Search

“I. Uluslararası Organik Tarım ve Biyoçeşitlilik Sempozyumu 27-29 Eylül Bayburt”

Bir Yengeç Örümceği olan Thomisus citrinellus Simon 1875 türü Irak Örümcek Faunası için ilk kez kaydedilmiştir. Türe ait habitus ve genitalya fotoğrafları sunulmuştur. Deskripsiyonu ve lokaliteler ayrıca çalışmada verilmiştir., A thomisid spider species, Thomisus citrinellus Simon 1875 is recorded for the first time in Iraq. Photographs of habitus and genitalia of the species are presented. Descriptions and localities of species are also given.

WOS: 000359208200003, PubMed ID: 25850818, There has been no study on the chitin structure of wasp species. Here, we selected the three most common wasp species belonging to the family Vespidae for chitin extraction and characterization. Chitin was isolated from each wasp species and characterized by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), X-ray diffractometry (XRD), elemental analysis (EA), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The chitin contents of Vespa crabro, Vespa orientalis, and Vespula germanica were 8.3, 6.4, and 11.9%, respectively. The crystalline index (CrI) values for the chitin extracted from each species were 69.88, 53.92, and 50%, respectively. The most important finding of the study is that although the same method was used to extract chitin from each of the three wasp species, the degree of acetylation was different: for V. crabro and V. orientalis it was 96.85 and 99.82% ( the chitin was extremely pure), respectively, whereas that for V. germanica the chitin was 79.83%. (C) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Berinda cypria Chatzaki & Panayiotou n. sp. Figs 13 –14, 17, 20–21 Etymology. The species name is derived from the island in which the type locality is situated. Types: CYPRUS: Lemesos, Kourio: 1 3 holotype, 6 33 1 Ƥ paratypes (15.III. 2006 to 27.V. 2007) [leg. Kaltsas, NHMC]. Further material examined. CYPRUS: Lemesos, Kourio: 3 33 1 Ƥ (13.V. 2006 to 09.VII. 2006); 1 Ƥ (15.III. 2008 to 17.V. 2008) [leg. Kaltsas, NHMC]. Diagnosis: B. cypria is very similar to B. ensigera and B. hakani in somatic and genital characters. It may be easily separated from them by the presence of two tibial apophyses on the male palp. Females differ from B. ensigera in the shape of lateral margins and the formation of lateral pouches situated at their middle and from both B. ensigera and B. hakani in the shape of scape being more elongated. Description. Measurements 3 (Ƥ), n = 6 (1): TL: 5.7–7.4 (6.2), PL: 1.9–3.2 (2.8), PW: 1.9–2.4 (1.9), OL: 2.9–3.5 (3.2), PL/PW: 0.95–1.52 (1.47). 3 Ƥ: Red-brown spiders. Maxillae as in Zelotes. Labium longer than wide. Chelicerae with 2 anterior and 4 posterior teeth and with lateral condyles. Brush of thick hair present on inner posterior side of chelicerae. Eyes round except for oblique PME. Anterior row of eyes slightly recurved, posterior one slightly procurved. Opisthosoma grey, in 3 with scutum, covered with thick fringe of bristles. Spinnerets long and cylindrical, anterior ones longer, thicker than posteriors. Legs: All Ta with scopulae, Me III–IV with apical preening comb, as in Zelotes. Spination: Fe: I -; 3 II -; Ƥ II d 2; 3 III d 6–8; Ƥ III d 7; 3 IV d 5–6; Ƥ IV d 6. Pa: I–II, IV -; III p 1 r 1. Ti: I -; 3 II v 3–4; Ƥ II -; Ti: I -; 3 II v 3–4; Ƥ II -; III–IV spinose. Me: I v 1; 3 II v 3–4; Ƥ II v 2; III–IV spinose. 3 Pedipalp (Figs 13 –14, 17): Fe with 2 spines, Pa short, without apophysis. Two tibial apophyses: one dorsal, laterally directed, straight, with crested end (Figs 14, 17), and one retrolateral, straight with hinge on its end (Fig. 14). Cymbium oval with retrolateral furrow, its retrolateral proximal angle slightly extended (Fig. 14). Second furrow behind tibial apophysis also present (Fig. 17). Subtegulum with triangular projection at its proximal end (Fig. 13). Tegulum robust, ventrally membranous, with distinct conductor. Embolus long, filiform, rising from proximal base of tegulum. Conductor with three elements, as in B. ensigera: membranous anterior sac (a), sickle-shaped guiding structure (b), leading to sclerotized posterior hook (c). Epigyne (Fig. 20): with long, extended anterior scape as in B. ensigera, but longer, more slender. Lateral margins almost parallel, widening posteriorly, forming lateral pouches which may provide anchoring place for palpal hook. Copulatory orifices open at upper part of spermathecal length. Vulva (Fig. 21): Introductory ducts with glandular heads, forming one coil before leading to oval spermathecae. Distribution. CYPRUS.

Berinda Roewer, 1928 Species belonging to the genus Berinda show a puzzling combination of characters. For example, the epigyne of B. ensigera pocesses a large anterior hood, resembling, for instance, that found in many Gnaphosa Latreille, 1804 species. The epigyna of B. amabilis and of B. aegilia are very similar to each other, sharing a small anterior conical hood and similar introductory ducts and spermathecae, but do not particularly resemble the epigyna of B. ensigera and the two newly described species of the genus. Similarly, males of all five species share long filiform embolous, a strong conductor of various shapes and distinctive tibial apophyses, which are characteristic to each species. On the other hand, the preening combs on Me III & IV, the shape of maxillae, labium and spinnerets are characters common to all Berinda species clearly putting them in the group of zelotine species. Diagnosis. Yellow to red-brown spiders of medium size (total length of 3 5.3���7.8 mm and of �� 5.7���10.2 mm). Prosoma oval widening at thoracic part. Maxillae as in Zelotes, wider at basal half and abruptly narrowing at distal half. Labium longer than wide. Chelicerae with 2 anterior and 3���4 posterior teeth and with lateral condyles. Eyes round except for oblique PME. Anterior row of eyes recurved, posterior one slightly procurved or straight. Opisthosoma light brown, in 3 with relatively large brown scutum, covered with thick fringe of bristles. Spinnerets long, cylindrical, anterior ones longer than posteriors. Leg setation variable except for following: All Ta with scopulae; Me III���IV with apical preening comb, as in Zelotes; Me and Ti III���IV spinose; Pa I, II, IV without any spines, III with 1 pro- and 1 retrolateral spine., Published as part of Panayiotou, Eleni, Kaltsas, Dimitris, Seyyar, Osman & Chatzaki, Maria, 2010, Revision of the genus Berinda (Araneae, Gnaphosidae) in the East Mediterranean with the description of two new species, pp. 44-54 in Zootaxa 2362 on page 45, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.275752, {"references":["Roewer, C. F. (1928) Araneae. In: Zoologische Streifzuge in Attika, Morea, und besonders auf der Insel Kreta, XI. Abhandlungen vom naturwissenschaftlichen Verein zu Bremen, 27, 92 - 123."]}

