Zinophora brevilobata

Figs 2, 68–77

Poratophilus brevilobatus Attems, 1928: 381.

Poratophilus (Philoporatia) brevilobatus; Schubart 1966.

Zinophora brevilobata; Demange 1983; Hamer 1998.

Type material (examined): Holotype: MOZAMBIQUE: 1ơ, No reference to exact locality and date, J. de Coster (SAMC 1613). The type locality is here fixed as Lake Sibaya [2732BC].

Additional material examined: SOUTH AFRICA: KwaZulu-Natal: 3ơ, Lake Sibaya [2732BC], Crocodile Bay, mainly under logs, i.1968, B. Lamoral (NMSA 16144); 1ơ, Tembe Elephant Reserve (26˚ 59.01S:32˚ 25.08E), 5.x.1999, D. Herbert (NMSA 18708); 1ơ, Sibayi [2732BC] South route, grassland valley below Mt. Tabor, open grassland with patches of scrub, 9.i.2000, O. Bourquin (NMSA 18933); 1ơ, Kosi Bay (26˚59'S:32˚50'E), 16.x.2001, P. Reavell (NMSA 19199).

Diagnosis: Telopodite with one weakly s-shaped (Fig. 72), apically tapered femoral spine, partially concealed under posterior telocoxal fold (Fig. 70). Thumb reduced, branching off base of pectinophore (Figs 74, 75). Dorsal surface of posterior telocoxal fold deeply concave (Fig. 73). Telocoxal spine prominent and directed medially (Fig. 71).

Description:

Dimensions: Males, n = 7. Body width 11.0, 9.0–11.0 [9.6]; collum width 9.0, 7.6–9.0, 8.4; body length 110.0, 85.0–115.0 [100.4]; leg length (legs on type specimen detached and missing), 4.9–5.6; antenna length (antennae on type specimen detached and missing), 5.8–6.6 [6.0].

Number of segments: 53, 45–56 [50].

Colour: Head and clypeus orange. Collum orange but brown in fresh specimen. Prozonites light yellow to brown, mesozonites orange (light brown in fresh specimen) and metazonites with dark brown strip along margin, otherwise orange. Anal valve brown, posterior margin orange. Caudal spine brown and with orange streak on dorsal surface. Legs and antennae orange.

First ozopore: Segment 6.

Collum: Anterior corner rounded and at angle of about 90. One submarginal groove (Fig. 68).

Gonopods: Telopodite with one femoral spine, weakly s-shaped, tapering towards apex and partially concealed under posterior telocoxal fold (Figs 70, 72, 77). Thumb reduced and not obvious, branching off base of pectinophore. Second lamella a flat hyaline laminate plate, broadening apically and curved away from pectinophore (Figs 74, 75). Posterior telocoxal fold with a strong, acute and medially directed telocoxal spine (Fig. 71). Posterior telocoxal fold without distinct lobes medially, but margin reaching anterior telocoxal fold median margin (Fig. 71). Dorsal surface of posterior telocoxal fold deeply concave (Fig. 73).

Pre-anal ring: Caudal spine extending beyond margin of anal valve and sharply curved distally.

Distribution: The type material was collected in Mozambique, however no reference is made to the exact location in the original description, or on the label. Other records are from South Africa in north-eastern KwaZulu-Natal (Fig. 2).

Remarks: The apical elements of the telopodite in the type specimen are broken and these have been described from another specimen (NMSA 18708). The telopodite was broken before the original description (‘Gonopod telopodites are badly preserved so that the description is not complete’(Attems1928)).The thumb on the posterior limb of the telopodite is reduced, as is the case with Z. laminata. The caudal spine varies in length. In some specimens, the gap between the coxal elements of the first pair of legs of the male is narrow and the two walls may be in contact medially (resembling the condition in Harpagophora). Demange (1983) mentions brevilobatus in both Harpagophora s.s. and in Zinophora, but the reasoning behind this is unclear.