Sphingius Thorell, 1890

Sphingius Thorell, 1890: 284; Gravely, 1931: 269; Majumder & Tikader, 1991: 147; Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001: 488; Tso, Zhang, Zhu & Zhang, 2005: 48.

Thamphilus Thorell, 1895: 35.

Alaeho Barrion and Litsinger, 1995: 170 .

Scotophaeoides Schenkel, 1963: 49 . New synonymy.

Type species: Sphingius thecatus Thorell, 1890, by original designation.

Diagnosis (Chinese Sphingius only). Species of this genus can be distinguished from other liocranid spiders by the following combination of characters: tarsi I-III almost as long as metatarsi; anterior tibiae and metatarsi spineless; male carapace with angular granulations along margin; thoracic groove obsolete, but fronted by a triangular dark marking. In addition, male abdomen with nearly entire dorsal, epigastric, and ventral scuta; in females, only a tripartite epigastric scutum present (but without distinct epigastric scutum in Sphingius sinensis). Embolus spine-like or filiform, conductor membranous or absent, median apophysis compact, cymbium with a dense cluster of fine hairs dorsally near apical tip. Epigyne usually with an anterior or two lateral depressions, and vulva with pairs of large spermathecae and small bursae (for the term ‘bursa’, we followed Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001).

Sphingius is similar to the genera Sesieutes Simon, 1897 and Teutamus Thorell, 1890, all of them having a cymbium with a dense cluster of fine hairs near apical tip. Sphingius is distinct from Sesieutes by the nearly entire dorsal scutum in males, by the anterior tibiae and metatarsi spineless, and by the small bursae present, while bursae are absent or larger in the other genera (Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001). Sphingius is distinct from Teutamus by the anterior tibiae and metatarsi spineless (anterior tibiae and metatarsi with spines in Teutamus); by the truncate posterior margin of carapace (wedge-shaped in Teutamus); by the male carapace with angular granulations along the margin (with undulating margins and four pairs of lateral lobes in Teutamus) (Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001); also by having a basal dorsal spine on femora, tegulum not inflated (inflated in Teutamus), presence of median apophysis on male bulbus, female epigastric sclerite not surrounding petiolus (surrounding in Teutamus), and the presence of epigynal hood (Bosselaers & Jocqué 2002).

Description (Chinese Sphingius only). Small to medium-sized liocranids, about 3–8 mm in length. Carapace convex, yellow-brown to dark red, densely covered with granulations, pits or smooth, ovoid in dorsal view (Figs. 1, 9, 13, 21, 26), male carapace with angular granulations along the margin except anterior edge; some female species carapace with hairs along the lateral margin. Clypeus often rebordered and with a triangular chilum, clypeal height about the same as AME diameter. Thoracic groove obsolete, often fronted by a triangular dark marking. Eye group width more than 2/3 of carapace width. Eyes in two transverse rows, both procurved in front view; AER slightly recurved, PER straight or slightly recurved in dorsal view and longer than AER (Figs. 4, 17, 23). AME usually smallest, PME biggest. Chelicerae colored as carapace, covered with minute granulations or smooth, cheliceral boss pronounced in most species. Chelicerae usually armed with three promarginal teeth and two widely spaced retromarginal teeth (Figs. 3, 22). Endites longer than wide, constricted at middle on lateral margin, anterior edge with distinct serrula and scopula. Labium slightly wider than long (Figs. 5, 15), anterior margin truncate and even with a slight concavity centrally. Sternum (Figs. 5, 15) longer than wide, shield shaped, some species covered with granulations, posterior margin truncate and extending between coxae IV; lateral margin with precoxal triangles and intercoxal sclerites. Space above the coxae and below the carapace with longitudinal, sclerotized pleural bars. Legs brown, femora with one or two small dorsal spines basally, anterior tibiae and metatarsi spineless, posterior metatarsi with apical combing brush ventrally. Tarsi in legs I–III being almost as long as the metatarsi. Leg formula: 4123.

Abdomen oval, longer than wide, widest in posterior half (Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001), brown or gray, in males with dorsal and ventral scuta, covering nearly all, or at least four-fifths of dorsum; ventral scutum composed of an epigastric and a full postgentital scutum; females without dorsal scutum, epigastric scutum tripartite, divided into a central plate and two lateral plates (Figs. 1, 2, 9, 13, 14, 21, 26), indistinct in Sphingius sinensis; some species with one or two pairs of muscular impressions dorsally, and with two rows of dark spots or marks in the venter. Six spinnerets, ALS conical and juxtaposed, distal segment of PLS short and flat, female PMS feebly compressed laterally, male PMS cylindrical (Deeleman-Reinhold 2001).

Male palpal tibia with simple retrolateral apophysis. Tegulum rounded at base; sperm duct a distinct, long loop encircling the tegulum, often originating from upper part of tegulum; subtegulum small, darker than tegulum, visible prolaterally (Figs. 6, 7). Spine-like or filiform embolus originating from prolateral tegulum, often short and thin (Figs. 6, 30), only occasionally longer and reaching beyond tip of tegulum (Figs. 10, 11). Median apophysis variously shaped, often blocky, arising retrolaterally from tegulum, usually with processes in different directions (Figs. 6, 11, 30). Conductor small, semi-transparent, membranous (Figs. 6, 11, 30), difficult to see or absent in some species. Cymbium with dorsal cluster of fine hairs near tip. Epigyne generally framed by anterior depression and posterior convex plate, often with one (in most species) or two atrial hoods; copulatory openings often near the middle of the epigynal plate, situated in the corners of the depressions, leading through funnel-shaped ducts to the spermathecae and bursae. Spermathecae posterior, globose or kidney-shaped; bursae anterior, usually smaller, thin-walled; a short connecting tube between the anterior bursa and posterior spermatheca.

Note. According to Deeleman-Reinhold (2001), the type species of the genus was never illustrated or reexamined. Deeleman-Reinhold could not find the type specimen in the “Museo civico storie naturale, Genoa”, and we presume that it may be lost. We follow Deeleman-Reinhold in the characterization of the genus. According to our examinations, the Chinese species have a dorsal cluster of fine hairs near tip of cymbium, but such a cluster was not mentioned or illustrated by Deeleman-Reinhold.