Berinda hakani Chatzaki & Seyyar n. sp. Figs 15 ���16, 18���19, 22��� 23 Etymology. This species is dedicated to the Turkish arachnologist Dr. Hakan Demir, Gazi University, Turkey. Types: TURKEY: Kayseri Province, Hisarcık, Lifos Mountain 38 �� 35.960 ' N, 35 �� 30.962 ' E, 1800: 1 3 holotype, 1 �� paratype (16.V. 2007) [leg. Musa Kar, NUAM]. Further material examined. TURKEY: Kayseri Province, Develi district (in the direction to Erciyes Mountain), 38 �� 20.090 ' N, 35 �� 38.074 ' E, 1330 m: 2 33 2 ���� (25.VI. 2008) [leg. Osman Seyyar, NUAM]; Kayseri Province, Pınarbaşi, the southern slopes of Şirvan Mountain, 38 �� 42.949 ' N, 36 �� 24.013 ' E, 1700 m: 1 3 (07.VI. 2006) [leg. Fuat Bozok, NUAM]; Kayseri, Hisarcık, Sakar vineyard, 38 �� 37.422 ' N, 35 �� 30.401 ' E, 1520 m: 1 3 2 ���� (20.V. 2008) [leg. Burak ��zberk, NUAM]. Diagnosis: As noted before the three species, B. ensigera, B. cypria and B. hakani are very similar in all characters of the genital organs apart from the number and shape of the tibial apophyses. Females are almost indistinguishable, except for the shape of lateral margins and their anchoring openings and the size and shape of the scape. Description. Measurements 3 (��), n = 4 (5): TL: 7.0��� 7.8 (7.2���10.2), PL: 3.2���3.5 (3.7���5.2), PW: 2.8���3.1 (2.7���3.8), OL: 3.5 ���4.0 (3.7���5.2), PL/PW: 1.12���1.14 (1.36���1.37). 3 ��: Habitus (color, size, mouth parts, shape of eyes, scutum present in male opisthosoma, spinnerets) as in Berinda cypria. The only difference lies in the dentition of chelicerae: 2 anterior and 3���5 posterior teeth and with lateral condyles. Legs: All Ta with scopulae, Me III���IV with apical preening comb, as in Zelotes. Spination: Fe: I d 3; II d 3; 3 III d 7; �� III -; 3 IV d 6; �� IV d 5. Pa: I���II, IV -; III p 1 r 1. Ti: I -; 3 II v 4; �� II -; Ti: 3 I v 1; II v 5; �� I���II -; III���IV spinose. Me: I v 1; 3 II v 3���4; �� II v 2; III���IV spinose. 3 Pedipalp (Figs 15 ���16, 18��� 19): Fe with 3 dorsal spines, Pa short (as long as tibia), with very small conical dorsal tip (almost like an apophysis). One retrolateral tibial apophysis, long, wide, straight, with bifid end: one long, filiform and more basal one with truncate end (Figs 16, 18��� 19). Shape of cymbium, tegulum, subtegulum and conductor as in B. cypria with all three elements (a, b, c) present (Figs 15���16). Epigyne and vulva (Figs 22���23): Shape of both epigyne and vulva as in B. cypria. The two species may be distinguished only by the relative position and shape of the anterior scape and its general appearance which, on the other hand may be a consequence of the degree of extension at the time of alcohol fixation. Differences in the spermathecal configuration must be attributed to the difficulty in revealing the coiling of ducts due to the overlap of structures. Distribution. TURKEY: Kayseri Province., Published as part of Panayiotou, Eleni, Kaltsas, Dimitris, Seyyar, Osman & Chatzaki, Maria, 2010, Revision of the genus Berinda (Araneae, Gnaphosidae) in the East Mediterranean with the description of two new species, pp. 44-54 in Zootaxa 2362 on page 52, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.275752

Berinda aegilia Chatzaki, 2002 Figs 1 ���2, 5��� 6 Diagnosis: The general appearance of the genital organs of this species is close to that of B. amabilis, although details in the structures of the pedipalp also resemble that of B. ensigera. Distinct characters for B. aegilia are the following: male palp, cymbium without proximal retrolateral extension (found in B. amabilis and to a lesser extent in other Berinda species), with a hairless, slightly excavated retrolateral edge (Fig. 1); no apophysis on the patella, apophysis on tibia relatively small, with a curved tip, set well apart from the cymbium, conductor of distinct shape (Figs. 1���2) originating from a membranous anterior bladder (a) and projecting ventrally into a strongly sclerotized claw (b); epigyne similar to that of B. amabilis, but with broader, rectangular anterior hood (Fig. 5), spermathecae oval with coiled glandular heads (Fig. 6). Description: See Chatzaki et al. (2002 b) New records: GREECE: Peloponnisos: Taygetos Mt, 600 m, phrygana: 1 3 (15.III. 1997 to 06.VII. 1997) [leg. Anastasiou, ZMUA]. Comments. This is the first time that the species is recorded from mainland Greece. Presumably its distribution may expand at least to the rest of Peloponnisos and Kythira (the island between Antikythira and Peloponnisos) when further material becomes available. Distribution. GREECE: Antikythira Isl., Peloponnisos., Published as part of Panayiotou, Eleni, Kaltsas, Dimitris, Seyyar, Osman & Chatzaki, Maria, 2010, Revision of the genus Berinda (Araneae, Gnaphosidae) in the East Mediterranean with the description of two new species, pp. 44-54 in Zootaxa 2362 on page 47, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.275752, {"references":["Chatzaki, M., Thaler, K. & Mylonas, M. (2002 b) Ground spiders (Gnaphosidae; Araneidae) of Kriti and adjacent areas of Greece. Tanonomy and distribution. II. Revue suisse de Zoologie, 109, 603 - 633."]}

