEUM Novitautes PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10024 Number 280 1, pp. 1-1 7, figs. 1-53 December 12, 1984 Studies on Malagasy Spiders, 1. The Family Gallieniellidae (Araneae, Gnaphosoidea) NORMAN I. PLATNICK' ABSTRACT On the basis of the sclerotized anterior spin- ognized. Gallieniella includes the type species G. nerets, obliquely depressed endites, and flattened mygaloides Millot and the new species G. blanci oval posterior median eyes, the spider family Gal- and G. betroka, all from Madagascar, and the new lieniellidae Millot is transferred from the Clu- species G. jocquei from the Comoro Islands. The bionoidea to the Gnaphosoidea. The presence of new genus Legendrena includes four new species a small but distinct apical segment on the anterior (L. angavokely, L. perinet, L. tamatave, and L. spinnerets suggests that gallieniellids are relatively rolandi) from Madagascar. plesiomorphic gnaphosoids. Two genera are rec- INTRODUCTION The taxonomic history ofthe spider family resemblances to mygalomorphs are superfi- Gallieniellidae is relatively brief. The only cial, and that other araneomorph spiders ex- previously known species, Gallieniella my- ist which have similarly elongated chelicerae; galoides, was described by Millot (1947) on he specifically mentioned tetragnathids, ar- the basis of two male specimens from Mad- chaeids, Myrmarachne, Desis, and some an- agascar. As his choice of specific name in- yphaenids as examples, and even more im- dicates, Millot was impressed by the myga- pressively elaborated chelicerae occur in some lomorph-like appearance of the ocular area Malagasy clubionoids as well. Nonetheless, and, especially, the chelicerae, which are Millot was uncertain ofthe proper taxonomic greatly elongated and bear a long, heavy fang position of Gallieniella; although he thought (figs. 1-3). Millot realized, however, that these the genus was clearly a member ofthe "Dion- ' Curator, Department of Entomology, American Museum of Natural History; Adjunct Professor, Department of Biology, City College, City University of New York. Copyright © American Museum of Natural History 1984 ISSN 0003-0082 / Price $1.95 2 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2801 FIGS. 1-4. Gallieniella mygaloides Millot, cephalothorax and abdomen. 1-3. Male. 4. Female. 1, 4. Dorsal view. 2. Ventral view. 3. Lateral view. ychia" (i.e., a two-clawed hunting araneo- amined any specimens of G. mygaloides. morph), Millot was unable to decide whether Nonetheless, placement of the genus some- it deserved a family of its own (the Gallien- where within the Clubionidae was accepted, iellidae) or should be placed as a separate at least implicitly, by workers such as Kae- subfamily (the Gallieniellinae) within the stner (1968) and Kaston (1972), who did not family Clubionidae. include the Gallieniellidae in their lists ofex- Roewer (1954), in his catalog of spiders, tant spider families. preferred the latter placement but gave the Millot's alternative view of familial status group only tribal status (as the Gallienielleae) for the genus was supported, however, by Le- within the clubionid subfamily Corinninae, gendre (1967), who had the good fortune to coordinate with the Tracheleae, Oedigna- recollect G. mygaloides at the type locality theae, and Corinneae. The association ofGal- and obtained the first known females of the lieniella with corinnines was not supported species. Legendre also observed several in- by any discussion of evidence, however, and dividuals in the field, occurring together with it is very unlikely that Roewer actually ex- (and probably preying on) ants (of similar 1 984 PLATNICK: GALLIENIELLIDAE 3 FIGS. 5-8. Gallieniella sp., juvenile. 5. Labium and endites, ventral view. 6. Chelicerae, posterior view; arrow indicates position of cheliceral gland pit. 7. Cheliceral gland pit, medial view. 8. Pores of cheliceral gland, medial view. general appearance) and moving with such a series on gnaphosoid spiders, deals with the extreme agility that they could be distin- available gallieniellid material, which has al- guished from the ants and captured only with lowed a reappraisal ofboth the diversity and great difficulty. More recent authors, such as relationships of the group. Levi (1982) and Brignoli (1983), have fol- At Professor Legendre's request, the stud- lowed Legendre's treatment and accepted the ied material has been distributed among the Gallieniellidae as a valid family closely allied collections of the Museum National d'His- to the Clubionidae. toire Naturelle, Paris (MNHN), the Ameri- Through the generosity of Professor Ro- can Museum of Natural History, New York land Legendre ofthe Universite des Sciences (AMNH), and the British Museum (Natural et Techniques du Languedoc, Montpellier, I History), London (BMNH). Special thanks have recently had the opportunity to study go to Dr. Rudy Jocque of the Musee Royal significant collections of ground- and litter- de l'Afrique Centrale, Tervuren (MRAC), dwelling spiders taken in Madagascar by sev- who collected, recognized as gallieniellids, and eral French workers, notably Drs. R. Le- made available for inclusion in this paper the gendre, J.