Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://zmmu.msu.ru/files/images/spec/journals/18_1%20021_033%20Lathys%20Crimea%20for%20Inet.pdf Дата изменения: Tue Jun 11 05:41:00 2013 Дата индексирования: Fri Feb 28 02:13:18 2014 Кодировка: Windows-1251 Поисковые слова: aurora

Arthropoda Selecta 18(12): 2133

ї ARTHROPODA SELECTA, 2009

A survey of Lathys Simon, 1884, from Crimea with resurrection of Scotolathys Simon, 1884 (Aranei: Dictynidae) Обзор пауков рода Lathys Simon, 1884 из Крыма с восстановлением рода Scotolathys Simon, 1884 (Aranei: Dictynidae) Yuri M. Marusik1,2, Mykola M. Kovblyuk3, Anton A. Nadolny3 Ю.М. Марусик1,2, М.М. Ковблюк3, А.А. Надольный3
1 1 2 3 3

Institute of Biological Problems of the North, RAS, Portovaya Str. 18, Magadan 685000 Russia. E-mail: yurmar@mail.ru Институт биологически проблем Севера ДВО РАН, Портовая 18, Магадан 685000 Росиия. Zoological Museum, University of Turku, FI-20014 Turku, Finland. Zoology Department, V.I. Vernadsky Taurida National University, Yaltinskaya Str. 4, Simferopol 95007 Ukraine. E-mail: kovblyuk@mail.ru Кафедра зоологии, Таврический национальный университет им. В.И. Вернадского, ул. Ялтинская 4, Симферополь 95007 Украина.

KEY WORDS: spiders, Lathys, Scotolathys, Ukraine, Mediterranean, Crimea, revalidation. КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: пауки, Lathys, Scotolathys, Украина, Средиземноморье, Крым, ревалидизация.

ABSTRACT. Four species of Lathys have been found on the Crimean Peninsula: L. humilis (Blackwall, 1855); L. stigmatisata (Menge, 1869), L. simplex (Simon, 1884) and Lathys sp. ( only) belonging to the L. stigmatisata-group. All species are illustrated. The male of L. simplex (Simon, 1884) is described for the first time. The discovery of the male of the latter species permitted revalidation of Scotolathys Simon, 1884 (type species S. simplex Simon, 1884), earlier thought to be a synonym of Lathys. New diagnoses for Lathys and Scotolathys are provided. РЕЗЮМЕ. Установлено, что фауна Крыма включает 4 вида рода Lathys: L. himilis (Blackwall, 1855); L. stigmatisata (Menge, 1869), L. simplex (Simon, 1884) и Lathys sp. ( только) относящийся к группе видов L. stigmatisata. Приведены рисунки для всех видов. Впервые описаны самцы L. simplex (Simon, 1884). Обнаружение последних позволило восстановить валидность рода Scotolathys Simon, 1884 (типовой вид S. simplex Simon, 1884), ранее считавшегося младшим синонимом Lathys. Даны новые диагнозы родов Lathys and Scotolathys.

tynidae we found two males of L. simplex. Investigation of the male palp of this species reveals significant differences with that in L. humilis, type species of the genus. The goals of our paper are to provide the first description of the male of L. simplex, present a detailed study of the copulatory organs of all Crimean Lathys species, and to resurrect the genus name Scotolathys.

Material and methods
Specimens were photographed using an Olympus SZX12 stereomicroscope and Olympus Camedia C5050 camera. The images have been montaged using CombineZM image stacking software. SEM-microphotographs were made with a JEOL JSM-5200 in the Zoological Museum, University of Turku. Scales in some figures are missing because of lack of special equipment and computer programs. All measurements are given in millimeters. Material treated herein will be deposited in the Zoology Department, Taurida National University, Simferopol (TNU), Zoological Museum of Moscow State University (ZMMU) and Zoological Museum of University of Turku (ZMUT). The following abbreviations have been used for morphological terms: Ca apical part of conductor; Cb base of conductor; Cp coiled portion of insemination duct; Cs spine of Ct; Ct terminal part of conductor; Ctt tip of Ct; Dt dorsal tibial apophysis; Eo epigynal opening; Fo fovea; Pa patellar apophysis; Po patellar outgrowth; Re receptaculum; Rt retrolateral (intermediate) tibial apophysis; Sc spine-like outgrowth of cymbium; Sl loop of seminal duct; Sp leg spine; Te tegulum; Tl terminal loop; Vp vertical portion of insemination duct; Vt ventral tibial apophysis.

