Eratigena herculea, COMB. NOV.
Creators: name: Bolzern, Angelo
name: Burckhardt, Daniel
name: Hänggi, Ambros
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2013
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Arachnida
Araneae
Agelenidae
Eratigena
Eratigena herculea

description: ERATIGENA HERCULEA (FAGE, 1931) COMB. NOV.
(FIG. 12A, B)
Tegenaria herculea Fage, 1931: 210, 211, fig. 47, female; Brignoli, 1977c: 69, 70, fig. 3, female; Ribera & Barrientos, 1986: 188–191, figs 1–3, male.
Pseudotegenaria herculea: Lehtinen, 1967: 261.
Types
Holotype. Gibraltar: ‘ Cueva de San Miguel’, ♀ (MNHN, 1976, 507), 6.iv.1912.
Other material examined
Gibraltar (1 ♀); Spain (5 ♀).
No males were available for examination. For figures of males see Ribera & Barrientos (1986).
Diagnosis
Eratigena herculea, E. hispanica, and three species originally described in Malthonica (E. arganoi, E. sardoa, and E. sicana, the ‘ Eratigena arganoi - group’) have the distal segment of PLS longer than basal segment (as in E. picta, E. balearica, and E. montigena; segment as long as basal in other species), short dorsal spike at male palp tibia absent (shared with E. feminea, E. incognita, E. inermis, and E. vomeroi, all other Eratigena gen. nov. species with spike), conductor with lateral margin entirely folded (as in E. picta and E. balearica, all other species with folded margin only at the terminal half), terminal end of conductor with one simple elongated peak (comparable with E. atrica, E. bucculenta, E. feminea, E. barrientosi, and E. incognita, in all other Eratigena gen. nov. species more complex), MA protruding, longer than wide, spoon-like (all other Eratigena gen. nov. species with the length of MA not exceeding its width, pocket-like), connection of MA to tegulum membranous (only similar in E. incognita), epigyne with a distinct posterior sclerite, forming a strongly sclerotized and protruding pocket-like structure (shared with E. bucculenta and E. feminea, all other Eratigena gen. nov. species without such structure).
Eratigena herculea and E. hispanica can be separated from the ‘ Eratigena arganoi -group’ by the length of tibia I (longer than CL, in other species shorter than or equal to CL), the PMS bearing three to four cylindrical gland spigots laterally (others with only two), the shape of the dorsal branch of the RTA, the conductor, and the MA, the very long appendages at the CD (short or absent in other species), and the special form of the RC. From E. hispanica it differs in the smaller size (Ribera, 1978; Ribera & Barrientos, 1986; even though this character is strongly variable in many species of the genus, there are very few other discriminating characters mentioned in the literature), the shape of the RTA in dorsal view (Ribera & Barrientos, 1986: 190, figs 3, 5), the conductor not reaching the distal margin of the alveolus (reaching it in E. hispanica), the differently shaped epigyne (larger membranous part anteriorly of distinctly differently shaped posterior sclerite in E. hispanica), the absence of epigynal teeth (present in E. hispanica), and the distally less convoluted appendages at the CD (more elongated and convoluted in E. hispanica).
Description
Measurements: Measurements of males were provided by Ribera & Barrientos (1986). Female (N = 2): CL 2.96–3.16, CW 2.11–2.15, STL 1.53–1.56, STW 1.31– 1.33, OL 2.55–3.63, OW 1.67–2.65. Leg I (4.46, 1.19, 4.64, 4.77, 2.57), II (3.83–3.99, 1.04–1.16, 3.42–3.51, 3.68–4.09, 1.88–2.2), III (3.6–3.74, 1.02–1.05, 3.1– 3.24, 3.98–4.22, 1.72–1.93), IV (4.58–4.85, 1.04–1.07, 4.54–4.57, 5.62–5.91, 1.95–2.2). Pedipalp (1.57–1.59, 0.56–0.59, 1.11–1.17, 1.6–1.69). EPL 0.31, EPW 0.53, ATL 0.18, ATW 0.2. Eyes (moderately reduced): PME 0.04–0.06, PLE 0.05–0.06, AME 0.03–0.05, ALE 0.06– 0.08. Eye distances: PME- PME 2 x PME, PME–AME 1.5–2 x PME, PME–PLE 1.5–2 x PME, PME–ALE 2–2.5 x PME, AME–AME 1.5–2 x AME, AME- ALE 1.5–2 x AME, CLY1> 3 x AME, CLY2 2–3 x ALE.
