DOCSLIB.ORG

A Check-List of the Spiders of Arkansas Peggy Rae Dorris Henderson State University

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Check-List of the Spiders of Arkansas Peggy Rae Dorris Henderson State University Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 39 Article 10 1985 A Check-list of the Spiders of Arkansas Peggy Rae Dorris Henderson State University Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Dorris, Peggy Rae (1985) "A Check-list of the Spiders of Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 39 , Article 10. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol39/iss1/10 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 39 [1985], Art. 10 A CHECK-LIST OF THE SPIDERS OF ARKANSAS PEGGY RAE DORRIS Henderson State University Arkadelphia, AR 71923 ABSTRACT Collections of spiders were made from 1966, to the present in the sixphysiographic regions of Arkan- sas. During this time 435 species representing 35 families were collected and recorded. INTRODUCTION mixed grasses, fields ofmixed grasses, shrubs, herbs, mud-dauber nests, and water surfaces. The number ofspecimens decreased as temperature Research has been in progress for the past 18 years to provide a and humidity increased. checklist of Arkansas spiders. Dorris (1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, Figure 1, Pell(1983), represents the six physiographic regions covered 1980); Dorris and Burnside (1977); Beck and Dorris (1983); and Dorris in this study. Itis the belief ofthis author that at least 90% ofthe spider and Saugey (1983); made numerous studies in an effort to cover the fauna of Arkansas has been identified. The Arkansas spider checklist major physiographic regions ofthe state. Whitcomb, Exline, and Hite of species follows and common names are employed where known. (1963); Whitcomb and Tadic (1963); Whitcomb and Bell (1964); and Warren, Peck, and Tadic (1967) made arthropod studies in agricultural habitats of the Ozark Mountain Area. Heiss (1977) collected specimens from pit traps located in two counties of the Ozark Mountain Area. The six physiographic regions of Arkansas as defined by the En- vironmental and Conservation office of the Department of Education, show significant ecological differences withhabitat diversity including mountains, upland hardwoods, bottomland hardwoods, loblolly- shortleaf pine, cedar glade, upland prairie, to caves. The purpose of this lengthy study has been to determine the spider fauna of Arkansas. Itis the authors opinion that at least 90% of the species have been identified, while recognizing that an ecological study of this scope can rarely be definitive. METHODS AND MATERIALS Several methods and types of instrumentation for collecting wereused. They were (a) heavy duty sweep net in grasses and heavy brush, (b) wire mesh for leaf litter, (c) chopping bark from trees, (d) hand pick- ing from bushes, ground and old dwellings and other related places, (e) mud-dauber nest collections to reveal paralyzed spiders captured by mud-daubers, (f)night spot-lighting. Pit traps were used extensive- ly inDrew County and Heiss (1977) also employed this sampling tech- nique. Collections from other institutions such as University of Arkansas at Fayetteville and L.S.U. at Baton Rouge were examined. Most of the collections were made between the hours of 9 A.M.and 1 OZARK MOUNTAINS NATURAL DIVISION 5 P.M. The specimens were preserved in screw cap vials containing 75% la Salem Plateau Subdivision ethyl alcohol. lb Springfield Plateau Subdivision In all physiographic regions 8-10 check stations were set up across lc Boston Mountains Subdivision the whole region so that coverage of the various habitats could be assured. 