Chrysometa bolivia Levi, 1986

Peñaherrera-R, Pedro, 2025, On some Chrysometa Simon, 1894 species collected from Ecuador: redescription of C. bolivia, description of a new species, and comments on the type locality of C. otavalo (Araneae, Tetragnathidae), Zootaxa 5636 (3), pp. 511-522 : 512-515

publication ID	https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5636.3.6
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A5439280-0602-47EB-A6FF-EF2F1A1F5C05
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15561761
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE8798-A142-2063-FF62-7C23FE0756FA
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Chrysometa bolivia Levi, 1986
status

Treatment

Chrysometa bolivia Levi, 1986 View in CoL

Figs 1–3 View FIGURE 1 View FIGURE 2 View FIGURE 3 , 4A View FIGURE 4 , 11 View FIGURE 11

Chrysometa tenuipes Keyserling 1893 View in CoL (in part, three females, one juvenile, and one male paralectotypes identified as C. bolivia View in CoL (deposited at NHMUK), see Levi 1986: 196): 335

Chrysometa bolivia Levi 1986: 203–204 View in CoL , figs 703–710

Type material. Holotype ♀, Rurrenabaque , departamento El Bení, Bolivia, October / November 1956, Peña, L. ( IRSNB) (not examined)

Material examined. 1♂, Rio Blanco , parroquia de Paquisha, provincia de Zamora Chinchipe, República del Ecuador (3°54'52.43"S 78°30'28.39"W), 10 August 2024, Peñaherrera-R., P. leg. (ZSFQ-i20626)) GoogleMaps ; 1 ♀, same data as previous (ZSFQ-i20627) GoogleMaps .

Diagnosis. Males of C. bolivia resemble those of C. chuchaqui sp. nov. by having the coil of conductor and embolus much wider than tegulum and by the presence of a bifid conductor ( Figs 2B View FIGURE 2 , 6B View FIGURE 6 ). Chrysometa bolivia is diagnosed from the new species by the embolus without a distal tooth and being wrapped by the conductor at distal section; conductor short and bifid; cymbial ectomedian process square with truncated tip; cymbial ectomedian and ectobasal processes fused; paracymbium lower prong with a single incrassate prolateral process and upper prong with an indentation ( Figs 2A–C View FIGURE 2 , 4A, B View FIGURE 4 , 6A–C View FIGURE 6 ). Females of C. bolivia resemble those of C. uaza Levi, 1986 by its genitalia with elongated triangular septum and copulatory and fertilisation ducts coiling between each other approximately two times ( Figs 3A–C View FIGURE 3 ; Levi 1986, figs 602–605). However, it differs from C. uaza by having two triangular weakly sclerotised marks above epigynum; median plate elongated with thinner arms in ventral view and rounded in posterior view; lateral plates straight in posterior view; and copulatory openings sinuous (short and wide arms of median plate in ventral view and triangular in posterior view; lateral plates sinuous in posterior view; copulatory openings rounded; and sclerotised marks above epigynum absent in C. uaza ) ( Figs 3A–C View FIGURE 3 ; Levi 1986, figs 602–605).

Description. Male (based on specimen ZSFQ-i20626). Carapace and legs overall pale yellow ( Fig. 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ). Abdomen oval, anteriorly elevated, with lateral portion pale yellow with a dark line on ventral edge and covered with guanine patches, these absent on venter and anterior section of dorsum surface ( Fig. 1B View FIGURE 1 ); dorsum with yellowish shade ( Fig. 1A View FIGURE 1 ); venter of abdomen dark brown. Total length 2.78. Carapace 0.85 long, 0.76 wide. Abdomen 1.66 long, 1.09 wide. Left chelicera 0.88 long, 0.22 wide. Leg formula I–II–IV–III. Leg I: 4.16/0.56/5.12/6.42 / 1.16 / 17.42 (femur / patella / tibia / metatarsus / tarsus/ total). Leg II: 2.27 / 0.41 / 2.29 / 2.83 / 0.83 / 8.63. Leg III: 1.32 / 0.36 / 0.85 / 1.09 / 0.60 / 4.22. Leg IV: 2.20 / 0.47 / 1.73 / 1.83 / 0.65 / 6.88. Palpus ( Figs 2A–C View FIGURE 2 , 4A View FIGURE 4 ): Palpal femur not swollen. Palpal tibia longer than wide. Squat cymbial ectomedian process present ( Fig. 2B, C View FIGURE 2 ); cymbial ectobasal process small and rounded, fused with cymbial ectomedial process ( Fig. 2C View FIGURE 2 ). Paracymbium with proximate bifurcated lower prong and an elongated upper prong with distal indentation; lower prong with two processes, one on each side ( Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ). Coil of conductor and embolus much wider and longer than tegulum ( Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ). Conductor bifid and shorter than embolus; upper conductor follows the embolus angle and wrapped the embolus while lower conductor goes downwards ( Fig. 2A, B View FIGURE 2 ). Embolus without distal tooth ( Fig. 4A View FIGURE 4 ). Small and rounded embolic basal apophysis present, almost absent due to the weakly developed state ( Fig. 4A View FIGURE 4 ).