-M. Betsch, and J. Millot. The pres- first specimens ofthe family taken outside of ent paper, the first in a series devoted to these Madagascar. I am also indebted to Ms. Joan fascinating collections and the twenty-first in Whelan of the American Museum for assis- 4 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2801 FIGS. 9-12. 9, 10. Gallieniella sp., juvenile. 11, 12. G. mygaloides Millot, male, leg IV. 9. Ocular area, dorsal view. 10. Left posterior lateral and posterior median eyes, dorsal view. 11. Trichobothnal base, dorsal view. 12. Tarsal organ, dorsal view. tance with the scanning electron microscope, Corinninae as limited, for example, by Roew- to Dr. Mohammad Shadab of the American er (1954). Given this situation, a compelling Museum for providing illustrations, and to argument against associating the gallieniel- Dr. Charles Dondale of the Biosystematics lids with clubionids can only come from de- Research Institute for a helpful review of the rived characters shared with other groups in- manuscript. All measurements presented be- stead. I suggest that such characters do exist. low are in millimeters; abbreviations for eyes Millot (1947, p. 159), for example, noted are standard for the Araneae. that "C'est avec les Clubionides qu'il mani- festerait le plus d'affinites, bien que les pieces buccales, entre autres, ne soient guere 'clu- RELATIONSHIPS bionesque'." Indeed, these unclubionid-like It is not surprising that no special charac- endites bear a distinct oblique depression (figs. ters of Gallieniella have been cited by any 2, 5). Obliquely depressed endites are char- author as evidence for a relationship to the acteristic of gnaphosoids rather than clu- Clubionidae, for (as has been widely recog- bionoids. So far as I am aware, the only taxa nized in recent years) there seems to be no currently placed in the Clubionidae that have known synapomorphy uniting the taxa clas- such endites are the Australian molycriines sically placed in that family. The same am- and the Mediterranean cybaeodines. The first biguity exists with regard to the subfamily ofthese groups is almost certainly misplaced; 1984 PLATNICK: GALLIENIELLIDAE 5 their greatly thickened anterior spinnerets synapomorphy within the superfamily and suggest that they may in fact be the closest that the gallieniellids are therefore one ofthe relatives of the prodidomine gnaphosoids. more plesiomorphic groups of gnaphosoids. The second group is more problematical; cy- baeodines were originally placed by Simon GALLIENIELLIDAE MILLOT (1893) as a subfamily of Gnaphosidae, co- Hemicloeinae, Drassodi- Gallieniellidae Millot, 1947, p. 159 (type genus ordinate with his Gallieniella Millot). nae, and Cithaeroninae. More recent workers Gallieniellinae: Millot, 1947, p. 159. have assigned the group to the Clubionidae; Gallienielleae: Roewer, 1954, p. 605. Roewer (1954), for example, considered it a tribe ofthe Liocraninae. The type genus, Cy- DIAGNOSIS: The combined presence of baeodes, contains two Mediterranean species, obliquely depressed endites (fig. 5), flattened known only from females, that do have and irregularly oval posterior median eyes slightly depressed endites. However, in the (figs. 9, 10), and sclerotized but proximally African genus Andromma, which Simon (cor- and distally subcontiguous anterior spinner- rectly, I suspect) considered a close relative ets bearing a small apical segment (figs. 2, of Cybaeodes, no such depressions are ap- 13-16) will distinguish gallieniellids from all parent; as will be demonstrated elsewhere, a other spiders. third genus (Baeriella) assigned to the group DESCRIPTION: Medium-sized ecribellate by Simon (1903) is just a misplaced gna- entelegyne araneomorph spiders. Carapace phosid. Ifthe depressed endites ofCybaeodes longer than wide, almost circular in dorsal are plesiomorphic for a group including at view, widest between coxae II and III, slightly least that genus and Andromma, then that narrowed opposite coxae I, truncated ante- group may represent the closest relative of riorly, where overshadowed at middle by all the current Gnaphosoidea; alternatively, ocular tubercle (fig. 9), slightly invaginated at the character may simply be a parallelism middle ofposterior margin; surface finely re- between Cybaeodes and true gnaphosoids. ticulate (fig. 9), with lightened elevated lateral