2 ARKANSAS VALLEY NATURAL DIVISION Names used are those employed by Kaston and Kaston (1972), Gertsch (1974), and Comstock (1982). Species are listed alphabetically. The ar- 3 OUACHITA MOUNTAINS NATURAL DIVISION rangement followed is that of Kaston (1948, 1978). Other literature 3a Fourche Mountains Subdivision used for identification of specimens included: Archer (1951), Brady 3b Central Ouachita Mountains Subdivision i (1964, 1969), Bell(1967), Bowling and Sauer (1975), Carico and Holt 3c Athens Piedmont Plateau Subdivision (1964), Dondale (1961), Dondale and Redner (1968), Emerton (1961), Exline (1938, 1962), Exline and Levi(1962), Gertsch (1934, 1949, 1953, 4 WEST GULF COASTAL PLAINNATURAL DIVISION 1979), Ivie (1969), Kaston (1973), Peck (1966, 1981), Peck and Peck 4a Southwestern Arkansas (1982), Rapp (1980), and Sauer and Platnick (1972). 4b Southcentral Arkansas 5 MISSISSIPPI ALLUVIALPLAINNATURAL DIVISION RESULTS ANDDISCUSSION 5a Bottomlands Subdivision i 5b Loessial Plains Subdivision Four hundred thirty-five species representing 35 families were col- lected from the followinghabitat types: forests, mixed deciduous and 6 CROWLEY'S RIDGE NATURAL DIVISION pine forests, buildings, inhabited dwellings, abandoned dwellings, barns and other out buildings, caves, mine tunnels, roadsides, bare ground, Figure 1. Natural Divisions of Arkansas Published by34 Arkansas Academy of Science, 1985 34 Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 39 [1985], Art. 10 Peggy Rae Dorris A CHECKLIST OF THE SPIDERS OF ARKANSAS Theridula emertoni (Levi) Theridion australe Banks ANTRODIAETIDAE Folding-door trap-door spiders Theridion differens Emerton Antrodiaetus unicolor (Hentz) Theridion flavonotatum Becker THERAPHOSIDAE "Ordinary" tarantulas Theridion frondeum Hentz Dugesiella hentzi (Girard) Theridion intervallatum Emerton CTENIZIDAE Trap-door spiders Theridion murarium Emerton Bothriocyrtum californicum (O. P. Cambridge) Theridion neshamini Levi audouini (Lucas) Common trap-door spider Theridion rabuni Chamberlin &Ivie KUmmidiaISTATIDAE Theridion tinctum Walckenaer hibernalis Hentz Brown house spider Tidarren sisyphoides (Walckenaer) SFilistataCOBIIDAE Ulesanis americana Emerton Oecobius annulipes Lucas NESTICIDAE Oecobius cellariorum (Duges) Eidmannella pallida (Emerton) Oecobius texanus Bryant LINYPHIIDAE ULOBORIDAE Florinda coccinea (Hentz) Hyptiotes cavatus (Hentz) Triangle spider Frontinella pyramitela (Walckenaer) Bowl & doily spider Uloborus diversus Marx Lepthyphantes nebulosa (Keyserling) Uloborus glomosus (Walckenaer) Feather-legged spider Meioneta fabra (Keyserling) DICTYNIDAE Meioneta meridionalis Crosby & Bishop Dictyna annulipes (Blackwall) Meioneta micaria Emerton Dictyna bicornis (Emerton) Porrhomma cavernicolum Keyserling Dictyna hentzi Kaston Prolynphia maculata Emerton Dictyna segregata Gertsch & Mulaik Prolynphia marginata (C. L. Koch) Dictyna volucripes Keyserling MICRYPHANTIDAE Lathys pallida (Marx) Ceraticelus creolus Chamberlin White-eyed spiders Ceraticelus similis (Banks) Amaurobius bennetti (Blackwall) Eperigone maculata (Banks) Amaurobius ferox (Walckenaer) Eperigone tridentata (Emerton) Callioplus tibialis (Emerton) Eperigone trilobata (Emerton) Titanoeca americana Emerton Erigone autumnalis Emerton r\UROBIIDAESCYTODIDAE Spitting spiders Gonatium rubens (Blackwall) Scytodes thoracica (Latreille) Grammonota inornata Emerton Scytodes perfecta Banks Grammonota maculata Banks LOXOSCELIDAE Grammonota texana (Banks) Loxosceles reclusa Gertsch & Mulaik Brown recluse- Walckenaera spiralis (Emerton) Violin spider Walckenaera vigilax (Blackwall) Loxosceles rufescens (Dufour) THERIDIOSOMATIDAE Ray spiders LEPTONETIDAE Theridiosoma radiosa (McCook) Ray spider arkansa Gertsch