Berinda amabilis Roewer, 1928 Figs 3 ���4, 7��� 8 Berinda amabilis Roewer, 1928 (p. 106, Figs 11���13), CRETE: Chania: Akrotiri, Governeto monastery (type locality, not reexamined). Talanites aculeatus Charitonov, 1946: p. 26, fig. 43, UZBEKISTAN: Yakkabagh (type locality, not examined). Diagnosis: The species resembles B. aegilia. Males are easily recognized by the fingerlike retrolateral apophysis of the patella (unique within Berinda) and the slender retrolateral apophysis of the tibia of the pedipalp (Fig. 4). A distinct conductor (Fig. 3) ending as an S-shaped sclerotized band (possibly the posterior hook in other Berinda species, like B. ensigera) is also a distinctive character of males. Females are recognized by the anterior lateral margins widely curved at sides, and the small (compared to B. aegilia) conical hood at midline (Fig. 7). Spermathecae are globular with lateral introductory ducts (Fig. 8). Description: See Chatzaki et al. (2002 a) (re-description). Distribution. GREECE: Crete, Gavdos; UZBEKISTAN; TURKEY: Niğde. Berinda ensigera (O.P.-Cambridge, 1874) 1 Figs 9 ���10, 11��� 12 Drassodes ensiger (O.P.-Cambridge, 1874), p. 389, Fig. 14, TURKEY, SMYRNE (male holotype and female paratype, not examined); Karol (1967). Drassodes reimoseri Bristowe, 1935 (p. 779, Figs 4���6), RODOS (type locality, description of female); Hadjissarantos (1940, p. 77, Fig. 22, description of male), ATTIKI: Parnitha, Agia Triada; Rafina; Nea Philadelphia; Salamina, Selinia; Podoniftis; Pikermi; Pendeli-Monastiri; Hymittos-Kareas; Toyrkolimano; Psychiko (not reexamined). Haplodrassus grazianoi Caporiacco, 1948 (p. 59, Fig. 10), RODOS (type locality, not examined) Syn.N. Diagnosis: Males can be recognized by the tibial apophysis which is straight and very long, almost as long as the cymbium (Fig. 9). The conductor is strongly developed, with three elements: a membranous anterior sac 1. This species is listed in Platnick���s catalogue (2009) as Berinda ensiger. However because Berinda is a female noun, we persist in our proposition of changing the corresponding adjective to ��� ensigera ��� (Chatzaki et al. 2002 a). (a), a sickle-shaped guiding structure (b) leading to a sclerotized posterior hook (c) (Figs 9���10). All three elements are interconnected. This configuration is shared among three species: B. ensigera, B. cypria and B. hakani (see below) and is almost indistinguishable. In females there is a scape (Sc) (Fig. 11) with an anterior hood as in Gnaphosa. Lateral margins are parallel and open at posterior part, leading to the copulatory orifices. New records: GREECE: NE Attiki: Marathonas, Ag. Marina: 9 33 2 ���� (30.IV. 2006 to 01.VII. 2006); 3 ���� (01.VII. 2006 to 28.VIII. 2006); 3 33 4 ���� (04.V. 2006 to 30.VI. VII) [all leg. Kaltsas, NHMC]; Peloponnisos: Mainalo Mt, 1600 m: 2 ���� (09.VII. 1997 to 12.X. 1997) [leg. Anastasiou, ZMUA]; Aegean Islands: Samos: Psili Ammos: 13 33 9 ���� (02.V. 2006 to 06.VII. 2006); 5 ���� (06.VII. 2006 to 30.VIII. 2006); 3 33 (06.III. 2007 to 05.V. 2007); 10 33 6 ���� (05.V. 2007 to 01.VII. 2007) [all leg. Kaltsas, NHMC]; Rodos: Lindos, phrygana: 3 ���� (13.V. 2006 to 09.VII. 2006); Epta Piges, bank of a small river: 1 3 1 �� (14.V. 2006 to 10.VII. 2006); Afandoy-Psinthos, phrygana: 8 33 3 ���� (14.V. 2006 to 10.VII. 2006); Lardos-Laerma, pine forest, 200 m: 3 33 3 ���� (13.V. 2006 to 09.VII. 2006); Prasonisi (coast of Rodos), phrygana: 7 33 5 ���� (13.V. 2006 to 09.VII. 2006); Prasonisi (islet): 1 �� (13.V. 2006 to 09.VII. 2006); Attaviros Mt., 1000 m: 1 �� (12.V. 2006 to 08.VII. 2006) [all leg. Chatzaki & Kaltsas, NHMC]; Leros: Blefouti: 1 �� (23.VII. 1997) [leg. M. Engvall, NHMC]; TURKEY: Smyrne: 3 33 2 ���� (MNHN 5-1912). Comments: Both sexes of B. ensigera share very similar structures with B. cypria and B. hakani. However males are easily distinguished by the tibial apophysis, distinct in all three species (compare Figs 10, 14, 16). In females the distinction is more difficult: the shape of the lateral margins is one distinctive character (compare Figs 11, 20, 22) and the length and shape of the scape is another. However the latter may differ among individuals depending on the extension of the organ at the moment of the animal���s death. The new synonymy here proposed is based on the description of a female as Haplodrassus grazianoi by Caporiacco (1948: 59, Fig. 10). The illustration presented by Caporiacco clearly represents one of the three Berinda species (B. ensigera, B. cypria or B. hakani -see below and Figs 11���12 and 20���23). The shape of the scape mostly resembles B. ensigera, although the shadows at the lateral margins (also in combination to the shape of the scape) would suggest B. hakani. However since B. ensigera was found by the authors multiple times on the island of Rodos, which is the type locality of H. grazianoi, it may be safely concluded that the latter corresponds to B. ensigera. Distribution. GREECE: Attiki, Peloponnisos, Aegean Islands: Crete, Rodos, Samos, Leros, Poros, Salamina; TURKEY: Smyrne., Published as part of Panayiotou, Eleni, Kaltsas, Dimitris, Seyyar, Osman & Chatzaki, Maria, 2010, Revision of the genus Berinda (Araneae, Gnaphosidae) in the East Mediterranean with the description of two new species, pp. 44-54 in Zootaxa 2362 on pages 47-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.275752, {"references":["Roewer, C. F. (1928) Araneae. In: Zoologische Streifzuge in Attika, Morea, und besonders auf der Insel Kreta, XI. Abhandlungen vom naturwissenschaftlichen Verein zu Bremen, 27, 92 - 123.","Chatzaki, M., Thaler, K. & Mylonas, M. (2002 a) Ground spiders (Gnaphosidae; Araneidae) of Kriti (Greece). Tanonomy and distribution. I. Revue suisse de Zoologie, 109, 559 - 601.","Karol, S. (1967) Turkish spiders. I. A preliminary list. Com. de la Faculte des sciences de l' Universite de Ankara, 109 (7), 1 - 34.","Hadjissarantos, H. (1940) The spiders of Attiki. Thesis, University of Athens, Athens, 132 pp (in Greek)."]}

The characteristic features of Oecobius rhodiensis Kritscher, 1966 and Oecobius teliger O.P.-Cambridge, 1872, which are recorded for the first time in Turkey, are presented in this paper. Identification keys for the Turkish species, digital and SEM photographs, and drawings of genitalia of the new recorded species are also given together with their zoogeographical distributions.

Doğu Akdeniz Bölgesi'nden, 2007 yılının Mart ayından başlayarak 2008 yılının Aralık ayına kadar iki yıl süre ile toplanan Gnaphosidae örnekleri sistematik bakımdan değerlendirildi. Ergin 615 erkek ve 791 dişi gnafozid örümceği incelendi. Bu değerlendirme sonucunda Gnaphosidae familyası içerisinde yer alan yirmi cinse ait toplam kırk yedi tür tespit edildi. Bunlardan Nomisia anatolica Seyyar, Ayyıldız ve Topçu, 2009 bilim dünyası için yeni olarak tespit edildi ve yayımlandı. Arboricaria koeni, Cesonia aspida, Drassodes lacertosus, Drassodes serratichelis, Drassyllus crimeaensis, Gnaphosa mongolica, Haplodrassus invalidus, Haplodrassus morosus, Haplodrassus mediterraneus, Nomisia negebensis, Setaphis carmeli, Setaphis fuscipes, Trachyzelotes lyonnetii, Zelotes ilotarum türleri Türkiye faunası için yeni kayıt olarak belirlendi. Anagraphis pallens, Aphantaulax trifasciata, Berinda ensigera, Callilepis cretica, Callilepis nocturna, Drassodes lapidosus, Drassodes pubescens, Drassodes lutescens, Drassyllus praeficus, Gnaphosa dolosa, Gnaphosa opaca, Haplodrassus dalmatensis, Haplodrassus signifer, Micaria albovittata, Micaria pulicaria, Micaria coarctata, Micaria rossica, Nomisia aussereri, Nomisia exornata, Nomisia orientalis, Nomisia palaestina, Nomisia ripariensis, Parasyrisca turkenica, Phaeocedus braccatus, Poecilochroa senilis, Poecilochroa variana, Scotophaeus scutulatus, Trachyzelotes malkini, Zelotes caucasius, Zelotes puritanus, Zelotes tenuis ise daha önce Türkiye'den kaydedilen taksonlar olarak tespit edildi.Örnekler araziden aspiratör, atrap ve çukur tuzak kullanılarak toplandı. Toplanan örneklerin teşhis, çizim ve ölçüm işlemleri yapıldı. Tarama elektron mikroskobunda bazı taksonların incelemeleri yapıldı ve fotoğrafları çekildi. Yeni ve bilinen türlerin örneklerimiz üzerinden tanımları yapılarak sistematik sorunları tartışıldı. Ayrıca cins ve tür düzeyinde teşhis anahtarları düzenlendi. Örnekler etiketlenerek müze materyali olarak muhafaza altına alındı. Ground spiders collected from East Mediterranean Region in Turkey during two years, beginning from March 2007 to December 2008 were evaluated from a systematic point of view. Adult 615 males and 791 females gnaphosid spider were examined. Totally forty seven species belonging to twenty genera in the family of Gnaphosidae were determined. Of these, Nomisia anatolica Seyyar, Ayyıldız and Topçu, 2009, is new to science; Arboricaria koeni, Cesonia aspida, Drassodes lacertosus, Drassodes serratichelis, Drassyllus crimeaensis, Gnaphosa mongolica, Haplodrassus invalidus, Haplodrassus morosus, Haplodrassus mediterraneus, Nomisia negebensis, Setaphis carmeli, Setaphis fuscipes, Trachyzelotes lyonnetii and Zelotes ilotarum are new records for the Turkish fauna; Anagraphis pallens, Aphantaulax trifasciata, Berinda ensigera, Callilepis cretica, Callilepis nocturna, Drassodes lapidosus, Drassodes pubescens, Drassodes lutescens, Drassyllus praeficus, Gnaphosa dolosa, Gnaphosa opaca, Haplodrassus dalmatensis, Haplodrassus signifer, Micaria albovittata, Micaria pulicaria, Micaria coarctata, Micaria rossica, Nomisia aussereri, Nomisia exornata, Nomisia orientalis, Nomisia palaestina, Nomisia ripariensis, Parasyrisca turkenica, Phaeocedus braccatus, Poecilochroa senilis, Poecilochroa variana, Scotophaeus scutulatus, Trachyzelotes malkini, Zelotes caucasius, Zelotes puritanus and Zelotes tenuis have already been recorded from Turkey.All specimens were collected from field by using aspirator, sweep net and pitfall traps. Identifications, drawings and measurements of the collected specimens were provided. Some taxa were photographed and examined in scanning electron microscope. The definitions of the new and known taxa were given and their systematic problems were discussed on the basis of our samples. Furthermore, the identification keys to the genera and species were provided. The specimens which were labelled were preserved as museum materials. 184

