Alpaida guimaraes Levi, 1988

Alpaida guimaraes Levi, 1988 View in CoL

Figs 1A–D View FIGURE 1 , 2A–D View FIGURE 2 , 3A–C View FIGURE 3 , 15 View FIGURE 15

Alpaida guimaraes Levi 1988: 390 View in CoL , figs 19–22, Map 2.

Alpaida murtinho Levi 1988: 399 View in CoL , figs 84, 85, Map 2. New Synonymy. Type material. Alpaida guimaraes View in CoL : holotype ♀ from Chapada dos Guimarães View in CoL , Mato Grosso, Brazil, 01.XII.1993, M. Hoffmann coll. (MCN 11969), examined. Paratypes. ♀ from Kartabo, Guyana, 1922 (AMNH), not examined; ♀ from Jacareacanga, Pará, Brazil, X.1959, M. Alvarenga coll. (AMNH), not examined; ♂ from Fazenda Almada, Uruçuca View in CoL , Bahia, Brazil, 26.XI.1967, J.S. Santos coll. (MCN 10287), examined, misidentified as A. guimaraes View in CoL ; ♀ from Chavantina, Mato Grosso, Brazil, X.1946, H. Sick coll. (MZSP 4637), not examined; 3 ♀ from Barra dos Bugres, Mato Grosso, Brazil, A. Cerrutti coll. (MNRJ), not examined (destroyed by the 2018 fire).

Alpaida murtinho View in CoL : ♂ holotype from Vila Murtinho , Rondônia, Brazil, 03.IV.1992, J.H. Willianson coll. ( MZSP), not examined .

Additional material examined. BRAZIL: Pará: São Geraldo do Araguaia, Serra dos Martírios / Andorinhas ( 6°14'35.7''S, 48°28'2.5''W), 22–26.X.2019, C. Xavier coll., 1♂ ( MPEG. ARA 038515 View Materials ) GoogleMaps ; same locality as previous (except 6°13'39.6''S, 48°26'41.3''W), 22–26.X.2019, S. Chaves coll., 2♂ ( MPEG. ARA 038516 View Materials ) GoogleMaps ; same locality as previous, A. Salgado coll., 2♂ ( MPEG. ARA 038517 View Materials ) GoogleMaps ; same data as previous, 1♂ ( MPEG. ARA 038518 View Materials ) GoogleMaps ; Juruti, Várzea ( 02°30'08.8''S, 56°09'48.87''W), 22.II.2011, B.V.B. Rodrigues coll., 1♂ ( MPEG. ARA 024314 View Materials ) GoogleMaps ; same locality as previous (except 02°12'36.1''S, 56°07'20.7''W), 08.I.2012, N. Bastos coll., 1 ♀ ( MPEG. ARA 024317 View Materials ) GoogleMaps ; same locality as previous, E.G. Cafofo coll., 1♀ ( MPEG. ARA 024319 View Materials ) GoogleMaps ; same locality as previous, 22.II.2012, N.F. Lo-Man-Hung, 1♀ ( MPEG. ARA 024318 View Materials ) GoogleMaps ; same locality as previous, 07.VIII.2010, N. Abrahim, 1♀ ( MPEG. ARA 024320 View Materials ) GoogleMaps .

Diagnosis. Males of A. guimaraes are similar to the males of A. utcuyacu ( Levi 1988, fig. 30) and A. coroico Levi, 1988 ( Levi 1988, fig. 43) in having a short and pointed embolus and a short terminal apophysis; similar to A. utcuyacu by the narrow and curved conductor lobe and to A. coroico by the conspicuous lobe on the ventral edge of the tegulum ( Figs 1C, D View FIGURE 1 , 3A View FIGURE 3 ). Males of A. guimaraes are differentiated by the presence of denticles on the distal margin of the terminal apophysis ( Figs 1C, D View FIGURE 1 , 3A View FIGURE 3 ); specifically, from A. utcuyacu by the presence of a conspicuous tegular lobe and from A. coroico by the median apophysis slightly shorter ( Figs 1C, D View FIGURE 1 , 3A View FIGURE 3 ). Females A. guimaraes resemble those of A. utcuyacu ( Levi 1988, figs 25, 26) by the two dorsal paramedian white bands and a ventral large subrectangular black spot on the abdomen and by the presence of two lateral lobes on the epigyne ( Figs 2C, D View FIGURE 2 , 3B, C View FIGURE 3 ), differing by the larger, rounded epigynal lips, which, in A. utcuyacu , are slender, with a median inner projection ( Levi 1988, figs 25, 26).