ARANEIDAE Typical orb weavers KLeptonetaESTRIIDAE Acacesia hamata (Hentz) Ariadna bicolor (Hentz) Acanthepeira moesta Comstock PHOLCIDAE Cellar spiders Acanthepeira Stella ta (Marx) Star-bellied spider Pholcus phalangioides (Fuesslin) Long-bodied cellar spiders Acanthepeira vanusta (Banks) Spernophora meridionalis Hentz Short-bodied cellar spiders Araneus cavaticus (Keyserling) THERIDIIDAE Comb-footed spiders Araneus cingulatus (Walckenaer) Achaearanea globosa (Hentz) Araneus gemma (McCook) Achaearanea porteri (Banks) Araneus frondosa (Linnaeus) Foliate spider Achaearanea tepidariorum (C. L. Koch) House spider- Araneus guttulatus (Walkenaer) Domestic spider Araneus juniperi (Emerton) Argyrodes trigonum (Hentz) Araneus marmoreus Clerck Marbled spider A^elosimus textrix (Walckenaer) Araneus miniatus (Walckenaer) Conopistha rufa (Walckenaer) Araneus nordmanni (Thorell) Conopistha trigona (Hentz) Araneus partitus (Walckenaer) Ctenium riparius (Keyserling) Araneus thaddeus (Hentz) Dipoena nigra (Emerton) Araniella displicata (Hentz) Diopena buccalis Keyserling Argiope aurantis Lucas Black & yellow garden spider- Euryopis limbata (Walckenaer) Writing spider Euryopis funebris (Hentz) Argiope trifasciata (Forskal) Banded garden spider Latrodectus geometricus C. L. Koch Conopeira ozarkansis Archer Latrodectus hasselti Thorel Cyclosa bifurca (Hentz) Latrodectus hesperus Chamberlin &Ivie Cyclosa conica (Pallas) Latrodectus mactans (Fabricius) Black widow Cyclosa turbinata (Walkenaer) Latrodectus variolus (Walckenaer) Epeira cornuta (Clerck) Rhomphaea lacerta (Walckenaer) Eustala anastera (Walckenaer) Spintharus flavidus Hentz Eustala arkansana Archer Steatoda palmara
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arachnids (Excluding Acarina and Pseudoscorpionida) of the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge, Oklahoma
    OCCASIONAL PAPERS THE MUSEUM TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY NUMBER 67 5 SEPTEMBER 1980 ARACHNIDS (EXCLUDING ACARINA AND PSEUDOSCORPIONIDA) OF THE WICHITA MOUNTAINS WILDLIFE REFUGE, OKLAHOMA JAMES C. COKENDOLPHER AND FRANK D. BRYCE The Wichita Mountains are located in eastern Greer, southern Kiowa, and northwestern Comanche counties in Oklahoma. Since their formation more than 300 million years ago, these rugged mountains have been fragmented and weathered, until today the highest peak (Mount Pinchot) stands only 756 meters above sea level (Tyler, 1977). The mountains are composed predominantly of granite and gabbro. Forests of oak, elm, and walnut border most waterways, while at elevations from 153 to 427 meters prair­ ies are the predominant vegetation type. A more detailed sum­ mary of the climatic and biotic features of the Wichitas has been presented by Blair and Hubbell (1938). A large tract of land in the eastern range of the Wichita Moun­ tains (now northeastern Comanche County) was set aside as the Wichita National Forest by President McKinley during 1901. In 1905, President Theodore Roosevelt created a game preserve on those lands managed by the Forest Service. Since 1935, this pre­ serve has been known as the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge. Numerous papers on Oklahoma spiders have been published (Bailey and Chada, 1968; Bailey et al., 1968; Banks et al, 1932; Branson, 1958, 1959, 1966, 1968; Branson and Drew, 1972; Gro- thaus, 1968; Harrel, 1962, 1965; Horner, 1975; Rogers and Horner, 1977), but only a single, comprehensive work (Banks et al., 1932) exists covering all arachnid orders in the state. Further additions and annotations to the arachnid fauna of Oklahoma can be found 2 OCCASIONAL PAPERS MUSEUM TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY in recent revisionary studies.