ÖZET NİĞDE İLİ VE ÇEVRESİNDE YAYILIŞ GÖSTEREN YER ÖRÜMCEKLERİNİN (ARANEAE: GNAPHOSIDAE) SİSTEMATİĞİ SEYYAR, Osman Niğde Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Biyoloji Anabilim Dalı Danışman: Prof. Dr. Ayvaz BABAŞOGLU Haziran 2005, 84 sayfa Bu çalışmada Niğde ili ve çevresinde yayılış gösteren Gnaphosidae familyası örümcekleri incelenmiştir. 2002 yılının Nisan ayı ile 2004 yılının Eylül ayına kadar olan bu çalışmada Gnaphosidae familyasına ait örümcek örnekleri toplanmıştır. Bölgeden bu familyaya ait 260 erişkin birey toplanmış 15 cinse ait 33 türün varlığı tespit edilmiştir. Bu türler faunistik, ekolojik ve sistematik açıdan mcelenmiştir. Belirlenen türlerin Türkiye ve dünya üzerindeki dağılımları, ayırt edici özellikleri ve sinonimleri verilmiştir. Tespit edilen taksonlardan 1 cins ve 9 tür Türkiye faunası için yeni kayıttır. Yeni kaydedilen taksonlar, Cryptodrassus, Berinda amabilis, Callüepis cretica, Cryptodrassus creticus,, Gnaphosa dolosa, Nomisia palaestina, Poecüochroa senilis, Pterotricha lesserti, Zelotes tenuis ve Z. solstitialis. Anahtar sözcükler: Örümcek, Sistematik, Gnaphosidae, Niğde. m SUMMARY SYSTEMATIC OF THE GROUND SPIDERS (ARANEAE: GNAPHOSIDAE) IN NÎ?DE PROVINCE AND ITS SURROUNDING SEYYAR, Osman Niğde University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences Department of Biology Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Ayvaz BABAŞOGLU June 2005, 84 pages In this study, the ground living spiders Gnaphosidae of the province Niğde and its surrounding were investigated, m this study which was performed between april 2002 and September 2004, spiders of family of the Gnaphosidae were collected. A total of 260 specimens belong to this taxon were collected from the region, 33 species in 15 genera were found. For each species, faunistical, ecological and systematical features were investigated and their distribution in the Turkey and on the world, characteristic features and synonims were given. Among the taxa, one genus and nine species are new for Turkey. The newly recorded taxa are Cryptodrassus, Belinda amabilis, Callilepis cretica, Cryptodrassus creticus, Gnaphosa dolosa, Nomisia palaestina, Poecilochroa senilis, Pterotricha lesserti, Zelotes tenuis and Z. solstitialis. Key words: Spider, Systematics, Gnaphosidae, Niğde. iv 97

Böğülerin keliser yapılarında hangi patojen mikroorganizmaları bulundurdukları henüz bilinmemektedir. Son yıllarda halk arasında ve medyada böğülerin zehirli oldukları ile ilgili haberlerin artması, bu canlılara olan korku ve olumsuz önyargıları arttırmakta ve bu konunun araştırılması gerekliliğini zorunlu kılmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı; böğülerin keliserlerinde mikroorganizmaların var olup olmadığını araştırmak, eğer varsa bu mikroorganizmaların tıbbi öneme sahip patojen mikroorganizmalar olup olmadıklarını belirlemektir. Bu amaçla 14 farklı böğü üzerinde çalışma yapılarak keliserlerinden sürüntü yöntemiyle örnekler alınmıştır. Bakteri üremesi görülen mikrobiyolojik kültürlerden bakteri izolasyonu yapılarak Matriks Destekli Lazer Dezorpsiyon İyonlaştırma Uçuş Zamanı Kütle Spektrometrisi (MALDI-TOF MS) yöntemi kullanılarak bu bakteriler tanımlanmıştır. Tanımlama işleme sonucunda 13 farklı bakterinin böğülerin keliserlerinde olduğu tespit edilmiş olup bunlardan 10 tanesinin patojen bakteri olduğu belirlenmiştir. Tanımlanan bu patojen bakterilerden Enterobacter hormaechei/E. cloacae, Enterobacter asburiae ve Bacillus cereus ölümcül bir enfeksiyon olan Nekrotizan Fasiit'e yol açabilecek bakterilerdendir. Bu çalışma böğülerin keliserlerinde patojen bakterilerin varlığını ortaya koyan ilk çalışmadır., The pathogenic microorganisms on the surface of chelicerae of solpugids are not known yet. In recent years, because of the increase in the news about the idea that is be poisonous of the soliphugids among the public and the media increases the fear and negative preconceived opinion against these creatures have to investigate this issue. The aim of this study is to investigate the presence of microorganisms on the surface of chelicerae of solpugids, to determine whether these microorganisms are medically important pathogenic microorganisms. For this purpose, 14 of live solpugid specimens were investigated and were taken from swab samples from their chelicerae. Isolation of microorganisms by microbiological culture, identification of microorganisms with Matrix Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization-Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) system. As a result of the identification process, it was determined that 13 different bacteria were found in the chelicerae, and 10 of them were determined to be pathogenic bacteria. From identified bacteriai Enterobacter hormaechei/E. cloacae, Enterobacter asburiae ve Bacillus cereus that can cause Necrotizing Fasciitis, a deadly infection. This study is the first to reveal the presence of pathogenic bacteria in the chelicerae of solfugids.

Ali Dağı'ndan 2017- 2019 yılları arasında iki yıl süreyle toplanan örümcek örnekleri sistematik bakımından değerlendirilmiştir. Bu değerlendirme sonucunda Araneae takımına ait 21 familya ait 68 tür tespit edilmiştir. Araştırma alanından tespit edilen bütün örümcek türleri araştırma alanı yeni kayıt olarak belirlenmiştir. Örnekler araziden aspiratör, atrap ve çukur tuzak kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Toplanan örümceklerin sinonimleri, lokaliteleri ve dünya yayılışları verilmiştir. Örnekler etiketlenerek müze materyali olarak Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Araknoloji Müzesi'nde muhafaza altına alınmıştır., Spiders collected from Ali Mountain during 2017-2019 years, were evaluated from systematic point of view. Totally 68 species belonging to 21 families were determined. All determined species are new records for the study area. All specimens were collected from field by using aspirator, sweep net and pitfall traps. Synonyms, localities and world distributions of all species were given. The specimens which were labelled and preserved as museum materials in Arachnology Museum of Niğde Ömer Halisdemir University.