Introduction
Lathys is relatively large genus of dictynids spiders with 38 species known exclusively from the Holarctic [Platnick, 2009]. Three species of this genus were reported from the Crimea: Lathys humilis (Blackwall, 1855), L. stigmatisata (Menge, 1869) and L. simplex (Simon, 1884) [Kovblyuk, 2004; Kovblyuk et al., 2008a,b]. The first two species are relatively well studied, while the latter, L. simplex, was previously known by females only. Its epigyne was illustrated only once [Wiehle, 1960]. During our study of Crimean Dic-


22 Taxonomic survey Lathys Simon, 1884

Yu.M. Marusik, M.M. Kovlyuk & A.A. Nadolny VARIATION. Male (n=2) total length 1.61.7; carapace 0.80.9 long, 0.60.7 wide; 0.4 high. Female: total length 1.9; carapace 0.8 long, 0.6 wide, 0.4 high; chelicerae 0.4 long. Length of leg segments in :
I II III IV femur 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.6 patella 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 tibia 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.4 metatarsus 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 tarsus 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 total 2.3 1.8 1.6 1.9

Type species: Lethia varia Menge, 1869 (from Prussia) considered as a junior synonym of Ciniflo humilis Blackwall, 1855 (from England). Type specimens of L. varia seem lost. It is not certain whether L. varia and L. humilis are synonyms. L. varia could be a senior synonym of L. nielseni (Schenkel, 1932). Lathys is a replacement name for the preoccupied Lethia. Lathys and Scotolathys were described in the same publication and on the same page. Scotolathys was diagnosed only by the presence of 6 eyes and their sizes. Six generic names have been, at one time or another, considered as junior synonyms of Lathys: Analtella Denis, 1947, Auximus Simon, 1892, Dictyolathys Banks, 1900, Neophanes Marx, 1891, Prodalia Marx, 1891 and Scotolathys Simon, 1884. Lathys humilis (Blackwall, 1855) Figs 56, 1117, 2124, 38, 43, 4547, 5461, 65.
L. h. L. h. L. h. L. h. L. h. L. h. For a although Thaler, 1981: 127, f. 7779, 8586 (). Roberts, 1985: 52, f. 15d (). Roberts, 1987: 170, f. 88b (). Roberts, 1995: 87, f. (). Roberts, 1998: 89, f. (). Almquist, 2006: 319, f. 280ah (). complete list of taxonomic references see Platnick [2009], some of these refer to the sibling species L. nielseni.

Lethia Menge, 1869: 249. Lathys Simon, 1884: 321, nomen novum pro Lethia Menge, 1869, preoccupied by Lethia Hubner, 1816 in Lepidoptera.

FAUNISTIC RECORDS FROM CRIMEA. Charitonov, 1936; Charitonov, 1937; Bukowski, 1936, 1940; Tyshchenko, 1971; Mikhailov, 1997, 1998; Kovblyuk, 2004a; Kovblyuk et al., 2008a.

DESCRIPTION. Measurements. Male: total length 1.7; carapace 0.9 long, 0.7 wide, 0.4 high; chelicerae 0.5 long. Length of leg segments in :
I II III IV femur 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.6 patella 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 tibia 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.5 metatarsus 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 tarsus 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 total 2.8 2.2 1.7 2.0

MATERIAL. UKRAINE, CRIMEA. Simferopol Distr.: 1 (TNU2180/5), Chatyr-Dagh Mt., 23.04.2000 (D.S. Letova); Feodosya Distr.: 6 , 14 (TNU2603/6; 2605/6; 2607/2), Karadagh Nature Reserve, Kara-Agach Mt., Juniperus excelsa, sweeping, 14 16.05.2008 (A.A. Nadolny); Yalta Distr.: 4 , 6 (TNU2340/ 14; 2343/18; 2349/26), Martyan Cape Reserve, 30.04.13.05.2007 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 3 , 3 (YMM), same locality, sweeping on juniper, 10.04.1999 (V.P. Kornilov & M.M. Kovblyuk). COMPARATIVE MATERIAL. IRAN: 2 (ZMMU), Mazandaran Prov., Nashtarood-Khoshkadaran, 51.033њE 36.750њN, 9 10.06.2000 (Yu.M. Marusik). AZERBAIJAN: 2 31 (ZMMU), SE Azerbaijan, Lenkoran Dist., env. of Aurora Vill., 38њ40N 48њ52E, 2328.04.2001 (Yu.M. Marusik); 1 (ZMMU), same locality, 2129.05.2003 (Yu.M. Marusik); 2 (ZMMU), SE Azerbaijan, Lenkoran Dist., Hyrcan Reserve, env. of Apo Vill., 38?38N 48?47E, 28.05.2003 (Yu.M. Marusik); 1 (ZMMU), SE Azerbaijan, ca 10 km W of Astara Vil, Isti-Su, 38њ27N 48њ47E, on the border with Iran, 25.04.2001 (Yu.M. Marusik).