    [Show full text]
  • SPIDERS of WASHINGTON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI Orrey P. Young Southern Field Crop Insect Management Laboratory USDA-ARS, P.O. Box
    Young, O . P., T. C . Lockley and G . B . Edwards . 1989 . Spiders of Washington County, Mississippi . J . Arachnol ., 17 :27-41 . SPIDERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI Orrey P. Young Southern Field Crop Insect Management Laboratory USDA-ARS, P.O. Box 346 Stoneville, Mississippi 38776 USA Timothy C. Lockley Imported Fire Ant Station USDA-APHIS-PPQ 3505 25th Avenue Gulfport, Mississippi 39501 USA and G. B. Edwards Florida State Collection of Arthropods Division of Plant Industry Florida Dept. Agric. & Cons . Serv. P.O. Box 1269 Gainesville, Florida 32602 USA ABSTRACT Over a seven-year period, approximately 35,000 spiders representing 26 families, 133 genera, and 234 species were captured in Washington County, Mississippi, by pitfall, sweepnet, vacuum, bag, and hand. Specimens were collected in 10 different habitat types and in four vegetational strata . Old-field habitats yielded the most species (152) and residential lawns the fewest (14) . Considering all habitats sampled, the ground layer produced 111 species, the herbaceous strata 133, the shrub layer 49, and the tree strata 30 species . The sweepnet method of capture obtained 128 species, pitfall 95, hand 61, vacuum 53, and bagging 19 species. The largest number of species were obtained in spring and early summer (maximum of 125 in May), with the fewest in mid-winter (Jan . = 24) . Twenty-one species were considered abundant, 51 common, 67 uncommon, and 95 rare . Additions to the state list of Dorris (1972) number 102 species, for a new state total of 364 species . A comparison with the North American fauna and with other surveys indicates that Washington County is underrepresented both in cursorial forms active on the soil surface and web-spinning forms typical of undisturbed habitats .
    [Show full text]
  • Abundance and Community Composition of Arboreal Spiders: the Relative Importance of Habitat Structure
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Juraj Halaj for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Entomology presented on May 6, 1996. Title: Abundance and Community Composition of Arboreal Spiders: The Relative Importance of Habitat Structure. Prey Availability and Competition. Abstract approved: Redacted for Privacy _ John D. Lattin, Darrell W. Ross This work examined the importance of structural complexity of habitat, availability of prey, and competition with ants as factors influencing the abundance and community composition of arboreal spiders in western Oregon. In 1993, I compared the spider communities of several host-tree species which have different branch structure. I also assessed the importance of several habitat variables as predictors of spider abundance and diversity on and among individual tree species. The greatest abundance and species richness of spiders per 1-m-long branch tips were found on structurally more complex tree species, including Douglas-fir, Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirbel) Franco and noble fir, Abies procera Rehder. Spider densities, species richness and diversity positively correlated with the amount of foliage, branch twigs and prey densities on individual tree species. The amount of branch twigs alone explained almost 70% of the variation in the total spider abundance across five tree species. In 1994, I experimentally tested the importance of needle density and branching complexity of Douglas-fir branches on the abundance and community structure of spiders and their potential prey organisms. This was accomplished by either removing needles, by thinning branches or by tying branches. Tying branches resulted in a significant increase in the abundance of spiders and their prey. Densities of spiders and their prey were reduced by removal of needles and thinning.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan 2011-2016
    Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan 2011-2016 April 1981 Revised, May 1982 2nd revision, April 1983 3rd revision, December 1999 4th revision, May 2011 Prepared for U.S. Department of Commerce Ohio Department of Natural Resources National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Division of Wildlife Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management 2045 Morse Road, Bldg. G Estuarine Reserves Division Columbus, Ohio 1305 East West Highway 43229-6693 Silver Spring, MD 20910 This management plan has been developed in accordance with NOAA regulations, including all provisions for public involvement. It is consistent with the congressional intent of Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, and the provisions of the Ohio Coastal Management Program. OWC NERR Management Plan, 2011 - 2016 Acknowledgements This management plan was prepared by the staff and Advisory Council of the Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve (OWC NERR), in collaboration with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources-Division of Wildlife. Participants in the planning process included: Manager, Frank Lopez; Research Coordinator, Dr. David Klarer; Coastal Training Program Coordinator, Heather Elmer; Education Coordinator, Ann Keefe; Education Specialist Phoebe Van Zoest; and Office Assistant, Gloria Pasterak. Other Reserve staff including Dick Boyer and Marje Bernhardt contributed their expertise to numerous planning meetings. The Reserve is grateful for the input and recommendations provided by members of the Old Woman Creek NERR Advisory Council. The Reserve is appreciative of the review, guidance, and council of Division of Wildlife Executive Administrator Dave Scott and the mapping expertise of Keith Lott and the late Steve Barry.
    [Show full text]
  • Lathys Stigmatisata (Menge, 1869), Ballus Rufipes (Simon, 1868), Synageles Hilarulus (C.L
    Lathys stigmatisata (Menge, 1869), Ballus rufipes (Simon, 1868), Synageles hilarulus (C.L. Koch, 1846), Phrurolithus nigrinus (Simon, 1878) and Phycosoma inornatum (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1861): five spiders new to the fauna of Luxembourg (Araneae: Theridiidae, Dyctiniidae, Phrurolithidae, Salticidae) with records of other rare species Raoul Gerend 35, rue de Hellange L-3487 Dudelange, Luxembourg ([email protected]) Gerend, R., 2020. Lathys stigmatisata (Menge, 1869), Ballus rufipes(Simon, 1868), Synageles hilarulus (C.L. Koch, 1846), Phrurolithus nigrinus (Simon, 1878) and Phycosoma inornatum (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1861): five spiders new to the fauna of Luxembourg (Araneae: Theridiidae, Dyctiniidae, Phrurolithidae, Salticidae) with records of other rare species. Bul- letin de la Société des naturalistes luxembourgeois 122 : 211-215. Published online 26 August 2020 (ISSN 2716-750X). Abstract. Five spider species are recorded for the first time from Luxembourg. Their habi- tats are described. New data are presented for another three species. The importance of the former open-cast iron ore quarries of southwestern Luxembourg for thermophilous spiders is emphasised. 1. Introduction 2. Material and methods The first catalogue of the spider fauna of Lux- Spiders were collected using a range of con- embourg published in 2019 (Kreuels et al.) ventional methods which shall be specified lists 495 species while the authors estimate in the respective species’ paragraph. The that roughly 600 to 700 species should rea- spiders were then preserved in 70% isopro- sonably be expected to occur in the Grand- panol or 70% ethanol. All the material is Duchy. They consider Luxembourg’s spider kept in the author’s collection. Identifica- fauna to be rather under-recorded, due to a tions are based on Roberts (1996), Bee et lack of systematic collecting throughout the al.