Mevcut çalışmada, Chaetopelma olivaceum'dan kitin izole edilerek FTIR, SEM, TGA ve XRD cihazları kullanılarak kitin karakterize edilmiştir. Elde edilen kitinin TGA değerlerine göre termal kararlılığının yüksek olduğu, XRD değerine göre Crl değerinin %70,1 olduğu, FTIR analizi sonucuna göre kitinin alfa formunda olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Ayrıca kitinin yüzey morfolojisi SEM ile incelendiğinde porlar içeren iç içe geçmiş karmaşık liflerden oluştuğu görülmüştür. Tüm bu fizikokimyasal özelliklerden dolayı daha önce çalışılmamış olan bu örümcek türünün alternatif bir kitin kaynağı olabileceği düşünülmektedir. In the present study, chitin was isolated from Chaetopelma olivaceum and characterized by using FTIR, SEM, TGA and XRD devices. It was observed that the thermal stability of the obtained kit according to the TGA values are high, the Cr1 value according to XRD value is 70.1%, and the kit is in alpha form according to FTIR analysis. In addition, when the surface morphology of the kit was examined by SEM, it was seen that it consisted of intertwined complex fibers containing pores. Because of all these physicochemical properties, this spider species, which has not been studied before, may be the source of an alternative chitin. 38

Adana ile bağlı Aladağ ilçesinden, 2017 yılının Nisan ayından başlayarak 2019 yılının Temmuz ayına kadar üç yıl süre ile toplanan örümcek örnekleri sistematik bakımından değerlendirilmiştir. Bu değerlendirme sonucunda ait 24 familyadan 68 cinse ait 91 tür tespit edilmiştir. Tespit edilen türler içerisinde Gnaphosidae familyasına ait Lasophorus (Chatzaki, 2018) ve Lasophorus zografae (Chatzaki, 2018) taksonları Türkiye örümcek faunası için yeni kayıt olarak belirlenmiştir. Örnekler araziden atrap, çukur tuzak ve aspiratör kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Toplanan örümceklerin sinonimleri, lokaliteleri ve dünya yayılışları verilmiştir. Türkiye faunası için yeni kayıt olarak tespit edilen taksonların fotoğraflama işlemleri yapılmıştır. Örnekler etiketlenerek müze materyali olarak Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Araknoloji Müzesi'nde muhafaza altına alınmıştır., Spiders collected from Aladağ district during three years, beginning from April 2017 to August 2019 were evaluated from systematic point of view. Totally 91 species belonging to 68 genera in 24 families determined. Of these, Lasophorus (Chatzaki, 2018) from Lasophorus zografae (Chatzaki, 2018) from Gnaphosidae are new records for the Turkish spider fauna. All specimens were collected from field by using aspirator, sweep net and pitfall traps. Synonyms, localities and world distributions of all species were given. The species of the new records for the Turkish spider fauna were photographed. The specimens which were labelled and preserved as museum materials in Arachnology Museum of Niğde Ömer Halisdemir University.

Son zamanlarda kitin yenilenebilir bir kaynak ve biyopolimer olma özelliğinden dolayı dünya genelinde tıptan gıdaya, ziraatten kozmetiğe, eczacılıktan atık su arıtımına ve tekstil sektörüne kadar birçok alanda kullanılabilmektedir. Bundan dolayı oldukça dikkat çekmektedir. Kitin doğada selülozdan sonra en yaygın olarak bulunan ikinci biyopolimer olup çoğunlukla deniz kabuklularından elde edilmektedir. Bunun yanı sıra eklembacaklıların dış iskeletleri ve mantarların hücre duvarında bol miktarda bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmada Haziran böceği (Polyphylla fullo)'nin dış iskeletinden yararlanılarak kitin elde edilmiştir ve Ultraviyole Görünür Bölge Spektrofotometre cihazı kullanılarak 592 nm dalga boyunda kitinin boyar maddeyle giderimi yapılmıştır., Recently, since the chitin is a renewable source and biopolymer, it can be used in many fields from medicine to food, agriculture, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, wastewater treatment and textile sector. Therefore, it attracts attention. Chitin is the second most common biopolymer found in nature after cellulose and is mostly obtained from shellfish. In addition, the exoskeleton of arthropods and fungi are abundant in the cell wall. In this study, chitin was obtained by using the exoskeleton of June beetle (Polyphylla fullo) and the chitin was removed with dyestuff at 592 nm wavelength using Ultraviolet Visible Spectrophotometer.

Kitin ve kitosan son zamanlarda endüstri alanında oldukça dikkat çekmektedir ve ilaç endüstrisi, eczacılık, gıda mühendisliği, biyokatalizör, atık su temizliği gibi pek çok alanlarda kullanılmaktadır. Kitin endüstriyel olarak yengeç, karides ve istakoz gibi deniz ürünlerinden yan sanayi olarak üretilmektedir. Kitosan kitinin deasetilasyonundan yüksek sıcaklıkta sodyum hidroksit konsantrasyonun da üretilmektedir. Son yıllarda böcekler, mantarlar, mercan ve kabukluların yumurtaları kitin kaynağı olarak önerilebilmektedir. Bu amaçla yeni kitin kaynakları önerebilmek için bir örümcek türü olan Aculepeira ceropegia (Walckenaer, 1802)’nın SEM, FTIR, TGA ve XRD değerleri çalışılmıştır. Bu çalışma sonunda bu türde bulunan kitinin alfa formda olduğu, yüzeyinin nanofiber ve nanoporlardan oluştuğu, termal karalılığının yüksek olduğu ve alternatif kitin kaynağı olarak önerilebileceği görülmüştür., Chitin and chitosan are currently receiving a great deal of interest industry areas which are medical and pharmaceutical, food applications, biocatalysis, waste water treatment, and new applicaitons for chitin and chitosan. Chitin is industrially extracted from crab and shrimp shells obtained as a byproduct in the sea food industry. Chitosan is produced by deacetylation of chitin with hot concentrated sodium hydroxide. In recent years, some studies have emphasized that insects, mushrooms, coral and crustacean resting eggs can be alternative sources of chitin. In order to purpose a new chitin and its derivatives resource, we studied Aculepeira ceropegia (Walckenaer, 1802) which has common distribution in Turkey. These chitins characterized with SEM, FTIR, XRD and TGA. The dry weight of the chitin content of this species determined and compare with the chitin content of other groups of organisms, and we found that it has alpha form and nonofibers/nanopors, also TGA higher than some chitin specimens and and may purpose a new chitin resource for using commercially.

WOS: 000369326900002, Chitin specimens from 16 arthropod species (13 of Insecta and 3 of Arachnida) were isolated for the first time using the same method. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometry (FTIR), Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA), X-ray diffraction (XRD), Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) and elemental analysis have been applied to determine how physicochemical properties of chitin specimens are affected by taxonomic relationship. The characterisation studies revealed that physicochemical nature of the chitin specimens differed greatly and were found partially specific to taxa. Significant differences in the surface morphologies of chitin specimens were observed even in the same order. However, the chitin contents were recorded to be specific to the order in the class Insecta. The highest chitin content was observed in Coleoptera (18.2-25.2 %) followed by Hemiptera (10.6-14.5 %), Odonata (9.5-10.1 %), Hymenoptera (7.8-9.3 %), Diptera (8.1 %), Blattodea (4.7 %). In addition, the crystalline index (CrI) values of chitin specimens from Coleoptera were found to be higher than the other orders in Insecta. This study revealed that the chitin contents and CrI values can be related to taxonomical relationships.

