Rothaeina beaudini Bennett & Copley & Copley 2023, spec. nov.
Creators: name: Bennett, Robb
name: Copley, Claudia
name: Copley, Darren
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2023
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Arachnida
Araneae
Cybaeidae
Rothaeina
Rothaeina beaudini

description: Rothaeina beaudini Bennett spec. nov.
Figs 66–69, 85
Type material. U.S.A.: California: Holotype female. Tehama County, near junction south of Lassen Volcanic National Park, 19.ix.1961, W. Ivie & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH). Paratypes. Butte, 1♀, 3.3 mi. from junction of Humbug & Understock Roads, 5.v.1966, Dokes (CAS); Plumas, 1♀, 9.2 mi. NE of Bucks Lake, 4.ix.1988, D. Ubick (CAS); 7♀, S side of Lake Almanor, 5.ix.1959, V.D. Roth & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH); Shasta, 1♀, 5 mi. N of Manzanita Lake, 19.ix.1961, W. Ivie & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH); 3♀, Delta, N end of Shasta Lake, 3.ix.1959, W.J. Gertsch & V.D. Roth (AMNH); 4♀, Emigrant Ford Rd., 4 mi. S of Old Station, 4.ix.1959, V.D. Roth & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH); Tehama, 1♀, Hwy 89, 3.5 mi. S of Lassen Volcanic National Park, 8.viii.1968, F.O. Leech (UASM); 5♀, nr. junction S of Lassen Volcanic National Park, 19.ix.1961, W. Ivie & W.J. Gertsch (AMNH);
Etymology. The specific name is a patronym honouring Beaudin A. Bennett who was born in January 1985 at the beginning of the first author’s study of Nearctic Cybaeinae.
Diagnosis. As is common among females of other Cybaeinae as well as other supraspecific taxa of spiders (Bennett 2006), intraspecific variability and interspecific similarity of genitalic morphology characters can render the females of Rothaeina gen. nov. difficult to distinguish from each other. In some cases, collection with accompanying males, or geographic locality, may provide the best indication of species identification of females.
The male of R. beaudini spec. nov. is unknown; the female can usually be distinguished from its congeners by a combination of epigynal, atrial, and spermathecal characters. The atrium (Fig. 66) is usually small but prominent and U-shaped and, although various components of the vulval ducts are visible through the integument of the uncleared epigyne, none appear decidedly ring-shaped. The vulva (Figs 67–69) is relatively narrow with width (measured at widest extent of spermathecae) usually less than 3.5 times atrial height (measured from epigastric groove to atrium). Additionally, in the vulva the path of the copulatory and spermathecal ducts is relatively easily to trace from the atrium to the fertilization ducts and the medial transverse section of the spermathecae is inconspicuous in dorsal view.
In the females of the other species of Rothaeina gen. nov., the atrium is usually small but inconspicuous and never U-shaped (Figs 70, 73, 75, 80). Furthermore, the females of R petersoni spec. nov. and R. sequoia comb. nov. are unique among the females of Rothaeina gen. nov. in having the posterior-most spermathecal ducts clearly visible through the integument of the uncleared epigyne as circular, ring-like structures (Figs 75, 80) and the vulva is relatively broad (vulval width usually 4–5 times atrial height) (Figs 77–79, 81–83). Finally, in the females of the remaining two species (R. jamesi spec. nov. and R. mackinleyi spec. nov.), the vulval ducts (Figs 72, 74) are more complex with the path from the atrium to the fertilization ducts difficult to trace and, in dorsal view, the medial transverse section of each spermatheca is prominent and conspicuous.
Description. As in diagnosis and description of the genus. Additional descriptive characters presented here. Abdomen pale or gray, lightly patterned.
Male: Unknown.
Female: (n=24). Epigyne (Fig. 66) with single, anteromedial atrium; atrium occasionally reduced or apparently absent. Vulva (Figs 67–69) with copulatory ducts separated at atrium; spermathecal ducts not as convoluted as in other species; Bennett’s glands within medial third of spermathecal ducts.
Measurements (n=20). CL 1.95–2.45 (2.26+0.15), CW 1.48–1.90 (1.73+0.11), SL 1.09–1.33 (1.23+0.07), SW 1.03–1.24 (1.14+0.06). Holotype CL 2.25, CW 1.73, SL 1.24, SW 1.17.
Note: Two species may be represented here. Specimens from the northwestern part of the distribution around Shasta Lake have more heavily pigmented abdomens and somewhat more complex spermathecal ducts (Fig. 67) than specimens from southeast of Shasta Lake (Figs 68–69). Because the male of R. beaudini spec. nov. is unknown and the vulval and atrial characters of females tend to be variable even within populations, all these specimens are here considered to be members of R. beaudini spec. nov.
Distribution and natural history. (Fig. 85). Rothaeina beaudini spec. nov. is endemic to north central and northeastern California, U.S.A., from the Shasta Lake area southeast to the northern Sierra Nevada. Within that area, females appear to have been relatively common in the 1950s and 1960s but only a single specimen has been recorded since the 1960s (in 1988) and the conservation status of this taxon is currently unknown.
description: Published as part of Bennett, Robb, Copley, Claudia & Copley, Darren, 2023, Revision of the western Nearctic spider genus Cybaeina including the description of Neocybaeina gen. nov. and Rothaeina gen. nov. (Araneae: Cybaeidae: Cybaeinae), pp. 97-129 in Zootaxa 5318 (1) on pages 116-118, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5318.1.5, http://zenodo.org/record/8158357