Litoporus aerius Simon 1893
Creators: name: Huber, Bernhard A.
name: Villarreal, Osvaldo
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2020
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Arachnida
Araneae
Pholcidae
Litoporus
Litoporus aerius

description: Litoporus aerius Simon, 1893
Figs 200–202, 208–209, 1041
Litoporus aerius Simon, 1893a: 321.
Litoporus aerius – Simon 1893b: 479–483, fig. 479. — Huber 1997d: 582, figs 8a–b, 9a–e (not figs 8c–d; see Notes below). — González-Sponga 2010: 15, pl. 3, figs 1–8.
Diagnosis
Males are easily distinguished from most known congeners (except L. curimagua Huber sp. nov.) by armature of chelicerae (Fig. 208; two pairs of frontal apophyses, proximal pair short but wide). Females (newly described below) with distinctive internal genital structures (Figs 201–202, 209; anterior receptacle, heavily sclerotized ventral structure, and pair of processes originating from pore plates); note, however, that females of several putatively closely related species are unknown (L. dimona Huber, 2000; L. saul Huber, 2000; L. secoya Huber, 2000). Distinguished from very similar L. curimagua Huber sp. nov. by proximal cheliceral apophyses inclined rather than horizontal (compare Figs 208 and 210), by anterior margins of pore plates strongly bent towards posterior (arrows in Figs 201 and 206), and by pair of processes originating from pore plates (compare Figs 209 and 211).
Type material
VENEZUELA – Carabobo • ♂ lectotype (designated in Huber 1997d), 11 ♂♂ paralectotypes, and one misidentified female paralectotype (see Notes below), MNHN, San Esteban [approximately 10.425° N, 68.015° W], Mar. 1888 (E. Simon); examined.
Notes
The new material below confirms the old suspicion (in Huber 1997d) that the single female accompanying the male types of this species is not conspecific with the males. It is very likely a Mecolaesthus Simon, 1893.
González-Sponga (2010) redescribed the species and cited material from seven localities. This material seems to be present in the MAGS collection, but there are two major problems regarding the material and the publication. First, the collection cards (that contain all the collection data) of all seven vials are lost. Within the vials there are only labels with the MAGS numbers (334, 502, 1037, 1040, 1043, 1051, 1092). Second, the publication mentions only vial MAGS 502 with 9 ♂♂, 5 ♀♀, but this vial contains only 2 ♂♂, and all seven vials together contain 24 ♂♂, and 3 juveniles and not a single female. González-Sponga’s (2010) figure 8 (abdomen) is thus probably from a juvenile, and it is probably for this reason that his figure 9 (epigynum) exists in the legend but not in the plate.
The numerical agreement between seven localities mentioned in González-Sponga (2010) and seven vials with L. aerius in the MAGS collection suggests that all his records are probably valid. They
are thus all shown in the map in Fig. 1041. Apart from the type locality San Esteban this includes the following:
Miranda, Birongo [10.482° N, 66.240° W]
Miranda, El Guapo-Las Mayas [10.149° N, 65.972° W]
Miranda, Guatopo National Park [approximately 10.06° N, 66.46° W]
Miranda, Pueblo Seco-Chuspa [approximately 10.59° N, 66.26° W]
Miranda, Salmerón [approximately 10.468° N, 66.376° W]
Anzoátegui, Sabana de Uchire [approximately 10.02° N, 65.52° W]
New records
VENEZUELA – Miranda • 3 ♂♂, 3 ♀♀, ZFMK (Ar 21864), and 3 ♂♂, 1 ♀ in pure ethanol, ZFMK (Ven18-144), El Ávila National Park, Sabas Nieves (10.5165° N, 66.8558° W), 1080 m a.s.l., 7 Nov. 2018 (B.A. Huber, O. Villarreal M.) • 1 ♂, ZFMK (Ar 21865), and 3 ♀♀ in pure ethanol, ZFMK (Ven20- 180), El Ávila National Park, near La Julia, ‘site 3’ (10.5066° N, 66.8119° W), 1090 m a.s.l., forest near dry brook bed, 22 Feb. 2020 (B.A. Huber, O. Villarreal M.).
Redescription of male (amendments, see Huber 1997d)
Measurements (male from El Ávila): distance PME–PME 160 µm; diameter PME 50 µm; distance PMEALE 40 µm; distanceAME–AME 40 µm; diameter AME 30 µm. Leg 1: 38.1 (10.7+0.4 +8.9+16.4 + 1.7), tibia 2: 6.3, tibia 3: 4.5, tibia 4: 5.9; tibia 1 L/d: 99. Carapace monochromous whitish to pale ochre; legs light brown, femora and tibiae with whitish tips, metatarsi entire distal half whitish. Thoracic furrow shallow but distinct. Retrolateral trichobothrium on tibia 1 at 1.5%; prolateral trichobothrium present on tibia 1. Tibia 1 in 11 males (Sabas Nieves and types measured in Huber 1997d): 8.5–9.9 (mean 9.2); tibia 1 in male from near La Julia: 6.7.
Description of female
In general similar to male (and very similar to L. curimagua Huber sp. nov.; cf. Fig. 204), but carapace with dark Y-mark, and legs pale ochre yellow with darker patellae and tibia-metatarsus joints, without whitish tips. Tibia 1 in three females from Sabas Nieves: 4.2, 4.3, 4.4; two females from near La Julia: 3.5, 3.5. Epigynum (Fig. 200) weakly sclerotized, posteriorly rectangular plate, internal structures partly visible in uncleared specimens. Internal genitalia (Figs 201–202, 209) with anterior median receptacle, heavily sclerotized ventral structure, and pair of processes originating from pore plates.
Distribution
Known from several localities in the Venezuelan states Carabobo, Miranda, and Anzoátegui (Fig. 1041).
Natural history
The newly collected specimens were found in domed webs among low vegetation (10–40 cm above the ground). The specimens from Sabas Nieves were found in a humid part of the forest close to a small stream; near La Julia the species was found close to a dry brook bed. The long-legged males were constantly slightly swinging in the webs while the females were not seen to move but were hiding on the undersides of leaves. It is probably for this reason that the collections of E. Simon and M.A. GonzálezSponga include numerous males but no females.
description: Published as part of Huber, Bernhard A. & Villarreal, Osvaldo, 2020, On Venezuelan pholcid spiders (Araneae, Pholcidae), pp. 1-317 in European Journal of Taxonomy 718 on pages 65-67, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.718.1101, http://zenodo.org/record/4069574