VARIATION. Female (n=3) total length 1.9; carapace 0.80.9 long; 0.6 wide, 0.4 high. COPULATORY ORGANS. Male palp as in Figs 2124, 38, 43, 4547, with patellar apophysis, tibia with three apophyses (retrolateral dorsal (Dt), retroventral (Vt) and retrolateral (or intermediate) (Rt) that grip (lock) the terminal part of conductor. Conductor very long with two arms, the upper arm coiled, and the lower part spine like slightly twisted. Epigyne as in Figs 5457, 65, with one shallow fovea, and copulatory opening in anteriolateral part. Receptacula droplet-shaped. Insemination ducts short, making one loop. DIAGNOSIS. Differs from other Crimean species notably by the abdominal pattern (of white guanine spots) (Figs 56), lack of spiraled tip of conductor and presence of patellar apophysis in male palp, and large shallow epigynal fovea. This species is most closely related to L. nielseni (Schenkel, 1932) known from middle and northern Europe. Differences between these two sibling species were well demonstrated by Thaler [1981]. COMMENTS. This species belongs to the Lathys humilis-species group which encompasses six species: L. humilis; L. alticola (Denis, 1954); L. annulata Bosenberg & Strand, 1906; L. brevitibialis Denis, 1956; L. nielseni (Schenkel, 1932); and L. sexpustulata (Simon, 1878) [Lehtinen, 1967; Thaler, 1981; Ono, 2003]. DISTRIBUTION. According to Platnicks catalogue [2009] this species has a Palaearctic (=trans-Palaearctic) distribution with several records from China (Taiwan, Anhui, Shanxi and Gansu). However, judging from the figures of the Chinese specimens, all records of L. humilis refer to another species. According to our studies of Palaearctic Lathys, L. humilis seems distributed from western Europe to Caucasus and Mazandaran, northern Iran (see Comparative material). HABITATS. Sub-mediterranean vegetation on south coast and mountainous parts of Crimea: Arbutus andrachne, Juniperus excelsa, J. oxycedrus, Quercus pubescens, Pistacia mutica, Coronilla emeroides, Cistus taurica, Ruscus ponticus. PHENOLOGY. IVV. Lathys stigmatisata (Menge, 1869) Figs 4, 2932, 44, 5153.
L. s. Wiehle, 1953: 105, f. 228229b ().


A survey of Lathys from Crimea

23

Figs 16. Habitus and pattern of Scotolathys simplex (13), Lathys stigmatisata (4) and L. humilis (56). 12, 46 dorsal; 3 fronto-lateral; 1, 6 female; 25 male. Рис. 16. Габитус и рисунок Scotolathys simplex (13), Lathys stigmatisata (4) и L. humilis (56). 12, 46 сверху; 3 спереди-сбоку; 1, 6 самка; 25 самец. L. s. Roberts, 1985: 52, f. 15e (). L. puta Roberts, 1995: 88, f. (). L. puta Roberts, 1998: 90, f. () For a complete list of taxonomic references see Platnick (2009), although many of them refer to sibling species.

FAUNISTIC RECORDS FROM CRIMEA. Kovblyuk, 2004a as Argenna subnigra (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1861); Kovblyuk, 2004b as Lathys puta (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1863); Kovblyuk et al., 2008b.

MATERIAL EXAMINED. UKRAINE, CRIMEA. Saky Distr.: 35 , 2 (YMM1592/6, 1593/5, 1594/6, 1601/9, 1615/ 12, 1616/4, 1617/2, 1618/12, 1625, 1652/13, 1653/3, 1676/10, 1677/12, 1699/7, 1700/3), Pribrezhnaya railway station, pitfalls, 6.04.9.08.2000 (M.M. Kovblyuk); Simferopol Distr.: 1 (YMMx/20), Bayrakly Mt. (519 m a.s.l.), steppe, pitfalls, 114.05.2000 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 6 (YMM961/15, 962/20, 963/22), Fersmanovo Vil., steppe, pitfalls, 4.04.14.05.2000 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 14 , 1 (TNU1833/18, YMM1834/19, 1843/10, 1844/ 6, 1845/7, 1846/15, 1854/5), Skvortsovo Vil., pitfalls, 12.04.


24

Yu.M. Marusik, M.M. Kovlyuk & A.A. Nadolny

Figs 714. Cephalothorax of Scotolathys simplex (710) and Lathys humilis (1114). 7, 11 ventro-caudal; 8, 12 ventral; 9, 13 frontal; 10, 14 lateral. Scale = 0.1 mm. Рис. 714. Головогрудь of Scotolathys simplex (710) и Lathys humilis (1114). 7, 11 сзади-снизу; 8, 12 снизу; 9, 13 спереди; 10, 14 сбоку. Масштаб 0,1 мм.

1.06.2002 (M.M. Kovblyuk); Yalta Distr.: 1 (TNU1311/3), Nikita Vil., steppe, pitfalls, 29.07.2000 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 1 (TNU2473/5) Yalta Mountain-Forest Nature Reserve, 13 28.04.2002 (A.A. Khaustov); 3 (TNU2476/7), same locality, Nikita Vill., meadow, 28.0412.05.2002 (A.A. Khaustov) (specimens with 2.5 coils of conductor); 1 (YMM1504/3), Crimean State Nature Reserve, Nikitskaya Yaila Mt., pitfalls, 22.04. 4.05.2001 (M.M. Kovblyuk). Specimens with 3 coils of conductor: Simferopol Distr.: 2 (TNU1833/18) Skvortsovo Vil., pitfalls, 1227.04.2002 (M.M. Kovblyuk).

