Metaleptyphantes Locket, 1968

Metaleptyphantes Locket, 1968 View in CoL

Type species

Metaleptyphantes machadoi Locket, 1968 View in CoL , by original designation.

Remarks

Originally, the genus Metaleptyphantes was considered belonging to the subfamily Micronetinae ( Brignoli 1983) . Saaristo (2007) established a new subfamily, Ipainae Saaristo, 2007 , to accommodate seven genera: Epibellowia Tanasevitch, 1996a , Epigytholus Tanasevitch 1996b , Ipa Saaristo, 2007 (the type genus), Solenysa Simon, 1894 , Uralophantes Esyunin, 1992 , Wubanoides Eskov, 1986 , and Metaleptyphantes .

Recent publications have shown the subfamily Ipainae to be a paraphyletic group ( Wang et al. 2015; Moreira & Hormiga 2022). However, only a few representatives of Ipa and Solenysa were included in the phylogenetic study, while the remaining five genera of the subfamily (see above), including Metaleptyphantes , remain untreated and thus ‘hang in the air’ as it were. As regards Solenysa , this genus was previously transferred to the subfamily Erigoninae ( Tu & Hormiga 2011) . So the question of the status and composition of Ipainae remains open, while below I consider this subfamily in the traditional sense, with the exception of Solenysa .

Most of the genera ofIpainae (sensu Saaristo 2007) show some similarities to each other in the male palpal and, particularly, epigynal structure. Unlike them, Metaleptyphantes has a palpal structure resembling the micronetine type (sensu Saaristo & Tanasevitch 1996) of the embolic division: a boat-shaped radix; aside from the embolus, the presence of two separate sclerites, i. e. the lamella characteristica (see its attachment to radix, PA in Fig. 10H View Fig ) and the terminal apophysis (membranous); the embolus with a short embolus proper and a well developed embolus body (see Fig. 11D–F View Fig ), connected to the radix by a membranous tissue. In addition, the habitus, chaetotaxy and trichobothriotaxy also conform to micronetines.

The epigynal structures of the female are very similar within the subfamily, including Metaleptyphantes , but they are completely different from those of micronetines. All genital structures of the female are concentrated inside a bulb-shaped container termed differently by various authors: a “sclerotized region” and a “terminal region” by Locket (1968); a “plate” by Holm (1968); a “chitinized part at the end of a protruding scape” by Scharff (1990); a “spavin-like epigyne” by Saaristo (2002). Hereafter, I term this bulb-shaped container a “capsula”. In most Ipainae , this capsula is connected to the abdomen through bellow-shaped formations differing in length and devoid of secondary sexual characters. That connection was denominated a “scape” by Locket (1968); a “wrinkled-ribbed base” by Helsdingen (1985); a “weakly chitinized stalk” by Saaristo (2002); etc.A special term for this structure was proposed by Tu & Li (2006) a “solenoid base”, and later a “solenoid” by Tu et al. (2007).

This capsula-on-solenoid-type of the epigyne was the main and perhaps the only reason for including the genus Metaleptyphantes in the subfamily Ipainae , despite the structure of the male palp which is drastically different from that of the other members. Based on the micronetine-like structure of the palp, as well as the similar habitus, chaetotaxy and trichobothriotaxy, I consider that most likely the genus Metaleptyphantes belongs to the subfamily Micronetinae , not to Ipainae .

Species included

The genus was created to accommodate seven Afrotropical species: Metaleptyphantes bifoliatus Locket, 1968 , M. carinatus Locket, 1968 , M. clavator Locket, 1968 , M. machadoi Locket, 1968 , M. vicinus Locket, 1968 , M. perexiguus ( Simon & Fage, 1922) , and M. praecipuus Locket, 1968 . Presently, the genus consists of 16 Afrotropical species and one Oriental, Metaleptyphantes kraepelini ( Simon, 1905) , from Java, Indonesia (Word Spider Catalog 2024).

Distribution

Old-World tropics.