Description. Female (based on holotype MCN 11969): carapace longer than wide, orange ( Fig. 2A View FIGURE 2 ). Sternum cordiform, orange, with a black longitudinal median stripe. Chelicerae, maxillae, and labium orange ( Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ). Legs yellow; femora I–II, IV with brown spots apically; patellae, tibiae and metatarsi I–IV with brown longitudinal dorsal bands; tibiae I–II brown ventrally;tarsi I–IV brown( Figs2A,B View FIGURE 2 ).Abdomen twice as long as wide, anterior and posterior region slightly tapered; dorsum gray with an anterior median ellipsoid white spot, two longitudinal paramedian white spots with a median inward-directed projection, and a posterior longitudinal white stripe ( Fig. 2A View FIGURE 2 ); venter dark grey, surrounded by a lateral beige spot ( Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ). Epigyne ( Figs 2C, D View FIGURE 2 , 3B, C View FIGURE 3 ) bears an inconspicuous scape; posterior plate slightly wider than long, with paramedian copulatory openings; lips with anterior projection curved inward.

Male (based on MPEG.ARA 038516): carapace, sternum, chelicerae, maxillae and labium as in female ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ). Legs as in female ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ). Abdomen oval; dorsum with and anterior median strip connected with two paramedian longitudinal white strips ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ); venter dark grey surrounded by a beige lateral spot ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ). Palp ( Figs 1C, D View FIGURE 1 ): tegular lobe well-developed; terminal apophysis with distal margin bearing denticles; conductor lobe slender with acute tip, ventrally curved; conductor broad with a mesal projection lying on the terminal apophysis; embolus pointed, retrolaterally directed; median apophysis posteriorly conspicuous with a pointed posterior tip.

Taxonomic notes. Levi (1988: 390) described A. guimaraes based on a female from the central-western state of Mato Grosso, Brazil, associating it with a male from a different locality 1,770 Km apart, in the northeastern state of Bahia, Brazil, and indicated that this association was not certain, basing his decision solely on similarities in color the pattern of the abdomen and legs. After examining numerous Alpaida specimens deposited at the MPEG, we recognized females of A. guimaraes collected along with males originally attributed to A. murtinho Levi, 1988 . These specimens share similar morphological characters, including a distinctive color pattern: orange sternum with a central black spot, gray abdomen with longitudinal white spots, dark venter surrounded by a beige spot, and all legs with a longitudinal dorsal brown strip, from the apex of the femur to the tip of the tarsus ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 , 2A, B View FIGURE 2 ). Females of Alpaida guimaraes exhibit an unusual genital morphology, with epigyne possessing robust and well-developed lips and inconspicuous median scape ( Figs 2C, D View FIGURE 2 , 3B, C View FIGURE 3 ), a feature also present in A. utcuyacu Levi, 1988 . Males of A. murtinho also share several similarities with males of A. utcuyacu (see diagnosis above), while Levi's (1988) male of A. guimaraes is very distinctive due to the presence of a conspicuous basal prong and distal lobe of the terminal apophysis, mushroom-shaped conductor lobe and a posteriorly projected median apophysis, bearing pointed ends ( Figs 4C, D View FIGURE 4 , 5 View FIGURE5 ). In this context, we assume that the female of A. guimaraes and the male of A. murtinho belong to the same species, being similar to A. uticuyacy , and, by page priority, we consider A. murtinho as junior synonym of A. guimaraes . The male described as A. guimaraes by Levi (1988) is redescribed below as A. tupinamba sp. nov.

Natural history. The examined specimens were collected in savanna and flooded forests habitats in the Amazon.

Distribution. Guyana and Brazil ( Fig. 15 View FIGURE 15 ; Levi, 1988).