Aranea longipes Fabricius, 1781: 545 Nephila robusta Tikader, 1962: 566 Tikader, 1982: 100 On a new synonymy in the spider genus Nephila Leach, 1815 (Araneidae Nephilinae) from India with supplementary notes on colour polymorphism in the genus Sankaran, Pradeep M. Caleb, John T. D. Joseph, Mathew M. Sebastian, Pothalil A. Zootaxa 2020 2020-06-04 4786 4 592 596 Leach, 1815 Leach 1815 [151,405,1789,1816] Arachnida Nephilidae Nephila Animalia Araneae 0 592 Arthropoda genus   Figs 1–3      Aranea longipes Fabricius, 1781: 545. (For complete list of references, see World Spider Catalog 2020).     Nephila robusta Tikader, 1962: 566;  Tikader, 1982: 100, figs 191–194. Holotypefemale from INDIA: West Bengal: North 24 Parganas: Gobardanga ( 22 o52’59.62’’N, 88 o45’49.79’’E), 13 malt.; B.K. Tikader leg.; 30 September 1956; repository NZC-ZSI, Kolkata (2566/18), examined. New synonymy.   Type material status.The ZSI collection has one glass bottle for this species, labelled as holotype, containing the female specimen in good condition. The same bottle has a small glass vial containing the dissected genitalia.  Additional material examined.   INDIA,  Kerala: Kollam, Kulathupuzha Forest Reserve( 8 o54’06.37’’N, 77 o03’51.70’’E),  134 malt.,  31 July 2013, M.S. Pradeepleg., by hand: 1 black morphmale, 3 black morphfemales ( ADSH623218), 4 yellow morphmales and 12 yellow morphfemales ( ADSH623318).  Ernakulam, Kothamangalam, Salim Ali Bird Sanctuary( Thattekkadu Bird Sanctuary) ( 10 o07’48.3’’N, 76 o41’43.24’’E),  96 malt.,  2 October 2013, M.S. Pradeepleg., by hand: 2 black morphmales, 2 black morphfemales ( ADSH623418), 4 yellow morphmales and 9 yellow morphfemales ( ADSH623518).  Justification of the synonymy.Detailed examination of the holotypeof  N. robustarevealed that this species has all of the diagnostic features of  N. pilipes( Harvey et al.2007): longer than broad opisthosoma with a broad mid-dorsal longitudinal band, very wide and narrow epigynum with paired lateral indentations and deep depression across posterior margin, short and thick copulatory ducts and wide and flat fertilization ducts (compare Fig. 2A–C with Harvey et al.2007: figs 4, 28–29). Although the spermathecal bulb of  N. robustalooks more spherical in shape, it may be attributed to intraspecific variation and would not warrant the recognition of  N. robustaa separate species. The species  N. robustashould thus be considered as a junior synonym of  N. pilipes.  Note.  Nephila pilipesis notable for its colour polymorphism ( Dahl 1912; Tso et al. 2004; Harvey et al.2007). We also have observed two distinct colour morphs in the Indian population of  N. pilipes: black morphwith black opisthosoma and reddish legs and yellow morph(typical morph of  N. pilipes) with yellow stripes and spots on opisthosoma and greyish-black legs ( Fig. 1A–B). In some black morphs, the opisthosoma has an inconspicuous mid-dorsal longitudinal greyish-black patch. The males of both blackand yellow morphsare identical in somatic colouration (uniform reddish-brown colouration) except the occurrence of longitudinally arranged silver spots on the opisthosoma of the latter ( Fig. 1C–D). Except for these variations in somatic colouration, in all other respects, including the morphology of genitalia, the black morphis highly similar to yellow morph(compare Fig. 3A–D with Fig. 3E–H).   FIGURE 2A–J.  Nephilaspecies described from India. A–D  Nephila robusta Tikader, 1962: A, Holotype female habitus, dorsal. B, Epigynum of the same, ventral. C, Vulva of the same, dorsal; D, Label from type bottle. E–G, One of the  Nephilaspecimens in the ZSI collection labelled as ‘  Nephila kuhlii’ ( Doleschall, 1859). E, Epigynum, ventral. F, Vulva, dorsal. G, Label from the jar. H–J,  Nephila angustataStoliczka, 1869; H, female type, dorsal; I, same, prolateral; J, label from type bottle. Scale bars: B–C, H–I, 1 mm; E–F, 0.5 mm. A not to scale. We were unable to locate the typematerial of  N. dirangensisin the arachnid collection of ZSI, even though the authors claimed that the typeswere deposited there ( Biswas & Biswas 2006). However, while examining specimens from Uttarakhanddeposited in ZSI, we found a few  Nephilaspecimens that are identified as  N. dirangensisby one of the original authorities of  N. dirangensis(Bijan Biswas). These specimens in fact belong to  Trichonephila clavata(L. Koch, 1878), indicating that  N. dirangensismay be a junior synonym of  T. clavata. But confirmation requires examination of typeor topotype materials of  N. dirangensis. The ZSI collection has a glass jar containing seven female specimens in separate glass tubes labelled as ‘  N. kuhlii’. These specimens in fact represent the black morphof  N. pilipes(compare Fig. 2E–F with Figs 2B–C and 3C–D). The species illustrated as ‘  N. kuhlii’ in Tikader (1982)also is a black morphin its genitalic details (compare Tikader 1982: figs 200–201 with Fig. 3C–D). All these indicate that the species identified/described from Indiaas ‘  N. kuhlii’ is indeed a black morphof  N. pilipes. Additionally, we also examined the typeof  Nephila angustataStoliczka, 1869(three female specimens; 3552/10) (now a synonym of  Leucauge decorata(Blackwall, 1864))( Fig. 2H–I) and all are in a bad condition. 2013-07-31 ADSH M. S. Pradeep India 134 8.901769 Kulathupuzha Forest Reserve 1 77.06436 Kollam 1 593 ADSH623218 1 Kerala [338,1106,1364,1388] ADSH India 1 593 ADSH623318 1 Kerala 2013-10-02 ADSH M. S. Pradeep India Ernakulam 96 10.130083 Salim Ali Bird Sanctuary 1 76.69534 Kothamangalam 1 593 ADSH623418 1 Kerala ADSH India 1 593 ADSH623518 1 Kerala