Forsteropsalis fabulosa Taylor 2011, new combination
Creators: name: Taylor, Christopher K.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2011
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Arachnida
Opiliones
Neopilionidae
Forsteropsalis
Forsteropsalis fabulosa

description: <i>Forsteropsalis fabulosa</i> (Phillipps &amp; Grimmett 1932) new combination (Figs 30, 99–101) <i>Macropsalis fabulosa</i> Phillipps &amp; Grimmett 1932: 731–733, fig. p. 732. <i>Megalopsalis fabulosa</i> (Phillipps &amp; Grimmett) — Forster 1944: 186–187, figs 10–11 (misidentification of <i>Forsteropsalis inconstans</i>). <b>Material examined.</b> (MONZ). <b>WN.</b> 1 male, Rimutaka Hill, New Zealand, 41°06.2’S 175°12.7’E, 14 July 2004, A Tennyson, on tree trunk at night (see comments below); 1 male, 1 female, Karori Hills, New Zealand, 22 January 1947, on foliage. <b>Description.</b> MALE. As in Phillipps &amp; Grimmett (1932), except following: Dorsal prosomal plate unarmed except cluster of small denticles on anterior corners. Femora of legs unevenly denticulate dorsally and ventrally, with more denticles dorsally forming irregularly longitudinal line for distal half of femur. <i>Penis</i> (figs 99–101). Tendon long; bristle groups well-developed. Glans in line with shaft; medium length, subtriangular in ventral view; without dorsolateral keel. Deep pores. <i>Spiracle</i> (fig. 30). Dense curtain of non-reticulate spines across spiracle; terminations of spines palmate; no lateral lace tubercles. FEMALE (N = 1). Prosoma length 2.41, width 3.68. Articular membranes pink. Anterior propeltidial area dusted purple with medium orange-brown medial stripe between ocularium and anterior margin; median propeltidial area dusted purple with iridescent white patches along medial third of posterior margin, extending behind ocularium on either side of postocularium; posterior propeltidial area light grey. Ocularium medium orange-brown. Mesopeltidium, metapeltidium and dorsum of opisthosoma patched purple and light grey with light grey median saddle from mesopeltidium to first segment of opisthosoma. Mouthparts white; coxae grey-brown darkening to dusted purple-brown distally; genital operculum and venter of opisthosoma orange-cream with purple dusting on venter of opisthosoma. <i>Chelicerae</i>. Segment I 1.95, segment II 3.25. Both segments golden brown dusted with purple laterally; unarmed. <i>Pedipalps</i>. Femur 2.56, patella 1.43, tibia 1.64, tarsus 3.44. Femur medium brown dusted with purple with cream bands; patella and tibia golden brown proximally, cream distally; tarsus cream. Patella with small cream mediodistal apophysis, about one-quarter length of patellar body. <i>Legs</i>. Leg I femur 5.56, patella 1.92, tibia 5.0; leg II femur 10.08, patella 2.29, tibia 9.77; leg III femur 5.32, patella 1.82, tibia 4.95; leg IV femur 7.23, patella 1.97, tibia 6.77. Golden brown with dark brown ends to femora, legs I and III with cream band dividing golden brown and dark brown sections; cream band at midpoints of tibiae I and III. Patellae with few small dorsodistal denticles, legs otherwise unarmed. Tibia II with eight pseudosegments; tibia IV with two pseudosegments. <b>Comments.</b> Forster (1944) reported that the holotype of this species was lost and designated another specimen from the type locality (Wellington) as neotype. Forster’s (1944) written description is simply a paraphrase of Phillipps &amp; Grimmett’s (1932) original but Forster’s (1944) neotype and illustrations disagree significantly with that description. Though the chelicerae of Forster’s (1944) neotype are enlarged, they are nowhere near as large as those illustrated by Phillipps &amp; Grimmett (1932) and they lack the long, bow-shaped fingers shown in the original illustration. Though the original specimen lacked denticles on the dorsum and leg femora, Forster’s (1944) neotype is heavily denticulate (contrary to Forster’s description). Forster’s neotype and the description of the lost holotype are recognisably referrable to distinct species. The neotype is here recognised as the male of the species described by Forster (1944) as <i>Megalopsalis inconstans</i>. In order to stabilise the definition of <i>Macropsalis fabulosa</i>, a proposal will be submitted to the ICZN (in preparation) to set aside Forster’s (1944) neotype and establish a new neotype in closer accord with the original description. The specimen from Rimutaka Hill listed above shows little variation from Phillipps &amp; Grimmett’s (1932) description. The only differences are a cluster of small denticles on the anterior corners of the prosoma, and the armature on the femora of the legs. These differences are minor enough to be interpreted as individual variation or descriptive errors (the complete absence of leg denticulation described by Phillipps &amp; Grimmett 1932 would be very unusual for a species of Monoscutidae with such heavily denticulate chelicerae, particularly one the size of <i>Forsteropsalis fabulosa</i>).
description: Published as part of <i>Taylor, Christopher K., 2011, Revision of the genus Megalopsalis (Arachnida: Opiliones: Phalangioidea) in Australia and New Zealand and implications for phalangioid classification 2773, pp. 1-65 in Zootaxa 2773 (1)</i> on page 51, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2773.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/5290745
description: {"references": ["Phillipps, W. J. &amp; Grimmett, R. E. R. (1932) Some new Opiliones from New Zealand. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1932, 731 - 740.", "Forster, R. R. (1944) The genus Megalopsalis Roewer in New Zealand with keys to the New Zealand genera of Opiliones. Records of the Dominion Museum, 1 (1), 183 - 192."]}