Paradonea variegata (Miller, Jeremy A., Griswold, Charles E., Scharff, Nikolaj, Xezac, Milan, Sz q ts, Tamas & Marhabaie, Mohammad 2012)
|Notice:||This page is derived from the original publication listed below, whose author(s) should always be credited. Further contributors may edit and improve the content of this page and, consequently, need to be credited as well (see
). Any assessment of factual correctness requires a careful review of the original article as well as of subsequent contributions.
If you are uncertain whether your planned contribution is correct or not, we suggest that you use the associated discussion page instead of editing the page directly.
This page should be cited as follows (rationale):
Citation formats to copy and paste
TY - JOUR
See also the citation download page at the journal.
- Paradonea variegata Miller, Jeremy A., 2012, ZooKeys 195: 70-72.
Diagnosis. Male distinguished from other eresids except Paradonea presleyi sp. n. by the conductor, which bears a helical ridge fringed with distinct papillae (Figs 14B, C, 69G, H); distinguished from Paradonea presleyi sp. n. by the mesally excavated chelicerae (Fig. 69C; contiguous in Paradonea presleyi sp. n., Fig. 70I), the dorsal abdominal pattern (Fig. 69A), the median eye group, which has only slight overlap on the vertical axis (Figs 10E, 69C; significant overlap in Paradonea presleyi sp. n., Fig. 70I), and the relatively more narrow and long shape of the conductor (Fig. 14B, C; compare with Fig. 14J, L). Female distinguished from other eresids except members of the Eresus sandaliatus group by the large, bulbous spermathecal head (Fig. 18E); distinguished from the Eresus sandaliatus group by the larger size difference between the AME and PME (AME/PME ca. 0.5 in Paradonea variegata, Fig. 69F;>0.6 in Eresus sandaliatus group, Fig. 9C) and by the overall lighter color (Fig. 69D; compare with Fig. 43E). Note that interpretation of the female reproductive duct characters for Paradonea variegata is based on light microscopy, not SEM, and must therefore be regarded as tentative.
Description. Male (Breekkierie Dunes, South Africa, C1062, SAM): Carapace with some white setae, especially around margin of thoracic region, cephalic region subtriangular, longer than wide, moderately raised; AME distinctly smaller than PME (AME/PME 0.52), median eyes adjacent on horizontal axis, some overlap on vertical axis; ALE tubercles absent; PER much narrower than AER (PER/AER 0.86), PLE position on carapace 0.31, clypeal hood forms a slightly less than 90° angle; fovea shallow. Chelicerae with lateral boss, excavated mesally. Legs with some white setae; with row of distal ventral macrosetae on metatarsus I-IV and scattered ventral macrosetae on metatarsus and tarsus I-IV. Dorsal surface of abdomen thickly covered in white setae except for central irregular oblong dark patch (Figs 10E, F, 69A-C). Male palp with proximal-distal axis; tegulum bulbous; conductor and embolus together form apical complex running more or less distally; conductor moderately sclerotized with helical ridge fringed with distinct papillae, hooked distally; tegular division longer than embolic division; cymbium with several prolateral macrosetae (Figs 14B, C, 69G, H). Female (Steinkopf, South Africa, ZMB 26964, ZMHB): Carapace with patches of white setae; cephalic region subtrapezoidal, longer than wide, moderately raised; AME distinctly smaller than PME (AME/PME 0.48), median eyes with some overlap on horizontal axis, some overlap on vertical axis; ALE on small tubercles; PER slightly narrower than AER (PER/AER 0.93), PLE position on carapace 0.31; clypeal hood forms acute angle; fovea moderately deep. Chelicerae contiguous mesally, with lateral boss. Legs without conspicuous white setae; legs with row of distal ventral macrosetae on metatarsus I-IV and numerous ventral macrosetae on metatarsus and tarsus II-IV. Abdomen with numerous white setae (Figs 10G, H, 69D-F). Epigynum with slightly converging slit-like atria copulatory converging slits occupying ca. the posterior half, median lobe subtrapezoidal, nearly as long as wide, deeply recessed within epigynum (Fig. 18B). Vulva with bulbous lobes slightly converging anteriorly (presumably bearing the spermathecal heads) and multilobed spermathecae posteriorly (Fig. 18E).