DESCRIPTION. Measurements. Male: total length 2.0; carapace 1.0 long, 0.8 wide, 0.4 high; chelicerae 0.7 long. Length of leg segments:
femur I II III IV 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.8 patella 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 tibia 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.6 metatarsus 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.6 tarsus 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 total length 3.2 2.5 2.1 2.6


A survey of Lathys from Crimea

25

Figs 1520. Chelicera and legs of Lathys humilis (1517) and Scotolathys simplex (1820). 15, 18 male chelicera, inner; 16, 19 male chelicera, frontal; 17, 20 tibia I, showing ventral spine (17) and absence of spines (20). Scale = 0.1 mm if not otherwise indicated. Рис. 1520. Хелицеры и ноги Lathys humilis (1517) и Scotolathys simplex (1820). 15, 18 хелицера самца, изнутри; 16, 19 хелицера самца, спереди; 17, 20 голень I, показан вентральный шип. Масштаб 0,1 мм, если не указано иначе.

VARIATION. Male (n=5) total length 1.82.2; carapace 1.0 long; 0.80.9 wide; 0.40.5 high. NOTE. One sample (TNU1833/18) contains three males. Two of which have a conductor with 3 coils as shown in Marusik et al. [2006: 355, f. 2], and with 2.5 coils. COPULATORY ORGANS. Male palp as in Figs 2930, with conical extension of patella. Tibia with three apophyses (retrolateral dorsal, retroventral and retrolateral (or intermediate) that grip (lock) the terminal part of conductor. Conductor very long with two arms, the upper arm coiled, and the lower part appearing like a cork-screw. Epigyne as in Figs 3132, with two large round fovea separated by thin septum. Receptacula round, insemination duct long and coiled in two plains (vertical over receptacula, and horizontal over openings). DIAGNOSIS. This species can be easily distinguished from other Crimean species by the larger size

and lack of distinct pattern, coiled conductor of the male palp, and two separate epigynal openings. This species belongs to the L. stigmatisata-group that contains many sibling species. The male of this species can be distinguished from all congroupers by the dorsal conical extension of the palpal patella. COMMENTS. This species belongs to the L. stigmatisata species group, one of eight groups created by Lehtinen [1967]. The exact number of species in this group is unclear because many species from East Palaearctic have been erroneously synonymised with L. stigmatisata. DISTRIBUTION. According to Platnicks catalog [2009], this species has a Palaearctic (=trans-Palaearctic) range. According to our studies of Palaearctic Lathys, L. stigmatisata has a European range and is distributed from western Europe to the Ural River. HABITATS. Some kinds of steppes and meadows. PHENOLOGY: IVV; VIIVIII.


26

Yu.M. Marusik, M.M. Kovlyuk & A.A. Nadolny

Figs 2128. Male palp and prosoma of Lathys humilis (2124) and Scotolathys simplex (2528). 21, 25 palp, ventral; 22, 26 palp, retrolateral; 23 palp, prolateral; 24, 27 dorsal; 28 prosoma, frontal. Scale = 0.1 mm. Рис. 2128. Пальпа самца и головогрудь Lathys humilis (2124) и Scotolathys simplex (2528). 21, 25 пальпа, снизу; 22, 26 пальпа, ретролатерально; 23 пальпа, пролатерально; 24, 27 сверху; 28 головогрудь, спереди. Масштаб 0,1 мм.

Lathys sp.

Figs 6669.

COMMENTS. When the final draft of this paper was almost ready, we recognized that a single female from the Karadag Nature Reserve, earlier identified as L. stigmatisata, actually belongs to another species of the L. stigmatisata-group. This species can be easily distinguished from L. stigmatisata by the smaller copulatory openings being spaced by about one radius (openings touching in L. stigmatisata), and its insemination ducts joining receptacula at an apical point (subapical in L. stigmatisata). The diameter of the receptacula and copulatory openings are almost equal in L. stigmatisata while the diameter of the copulatory openings in

MATERIAL EXAMINED. UKRAINE, CRIMEA. Feodosya Distr.: 1 (TNU2035/14), Karadagh Nature Reserve, Kara-Agach Mt., Juniperus excelsa, 24.04.2004 (O.V. Kukushkin).

Lathys sp. is significantly smaller that those of receptacula. The lack of a revision of this species group does not permit an identification of this species. A preliminary study of the Palaearctic Lathys conducted by the late S.V. Ovtchinnikov and YM (unfinished), reveals that there are about a dozen new species or wrongly synonymised names. However, none of the species studied from Caucasus, Middle East or Central Asia, has an epigyne similar to the one from Crimea. Most probably this specimen belongs to an undescribed species. Scotolathys Simon, 1884 DIAGNOSIS. Scotolathys is closely related to Lathys, but can be easily recognized by six eyes (Figs
Scotolathys Simon, 1884: 321. Type species: Scotolathys simplex Simon, 1884 by monotypy.