    [Show full text]
  • A Summary List of Fossil Spiders
    A summary list of fossil spiders compiled by Jason A. Dunlop (Berlin), David Penney (Manchester) & Denise Jekel (Berlin) Suggested citation: Dunlop, J. A., Penney, D. & Jekel, D. 2010. A summary list of fossil spiders. In Platnick, N. I. (ed.) The world spider catalog, version 10.5. American Museum of Natural History, online at http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog/index.html Last udated: 10.12.2009 INTRODUCTION Fossil spiders have not been fully cataloged since Bonnet’s Bibliographia Araneorum and are not included in the current Catalog. Since Bonnet’s time there has been considerable progress in our understanding of the spider fossil record and numerous new taxa have been described. As part of a larger project to catalog the diversity of fossil arachnids and their relatives, our aim here is to offer a summary list of the known fossil spiders in their current systematic position; as a first step towards the eventual goal of combining fossil and Recent data within a single arachnological resource. To integrate our data as smoothly as possible with standards used for living spiders, our list follows the names and sequence of families adopted in the Catalog. For this reason some of the family groupings proposed in Wunderlich’s (2004, 2008) monographs of amber and copal spiders are not reflected here, and we encourage the reader to consult these studies for details and alternative opinions. Extinct families have been inserted in the position which we hope best reflects their probable affinities. Genus and species names were compiled from established lists and cross-referenced against the primary literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Araneae) Parasite–Host Association
    2006. The Journal of Arachnology 34:273–278 SHORT COMMUNICATION FIRST UNEQUIVOCAL MERMITHID–LINYPHIID (ARANEAE) PARASITE–HOST ASSOCIATION David Penney: Earth, Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. E-mail: [email protected] Susan P. Bennett: Biological Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, M1 5GD, UK. ABSTRACT. The first description of a Mermithidae–Linyphiidae parasite–host association is presented. The nematode is preserved exiting the abdomen of the host, which is a juvenile Tenuiphantes species (Araneae, Linyphiidae), collected from the Isle of Mull, UK. An updated taxonomic list of known mer- mithid spider hosts is provided. The ecology of known spider hosts with regard to the direct and indirect life cycles of mermithid worms suggests that both occur in spiders. Keywords: Aranimermis, Isle of Mull, Linyphiidae, Mermithidae, Nematoda Nematode parasites of spiders are restricted to an updated and taxonomically correct list in Table the family Mermithidae but are not uncommon 1. Here we describe the first Mermithidae–Liny- (Poinar 1985, 1987) and were first reported almost phiidae parasite–host association and discuss the two and a half centuries ago (Roesel 1761). How- ecology of known spider hosts with regard to the ever, given the difficulty of identifying and rearing life cycles of mermithid worms. post-parasitic juvenile mermithids, they have re- This paper concerns three spider specimens, one ceived inadequate systematic treatment (Poinar with a worm in situ and two that are presumed to 1985). In addition, the complete life history is have been parasitized, but from which the worms known for only one species of these spider parasites have emerged and are lost.
    [Show full text]
  • SA Spider Checklist