Afyonkarahisar ilinden, 2015 yılının Nisan ayından başlayarak 2016 yılının Ekim ayına kadar iki yıl süre ile toplanan örümcek örnekleri sistematik bakımından değerlendirilmiştir. Bu değerlendirme sonucunda Araneae takımına ait 25 familya içerisinde yer alan 89 cinse ait 118 tür tespit edilmiştir. Tespit edilen türler içerisinde Gnaphosidae familyasına ait Setaphis parvula (Lucas, 1846) ve Liocranidae familyasına ait Arabelia pheidoleicomes Bosselaers, 2009 türleri Türkiye örümcek faunası için yeni kayıt olarak belirlenmiştir. Örnekler araziden aspiratör, atrap ve çukur tuzak kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Toplanan örümceklerin sinonimleri, lokaliteleri ve dünya yayılışları verilmiştir. Türkiye faunası için yeni kayıt olarak tespit edilen türlerin fotoğraflama işlemleri yapılmıştır. Örnekler etiketlenerek müze materyali olarak Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Araknoloji Müzesi'nde muhafaza altına alınmıştır. Spiders collected from Afyonkarahisar province during two years, beginning from April 2015 to October 2016 were evaluated from systematic point of view. Totally 118 species belonging to 89 genera in 25 families determined. Of these, Setaphis parvula ( Lucas, 1846) from Gnaphosidae and Arabelia pheidoleicomes Bosselaers, 2009 from Liocranidae are new records for the Turkish spider fauna. All specimens were collected from field by using aspirator, sweep net and pitfall traps. Synonyms, localities and world distributions of all species were given. The species of the new records for the Turkish spider fauna were photographed. The specimens which were labelled and preserved as museum materials in Arachnology Museum of Ömer Halisdemir University. 138