A survey of Lathys from Crimea

27

Figs 2932. Male palp and macerated epigyne of Lathys stigmatisata. 29 palp, retrolateral; 30 palp, ventral; 31 epigyne, ventral; 32 epigyne, dorsal. 3132 from Azerbaijan. Scale = 0.1 mm. Рис. 2932. Пальпа самца и мацерированная эпигина of Lathys stigmatisata. 29 пальпа, ретролатерально; 30 пальпа, снизу; 31 эпигина, снизу; 32 эпигина, сверху. 3132 из Азербайджана. Масштаб 0,1 мм.

Figs 3338. Male palp of Scotolathys simplex (3137) and Lathys humilis (38). 33, 38 ventral; 34 retrolateral; 35 prolateral; 36 caudal-retrolateral; 37 dorsal. Scale = 0.1 mm. Рис. 3338. Пальпа самца Scotolathys simplex (3137) и Lathys humilis (38). 33, 38 снизу; 34 ретролатерально; 35 пролатерально; 36 сзади-ретролатерально; 37 сверху. Масштаб 0,1 мм.


28

Yu.M. Marusik, M.M. Kovlyuk & A.A. Nadolny

Figs 3944. Left male palp of Scotolathys simplex (3942), Lathys humilis (43) and L. stigmatisata (44). 39 ventral; 40 dorsal; 41, 4344 retrolateral; 42 retro-dorsal; 3943 partly expanded palp. Рис. 3944. Левая пальпа самца Scotolathys simplex (3942), Lathys humilis (43) и L. stigmatisata (44). 39 снизу; 40 сверху; 41, 4344 ретролатерально; 42 ретролатерально-сверху; 3943 слегка вздутая пальпа.

13, 9, 28), smaller clypeus (cf. Figs 910 and 1314), a spine-like cymbial process (Fig. 37, etc.), free terminal part of conductor, and by the shape of the epigyne and vulva. Unlike in Lathys, Scotolathys has an epigynal opening (not fovea) posterior to the receptacula. COMMENTS. Lathys and Scotolathys were described in the same publication and on the same page. Scotolathys was diagnosed by Simon [1892] by the presence of 6 eyes and their sizes. That is the reason all species from West Palaearctic and Nearctic with a Lathys habitus and 6 eyes were previously placed in Scotolathys (S. alba Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944; S. delicatulus Gertsch & Mulaik, 1936; S. heterophthalmus

(Kulczyсski, 1891); S. maculata immaculata Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944; S. pallida (Marx, 1891); S. alticola Denis, 1954; and S. simplicior Dalmas, 1916). Gertsch [1946] synonymised the generic name Scotolathys under Lathys. He found that Nearctic species assigned in Lathys (with 8 eyes) and Scotolathys (with 6 eyes) have basically the same type of copulatory organs. Gertsch had not studied types or specimens of S. simplex, and the male of the generotype was unknown until now. Lehtinen [1967] considered that Scotolathys has priority over Lathys (although they were described on the same page) and planned to apply to ICZN to fix Gertschs decision.


A survey of Lathys from Crimea

29

Figs 4553. Left male palp of Lathys humilis (4547), Scotolathys simplex (4850) and Lathys stigmatisata (5153). 4546, 48, 52 retrolateral; 47, 49, 51 ventral; 50 caudal-retrolateral; 53 retro-dorsal. Scale = 0.1 mm if not otherwise indicated. Рис. 4553. Левая пальпа самца Lathys humilis (4547), Scotolathys simplex (4850) и Lathys stigmatisata (5153). 4546, 48, 52 ретролатерально; 47, 49, 51 снизу; 50 каудо-ретролатерально; 53 ретролатерально-сверху. Масштаб 0,1 мм, если не указано иное.


30

Yu.M. Marusik, M.M. Kovlyuk & A.A. Nadolny

Figs 5461. Epigyne of Lathys humilis (5457) and Scotolathys simplex (5861). 54, 58 ventral; 55, 59 ventral, after maceration; 56, 60 dorsal, after maceration; 67, 61 scheme, course of insemination and fertilization duct. Scale = 0.1 mm. Рис. 5461. Эпигина Lathys humilis (5457) и Scotolathys simplex (5861). 54, 58 снизу; 55, 59 снизу, после мацерации; 56, 60 сверху, после мацерации; 67, 61 схема расположения каналов эпигины. Масштаб 0,1 мм.

Figs. 6265. Epigyne of Scotolathys simplex (6264) and Lathys humilis (65). 6263, 65 ventral; 64 dorsal; 6364 after maceration in lactic acid. Scale = 0.1 mm. Figs. 6265. Эпигина of Scotolathys simplex (6264) и Lathys humilis (65). 6263, 65 снизу; 64 сверху; 6364 после мацерации в молочной кислоте. Масштаб 0,1 мм.


A survey of Lathys from Crimea

31

Figs. 6669. Epigyne of Lathys sp. 6667 ventral; 68 dorsal; 69 schematic course of insemination and fertilisation ducts; 67 68 after maceration. Scale = 0.1 mm. Figs. 6669. Эпигина of Lathys sp. 6667 снизу; 68 сверху; 69 схема расположения каналов эпигины; 6768 после мацерации. Масштаб 0,1 мм.