    REVIEW ZOOS' PRINT JOURNAL 22(2): 2551-2597 CHECKLIST OF SPIDERS (ARACHNIDA: ARANEAE) OF SOUTH ASIA INCLUDING THE 2006 UPDATE OF INDIAN SPIDER CHECKLIST Manju Siliwal 1 and Sanjay Molur 2,3 1,2 Wildlife Information & Liaison Development (WILD) Society, 3 Zoo Outreach Organisation (ZOO) 29-1, Bharathi Colony, Peelamedu, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641004, India Email: 1 [email protected]; 3 [email protected] ABSTRACT Thesaurus, (Vol. 1) in 1734 (Smith, 2001). Most of the spiders After one year since publication of the Indian Checklist, this is described during the British period from South Asia were by an attempt to provide a comprehensive checklist of spiders of foreigners based on the specimens deposited in different South Asia with eight countries - Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The European Museums. Indian checklist is also updated for 2006. The South Asian While the Indian checklist (Siliwal et al., 2005) is more spider list is also compiled following The World Spider Catalog accurate, the South Asian spider checklist is not critically by Platnick and other peer-reviewed publications since the last scrutinized due to lack of complete literature, but it gives an update. In total, 2299 species of spiders in 67 families have overview of species found in various South Asian countries, been reported from South Asia. There are 39 species included in this regions checklist that are not listed in the World Catalog gives the endemism of species and forms a basis for careful of Spiders. Taxonomic verification is recommended for 51 species. and participatory work by arachnologists in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • WO 2017/035099 Al 2 March 2017 (02.03.2017) P O P C T
    (12) INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (19) World Intellectual Property Organization International Bureau (10) International Publication Number (43) International Publication Date WO 2017/035099 Al 2 March 2017 (02.03.2017) P O P C T (51) International Patent Classification: BZ, CA, CH, CL, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DK, DM, C07C 39/00 (2006.01) C07D 303/32 (2006.01) DO, DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, C07C 49/242 (2006.01) HN, HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IR, IS, JP, KE, KG, KN, KP, KR, KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LU, LY, MA, MD, ME, MG, (21) International Application Number: MK, MN, MW, MX, MY, MZ, NA, NG, NI, NO, NZ, OM, PCT/US20 16/048092 PA, PE, PG, PH, PL, PT, QA, RO, RS, RU, RW, SA, SC, (22) International Filing Date: SD, SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TH, TJ, TM, TN, 22 August 2016 (22.08.2016) TR, TT, TZ, UA, UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, ZM, ZW. (25) Filing Language: English (84) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every kind of regional protection available): ARIPO (BW, GH, (26) Publication Language: English GM, KE, LR, LS, MW, MZ, NA, RW, SD, SL, ST, SZ, (30) Priority Data: TZ, UG, ZM, ZW), Eurasian (AM, AZ, BY, KG, KZ, RU, 62/208,662 22 August 2015 (22.08.2015) US TJ, TM), European (AL, AT, BE, BG, CH, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HR, HU, IE, IS, IT, LT, LU, (71) Applicant: NEOZYME INTERNATIONAL, INC.
    [Show full text]
  • 254 the JOURNAL of ARACHNOLOG Y SYSTEMATIZED SUBJECT INDEX Acari Chelicerate Arterial System and Endosternite–Firstman, 1 :1-5
    254 THE JOURNAL OF ARACHNOLOG Y SYSTEMATIZED SUBJECT INDEX Acari Chelicerate arterial system and endosternite–Firstman, 1 :1-54 Circulatory system of ticks–Obenchain and Oliver, 3 :57-7 4 Amblypygida Chelicerate arterial system and endosternite–Firstman, 1 :1-54 Araneae Chelicerate arterial system and endosternite–Firstman, 1 :1-5 4 New Philodromus from Arizona–Buckle, 1 :142-14 3 Egg cocoon of Linyphia marginata–Wise, 1 :143-144 Spider family Leptonetidae in North America–Gertsch, 1 :145-20 3 Spiders of Nacogdoches, Texas–Brown, 1 :229-24 0 Effects of d-amphetamine and diazepam on spider webs–Jackson, 2 :37-4 1 Names of higher taxa in spiders–Kaston, 2 :47-5 1 Rearing methods for spiders–Jackson, 2 :53-5 6 Feeding on eggs by Achaearanea tepidariorum–Valerio, 2 :57-6 3 Northern and southern Phidippus audax–Taylor and Peck, 2 :89-99 Dispersal of jumping spiders–Horner, 2 :101-10 5 Stabilimenta and barrier webs of Argiope argentata–Lubin, 2 :119-12 6 Genus Ozyptila in North America-Dondale and Redner, 2 :129-18 1 Revision of Coriarachne for North America–Bowling and Sauer, 2 :183-19 3 Key and checklist of Theridiidae–Levi and Randolph, 3 :31-5 1 Comments on Saltonia incerta– Roth and Brown, 3 :53-5 6 Web-site tenacity of Argiope–Enders, 3 :75-8 2 Ecology of Cyclocosmia truncata–Hunt, 3 :83-8 6 Spiders and scorpions from Arizona and Utah–Allred and Gertsch, 3 :87-9 9 Pitfall trapping of wandering spiders–Uetz and Unzicker, 3 :101-11 1 Male of Gnaphosa sonora–Platnick, 3 :134-13 5 Los generos Cyllodania y Arachnomura–Galiano, 3 :137-15 0
