• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

AMERICAN MUSEUM Novttates PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10024 U.S.A. NUMBER 2711 APRIL 10, 1981 NORMAN I. PLATNICK AND MOHAMMAD U. SHADAB On Central American Cryptocellus (Arachnida, Ricinulei) AMERICAN MUSEUM Novitates PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10024 Number 271 1, pp. 1-13, figs. 1-21 April 10, 1981 On Central American Cryptocellus (Arachnida, Ricinulei) NORMAN I. PLATNICK1 AND MOHAMMAD U. SHADAB2 ABSTRACT The nine species of Cryptocellus known from Cooke and Shadab is transferred to C. centralis. Central America are diagnosed and illustrations The female of C. striatipes Cooke and Shadab is of the male tarsal process and female spermathe- described for the first time. Four new species (C. cae are provided. The male of C. centralis Fage osa, C. goodnighti, C. chiriqui, and C. gamboa) is redescribed and the female allotype of C. fagei are described from Costa Rica and Panama. INTRODUCTION This paper, the fifth in a series on the of a male of Cryptocellus centralis from Cos- arachnid order Ricinulei, reviews the Central ta Rica. Ewing (1929) described a second American fauna of the genus Cryptocellus species, Cryptocellus emarginatus, from a and completes our coverage of that genus. single Costa Rican nymph; he was evidently In the preceding paper in this series (Plat- unaware of Fage's paper and provided no nick, 1980), about half of the 40 nominal characters to differentiate C. emarginatus species previously assigned to Cryptocellus from C. centralis. No additional specimens (including five of the 11 nominal Central are known from the type locality of C. emar- American species) were transferred to the ginatus (Navarro Farms, Cartago, Costa genus Pseudocellus, and they will be re- Rica) and an attempt to recollect the species viewed in future papers. there by Dr. Carlos E. Valerio in 1979 was The first record of a ricinuleid from Cen- unsuccessful (the area is now well developed tral America was Fage's (1921) description and the original forest is gone). Because the 1 Associate Curator, Department of Entomology, American Museum of Natural History; Adjunct Professor, De- partment of Biology, City College, City University of New York. 2 Scientific Assistant, Department of Entomology, American Museum of Natural History. Copyright ©) American Museum of Natural History 1981 ISSN 0003-0082 / Price $1.35 2 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2711 species cannot be recognized from the ho- genus Ricinoides have a lateral lobe in a sim- lotype nymph alone, C. emarginatus is here ilar position on the tarsal process (Legg, regarded as a nomen dubium. 1976, figs. 26, 27), but that lobe has a differ- There have been few subsequent studies ent shape. There is, however, one other of Central American species actually belong- species (Cryptocellus glenoides Cooke and ing to Cryptocellus. Fage (1938) reported on Shadab, from Colombia) which has an an- two additional Costa Rican collections of C. teroventral ledge; that species has previously centralis. One, taken by Silvestri in 1916, in- (Platnick and Paz, 1979) been placed in the cludes only two deutonymphs and therefore magnus species group because of the cannot be definitively identified. The other, straight and massive accessory piece of its taken by Nevermann in 1935 from a mound tarsal process (another apparently synapo- of the ant Eciton hamatum, was said to morphic character). Because C. glenoides is include one female and one juvenile. The lat- placed as the most plesiomorphic branch of ter collection has not been available for the magnus group (Platnick and Paz, 1979, study, but the locality (Hamburg Farm, fig. 1), and only on the basis of this one char- near the Rio Reventazon in Lim6n) is near acter, it is quite possible that the straight and other records of C. centralis listed below. massive accessory piece has evolved in par- Subsequently, an additional female from allel and that C. glenoides is actually a niem- El Salvador was assigned to C. centralis by ber of the centralis group. Additional syn- Roewer (1956); Cooke (1967) indicated that apomorphies are needed to resolve this this assignment is incorrect and the specimen character contradiction and determine the was later (erroneously) transferred to Cryp- placement of C. glenoides. tocellus boneti Bolivar y Pieltain by Beck The species of the centralis group are rath- and Schubart (1968) and (correctly) de- er uniform in somatic morphology, and their scribed as Cryptocellus dissimulans by general appearance has been well illustrated Cooke and Shadab (1973), and is now placed by Cooke and Shadab (1973, figs. 5-10). The in Pseudocellus. Similarly, a Costa Rican few detected somatic differences are so mi- male assigned to C. centralis by Beck and nor, involving such variable characters as Schubart (1968) is shown below to belong in- the degree of tuberculation and depth of the stead to