The epigyne of S. simplex was first illustrated by Wiehle [1960]. The epigyne and vulva of this species are considerably different from those of all European and Nearctic Lathys. When the male of S. simplex was found, it became possible to compare structures of the copulatory organs and somatic characters in the generotypes of the two taxa. Although S. simplex and L. humilis are similar in certain respects, they express significant differences in the shape of the male palp and the female epigyne and in a few somatic characters. L. humilis has three tibial apophyses (Figs 4546) and lacks cymbial apophysis, while S. simplex has only one tibial apophysis (Figs 34, 3637, 3942, 48, 50) and a strong spine like a cymbial outgrowth (Sc, Figs 2627, 3437, 4042, 48, 50). The terminal part of the conductor in all Lathys species is totally fixed between the tibial apophyses and the cymbium, while in S. simplex it is free (cf. Figs 3941). The terminal part of the conductor in L. humilis is slightly screwed along its axis (like in screw) and lacks any outgrowths, while in S. simplex the conductor makes several coils (like in corkscrew) and has spine-like outgrowth (Cs) near the basis of the coils. Other differences lie in the shape of the upper arm of the conductor. In L. humilis the apical arm of the conductor is very long, broad, totally covering the tegulum and turns below the base of the conductor. In S. simplex the apical arm is long, thin and translucent, covering only a part of the tegulum (Fig. 49). In Lathys the seminal duct inside the tegulum

forms only one small loop, while in Scotolathys there are two loops (Figs 25, 33, 39). The epigyne in the two genera are also quite different. The insemination ducts in Lathys never have straight parts as in S. simplex. They are always coiled around the receptaculum or/and around the entrance cone. The epigynal openings? (starting points of the insemination duct) are placed in Lathys always in the anterior half of the epigyne. Compare the figures of the epigyne of Lathys stigmatisata (Figs 3132) with those of Scotolathys simplex (Figs 5860). The males of the two generotypes differ in the shape of the maxillae. The maxillae are widest in the terminal part in L. humilis, while in S. simplex the sides are slightly rounded and subparallel (Figs 78, 1112). The carapace in Lathys is higher (length/height ratio = 2.15) than in Scolotathys (ratio 2.5) (cf Figs 10 & 14). There are some spines on the legs of L. humilis (Figs 56, 17), which are totally absent in S. simplex (13, 20). There are also differences in the chelicerae. They are longer in Lathys, and generally Lathys has fewer (three) teeth on the promarginal side (Fig. 16) and 5 teeth (Fig. 15) on the retromarginal side. Scotolathys, on the other hand, has 4 teeth on the pro- and retromarginal sides (Figs 1819). The promarginal teeth in Scotolathys are of the same size and shape as the retromarginal ones. In Lathys the promarginal teeth are thick, larger than the retromarginal teeth, and they are contiguous. The cheliceral teeth are variable in number and shape within the Lathys s.s. and can not be used for


32

Yu.M. Marusik, M.M. Kovlyuk & A.A. Nadolny VARIATION. Female total length (n=17) 1.41.9; carapace (n=19) 0.60.8 long; 0.50.6 wide; 0.3 high. COPULATORY ORGANS. Palp as in Figs 2527, 3337, 3942, 4850, femur shorter than cymbium, patella and tibia about as long as wide; patella unmodified; tibia with retrolateral apophysis (Rt) stretched perpendicular to axis of patella, tibial apophysis bifurcate on the tip; cymbium large, rounded on the top, almost not extending tegulum; basal part of cymbium with spine-like outgrowth (Sc); tegulum oval, with two translucent seminal loops (Sl on Fig. 39), upper arm of conductor thin. It is membranous, translucent, visible in SEM figures only (Fig. 49); it covers only part of tegulum, terminal part cork-screw-like with small spine (Cs) at the base of cork-screw (Fig. 50). Epigyne as in Figs 5861, 6264, with small oval copulatory opening (Eo) placed close to epigastric furrow and below large round translucent receptacula; opening well (depression) visible only after dissection of epigyne; insemination ducts long; first going anteriorly and coiling (Cp) around vertical straight portion (Vp) that goes posteriorly, vertical portion terminates in two loops (Tl). DIAGNOSIS. Same as for the genus. DISTRIBUTION. So far this species is known from Algeria (type locality) [Simon, 1884], Spain [Wiehle, 1960] and Crimea. HABITATS. South coast of Crimea: sub-mediterranean (Pistacia mutica, Arbutus andrachne, Juniperus excelsa, J. oxycedrus, Quercus pubescens, Carpinus orientalis, Cistus taurica) and nemoral (Pinus pallasiana, Quercus petraea, Cornus mas, Fraxinus, Mercurialis perennis, Dentaria) vegetation. PHENOLOGY: X; IIIXI.

separation of genera. Some species in the L. stigmatisata-group have 4+4 teeth. Members of the L. stigmatisata-group have the same conformation of the male palp, the same dentation of the chelicera, and have leg spines as in L. humilis. The conformation of the male palp and the epigyne of the L. stigmatisata-group were described in detail by Marusik et al. [2006]. The only differences between the L. humilis-group (humilis & nielseni) and the L. stigmatisata-group are the number of screws on the upper part of the conductor and the length of the insemination ducts. Scotolathys simplex Simon, 1884 Figs 13, 710, 1820, 2528, 3337, 3942, 4850, 5861, 6264.
S. s. Simon, 1884: 321 (D). S. s.: Simon, 1892: 243, f. 184. S. s.: Wiehle, 1960: 469, f. 13 (). Lathys s.: Gertsch, 1946: 1 (synonymised two genera). Lathys s.: Lehtinen, 1967: 242.

