Bioacoustics of Tmarus yueluensis

Diagnosis. Males of this new species are characterized by their slender embolus and a horned RTA. They can be distinguished from the similar T. taibaiensis Song & Wang, 1994 (see Zhang & Zhang 2023: 85 , figs 43–50) by: (1) RTA tips fused ( Figs 2 B-C) (RTA deeply bifurcated in T. taibaiensis ); (2) cymbium longer than wide in ventral view ( Fig. 2C ) (vs. as wide as long in T. taibaiensis ); (3) embolus originating at 11 o’clock position of tegulum in ventral view ( Fig. 2C ) (vs. 12 o’clock in T. taibaiensis ); (4) embolus about half as long as tegulum in retrolateral view ( Fig. 2B ) (vs. 2/3 as long in T. taibaiensis ). Females are characterized by short copulatory ducts, peanut-shaped spermathecae, absence of a distinct hood and the epigynal plate being longer than wide. In the similar T. taibaiensis the epigynal plate is as long as wide and the copulatory openings are located anteriorly (versus medially in T. yueluensis sp. nov. ). The females of this new species also resemble those of T. piger ( Walckenaer, 1802 ) (see Song & Zhu 1997: 51 , fig. 28A–D; Baba & Tanikawa 2015: 92 ), but can be easily distinguished by copulatory openings facing anteromedially and located medially ( Fig. 3D ) (vs. facing anterolaterally and located posteriorly in T. piger ).

Remarks. Re-examination of the type series of T. longqicus Song & Zhu, 1993 by the type-bearing institution (Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing , China ) revealed that the allotype males of T. longqicus are identical with males of T. yueluensis sp. nov. However, the holotype female of T. longqicus is clearly distinct from T. yueluensis sp. nov. : epigynal plate wider than long and copulatory openings located anteriorly (versus epigynal plate longer than wide and copulatory openings located medially in T. yueluensis sp. nov. ). We have collected both male and female specimens of T. yueluensis sp. nov. two times from the same locality at the same dates. Males matched with females on morphological characteristics (females appeared similar to males, Figs 1 , 3 ), and DNA barcoding data (showing a genetic distance of 0% between the male and female voucher specimens). We therefore conclude that the allo- and paratype males of T. longqicus were mistakenly paired with the female holotype . The real male of T. longqicus is still unknown.