Bu tez çalışmasında 1 (bir) adet uluslar arası makale üretilmiştir. Bu üretilen çalışma aşağıda sunulmuştur. Seyyar, O., Oba, A., Demir, H. & Türkeş, T. (2016). “Arabelia Bosselaers, 2009 and Arabelia pheidoleicomes Bosselaers, 2009 (Araneae: Liocranidae) are new records for the Turkish spider fauna”, Serket vol. 15(1), 30-32, 2016, Afyonkarahisar ilinden, 2015 yılının Nisan ayından başlayarak 2016 yılının Ekim ayına kadar iki yıl süre ile toplanan örümcek örnekleri sistematik bakımından değerlendirilmiştir. Bu değerlendirme sonucunda Araneae takımına ait 25 familya içerisinde yer alan 89 cinse ait 118 tür tespit edilmiştir. Tespit edilen türler içerisinde Gnaphosidae familyasına ait Setaphis parvula (Lucas, 1846) ve Liocranidae familyasına ait Arabelia pheidoleicomes Bosselaers, 2009 türleri Türkiye örümcek faunası için yeni kayıt olarak belirlenmiştir. Örnekler araziden aspiratör, atrap ve çukur tuzak kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Toplanan örümceklerin sinonimleri, lokaliteleri ve dünya yayılışları verilmiştir. Türkiye faunası için yeni kayıt olarak tespit edilen türlerin fotoğraflama işlemleri yapılmıştır. Örnekler etiketlenerek müze materyali olarak Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Araknoloji Müzesi’nde muhafaza altına alınmıştır., Spiders collected from Afyonkarahisar province during two years, beginning from April 2015 to October 2016 were evaluated from systematic point of view. Totally 118 species belonging to 89 genera in 25 families determined. Of these, Setaphis parvula ( Lucas, 1846) from Gnaphosidae and Arabelia pheidoleicomes Bosselaers, 2009 from Liocranidae are new records for the Turkish spider fauna. All specimens were collected from field by using aspirator, sweep net and pitfall traps. Synonyms, localities and world distributions of all species were given. The species of the new records for the Turkish spider fauna were photographed. The specimens which were labelled and preserved as museum materials in Arachnology Museum of Ömer Halisdemir University. …, ÖZET ............................................................................................................................. iv SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... v ÖN SÖZ ......................................................................................................................... vi İÇİNDEKİLER DİZİNİ…………………………………………………...………….vii ÇİZELGE DİZİNİ ....................................................................................................... xvii ŞEKİLLER DİZİNİ ................................................................................................... xviii SİMGE VE KISALTMALAR ..................................................................................... xix BÖLÜM I GİRİŞ ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1Örümceklerin Genel Özellikleri ................................................................................. 2 1.1.1.Arachnida sınıfının genel özellikleri…...……………………………………...3 BÖLÜM II MATERYAL VE YÖNTEM ....................................................................... 6 2.1 Çalışma Alanı ile İlgili Genel Bilgiler ...................................................................... 6 2.2 Afyonkarahisar İlinin İklimsel Özellikleri ................................................................ 6 2.3 Örümcek Örneklerinin Araziden Toplanması ........................................................... 7 2.4 Örümcek Örneklerinin İncelenmesi, Preparasyonu ve Saklanması .......................... 8 2.5 Örümcek Örneklerinin Toplandığı Lokaliteler ......................................................... 9 BÖLÜM III BULGULAR ............................................................................................ 14 3.1 AGELENIDAE ....................................................................................................... 14 3.1.1 Agelena Walckenaer, 1805 ........................................................................... 14 3.1.1.1 Agelena labyrinthica (Clerck, 1757) ................................................ 14 3.1.1.2 Agelena orientalis C.L.Koch, 1837 .................................................. 14 3.1.2 Agelescape Levy, 1996 ................................................................................. 15 3.1.2.1 Agelescape gideoni Levy, 1996 ....................................................... 15 3.1.3 Maimuna Lehtinen,1967 ............................................................................... 15 3.1.3.1 Maimuna vestita (C.L.Koch,1841) ................................................... 15 viii 3.1.4 Tegeneria Latreille, 1804 .............................................................................. 16 3.1.4.1 Tegeneria argaeica Nosek, 1905 ..................................................... 16 3.2 ARANEIDAE ......................................................................................................... 16 3.2.1 Aculepeira (Chamberlin & Ivie, 1942) ......................................................... 16 3.2.1.1 Aculepeira armida (Savigny, 1825) ................................................. 16 3.2.1.2 Aculepeira ceropegia (Walckenaer,1802) ........................................ 17 3.2.2 Araniella (Chamberlin & Ivie, 1942) ........................................................... 17 3.2.2.1 Araniella cucurbitina (Clerck, 1757) ............................................... 17 3.2.3 Argiope (Audouin, 1826) .............................................................................. 18 3.2.3.1 Argiope lobata (Pallas, 1772)........................................................... 18 3.2.4 Gibberanea Archer, 1951 ............................................................................. 19 3.2.4.1 Gibberanea bituberculata (Walckenaer,1802) ................................ 19 3.2.5 Larinioides (Caporiacco, 1934) .................................................................... 20 3.2.5.1 Larinioides cornutus (Clerck, 1757) ................................................ 20 3.2.6 Mangora O. P.-Cambridge, 1889 ................................................................. 21 3.2.6.1 Mangora acalypha (Walckenaer, 1802) ........................................... 21 3.2.7 Neoscona Simon, 1864 ................................................................................. 22 3.2.7.1 Neoscona adianta (Walckenaer, 1802) ............................................ 22 3.3 DYSDERIDAE ....................................................................................................... 23 3.3.1 Dysdera Latreille,1804 ................................................................................. 23 3.3.1.1 Dysdera crocata C.L.Koch, 1838 .................................................... 23 3.4 EUTICHURIDAE ................................................................................................... 24 3.4.1 Cheiracanthium C. L. Koch, 1839................................................................ 24 3.4.1.1 Cheiracanthium erraticum (Walckkenaer, 1802) ............................ 24 3.4.1.2 Cheiracanthium pennyi O. P.-Cambridge, 1873 .............................. 24 3.5 GNAPHOSIDAE .................................................................................................... 25 3.5.1 Anagraphis Simon 1893 ............................................................................... 25 ix 3.5.1.1.Anapgraphis pallens Simon 1893 .................................................... 25 3.5.2 Callilepis (Westring, 1874) .......................................................................... 26 3.5.2.1 Callilepis nocturna (Linnaeus, 1758) ............................................... 26 3.5.3 Cesonia Simon 1893 ..................................................................................... 26 3.5.3.1 Cesonia aspida Chatzaki, 2002 ........................................................ 26 3.5.4 Civizelotes Senglet, 2012 .............................................................................. 27 3.5.4.1 Civizelotes caucasius (L.Koch, 1866) .............................................. 27 3.5.5 Drassodes Westring, 1851 ............................................................................ 27 3.5.5.1 Drassodes lacertosus (O. P.-Cambridge, 1872) ............................... 27 3.5.5.2 Drassodes lapidosus (Walckenaer, 1802) ........................................ 28 3.5.6 Ganphosa Latreille 1804 .............................................................................. 29 3.5.6.1 Gnaphosa dolosa Herman, 1879 ...................................................... 29 3.5.6.2 Gnaphosa opaca Herman, 1879 ....................................................... 29 3.5.7 Haplodrassus Chamberlin.1922 ................................................................... 30 3.5.7.1 Haplodrassus invalidus (O.P.-Cambridge, 1872) ............................ 30 3.5.7.2 Haplodrassus morosus (O. P.-Cambridge, 1872) ............................ 30 3.5.7.3 Haplodrassus signifer (C.L.Koch, 1839) ......................................... 30 3.5.8 Micaria Westring, 1851 ................................................................................ 32 3.5.8.1 Micaria coarctata (Lucas, 1846) ..................................................... 32 3.5.9 Nomisia Dalmas 1921 ................................................................................... 32 3.5.9.1 Nomisia aussereri (L.Koch, 1872) ................................................... 32 3.5.9.2 Nomisia conigera (Spassky, 1941) ................................................... 33 3.5.9.3 Nomisia exornata (C.L.Koch, 1839) ................................................ 33 3.5.9.4 Nomisia ripariensis (O.P.-Cambridge, 1872) .................................. 34 3.5.10 Phaeocedus Simon 1893 ............................................................................. 34 3.5.10.1 Phaeocedus braccatus (L.Koch, 1866) ........................................ 34 3.5.11 Pterotricha Kulczyn'ski, 1903 .................................................................... 35 x 3.5.11.1 Pterotricha kochi (O.P.-Cambridge, 1872) .................................. 35 3.5.12 Setaphis Simon, 1893 ................................................................................. 35 3.5.12.1 Setaphis parvula (Lucas, 1846) ................................................... 35 3.5.13 Trachyzelotes Lohmander, 1944 ................................................................. 36 3.5.13.1 Trachyzelotes malkini Platnick & Murphy, 1984 ........................ 36 3.5.14 Zelotes Gistel, 1848 .................................................................................... 36 3.5.14.1 Zelotes cingarus (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1874) ......................... 36 3.5.14.2 Zelotes longipes (L.Koch, 1866) .................................................. 37 3.5.14.3 Zelotes metellus Roewer,1928 ..................................................... 37 3.5.14.4 Zelotes subterraneus (C.L.Koch, 1833) ....................................... 37 3.6 LIOCRANIDAE ..................................................................................................... 38 3.6.1 Arabelia Bosselears, 2009 ............................................................................ 38 3.6.1.1 Arabelia pheidoleicomes Bosselaers, 2009 ...................................... 38 3.6.2 Mesiotelus Simon, 1897................................................................................ 39 3.6.2.1 Mesiotelus scopensis Drensky, 1935 ................................................ 39 3.7 LINYPHIIDAE ....................................................................................................... 39 3.7.1 Frontinellina Van Helsdingen, 1969 ............................................................ 39 3.7.1.1 Frontinellina frutetorum (C.L.Koch, 1834) ..................................... 39 3.7.2 Lepthyphantes Menge, 1866 ......................................................................... 40 3.7.2.1 Lepthyphantes leprosus (Ohlert, 1865) ............................................ 40 3.7.3 Lnyphia Latreille, 1804 ................................................................................. 40 3.7.3.1 Linyphia triangularis (Clerck, 1757) .............................................. 41 3.7.4 Megalepthyphantes Wunderlich, 1994 ......................................................... 41 3.7.4.1 Megalepthyphantes nebulosus (Sundevall, 1830) ............................ 41 3.7.5 Neriene Blackwall, 1833 .............................................................................. 42 3.7.5.1 Neriene peltata (Wider, 1834) ......................................................... 42 3.8 LYCOSIDAE .......................................................................................................... 43 xi 3.8.1 Alopecosa Simon, 1885 ................................................................................ 43 3.8.1.1 Alopecosa accentuata (Latreille, 1817) ........................................... 43 3.8.1.2 Alopecosa pulverulenta (Clerck, 1757) ........................................... 43 3.8.2 Arctosa C. L. Koch, 1847 ............................................................................. 