FAUNISTIC RECORDS FROM CRIMEA. Kovblyuk et al., 2008a,b.

MATERIAL. UKRAINE, CRIMEA. Feodosiya Distr.: 3 (TNU1743/10; 1746/4), Karadag Nature Reserve, Tumanova ravine, NW slope of Beregovoy Mt. Range, 2425.04.2003 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 4 (YMM1779/6), same locality, ecological trail near turn to Shapka Monomakha Mt., 2.06.2003 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 3 (TNU1791/4; 1802/13), same locality, N slope of Svyataya Mt., 1013.10.2003 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 1 (YMM 1811/7), same locality, Lobovoy Mt. Range, Chornyi Yar ravine, 16.10.2003 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 3 (TNU2030/6; 2282/3; 2397/ 6), same locality, 39.07.2004 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 3 (TNU 2595/20), same locality, Lobovoy Mt.-range, 28.05.2008 (A.A. Nadolny); Yalta Distr.: 4 (TNU2322/7; 2333/11), Martyan Cape Reserve, 8.03.8.04.2007 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 1 , 2 (TNU 2415/10), same locality, 20.10.2007 (M.M. Kovblyuk); 1 (TNU 2419/5), same locality, 20.10.2007 (A.A. Nadolny); 3 (TNU 2417/5), same locality, 24.11.2007 (M.M. Kovblyuk).

Our identification of this species is based on the eye arrangements shown by Simon [1892], the epigyne illustrated by Wiehle [1960] and the unpublished figures provided by R. Bosmans. DESCRIPTION. Measurements. Male (n=1): total length 1.6; carapace 0.7 long, 0.5 wide, 0.3 high; chelicerae 0.3 long. Length of leg segments in :
I II III IV femur 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.5 patella 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 tibia 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.4 metatarsus 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 tarsus 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 total 2.0 1.4 1.1 1.6

Discussion
A preliminary study of the Palaearctic species of Lathys reveals that this genus requires a thorough revision. For a long time the palp of this genus was misinterpreted. The real conformation of the bulbus was described only recently [Marusik et al., 2006]. It became clear that all Asian Lathys species have been erroneously synonymised with L. stigmatisata, which has a European distribution. The reason for such a synonymisation was that earlier authors never compared Asian and European specimens in details, but paid more attention to non-species-specific characters. Judging from the shape of the male palp figured by Chamberlin & Gertsch [1958] most of the Nearctic Lathys may belong to separate genera: L. pallida Marx, 1891 (type species of Neophanes Marx, 1891 has a different locking mechanism of conductor (tibial retromesal apophysis + dorsal apophysis), L. immaculata (Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944), L. albida Gertsch, 1946, L. foxi Marx, 1891 (type species of Prodalia Marx, 1891), L. delicatula (Gertsch & Mulaik, 1936) and L. coralynae Gertsch & Davis, 1942 (have no locking mechanism at all or it may be that all the species are improp-

Female: total length 1.5; cephalothorax 0.6 long, 0.5 wide, 0.4 high; basal segment of chelicerae 0.3 long. Length of leg segments in :
I II III IV femur 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 patella 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 tibia 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 metatarsus 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 tarsus 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 total 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.3


A survey of Lathys from Crimea erly illustrated). Females of the above mentioned species have an epigyna typical for the Lathys stigmatisatagroup.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We thank our colleagues for providing us with unidentified material of Lathys, namely A.A. Khaustov (Yalta, Crimea); V.P. Kornilov (Nikita Vil., Crimea); O.V. Kukushkin (Karadag Nature Reserve, Crimea); D.S. Letova (Sevastopol, Crimea). Special thanks are to Robert Bosmans (Gent, Belgium) who gave us figures of several Mediterranean Lathys. Seppo Koponen (Turku, Finland) who helped us with literature and allowed us to use the SEM microscope at the Zoological Museum. University of Turku. The manuscript was critically reviewed by T. Kronestedt (Stockholm) and D. Ubick (San Francisco). In addition we thank the staff of the Karadagh Nature Reserve for supporting the scientific work of M. K. This work was supported in part by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grant # 09-04-01365-а).