Cryptocellus striatipes Cooke and pygidial notch, that no key is provided be- Shadab. As pointed out by Brignoli (1974, low; we recommend that identifications be p. 164), the "attribution of all the Costa made with reference to the details of the Rican specimens of Cryptocellus to C. cen- male and female genitalia, which are illus- tralis is based on no solid foundation whatso- trated for each known sex of each species. ever ...." Much of this confusion was re- Comments on the interrelationships of the solved by the description of four additional species can be found in the diagnoses below. species of Cryptocellus from Central Amer- We are particularly indebted to Drs. ica by Cooke and Shadab (1973), and the Charles, Clarence, and Marie Goodnight, material reported on here brings to nine the Sally Levings, Stewart B. Peck, and Vincent number of diagnosable Central American D. Roth for donating specimens of these rare forms (at least six of which occur in Costa arachnids. In addition to material in the Rica). American Museum of Natural History All nine of these species have a peculiar (AMNH), we have examined specimens pro- anteroventral ledge on the male tarsal pro- vided by the following curators and institu- cess (figs. 1-9) that projects out at a right tions: Drs. M. Grasshoff, Natur-Museum angle from the main body of the process. It Senckenberg (NMS); J. Gruber, Naturhis- seems likely that this ledge represents a syn- torisches Museum Wien (NMW); M. Hu- apomorphy of a monophyletic species group bert, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle (the centralis group), for it is generally lack- (MNHN); D. Kavanaugh, California Acad- ing in other ricinuleids; males of the African emy of Sciences (CAS); J. Kethley, Field PLATNICK AND SHADAB: CRYPTOCELLUS 3 FIGS. 1-3. Left male tarsal process, dorsal view, accessory piece removed. 1. Cryptocellus centralis Fage. 2. C. hanseni Cooke and Shadab. 3. C. fagei Cooke and Shadab. Museum of Natural History (FMNH); H. W. wardly curved tip of the prolateral ridge (fig. Levi, Museum of Comparative Zoology 1), females by the approximate spermathe- (MCZ); and C. E. Valerio, Universidad de cae (figs. 10, 11). Costa Rica (UCR). FEMALE: Described (as C. fagei) by All measurements presented below are in Cooke and Shadab (1973). Those authors millimeters. correctly noted that although the female al- lotype of C. fagei was collected at the same Cryptocellus centralis Fage time and place as the male holotype of C. Figures 1, 10, 11 striatipes, the two specimens cannot be con- Cryptocellus centralis Fage, 1921, p. 527, figs. A- sidered conspecific. Their assignment of the G (male holotype from La Caja, Heredia, Costa female specimen to C. fagei was not unrea- Rica, in MNHN, examined). sonable, given the material then available, Cryptocellus fagei (misidentification, in part): but both the collection site (in northern Cos- Cooke and Shadab, 1973, p. 21 (female allotype ta Rica) and the great of the only, from Colombiana, Lim6n, Costa Rica, in similarity sper- AMNH, examined). mathecal structure to that of the northern species C. hanseni suggest that the specimen DIAGNOSIS: Cryptocellus centralis seems is more appropriately placed in C. centralis most closely related to C. hanseni; in both than in the southern Costa Rican species C. species the retrolateral ridge of the male tar- fagei. It is worth noting that in addition to sal process is narrowed and the prolateral the Colombiana locality, C. centralis has ridge originates near the groove and over- been collected together with C. striatipes at laps the groove distally (figs. 1, 2). Males of Jimenez, Costa Rica. C. centralis can be distinguished by the out- MALE (LA SELVA): Total length, excluding 4 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2711 FIGS. 4-6. Left male tarsal process, dorsal view, accessory piece removed. 4. Cryptocellus striatipes Cooke and Shadab. 5. C. osa, new species. 6. C. goodnighti, new species. pygidium, 4.57. Carapace 1.69 long, 1.81 posterior three-fourths, their suture line wide near rear of coxae II, where widest, about as long as that of coxae III; coxae IV dark reddish brown with darkened borders meeting along their length. Abdomen 3.10 and small rectangular yellow translucent long, 2.32 wide near front of tergite 12, areas at margins opposite space between where widest, coloration and setation as in coxae I and II; surface coated with long carapace except for orange articular mem- white setae but without conspicuous tuber- branes, with tubercles restricted to paired cles. Cucullus 0.83 long, 0.94 wide, dark red- lateral depressions of median plates near dish brown proximally, lighter distally, with middle of tergite 11 and rear of tergites 12 long white setae densest distally, median dis- and 13 and unpaired lateral depressions near tal triangular patch of few tubercles, and inner margin of lateral plates of all tergites; only slightly protuberant lateral lobes.

Load more

  20

Copy Link