Pseudeuophrys, Dahl, 1912

Prószyński, Jerzy, Lissner, Jørgen & Schäfer, Michael, 2018, Taxonomic survey of the genera Euophrys, Pseudeuophrys and Talavera, with description of Euochin gen. n. (Araneae: Salticidae) and with proposals of a new research protocol *, Ecologica Montenegrina 18, pp. 26-74 : 57-59

Placement of Pseudeuophrys and Talavera

Revival of informal subgroup of genera SAITEAE* (see Prószyński, Noordam, Oger & Schäfer (2018 – in press) prompted search for an opposite subgroup and that led to delimitation of a subgroup named EUOPHRYDEAE 9 (see below), consisting now, at beginning, of genera Euophrys and Euochin . Since both Pseudeuophrys and Talavera were classified as Euophrys until the mid XXth century, due to similarities in appearance and environment, there arise question whether both genera could not be included to EUOPHRYDEAE too. The documentation relevant to that question is shown in Fig. 22 , for more complete documentation of both genera see Figs 23-29 , illustrations for genus Euophrys can be consulted on Figs 4- 17 . Comparison of characters shown on above mentioned plates does not give unequivocal answer to that question, there are similarities and at the same time there are differences, their interpretation is unclear..

Spermathecae are ball shaped in Euophrys and Talavera , with ducts running ahead, towards the center of each "window" ( Figs 22 A-B), these of Euophrys being broader and more robust. However in Pseudeuophrys spermathecae are oval, with some partial constriction and are variously oriented: longitudinally, transversally or obliquely, ducts runs transversally, along the rim of windows, with opening located at the rim, in two species ducts are running longitudinally ( Figs 22C ).

Palps in Euophrys and Pseudeuophrys are comparable, although basal coil of embolus is either hidden in the groove in bulbus or behind it ( Figs 22D, F ).

9 Names of both groups were first used by Simon (1901 -1903) and contents of included genera is comparable in part (see also more comments below).

Palps in Talavera are surprising by lack of meandering spermophor and not coiled embolus ( Figs 22E , also 27-29), as such they do not fit EUOPHRYINES and should be placed elsewhere in other Salticidae (by typical arrangement of eyes). But where? Of the other hand there is possibility that they lost these typical character states at the later stage of evolution - but how to confirm that? Cork-screw driver like embolus in T. aequipes and T. trivittata ( Fig. 27G, J ) could be interpreted as vestige of the coil-like state. And, on otherhand, spermathecae and ducts in Talavera nicely resemble Euophrys . Disentangling these doubts and hypotheses require apparently more research.

General appearance. All three genera are small size jumping spiders (body length 2-5, rarely 7 mm) on average, body shape is proportional, dorsal coloration cryptic and dull. Anterior surfaces of male legs I are intensively black and serve, apparently, as recognition character during courtship performance in Euophrys ( Figs 1 C-C2) and some Pseudeuophrys . Striking recognition characters are color scales on frontal views of the body in Euophrys and in some Pseudeuophrys , including clypeal stripes, orbital scales (around eyes) and on dorsal surface of cymbium, as well as bunches of long white setae on palps. Pseudeuophrys has some dorsal pattern of white or light scales on abdomen and carapace ( Figs 23 , 24 ). Talavera has uniform light, sparse scales on dark background ( Figs 26 ), with slightly different orbital scales, it seems that its clypeus is lower and there are no clypeal color stripes, but the number of photographed species is too small (3 only!) to generalize color pattern.

The results of the above comparisons are inconclusive and accordingly classification should be delayed, until results of further comparative studies, including more genera, will become available. So the answer to the question whether Pseudeuophrys and Talavera could be included into subgroup EUOPHRYDEAE, together with Euophrys , is provisionally negative.

SOURCES: A - Żabka, Prószyński, B - Prószyński, Logunov, C - Logunov, Prószyński, Cantarella & Alicata, Prószyński ,, D - Prószyński, E - Prószyński, Chvatalova & Buchar, Logunov & Kronestedt, F - Logunov, Prószyński, Cantarella & Alicata, Prószyński. All ©copyrights are retained by the original authors and copyright holders, used by their courtesy.

Figures

Figure 1. New protocol of macrophotographic diagnostic documentation by Arnaud Henrard, here on example of live Euophrys frontalis. It includes three views of both male (A-C) and female (H-I) specimens, two position of palps (F-G) and two views of epigyne (K-L), with some additional views (E, M-N), D - demonstrates disappearance of white setae and hairs in alcohol (compare live specimen at A), J - demonstrates changes of color pattern caused by preservation in alcohol.

