Phrurolithus C.L. Koch, 1839

Zamani, Alireza & Marusik, Yuri M., 2020, A survey of Phrurolithidae (Arachnida: Araneae) in southern Caucasus, Iran and Central Asia, Zootaxa 4758 (2), pp. 311-329 : 312-313

Phrurolithus C.L. Koch, 1839

Phrurolithus C.L. Koch 1839: 105 .

Phrurolithus: Wiehle 1967: 16 ; Sterghiu 1985: 145; Grimm 1986: 47.

Type species. Macaria festiva C.L. Koch, 1835 .

Diagnosis. Males of Phrurolithus differ from those of Phrurolinillus by having a retroventral tibial apophysis (Va, Figs 2B–C , 3A ) and lacking a dorsal tibial apophysis (vs. retroventral apophysis absent, dorsal tibial apophysis present). They can be separated from Liophrurillus by having a retroventral tibial apophysis that is as long as or longer than the tibia and much longer than the retrolateral apophysis, whereas in Liophrurillus the retroventral apophysis is shorter than the retrolateral. Otacilia males differ from those of Phrurolithus by the absence of a small retrolateral apophysis and the ridge-like extension of the palpal femur, which is digitiform in Phrurolithus . All genera of Phrurolithidae occurring in Eurasia differ from Abdosetae by the lack of long setae on the venter of abdomen. Furthermore, Phrurolithus spp. differ from most species of Otacilia by the abdominal pattern lacking transverse stripes.

Comments. A study of all illustrated descriptions of East Asian species currently assigned to Phrurolithus enabled us to recognize that all of them are misplaced and appear to be morphologically closer to Otacilia by lacking long retroventral and short retrolateral tibial apophyses, and having light colouration with transverse abdominal bars (in most of the species). It is worth mentioning that the male of the type species, O. armatissima Thorell, 1897 , remains unknown.

Since the morphology of the male palp is different from that of P. festivus , we transfer 27 Phrurolithus species to Otacilia , hence the following new combinations:

Otacilia annula (Zhou, Wang & Zhang, 2013) comb. n., O. antica (Wang, Chen, Zhou, Zhang & Zhang, 2015) comb. n., O. bifida (Yin, Ubick, Bao & Xu, 2004) comb. n., O. cangshan (Yang, Fu, Zhang & Zhang, 2010) comb. n., O. celata (Fu, Chen & Zhang, 2016) comb. n., O. clavata (Yao, Irfan & Peng, 2019) comb. n., O. coreana (Paik, 1991) comb. n., O. dianchiensis ( Yin, Peng, Gong & Kim, 1997) comb. n., O. fanjingshan (Wang, Chen, Zhou, Zhang & Zhang, 2015) comb. n., O. fausta (Paik, 1991) comb. n., O. hamata (Wang, Zhang & Zhang, 2012) comb. n., O. involuta (Yao, Irfan & Peng, 2019) comb. n., O. longa (Fu, Chen & Zhang, 2016) comb. n., O. nigera ( Yin, 2012) comb. n., O. palgongensis (Seo, 1988) comb. n., O. pennata (Yaginuma, 1967) comb. n., O. qiqiensis (Yin, Ubick, Bao & Xu, 2004) comb. n., O. splendida (Song & Zheng, 1992) comb. n., O. squamaca (Yao, Irfan & Peng, 2019) comb. n., O. subannula (Fu, Chen & Zhang, 2016) comb. n., O. subnigera (Fu, Chen & Zhang, 2016) comb. n., O. taoyuan (Fu, Chen & Zhang, 2016) comb. n., O. valida (Fu, Chen & Zhang, 2016) comb. n., O. wanshou ( Yin, 2012) comb. n., O. zhejiangensis (Song & Kim, 1991) comb. n., O. zhouyun (Wang, Chen, Zhou, Zhang & Zhang, 2015) comb. n., O. zongxu (Wang, Zhang & Zhang, 2012) comb. n., all ex. Phrurolithus .

It is worth noting that all of the Nearctic Phrurolithus species seem to be misplaced in the genus ( Platnick 2019). Although these species have a digitiform femoral extension, large retrolateral tibial apophysis (RTA) with two arms, and spiniform embolus, the retroventral apophysis is missing, and instead, there is a large RTA. Species with a digitiform femoral extension and a large two-armed RTA may belong to Scotinella Banks, 1911 . The type species of this genus, S. pallida Banks, 1911 , is only known from the female, and its unknown male may have palpal modifications like those mentioned.

Note. Homology of two palpal sclerites in Phrurolithus is unclear to us, and we call them terminal (located mesally, closer to the embolus) and subterminal (retrolateral). Since the terminal one is strongly sclerotized, it cannot be homologized with a conductor, even though it is located close to the embolus, and although the subterminal apophysis originates from the tegulum, it cannot be called a “median (=tegular)” apophysis, because it does not have a flexible connection with the tegulum.

Figures

FIGURE 2. Copulatory organs of Phrurolithus azarkinae sp. n. A–C male palp, prolateral, ventral and retrolateral; D epigyne intact, ventral; E macerated epigyne, dorsal; F dissected epigyne, ventral. Scale=0.2 mm. Abbreviations: Co—copulatory opening, Em—embolus, Fd—fertilization duct, Fe—femoral extension, Gr—receptacular gland, Pr—primary receptacle, Ra—retrolateral apophysis, Sd—sperm duct, Sr—secondary receptacle, Va—retroventral apophysis.

FIGURE 3. SEM micrographs of Phrurolithus azarkinae sp. n. (A–D) and Bosselaerius hyrcanicus sp. n. (E). A–C male palp, ventral, ventro-retrolateral and retrolateral; D terminal part of the male palp, ventral; E leg I, prolateral. Scale=0.1 mm. Abbreviations: Em—embolus, Pa—proventral apophysis, Ra—retrolateral apophysis, Sa—subterminal apophysis, Ta—terminal apophysis, Va—retroventral apophysis.