Male palp: No male specimen was available for examination. Relevant information was provided by Ribera & Barrientos (1986).
Epigyne and vulva: Epigyne with a distinct posterior sclerite, forming a strongly sclerotized, triangularly shaped, and protruding pocket, opening posteriad. Epigynal teeth absent. CO located anteriolaterally of the posterior sclerite. Vulva consists of distinguishable CD, RC, and FD. CD short, with a long, distally somewhat convoluted appendix. RC irregularly formed and sclerotized with several ‘chambers’, separated by about 1.5 x their diameter. FD only represented by small, leaf-shaped appendages.
Other important characters: Cheliceral promargin with three to four, retromargin with seven to ten teeth. Colulus rectangularly shaped with distal margin w-shaped. Distal segment of PLS longer than basal segment. PMS with one prominent minor ampullate gland spigot and three to four cylindrical gland spigots laterally. Tarsal trichobothria on cymbium and palp tarsus absent. Tarsal trichobothria seven to eight. Small teeth on paired claws of leg I 18. Leg spination: female palp (1–0–0–0, 2–0–0, 2–1+1p– 0), leg femora (2–2–1–0 or 2–2–3–0, 1–2–2–0 or 2–3– 2–0, 1–2–2–0 or 2–2–2–0 or 2–2–3–0 or 3–2–1–0, 1–1–1–0 or 2–1–1–0 or 2–1–2–0 or 2–2–1–0), patellae (all 2–0–0, one specimen with one retrolateral spine at patella IV), tibiae (0–0–0–1+1p or 0–1–0–1+1p or 2–2–0–1+1p, 0–2–0–1+1p or 2–2–0–1+2p or 2–2–1–2p, 2–2–1–2p+1 or 2–2–2–1+1p or 2–2–2–2 or 2–2–2–2p, 2–2–2–2p+1, or 2–2–2–3p, or 2–2–3–2, or 2–3–2–2), metatarsi (0–0–0–3p+1, 0–1–0–3p+1 or 0–2–0–3p+1, 0–4–3–2p+1 or 0–4–3–3p+1, 0–4–4–1p+1+2p+1 or 1–4–3–1p+1+2p+1), tarsi (I & II 0, III 0 or 0–0–1–0, IV 0–0–1–0 or 0–0–2–0).
Coloration: Carapace not darkened (troglobiont?). Sternum with a weakly expressed pale median region. Opisthosoma brown-yellowish, only cardiac mark darker. Legs without a pattern.
Distribution
Records are known only from southern Spain (mainland and the Balearic Island of Ibiza) (Fage, 1931; Brignoli, 1977c; Ribera & Barrientos, 1986).
Discussion
The specimen from Lima Gesus (Malaga, Tolox) differs slightly from the other material: the conspicuously different run of the copulatory duct, the larger size, and the leg spination. More material is necessary to decide whether or not this specimen represents a different species.
description: Published as part of Bolzern, Angelo, Burckhardt, Daniel & Hänggi, Ambros, 2013, Phylogeny and taxonomy of European funnel-web spiders of the Tegenaria-Malthonica complex (Araneae: Agelenidae) based upon morphological and molecular data, pp. 723-848 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society (Zool. J. Linn. Soc.) (Zool. J. Linn. Soc.) 168 (4) on pages 766-767, DOI: 10.1111/zoj.12040, http://zenodo.org/record/5282985