Figure 4. Color pattern diversity in Euophrys and some other European genera. A - Euophrys frontalis male and female in nuptial dance, B - E. frontalis, male frontal and dorsal view (compare with - D - presence of white palpal mane may be misleading), C - E. gambosa, male frontal and dorsal view, D - white palpal mane in Hasarius adansoni is comparable with Euophrys frontalis (see Fig. 4B) [correction of misinformation in Prószyński. (2018a: 17)., E - E. pseudogambosa, F -Pseudeuophrys erratica, male, F1 -Pseudeuophrys vafra, female, G - E. sulfurea, male and female, frontal and dorsal views, H - E. petrensis, I - E. terrestris, J - E. rufibarbis, K - Talavera aequipes, L - Saitis barbipes - (note differences with Euophrys spp.: legs I & II thin, legs III thickened, with strikingly black "bottle-brush" of longer setae, tarsus III white), M - Chalcoscirtus infimus.

Figure 5. Habitus diversity in male Euophrys (part I) (frontal, lateral and dorsal views). A - Euophrys frontalis (type species), B - Euophrys sulfurea, C - E. herbigrada, D - E. innotata, E - E. sp. [nigritarsis?].

Figure 6. Habitus diversity in male Euophrys (part II) (frontal, lateral and dorsal views). A - Euophrys petrensis, B - E. canariensis, C - E. rufibarbis, D - E. nigripalpis, E - E. terrestris.

Figure 7. Comparison of diagnostic value of characters (frontal color pattern, internal structure of epigyne and palps) in nine species of Euophrys. A - Euophrys frontalis, B - E. sulfurea, C - E. herbigrada, D - E. innotata, E - E. petrensis, F - E. rufibarbis, G - E. terrestris, H - E. canariensis, I - Euophrys alticola.

Figure 8. Habitus diversity in female Euophrys (part I) = frontal, lateral and dorsal views. A - Euophrys frontalis (type species), B - E. sulfurea, C - E. innotata, D - E. nigritarsis.

Figure 9. Habitus diversity in female Euophrys (part II) (frontal, lateral and dorsal views). A - Euophrys canariensis, B - E. rufibarbis, C - E. nigripalpis.

Figure 10. Habitus diversity in selected species of Euophrys (males and females, mainly African) changed by preservation and storage in collections (A-L, M - colors changed by preservation in alcohol, N-O - lithographs from Lucas (1846)). A - Euophrys bifida, B - E. cochlea, C - E. elizabethae, D - E. gracilis, E - E. subtilis, F - E. recta, G - E. purcelli, H - E. falciger, I - E. limpopo, J - E. maseruensis, K - E. meridionalis, L - E. miranda, M - E. nana, N - E. nigromaculata, O - E. quadripunctata, P - a photo of live E. kataokai (from Japan).

Figure 11. Diversity of diagnostic characters in Euophrys (part II). A-E - Euophrys frontalis, F - E. sulphurea, G - E. evae, H-J - E. gambosa, K-L - E. cf. gambosa, M-N - E. pseudogambosa.

Figure 12. Diversity of diagnostic characters in Euophrys (part II). A - Euophrys acripes, B-C - E. monadnock, D - E. uralensis, E -- E. nearctica, F - E. catherinae, G - E. herbigrada, H-I - E. rufibarbis, J-K - E. terrestris, L - E. kirghizica, M - E. talassica.

Figure 13. Diversity of diagnostic characters in Euophrys (part III). Diversity of diagnostic characters in Euophrys (part III). A - Euophrys kataokai, B - E. proszynskii, C- E. turkmenica, D - E. elizabethae, E - E. albimana, F - E. bifida, G - E. purcelli, H - E. gracilis, I - E. nigritarsis.

Figure 14. Diversity of diagnostic characters in Euophrys (part IV). A - Euophrys cochlea, B - E. convergentis, C - E. dhaulagirica, D - E. declivis, E - E. nangqianensis, F - E. everestensis, G - E. omnisuperstes, H-I - E. yulungensis. SOURCES: A - Wesolowska, Azarkina & Russell-Smith (2014) Zootaxa 3789(1) 12, f. 18-33, B - Denis (1937b) Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1936:: 1054, pl. 5, f. 6, C, H, I - Żabka (1980b) Senckenbergiana Biologica 60 365, f. 13-14; 363, f. 12, D - Prószyński (2009b) Arthropoda Selecta 18: 160, f. 32-33, E - Hu (2001) Henan Science and Technology Publishing House 383, f. 239.1-3, F-G -Wanless (1975) Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society 3(5) 134, f. 4-5, 9-11; 132, f. 1-3, 6-8. All ©copyrights are retained by the original authors and copyright holders, used by their courtesy.