33

References
Almquist S. 2006. Swedish Araneae, part 2 families Dictynidae to Salticidae // Insect Systematic and Evolution. Supplement no.63. P.285601. Bukowski W.I. 1936. [Die Tierbevolkerung der wirbellosen des Krimschen Buchenwaldes] // Nauchnie Trudy Goszapovednikov. Serie 2. Trudy Krymskogo Gosudarstvennogo Zapovednika. Vol.1. P.3103 [in Russian]. Bukowski W.I. 1940. [The animal population of invertebrates mainly blight on oak foliage in the Crimean State Reservation] // Trudy Krymskogo Gosudarstvennogo Zapovednika. Vol.2. P.39169 [in Russian] Chamberlin R.V., Gertsch W.J. 1958. The spider family Dictynidae in America north of Mexico // Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History. Vol.116. Article 1. 152 pp. Charitonov D.E. 1936. [Nachtag zum Katalog der Russischen Spinnen] // Uchenye zapiski Permskogo universiteta imeni M. Gorkogo. Vol.2. No.1. P.167225 [in Russian]. Charitonov D.E. 1937. Contribution to the fauna of Crimean spiders // Festschrift fur Prof. Strand (Riga). Bd.3. P.127140. Gertsch W.J. 1946. Notes on American spiders of the family Dictynidae // American Museum Novitates. No.1319. 21 pp. Kovblyuk M.M. 2004a. [Catalogue of the spiders (Arachnida: Aranei) of the Crimea, South Ukraine] // Voprosy razvitiya Kryma. Nauchno-prakticheski diskussionno-analiticheskiy sbornik. Vyp.15. Problemy ecologii Kryma. Inventarizatsiya krymskoi bioty. Simferopol: Tavriya-Plus. P.211262 [in Russian]. Kovblyuk M.M. 2004b. [Preliminary results of spider fauna and biotopic distribution in Karadagh Nature Reserve study] //

National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Karadagh Nature Reserve. Annals. T.20 (2003). P.139145 [in Russian]. Kovblyuk M.M., Nadolny A.A., Gnelitsa V.A., Zhukovets E.M. 2008a. [Spiders (Arachnida, Aranei) of the Martyan Cape Reserve (Crimea, Ukraine)] // Caucasian entomological bulletin. Vol.4. No.1. P.340 [in Russian with English summary]. Kovblyuk M.M., Kukushkin O.V., Gnelitsa V.A., Nadolny A.A. 2008b. [Brief atlas of spiders (Arachnida, Aranei) of Karadagh Nature Reserve]. Simferopol: N. Orianda. 120 pp [in Russian with English summary]. Lehtinen P.T. 1967. Classification of the cribellate spiders and some allied families, with notes on the evolution of the suborder Araneomorpha // Annales Zoologici Fennici. Vol.4. P.199468. Marusik Yu.M., Ovchinnikov S.V., Koponen S. 2006. Uncommon conformation of the male palp in common Holarctic species belonging to the Lathys stigmatisata group (Araneae, Dictynidae) // Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society. Vol.13. Part 9. P.353360. Menge A. 1869. Preussische Spinnen. III. Abtheilung // Schriften der naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Danzig (N.F.) Bd.2. P.219 264. Mikhailov K.G. 1997. Catalogue of the spiders of the territories of the former Soviet Union (Arachnida, Aranei). Moscow: Zoological Museum of the Moscow State University. 416 pp. Mikhailov K.G. 1998. Catalogue of the spiders (Arachnida, Aranei) of the territories of the former Soviet Union. Addendum 1. Moscow: KMK Scientific Press Ltd. 50 pp. Platnick N.I. 2009. The World Spider Catalog, Version 9.5. American Museum of Natural History, online at http://research.amnh. org/entomology/spiders/catalog/index.html Roberts M.J. 1985. The spiders of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 1: Atypidae to Theridiosomatidae. Colchester, England: Harley Books. 229 pp. Roberts M.J. 1987. The spiders of Great Britain and Ireland 2. Linyphiidae. Colchester: Harley Books. 204 pp. Roberts M.J. 1995. Collins Field Guide: Spiders of Britain & Northern Europe. London: HarperCollins. 383 pp. Roberts M.J. 1998. Spinnengids. Baarn, Netherlands: Tirion,. 397 pp. Simon E. 1884. Arachnides nouveaux dAlgerie // Bulletin de la Sociйtй zoologique de France. T.9. P.321327. Simon E. 1892. Histoire naturelle des araignйes. Paris: Libraire encyclopedique de Roret. T.1. P.1256. Thaler K. 1981. Bemerkenswerte Spinnenfunde in Nordtirol (Osterreich) // Veroffentlichungen der Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum. Bd.61. P.105150. Tyshchenko V.P. 1971. [Identification key to spiders of the European part of the USSR]. Leningrad: Nauka. 281 pp [in Russian]. Wiehle H. 1953. Spinnentiere oder Arachnoidea (Araneae) IX: Orthognatha-Cribellatae-Haplogynae-Entelegynae (Pholcidae, Zodariidae, Oxyopidae, Mimetidae, Nesticidae) // Tierwelt Deutschlands. Teil 42. Jena: VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag. 150 pp. Wiehle H. 1960. Der Embolus des mannlichen Spinnentasters // Verhandlungen der Deutschen zoologischen Gesellschaft. Bonn/Rhein. S.457480.