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomic Revision and Phylogenetic Hypothesis for the Jumping Spider Subfamily Ballinae (Araneae, Salticidae)
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Previously Published Works Title Taxonomic revision and phylogenetic hypothesis for the jumping spider subfamily Ballinae (Araneae, Salticidae) Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5x19n4mz Journal Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 142(1) ISSN 0024-4082 Author Benjamin, S P Publication Date 2004-09-01 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Blackwell Science, LtdOxford, UKZOJZoological Journal of the Linnean Society0024-4082The Lin- nean Society of London, 2004? 2004 1421 182 Original Article S. P. BENJAMINTAXONOMY AND PHYLOGENY OF BALLINAE Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2004, 142, 1–82. With 69 figures Taxonomic revision and phylogenetic hypothesis for the jumping spider subfamily Ballinae (Araneae, Salticidae) SURESH P. BENJAMIN* Department of Integrative Biology, Section of Conservation Biology (NLU), University of Basel, St. Johanns-Vorstadt 10, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland Received July 2003; accepted for publication February 2004 The subfamily Ballinae is revised. To test its monophyly, 41 morphological characters, including the first phyloge- netic use of scale morphology in Salticidae, were scored for 16 taxa (1 outgroup and 15 ingroup). Parsimony analysis of these data supports monophyly based on five unambiguous synapomorphies. The paper provides new diagnoses, descriptions of new genera, species, and a key to the genera. At present, Ballinae comprises 13 nominal genera, three of them new: Afromarengo, Ballus, Colaxes, Cynapes, Indomarengo, Leikung, Marengo, Philates and Sadies. Copocrossa, Mantisatta, Pachyballus and Padilla are tentatively included in the subfamily. Nine new species are described and illustrated: Colaxes horton, C. wanlessi, Philates szutsi, P. thaleri, P. zschokkei, Indomarengo chandra, I.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Ohio Spiders
    List of Ohio Spiders 2 August 2021 Richard A. Bradley Department of EEO Biology Ohio State University Museum of Biological Diversity 1315 Kinnear Road Columbus, OH 43212 This list is based on published specimen records of spider species from Ohio. Additional species that have been recorded during the Ohio Spider Survey (beginning 1994) are also included. I would very much appreciate any corrections; please mail them to the above address or email ([email protected]). 676 [+6] Species Mygalomorphae Antrodiaetidae (foldingdoor spiders) (2) Antrodiaetus robustus (Simon, 1890) Antrodiaetus unicolor (Hentz, 1842) Atypidae (purseweb spiders) (3) Sphodros coylei Gertsch & Platnick, 1980 Sphodros niger (Hentz, 1842) Sphodros rufipes (Latreille, 1829) Euctenizidae (waferdoor spiders) (1) Myrmekiaphila foliata Atkinson, 1886 Halonoproctidae (trapdoor spiders) (1) Ummidia audouini (Lucas, 1835) Araneomorphae Agelenidae (funnel weavers) (14) Agelenopsis emertoni Chamberlin & Ivie, 1935 | Agelenopsis kastoni Chamberlin & Ivie, 1941 | Agelenopsis naevia (Walckenaer, 1805) grass spiders Agelenopsis pennsylvanica (C.L. Koch, 1843) | Agelnopsis potteri (Blackwell, 1846) | Agelenopsis utahana (Chamberlin & Ivie, 1933) | Coras aerialis Muma, 1946 Coras juvenilis (Keyserling, 1881) Coras lamellosus (Keyserling, 1887) Coras medicinalis (Hentz, 1821) Coras montanus (Emerton, 1889) Tegenaria domestica (Clerck, 1757) barn funnel weaver In Wadotes calcaratus (Keyserling, 1887) Wadotes hybridus (Emerton, 1889) Amaurobiidae (hackledmesh weavers) (2) Amaurobius
    [Show full text]