Figure 15. Diversity of diagnostic characters in Euophrys (part V). A - Euophrys difficilis (syn. E. recta), B - E. recta, C - E. flavoatra, D - E. limpopo, E - E. maseruensis, F - E. baliola, G - E. wenxianensis, H - E. nana, I- E. nepalica, J - E.[?, Saitis?] namulinensis, K - E. pulchella, L - E. kawkaban, M - Euophrys uphami.

Figure 16. Diversity of diagnostic characters in Euophrys (part VI). A-B - Euophrys[?] bryophila, C -D - E. [?] kororensis, E, F - E. [?] wanyan, G-H - E. subtilis, I-J - E. falciger.

Figure 17. Diagnostic characters of "Euophrys" pending reclassification (part II). A1 -- Euophrys altera - syntype male, A2 - syntype female = Icius hamatus, A3 - facsimile of caption of the latter, B - “E." alticola, C - “E." albopatella, D - “E." bifoveolata, E1 -“E." banksi, E -“E." jirica, F -“E." patellaris, G -“E." miranda, G1 -“E." concolorata, H -“E." griswoldi, I1 - “E." megastyla, I - “E." cooki, J - “E." menemerellus, K - “E." newtoni, L - “E." melanoleucus, M - “E." sima, N - “E." testaceozonata, O - “E." vittata, P - “E." valens, Q - "E." alabardata, R - "E." ysobolii.

Figure 22. Diversity of main diagnostic characters in three genera: Euophrys, Talavera and Pseudeuophrys. A - Euophrys spp. spermathecae, B - Talavera spp. spermathecae, C- Pseudeuophrys spp. spermathecae, D - Euophrys spp. palps, E - Talavera spp. palps, F - Pseudeuophrys spp. palps.

Figure 23. Habitus and other diagnostic characters of diversity in males of Pseudeuophrys. A-B - Pseudeuophrys erratica, C-D - Pseudeuophrys obsoleta, E-F - Pseudeuophrys vafra, H Pseudeuophrys lanigera.

Figure 24. Habitus and other diagnostic characters of diversity in females of Pseudeuophrys. A - Pseudeuophrys erratica, B - Pseudeuophrys lanigera, C - Pseudeuophrys obsoleta, D - Pseudeuophrys vafra.

Figure 25. Diagnostic characters diversity in Pseudeuophrys. A-A1 - Pseudeuophrys erratica, B-B1 - Pseudeuophrys iwatensis, C - Pseudeuophrys obsoleta, D - Pseudeuophrys pascualis, E - Pseudeuophrys lanigera, F - Pseudeuophrys talassica (Logunov, 1997) - comb. n., G, L-M - Pseudeuophrys vafra, H - Pseudoeuophrys nebrodensis, I-K, N-P - Pseudeuophrys perdifumo.

Figure 26. Habitus diversity in Talavera. A -Talavera aequipes - male, B - Talavera aequipes - female, C - Talavera aperta, D - Talavera minuta - male, E - Talavera minuta - female. SOURCES: A, C -- ©Photo by M. Schäfer https://kleinesganzgross.de/gallery.php, B - ©Photo by Rudolf Macek https://arachnology.cz/druh/talavera-aequipes-686.html?jazyk=en, D - ©Photo by John Rosenfeld https://bugguide.net/user/view/64126, E - ©Photo by D. Walton, Naturnal History Services http://www.tkwalton.com. All ©copyrights are retained by the original authors and copyright holders, used by their courtesy.

Figure 27. Diagnostic characters diversity in Talavera (part I). A-E - Talavera minuta, F-H - Talavera aequipes, I-L - Talavera trivittata, M-P - Talavera inopinata.

Figure 28. Diagnostic characters diversity in Talavera (part II). A-B - Talavera thorelli, C-E - Talavera aperta, F-H - Talavera logunovi, I -- Talavera krocha (male?), J-M - Talavera parvistyla (J - same by Żabka, K-M - same by Logunov et al., L-M - deeper analysis by SEM, M - fine details of embolar region, M - spermatheca - dorsal view).

Figure 29. Diagnostic characters diversity in Talavera (part III). A-D - Talavera monticola, E-G - Talavera esyunini, H-I - Talavera ikedai, J - Talavera tuvensis, K-L - Talavera milleri, M - Talavera sharlaa, N-P - palp structure in Talavera aeqquipes (N - expanded palp, O - tip of distal haematodocha, P - translucent spermophor loop - lateral view [DH - distal haematodocha, BS - basal haematodocha, E - embolus].