On the Synaphrid Spider Cepheia Longiseta (Simon 1881) (Araneae, Synaphridae)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
T. yAMERICAN MUSEUM Novitates PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, NY 10024 Number 3575, 18 pp., 63 figures, 2 tables June 28, 2007 On the Synaphrid Spider Cepheia longiseta (Simon 1881) (Araneae, Synaphridae) LARA LOPARDO' AND GUSTAVO HORMIGA^ ABSTRACT We redescribe the monotypic spider genus Cepheia and provide detailed morphological information on its type species, Cepheia longiseta. We provide the first exhaustive diagnosis for the genus, including for the first time detailed information about its external morphology as well as its tracheal system. Some morphological features previously proposed as synapomorphies for the Synaphridae are also present in Cepheia, which corroborates some of the diagnostic characters of the family. We also propose new synapomorphies for Synaphridae. INTRODUCTION genus is being described as well (Miller, 2007), also from Madagascar. Cepheia was created by The recently erected araneoid spider family Simon (1894) within the Theridiidae to include Synaphridae Wunderlich 1986 (Marusik and its very unique type species Theonoe longiseta Lehtinen, 2003; see also Schiitt, 2003) groups Simon 1881. Although Cepheia longiseta has two genera of minute spiders: (1) Synaphris been redescribed a few times and has a charac¬ Simon 1894, with eight species described from teristic male palpal configuration (see below; the Canary Islands, Croatia, Egypt, Spain, Simon, 1926; Brignoh, 1970; Thaler and Turkmenistan, and Ukraine (Platnick, 2006) Noflatscher, 1990), no generic or specific di¬ and two new species currently being described agnoses have been proposed until recently from Madagascar (Miller, 2007); and (2) the (Marusik and Lehtinen, 2003; Miller, 2007). monotypic Cepheia Simon 1894 from the west Also, while the family placement of Cepheia in Mediterranean region (France, Italy, Portugal, the Mysmenidae has been questioned several and Spain) (Platnick, 2006). A third synaphrid times (Brignoli, 1970; Forster and Platnick, ^ Department of Biological Sciences, The George Washington University, 2023 G St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20052 (laralo @gwu. edu). ^ Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History; Department of Biological Sciences, The George Washington University, 2023 G St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20052 ([email protected]). Copyright © American Museum of Natural History 2007 ISSN 0003-0082 2 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 3575 1977; Brignoli, 1980; Wunderlich, 1980; Schiitt, idae (Brignoli, 1980; Wunderlich, 1980). Thaler 2003; Marusik and Lehtinen, 2003; Lopardo et and Noflatscher (1990) provided the second al., 2007; Mhler, 2007), the genus has always redescription of C. longiseta, presenting further been assumed to be closely related to Synaphris detailed drawings of the female and male (Brignoli, 1980; Wunderlich, 1980; Schiitt, 2003; genitalia and providing for the first time a de¬ Marusik and Lehtinen, 2003; Lopardo et al., tailed and more accurate description of the 2007; Miller, 2007). female genitalic ducts. Marusik and Lehtinen In his original description of Theonoe long- (2003) published the first differential diagnosis iseta, Simon (1881) included several somatic for C. longiseta, although their work was based features and a few features related to the male on data published in previous studies, as they palpal configuration, such as the modified did not examine specimens. The only diagnostic palpal tibia, the narrow cymbium, the enor¬ feature that they proposed was the narrow mous and compressed bulb, and the conduc¬ cymbium (Marusik and Lehtinen, 2003: 151). tor. In 1894, Simon created the genus Cepheia, Marusik and Lehtinen (2003: 151) also placed and included a short generic description Cepheia as provisional in their recently erected limited to the eye arrangement and the size Synaphridae, “because no ultrastructural char¬ of the clypeus. Simon (1926) later transferred acters of Cepheia have been studied”. In a recent Cepheia from his Theonoe to Mysmeneae, discussion of Synaphris and synaphrid potential which was later raised to subfamily rank by synapomorphies, Lopardo et al. (2007) docu¬ Petrunkevich (1928). In a dichotomous key to mented the spinneret spigot morphology of Mysmeneae genera, Simon (1926) provided Cepheia longiseta for the first time, and they additional characters that added to the gener¬ briefly discussed its inclusion within Synaph¬ ic/specific descriptions: male palpal bulb as ridae. No other detailed morphological study voluminous as the entire cephalothorax; em¬ has ever been done for the genus. bolus thin and very long, bordering an We herein provide a taxonomic description extremely large transparent piece (i.e., con¬ of Cepheia longiseta, including detailed in¬ ductor), extending farther than the cymbium. formation about its external morphology as Forster (1959) and Gertsch (1960) indepen¬ well as its tracheal system, and a more dently transferred Mysmeninae from the comprehensive diagnosis for the genus. We Theridiidae to the Symphytognathidae s.L, base our redescription on type material and but it was Levi and Levi (1962) who explicitly specimens used in previous redescriptions. We transferred Cepheia (and many other mysme- also discuss some of the morphological features nid genera) again from the Theridiidae to the shared with Synaphris that could further Symphytognathidae s.l. Brignoli (1970) rede¬ support the recently proposed potential syna¬ scribed C. longiseta and added attributes such pomorphies for Synaphridae (Lopardo et al., as legs I and II equally long, very long 2007; Miller, 2007). embolus, fitting the “auriform piece” (i.e., conductor), and bulb with an apophysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Brignoli is the only author who has mentioned the potential presence of a retrolateral basal Methods of study follow Hormiga (2003). paracymbium in the male palp of C. longiseta Specimens were studied in 80% ethanol using (also coded as “present” in Schiitt’s [2003] a Leica MZAPO stereomicroscope. For ob¬ dataset). Based on the uniqueness of its male servation of respiratory structures, the abdo¬ palp, Brignoli could not relate Cepheia to any mens of two specimens were bisected horizon¬ other spider genus (Brignoli, 1970: 1412). tally and digested with SIGMA Pancreatin LP Other authors later shared this concern. For 1750 enzyme complex, in a solution of sodium example, while assigning family rank to the borate prepared following the concentrations Mysmenidae, Forster and Platnick (1977) described by Dingerkus and Uhler (1977) as questioned the membership of Cepheia and modified in Alvarez Padilla and Hormiga (in Synaphris in this family. Subsequently, other press). The bisected abdomen was left in this authors have also expressed doubts about the solution overnight at room temperature. After inclusion of Cepheia and Synaphris in Mysmen¬ the enzymatic digestion the specimens were 2007 LOPARDO AND HORMIGA: ON CEPHEIA LONGISETA 3 transferred to distilled water for observation. lateral view, almost as large as prosoma, All measurements are in millimeters. Carapace fig. 2), compressed (figs. 2, 6, 44, 47); cym- height was measured at the highest point, bium long and narrow (figs. 46-49), with from the carapace lateral edge, not from the tarsal organ distal, flat, opening teardrop¬ sternum. Abdominal measurements are the shaped (fig. 54); small membranous cuticular largest. To account for length variations, protuberances interspersed on distal area of measurements are expressed first as the length conductor (figs. 2, 42, 50); one dorsal tegular of the described specimen, then as the range of pointed apophysis (figs. 39, 45, 49); female some of the observed specimens (in parenthe¬ copulatory ducts initially coiled posteriorly in ses). After dissection, male palps and female one loop (fig. 40), then wrapping around epigyna were cleared in clove oil. Genitalic spermathecae in four loops (figs. 40, 41, 59), drawings were made with a camera lucida and epigynum slightly sclerotized, with a me¬ attached to a Leica DMRM compound dial depression bearing the copulatory open¬ microscope. For SEM study, the specimens ings (fig. 57). were critical-point dried and sputter-coated Natural History: Cepheia longiseta has with gold-palladium. Images were taken with been collected from coastal dry regions and a LEO 1430VP microscope at the Department near the shore, for example, in dry grasses of Biological Sciences (George Washington (Simon, 1926); 100 m of the sea beach, under University) SEM facility. Species descriptions Ammophila (Wunderlich, 1980); and in dry and measurements follow Lopardo et al. hillsides of prevailing porphyry rocks habitats, (2007). Leg formula refers to the relative dry lawns, and seam areas (Thaler and length of legs. Two legs are considered equally Noflatscher, 1990). No information is avail¬ long when their range of variation overlaps, able on its web architecture. even if their averages are slightly different. We Distribution: Cepheia longiseta: West follow Lopardo et al. (2007) for nomenclature Mediterranean Region: southern France (Si¬ of palpal sclerites. Studied specimens were mon, 1881, 1894, 1926; Denis, 1933a; Brignoli, made available by the Museum National 1970), northern Italy (Bertkau, 1890; Thaler d’Histoire Naturelle (MNHN, Paris, France) and Noflatscher, 1990), southern Spain and by the Naturhistorisches Museum (Wunderlich, 1980; Thaler and Noflatscher, (NMW, Vienna, Austria). For abbreviations 1990; Lopardo et al., 2007), southern Austria used through figures and text