Zelotes argoliensis C.L. Koch 1839
Creators: name: Chatzaki, Maria
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2010
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Arachnida
Araneae
Gnaphosidae
Zelotes
Zelotes argoliensis

description: Zelotes argoliensis (C.L. Koch, 1839)
Figs 25–30
Melanophora argoliensis C. L. Koch, 1839: 72, Fig. 483 (Df), holotype from Peloponnisos (not examined); L. Koch, 1866: 174, pl. 7, Fig. 113 (f).
Z. balcanicus Deltshev, 2006: 711, Figs 2–11 (Dmf) from Bulgaria (female paratypes examined). Nov. Syn. Z. baram Levy, 2009: 31, Figs 67–70 (Dmf) from Israel (holotype and paratype examined). Nov. Syn.
Diagnosis: Males of Z. argoliensis are distinguished by the bulging sclerites of the upper part of the tegulum, such as the prolaterally extended terminal apophysis and the large embolar base hiding the embolus, while females are distinguished by the very long epigynal cavity.
Material: GREECE: Aigaio islands: Samothraki: Feggari Mt, 300 m alt: 2 ɗɗ (14.03.09 to 18.VII.09); Fonias-Khpoi, phrygana: 1 Ψ (01.X.08 to 14.03.09) [all leg. M. Chatzaki]; Ionio islands: Korfu: 1 Ψ (sub. Z. argoliensis, NHMW 7828), Lefkada, W Phryni: 1 ɗ (sub. Z. balcanicus, SMF 58599); Ipeiros: Parga-Preveza, maquis of Quercus: 1 ɗ (sub. Z. balcanicus, SMF 58604), Ioannina, street to Kastanea: 2 ΨΨ (sub. Z. balcanicus, SMF 58612); Thessalia: Volos, 730 m: 1 ɗ (sub. Z. balcanicus, SMF 58607); BULGARIA: Black Sea, Shabla town (dunes): 1 ɗ 1 Ψ (Z. balcanicus paratypes, col. C. Deltshev, leg. V. Popov, 4.VI. 99); ISRAEL: Bar’am forest: 1 ɗ (Z. baram holotype IX.96, ZMHUJ 15386, leg. R. Sharon); Bar’am forest: 1 Ψ (Z. baram paratype VIII.96, ZMHUJ 15387, leg. R. Sharon).
Taxonomic comments. Z. argoliensis was an insufficiently known species recorded from Greece. It was described on the basis of a female found in Peloponnisos, Argolida by C. L. Koch (1839). A female of this species from Korfu was examined by the author. The examination of paratypes of Z. balcanicus from Bulgaria and other comparative material from several localities in Greece as well as the figures provided in Deltshev et al. (2006) (p.711, Figs 2–11) leave no doubt that the two species are identical. Also the newly described species Z. baram by Levy (2009) (p. 31, Figs 67–70) conform to the distinct characters of the same species, namely the prolaterally extended terminal apophysis of the palpal organ (TA) (Fig. 25), the embolic projection (EP), the large embolar base with the embolus (E) hidden behind it and only visible from retrolateral view (Fig. 26) and the shape of the long epigynal posterior margin (Fig. 27). The similarities of the latter species were confirmed by the examination of the male holotype and the female paratype of Z. baram, although small differences may be observed. In the types of Z. baram the embolic projection of the bulb is wider (Fig. 30) and the glandular heads of the introductory ducts of the vulva are situated higher towards the introductory orifices. These differences are considered intraspesific variation. Therefore Z. argoliensis remains as the valid name, as it is the oldest.
Distribution. Greece; Bulgaria; Romania; FYROM; Israel.
Zelotes olympi (Kulczy ń ski, 1903) Figs 31–34
Prosthesima olympi (Kulczyński, 1903): 639, pl. 1, Fig. 4 (Df), holotype from Turkey (examined). Zelotes olympi Kovblyuk, 2005: 4, Figs 1.1–5, 2.1–5 (f, Dm).
Diagnosis: Z. olympi presents very distinct characters on its bulb, such as the ventrally protruding terminal apophysis with a bifid end and an anterior dorsal sclerite with characteristic shape. Females of this species differ from congeners of the same group by the almost straight and parallel epyginal lateral margins and the separated anterior margins extending further out of the lateral ones.
Comparative material examined: TURKEY: Asia Minor, Olympus Bithinicus Mt.: 1 Ψ (Type locality, NHMW 7859); BULGARIA: S. Sredna Gora, Strelcha Town: 1 ɗ 1 Ψ (sub. Z. talpinus, col. C. Deltshev, leg. S. Lazarov, 06.VII.96); UKRAINE: Crimea, Yalta, Nikitskay Yaila Mt.: 1 ɗ (col. C. Deltshev, leg. M. Kovblyuk, 0 8 to 18.IX.01); Crimea, Yalta, Simferopol, Lozovoe village: 1 Ψ (col. C. Deltshev, leg. M. Kovblyuk, 6 to 23.V.00).
Zelotes talpinus (L. Koch, 1872): ɗ holotype from the Alps, OUMNH, Jar 2140, Tube 49.
Taxonomic comments. Z. olympi was an insufficiently known species described on the basis of a female recorded from Turkey (Olympus Bithynicus in Asia Minor). Recently Kovblyuk (2005, Figs. 1: 1–3 and 3:1– 3) re-established its taxonomic status and described the male of the species from Crimea. Kovblyuk commented on the similarity of Z. olympi with Z. talpinus (L. Koch, 1872), a well known species of Central Europe, but also pointed to the differences of the two species: “…males of Z. olympi differ from Z. talpinus by the bifid terminal apophysis (one tip in Z. talpinus) and other details of the bulbus, while females differ by almost straight and parallel epyginal margins (not S-shaped) in the anterior half” (p. 2–5, translation from Russian kindly provided by Yuri Marusik). The type of Z. talpinus was examined by the author and differences were also identified in both the terminal apophysis tip (see outlined structure B in Figs 32 and 34) and the shape of the anterior dorsal sclerite (see outlined structure A in Figs. 31–33). A female of Z. talpinus was not available to the author. Interestingly a male and female from Bulgaria identified as Z. talpinus were found identical to another couple from Crimea identified as Z. olympi. The presence of Z. talpinus in Bulgaria has been re-confirmed by the cross checking of other specimens from Pirin Mt. (1 ɗ, 1 Ψ) and Rila Mt. (1 Ψ) (col. C. Deltshev, pers. com.).
The type locality of Z. olympi was misinterpreted by Bosmans & Chatzaki (2005) as belonging to the Greek mountain Olympus in Thessalia. Hence the species is not known to occur in Greece, at least not to our present knowledge.
Distribution. Bulgaria; Turkey; Ukraine (not Greece).
description: Published as part of Chatzaki, Maria, 2010, New data on the least known zelotines (Araneae, Gnaphosidae) of Greece and adjacent regions, pp. 43-61 in Zootaxa 2564 on pages 54-59, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.197217