Metaleptyphantes Locket, 1968

Type species

Metaleptyphantes machadoi Locket, 1968, 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) and the terminal apophysis (membranous); the embolus with a short embolus proper and a well developed embolus body (see Fig. 11D–F), 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.