Cteniza moggridgei Pickard-Cambridge, 1874

(Figs. 2, 21, 25, 29, 33,35, 38, 39, 44, 47, 48, 66 to 69)

Cteniza fodiens Pickard-Cambridge in Moggridge 1873: 89 –90 plate VII (description female and field observations).

Cteniza Moggridgii Pickard-Cambridge 1874: 196, 210, 248 plate XX.A (first description male); Ausserer 1875: 147 –148. Cteniza moggridgei Buchli 1968: 1 –40 figs. 14–27 (general biology, laboratory observations)

Material examined. 1 male id. Shu. 19.06.14, France, Alpes Maritimes, Sospel (43.91°N, 7.47°E), leg. S. Huber. 1 male id. 20.04.05 -5, France, Alpes Maritimes, Gorbio (43.79°N, 7.44°E), leg. A. Decae. 1 male id. NHMB.010, Italy, Liguria, Savona / Andora (43.95°N, 8.17°E), leg. R. Fabbri. 1 female id. 20/04/05.4, France, Alpes Maritimes, Gorbio (43.79°N, 7.44°E), leg. A. Decae. 1 female id. Isaia. 020, Italy, Liguria, Quiliano (44.29°N, 8.38°E, alt 82 m), leg. M. Isaia. 1 female id. Isaia. 010B, Italy, Liguria, Imperia, Ubaghi- Montalto Ligure (43.93°N, 7.84°E, alt 326m), leg. S. Beikes. 1 female id. Isaia. 151, Italy, Liguria, Ubaghi-Montalto Ligure (43.93°N, 7.85°E), leg. M. Isaia. 1 female id. NHMB.002, Italy, Liguria, Rochetta Nervina (43.88°N, 7.60E, alt 970 m), leg. M. G. Comotti.

Morphological variation. We did not observe any morphological variation that might hint at the existence of species level diversity between specimen taken from the French and Italian populations of C. moggridgei .

Diagnosis. See diagnosis of C. sauvagesi above. Simon (1914: 3–5, figs 1–10) described and figured diagnostic differences in both sexes to distinguish C. moggridgei from C. sauvagesi . As the most prominent distinguishing character Simon noted and figured a transverse recurved ‘groove’ (“ d’un profond sillon tranverse un peu recurve ” Simon 1914: 4, fig. 6) in the male cephalic part of C. moggridgei . This character had earlier been noted by Ausserer (1875: 147–148). Buchli (1968: 24) reports on this character that he observed it with difficulty in three specimens in a sample of five. We observed Simon’s ‘ sillon’ (furrow, scratch, groove) and Ausserer’s ‘ furche’ (furrow, wrinkle, groove) in two out of three males included in our sample as a rather inconspicuous, although notable character. We found all Simon’s diagnostic characters, safe the general size difference, including the ‘ sillon’ on the male carapace, to be variable at the species level and therefore of low diagnostic value.

Description. Female (id. Isaia-020), Italy, Liguria, Quiliano (44.29°N, 8.38°E, alt 82 m), leg. M. Isaia. Carapace: greenish brown, shiny (Fig. 33), almost glabrous with few bristles around the eye-group and on the crest of the bulging cephalic part only, fovea procurved, deep, posterior edge concave. Eye-group (Fig. 38): anterior eyes grey, posterior eyes grey, eye-group wider than long (PR/EL= 1.7), AR slightly shorter than PR (AR/PR= 0.94), ALE largest, PME larger than PLE, AME twice their diameter apart, eyes grouped on and around low ocular process. Chelicerae: very strong, warm brown, further as C. sauvagesi . Maxillae: field proximal cuspules stronger developed than in C. sauvagesi . Labium and sternum as C. sauvagesi . Palps and Legs: short and strong slightly lighter colored than carapace, spine patterns largely as in C. sauvagesi although Buchli (1968) reports smaller numbers of spines on metatarsus I (20–22 in C. moggridgei versus 25–31 in C. sauvagesi) and tarsus IV (7–11 in C. moggridgei versus 11–15 in C. sauvagesi). We have observed, with Pickard-Cambridge (1874: 286), that the spine patterns on the prolateral face of leg III, mostly on the patella, are diagnostic in many trapdoor spiders species. In the here described specimen of C. moggridgei the spine settings on prolateral leg III are more strongly developed than the type of C. sauvagesi with two tibia spines and more numerous spines on the patella and metatarsus. Tarsal claws, abdomen, spinnerets and spermathecae (Fig. 2) as described for C. sauvagesi (see also Buchli 1968 for a detailed description).

Measurements. TBL= 18.1, CL= 6.2, CW= 5.4, SL= 4.1, SW= 3.2, AR= 1.16, PR= 1.24, EL= 0.75, PaL= 9.8, LegI= 11.9, LegII= 10.7, LegIII= 10.6, LegIV= 15.3, Int= 0.45, Ext= 0.72, LRL= 0.30, LRR= 0.27.

Description. Male (id. Shu. 19.06.14) France, Alpes Maritimes, Sospel (43.91°N, 7.47°E), leg. S. Huber. Carapace (Fig. 44): roundish with thickened rim, tegument dull brown and finely sculptured, caput low, fovea deep procurved. Eyes formation virtually rectangular, ALE largest. Chelicerae: as in female, but in all aspects more lighter built. Sternum, as in female. Labium and maxillae without cuspules or with cuspules strongly reduced. Palps, as in C. sauvagesi, Leg I with strong development of spines relative to C. sauvagesi (Figs. 29–30). Bulb: with slenderer and more proximally curved embolus than C. sauvagesi (Figs. 66–69). Claws, abdomen and spinnerets as in C. sauvagesi .

Measurements. TBL= 10.2, CL= 4.1, CW= 3.6, SL= 2.6, SW= 2.0, AR= 0.77, PR= 0.85, EL= 0.48, PaL= 9.9, LegI= 12.5, LegII= 11.0, LegIII= 9.2, LegIV= 13.1, BuL= 1.46, EmL= 0.69, BuW= 0.62.

Size variation. Males (n= 3): TBL= 9.0–13.5, CL= 4.1–6.1, CW= 3.6–5.3, SL= 2.6–2.8, SW= 2.0–2.3, AR= 0.77–0.78, PR= 0.85, EL= 0.48–0,49, dAME= 0.11–0.13, disAME= 0.12–0.14, PaL= 9.6–9.9, LegI= 12.5–12.8, LegII= 11.0–11.4, LegIII= 9.2–10.1, LegIV= 13.1–14.1, BuL= 1.46–1.49, EmL= 0.62–0.69, BuW= 0.51–0.62. Females (n= 5): TBL= 14.0–18.1, CL= 4.8–6.3, CW= 4.4–5.5, SL= 3.2–4.1, SW= 2.5–3.3, AR= 0.91–1.20, PR= 0.54–0.79, EL= 0.48–0,49, dAME= 0.13–0.14, disAME= 0.13–0.22, PaL= 7.9–10.1, LegI= 9.7–12.4, LegII= 8.7– 11.7, LegIII= 8.3–11.1, LegIV= 11.6–15.3.