Female (based on specimen ZSFQ-i20627) ( Fig. 1C, D View FIGURE 1 ). Body colouration as in male, except for the venter of abdomen pale yellow with a central small brown dot. Total length 3.34. Carapace long 1.64, 1.18 wide. Abdomen 2.58 long, 2.04 wide. Left chelicera 0.68 long, 0.33 wide. Leg formula I–II–IV–III. Leg I: 3.51 / 0.68 / 3.27 / 4.06 / 1.40 / 12.92. Leg II: 2.19 / 0.53 / 2.08 / 2.13 / 0.79 / 7.72 Leg III 1.60 / 0.30 / 0.87 / 1.17 / 0.50 / 4.44. Leg IV 2.28 / 0.34 / 1.51 / 1.67 / 0.60 / 6.4. Genitalia ( Fig. 3A–C View FIGURE 3 ): two triangular sclerotised marks above the epigynum present ( Fig. 3A View FIGURE 3 ). Inverted T-shaped median plate, wider than long; anterior section with a laminar extension creating a pocket ( Fig. 3A View FIGURE 3 ). Sinuous copulatory openings extending the entire length of each arm length of the median plate ( Fig. 3A View FIGURE 3 ). In posterior view, median plate rounded and slightly protruding ( Fig. 3B View FIGURE 3 ). Triangular lateral plates, in posterior view ( Fig. 3B View FIGURE 3 ). Fertilisation ducts originating anteriorly and intersecting over rounded spermathecae ( Fig. 3C View FIGURE 3 ). Fertilisation ducts with membranous texture and being weakly sclerotised ( Fig. 3C View FIGURE 3 ). Copulatory ducts with smooth texture and being weakly sclerotised ( Fig. 3C View FIGURE 3 ). Fertilisation and copulatory ducts coiling between each other, at least two times ( Fig. 3C View FIGURE 3 ).

Distribution and natural history. This species is known to be distributed in Colombia (although dubious per Levi (1986)), Bolivia, and Ecuador. In Ecuador it is only known from a single locality ( Fig. 11 View FIGURE 11 ): Rio Blanco, 1700 m, province of Zamora Chinchipe. The examined specimens were collected at a riparian understory area on the banks of the Rio Blanco, at night, in a low montane evergreen forest of the Cordillera del Cóndor-Kutukú; Northern Andes biogeographic province ( Morrone 2014).

Notes. The examined specimens represent the first record of this species from Ecuador, extending this species' distribution approximately 1,670 km from the nearest confirmed locality (Rurrenabaque, Bolivia). Although this distance could support the idea that this is not the species assigned, the morphology of the abdomen as well as the genitalia of the examined specimens agree with those provided by Levi (1986, figs 703–710). Perhaps the provided figure of the examined male disposes the palpus at a different angle and position to that of Levi (1986, figs 708–709), but after carefully comparing any possible angle similar to Levi (1986, figs 708–709) I did not observe differences between both palpi. Even when the distance between each lower prong may appear to differ, this varies depending on the rotational position of the palpus (e.g., Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ; Levi 1986, figs. 708–709). The female I depict here slightly differs from the female holotype by having a rounded spermatheca while the latter shows a rectangular spermatheca. However, the observed difference could be attributed to unreported intraspecific variation. Another plausible option that could explain the suggested morphological variation on the spermathecae shape of C. bolivia could be the differences on Levi’s (1986) interpretation during the illustration process.

On the other hand, the only known male of C. bolivia (previous paralectotype of C. tenuipes ) matches the male I depict here as both share the same paracymbium with proximate bifurcated lower prong and an elongated upper prong with distal indentation, lower prong with two processes (one on each side), conductor bifurcated, and coil of conductor and embolus much wider and longer than tegulum ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 , Levi 1986, figs 708, 709). Certainly, the female examined in this study is conspecific with both the male illustrated here and the one which was originally designated as paralectotype of C. tenuipes . However, this raises the question: what is the relationship between these specimens and the female holotype of C. bolivia depicted in Levi (1986, figs 708, 709)? To resolve this uncertainty, a reexamination of the C. bolivia holotype, along with the Colombian females originally designated as paralectotypes of C. tenuipes is needed.

If the morphology of the Colombian females only matches that of the Ecuadorian specimen, it is more likely that a new name should be proposed for these spiders. Conversely, if the Colombian females exhibit intermediate morphology between the holotype of C. bolivia and the Ecuadorian specimen, we can confidently conclude that they all belong to a single species with a large range of distribution until more evidence can be presented (e.g. description of Bolivian males and molecular work). Further research is required to resolve these questions, but this falls beyond the scope of the present study.