On Pardosa schenkell (Araneae, Lycosidae) and its presence in Germany and Poland

The wolf spider Pardosa schenkeli Lessert, 1904 was since long regarded as occurring in Germany and Poland but is excluded from the recent checklist of spiders found in these countries. Re-examination of material collected in Germany and Poland, respectively, verifies its presence in both countries. Characters for distinguishing P. schenkeli and its ally P. bifasciata (C.L. Koch, 1834) are given and illustrated

Comparison of Spider Populations of Ground Stratum in Arkansas Pasture and Adjacent Cultivated Field

Of 64 species of spiders taken from the ground stratum of an Arkansas pasture and adjoining cotton field, only 26 were common to both. Twenty-two were collected only in the cotton field; 16, only in the pasture. Many of the 18 species of lycosids were taken in greater numbers in the cultivated field, especially Pardosa milvina and Lycosa helluo. Eight species of lycosids were found only in the cotton field; two, only in the pasture. Only Schizocosa avida, of the better represented lycosids, appeared to show no preference. Similar relationships are given for dictynids, erigonids, linyphiids, oxyopids, gnaphosids, clubionids, thomisids, and salticids

On the spider species described by L. Koch in 1882 from the Balearic Islands (Araneae)

Examination of the L. Koch collection of the Zoological Museum in Berlin allows us to propose the following new synonyms and combinations: Erigone marina L. Koch, 1882 = Oedothorax fuscus (Blackwall, 1834) n. syn.; Theridion elimatum L. Koch, 1882 = Enoplognatha diversa (Blackwall, 1859) n. syn.; Liocranum variabilis Wunderlich, 2008 = Zora inornata L. Koch, 1882 n. syn. = Liocranum inornatum n. comb.; Lycosa perspicax L. Koch, 1882 = Arctosa fulvolineata (Lucas,1846) n. syn.; Alopecosella Roewer, 1960 = Arctosa C. L. Koch, 1847 n. syn.; Lycosa subhirsuta L. Koch, 1882 = Arctosa lacustris (Simon, 1876) n. syn.; Philodromus vegetus L. Koch, 1882 = Thanatus vulgaris Simon, 1870 n. syn.; Ozyptila bicuspis Simon, 1932 = Ozyptila furcula L. Koch, 1882 n. syn.; Haplodrassus maroccanus Denis, 1956 = Drassus parvulus L. Koch, 1882 n. syn. = Haplodrassus parvicorpus (Roewer, 1951) n. comb. (replacement name); Zelotes ruscinensis Simon, 1914 = Zelotes semirufa (L. Koch, 1882) n. syn.; Phlegra simoni L. Koch, 1882 = Phlegra bresnieri Lucas, 1846 n. syn.; Trochosula conspersa (L. Koch, 1882), Lycorma fraisnei (L. Koch, 1882), Lycorma insulana (L. Koch, 1882), Arctosa misella (L. Koch, 1992) and Pirata simplex (L. Koch, 1882) are all retransferred to their original genus Lycosa stat. rev. Cheiracanthium occidentale L. Koch, 1882, Ozyptila furcula L. Koch, 1882 and Zelotes callidus (Simon, 1878) are redescribed

Notes on the distribution of Oculicosa supermirabilis (Araneae, Lycosidae)

The distribution of the poorly known Central Asian wolf-spider Oculicosa supermirabilis Zyuzin, 1993 is clarified, discussed and mapped on the basis of both original and literature-derived data. The species is currently known from the Turan Lowland between the 41st and 43rd degrees of latitude north; its distribution coincides with that of the grey-brown desert soil and lies within the geobotanical sub-zone of southern deserts. Both sexes are also illustrated and diagnosed

Ecology, Mating and Nesting of \u3ci\u3eTachypompilus Ferrugineus Nigrescens\u3c/i\u3e (Hymenoptera: Pompilidae)

An aggregation of Tachypompilus Jerrugineus nigrescens was studied during mid­ summer 1988 in Syracuse, NY. Wasp activity was focused on a 2 m high cemetery monument near a gravelly roadway. Males perched on thc stone, chased one another and pursued incoming females in flight. Details of mating are described. Both sexes spent the night and periods of inclement weather inside a narrow crevice near the base of the monument. Females flew around the monument, landed frequently and made exploratory walks inside of the crevice. They were observed searching for prey and transporting paralyzed spiders backward on the ground. Seven conical or concave depressions (cells) were located inside of the crevice in loosened soil, powdered mortar and debris. A paralyzed spider was positioned in each depression, ventral side up, and a wasp\u27s egg was affixed laterally to the base of the prey\u27s abdomen. Prey spiders comprised moderately large Lycosa helluo and L. rabida (Lycosidae). Closure of the nest is described

Australasian Arachnology, Number 72, August 2005

Just days before this newsletter went to the printer, the Australasian Arachnological Society launched its own website: www.australasian-arachnology.org It was a great effort from all involved, but two people in particular (who are not even directly involved with our society) deserve a special mention: Randolf Manderbach (web programming) and Thomas García Godines (graphic design) professionally developed and programmed the lay-out of our website, for free! Thanks to both of them! You will find further acknowledgements and some information in regard to the ‘philosophy’ of our site in an introductory article on page 4. Similar to this newsletter, the website will prosper only through contributions and feedback from all of you

A Check-list of the Spiders of Arkansas

Collections of spiders were made from 1966, to the present in the six physiographic regions of Arkansas. During this time 435 species representing 35 families were collected and recorded

Reproductive isolation between two populations of Aglaoctenus lagotis , a funnel-web wolf spider

Aglaoctenus lagotis (Lycosidae: Sosippinae) is a spider that, in contrast to the predominant wandering habit of the family, constructs funnel webs. The species is widely distributed throughout the Neotropics and is credited with high levels of intraspecific variation. Here, we evaluate whether reproductive isolating barriers operate between some populations of A. lagotis. We used heterotypic encounters between individuals from two distant localities: southern Uruguay (SU) and Central Argentina (CA). Additionally, we used spiders from an ntermediate locality, western Uruguay (WU), where both forms of the species overlap (SU.WU was used to describe individuals from WU reminiscent of those from SU; and CA.WU was used to describe individuals from WU reminiscent of those from CA). No copulations occurred between SU and CA individuals, whereas a single and atypical copulation occurred between SU.WU and CA.WU individuals. Attacks (only by females on males) were rare. In tests of choice based on silk cues, SU males did not prefer homotypic cues but almost did not court CA females, whereas CA males preferred homotypic cues but usually courted heterotypic females. These findings, with a previously reported temporal asynchrony between populations, suggest the occurrence of reproductive isolation between both spider forms and a speciation process favoured by the wide distribution and plasticity of the species.Fil: González Pérez, María de la Macarena. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Diversidad y Ecología Animal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Diversidad y Ecología Animal; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Cátedra de Diversidad Animal I; ArgentinaFil: Peretti, Alfredo Vicente. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Diversidad y Ecología Animal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Diversidad y Ecología Animal; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Cátedra de Diversidad Animal I; ArgentinaFil: Costa, Fernando G.. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas "Clemente Estable"; Urugua

Australasian Arachnology, Number 70, December 2004

This is it, my first issue! As Tracey announced in the editorial of the last Australasian Arachnology, it’s now my turn ‘at the helm’ of our newsletter. Everybody will agree that Tracey did a tremendous job over the last five years, editing 15 wonderful issues (numbers 55 – 69). Parallels of the current change to her take-over from Mark Harvey as previous editor are evident. As then Mark, Tracey embraces a new role as parent and her increasing family duties do not allow as many arachnological activities at this stage