44 3.8.2.1 Arctosa cinerea (Fabricius, 1777) .................................................... 44 3.8.3 Hogna Simon, 1885 ...................................................................................... 45 3.8.3.1 Hogna radiata (Latreille, 1817) ....................................................... 45 3.8.4 Pardosa C. L. Koch, 1847 ............................................................................ 45 3.8.4.1 Pardosa agrestis (Westring, 1861) ................................................. 46 3.8.4.2 Pardosa monticola (Clerck, 1757) ................................................... 46 3.8.4.3 Pardosa proxima (C.L.Koch, 1847) ................................................. 47 3.8.5 Wadicosa Zyuzin, 1985 ................................................................................ 47 3.8.5.1 Wadicosa fidelis (O. P.-Cambridge,1895) ....................................... 47 3.9 MITURGIDAE ....................................................................................................... 48 3.9.1 Zora C. L. Koch, 1847 .................................................................................. 48 3.9.1.1 Zora spinnimana (Sundevall, 1833) ................................................. 48 3.10 OECOBIDAE ....................................................................................................... 49 3.10.1 Oecobius Lucas, 1846 .............................................................................. 49 3.10.1.1 Oecobius rhodiensis Kritscher 1966 ......................................... 49 3.10.2 Uroctea Dufour, 1820 .............................................................................. 49 3.10.2.1 Uroctea durandi (Latreille, 1809) ............................................. 49 3.11 OXYOPIDAE ....................................................................................................... 50 3.11.1 Oxyopes Latreille, 1804 ............................................................................ 50 3.11.1.1 Oxyopes heteropthalmus (Latreille,1804) ................................. 50 3.11.1.2 Oxyopes lineatus Latreille, 1806 ............................................... 50 3.11.1.3 Oxyopes ramosus (Martini & Goeze, 1778) .............................. 51 3.12 PALPIMANIDAE ................................................................................................ 51 xii 3.12.1 Palpimanus Dufour, 1820 ........................................................................ 51 3.12.1.1 Palpimanus gibbulus Dufour, 1820 ........................................... 51 3.12.1.2 Palpimanus uncatus Kulczyński, 1909 ..................................... 52 3.13 PHILODROMIDAE ............................................................................................. 52 3.13.1 Philodromus Walckenaer, 1826 ............................................................... 52 3.13.1.1 Philodromus cespitum (Walckenaer, 1802)............................... 52 3.13.2 Pulchellodromus Wunderlich, 2012 ......................................................... 53 3.13.2.1 Pulchellodromus pulchellus (Lucas, 1846) ............................... 53 3.13.3 Thanatus C. L. Koch, 1837 ...................................................................... 54 3.13.3.1 Thanatus atratus Simon, 1875 .................................................. 54 3.13.3.2 Thanatus formicinus (Clerck, 1757) .......................................... 55 3.13.3.3 Thanatus oblongiusculus (Lucas, 1846) .................................... 56 3.14 PHOLCIDAE ........................................................................................................ 56 3.14.1 Pholcus Walkenaer, 1805 ......................................................................... 56 3.14.1.1 Pholcus phalangioides (Fuesslin, 1775) .................................... 56 3.15 PISAURIDAE ....................................................................................................... 57 3.15.1 Pisaura Simon, 1885 ................................................................................ 57 3.15.1.1 Pisaura mirabilis (Clerck, 1757) ............................................... 57 3.16 SALTICIDAE ....................................................................................................... 58 3.16.1 Aelurillus Simon, 1884 ............................................................................. 58 3.16.1.1 Aelurillus luctuosus (Lucas, 1846) ............................................ 58 3.16.2 Ballus C. L. Koch, 1850 ........................................................................... 58 3.16.2.1 Ballus chalybeius (Walckenaer, 1802) ...................................... 58 3.16.3 Chalcoscirtus Bertkau, 1880 .................................................................... 59 3.16.3.1 Chalcoscirtus nigritus (Thorell, 1875) ...................................... 59 3.16.4 Cyrba Simon, 1876 ................................................................................... 59 3.16.4.1 Cyrba algerina (Lucas, 1846) ................................................... 59 xiii 3.16.5 Evarcha Simon, 1902 ............................................................................... 60 3.16.5.1 Evarcha falcata (Clerck, 1757) ................................................. 60 3.16.6 Heliophanus C. L. Koch, 1833 ................................................................. 60 3.16.6.1 Heliophanus cupresus (Walckenaer, 1802) ............................... 60 3.16.6.2 Heliophanus edentulus Simon, 1871 ......................................... 61 3.16.7 Leptorchestes Thorell, 1870 ..................................................................... 61 3.16.7.1 Leptorchestes sikorskii Prószyński, 2000 .................................. 61 3.16.8 Pellenes Simon, 1876 ............................................................................... 62 3.16.8.1 Pellenes geniculatus (Simon, 1868) .......................................... 62 3.16.9 Philaeus Thorell, 1869 ............................................................................. 63 3.16.9.1 Philaeus chrysops (Poda, 1761) ................................................ 63 3.16.10 Phlegra Simon, 1876 .............................................................................. 64 3.16.10.1 Phelegra bresnieri (Lucas, 1846) ............................................ 64 3.16.10.2 Phlegra fasciata (Hahn, 1826) ................................................ 64 3.16.11 Plexippus C. L. Koch, 1846 ................................................................... 66 3.16.11.1 Plexippus paykulli (Audouin, 1826) ....................................... 66 3.16.12 Salticus Latreille, 1804 ........................................................................... 66 3.16.12.1 Salticus scenicus (Clerck, 1757) .............................................. 66 3.16.13 Talevera Peckham & Peckham, 1909 .................................................... 67 3.16.13.1 Talavera aequipes (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1871) .................. 67 3.17 SCYTOTIDAE ..................................................................................................... 67 3.17.1 Scytodes Latreille, 1804 ........................................................................... 67 3.17.1.1 Scytodes thoracica (Latreille, 1802) .......................................... 67 3.18 SICARIIDAE ........................................................................................................ 69 3.18.1 Loxosceles Heineken & Lowe, 1832 ....................................................... 69 3.18.1.1 Loxosceles rufescens (Dufour, 1820) ....................................... 69 3.19 SPARISIDAE ....................................................................................................... 70 xiv 3.19.1 Eusparassus Simon, 1903 ........................................................................ 70 3.19.1.1 Eusparassus walckenaeri (Audouin, 1826) .............................. 70 3.20 TETRAGNATHIDAE .......................................................................................... 70 3.20.1 Tetragnatha Latreille, 1804 ...................................................................... 70 3.20.1.1 Tetragnatha obtusa C.L.Koch, 1837 ......................................... 70 3.21 THERIDIIDAE ..................................................................................................... 71 3.21.1 Asagena Sundevall, 1833 ......................................................................... 71 3.21.1.1 Asagena phalera (Panzer, 1801) ............................................... 71 3.21.2 Cryptachaea Archer, 1946 ....................................................................... 72 3.21.2.1 Cryptachaea riparia (Blackwall, 1834) .................................... 72 3.21.3 Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880 ...................................................................... 72 3.21.3.1 Enoplognatha mandibularis (Lucas, 1846) ............................... 72 3.21.3.2 Enoplognatha oelandica (Thorell, 1875) .................................. 73 3.21.3.3 Enoplognatha thoracica (Hahn, 1833) ...................................... 74 3.21.4 Episinus Walckenaer, in Latreille, 1809 .................................................. 74 3.21.4.1 Episinus truncatus Latreille, 1809 ............................................. 74 3.21.5 Euryopis Menge, 1868 ............................................................................. 75 3.21.5.1 Euryopis laeta (Westring 1861) ................................................ 75 3.21.6 Neottiura Menge, 1868 ............................................................................. 76 3.21.6.1 Neottiura herbigrada (Simon, 1873) ........................................ 76 3.21.7 Steatoda Sundevall, 1833 ......................................................................... 76 3.21.7.1 Steatoda albomaculata (De Geer, 1778) ................................... 76 3.21.7.2 Steatoda paykulliana (Walckenaer, 1805)................................. 78 3.22 THOMISIDAE ...................................................................................................... 79 3.22.1 Heriaeus Simon, 1875 .............................................................................. 79 3.22.1.1 Heriaeus graminicola (Doleschall, 1852) ................................. 79 3.22.2 Ozyptilla Simon, 1864 .............................................................................. 79 xv 3.22.2.1 Ozyptilla atomaria (Panzer, 1801) ........................................... 79 3.22.3 Synema Simon, 1864 ................................................................................ 80 3.22.3.1 Synema globosum (Fabricius, 1775) .......................................... 80 3.22.4 Thomisus Walckenaer, 1805 ..................................................................... 81 3.22.4.1 Thomisus onustus Walckenaer, 1805......................................... 81 3.22.5 Tmarus Simon, 1875 ................................................................................ 82 3.22.5.1 Tmarus stellio Simon, 1875 ....................................................... 82 3.22.6 Xyticus C. L. Koch, 1835 ......................................................................... 82 3.22.6.1 Xysticus caperatus Simon, 1875 ................................................ 82 3.22.6.2 Xysticus edax (O. P.-Cambridge, 1872) .................................... 83 3.22.6.3 Xyticus kaznakovi Utochkin, 1968............................................. 83 3.22.6.4 Xyticus kochi Thorell, 1872 ....................................................... 84 3.22.6.5 Xysticus laetus Thorell, 1875..................................................... 84 3.22.6.6 Xysticus pseudorectilineus (Wunderlich, 1995) ........................ 84 3.22.6.7 Xysticus thessalicus Simon, 1916 .............................................. 85 3.22.6.8 Xysticus tristrami (O.P.-Cambridge, 1872) ............................... 85 3.23 TITANOECIDAE ................................................................................................. 86 3.23.1 Nurscia Simon, 1874 ................................................................................ 86 3.23.1.1 Nurscia albomaculata (Lucas 1846) ......................................... 86 3.23.2 Titanoeca Thorell, 1870 ........................................................................... 86 3.23.2.1 Titanoeca quadriguttata (Hahn, 1833) ....................................... 86 3.24 ULOBORIDAE .................................................................................................... 87 3.24.1 Uloborus Latreille, 1806 .......................................................................... 87 3.24.1.1 Uloborus walckenaerius Latreille, 1806 ................................... 87 3.25 ZODARIDAE ....................................................................................................... 88 3.25.1 Pax Levy, 1990 ......................................................................................... 88 3.25.1.1 Pax islamita (Simon, 1873) ...................................................... 88 xvi 3.25.2 Zodarion Walckenaer, 1826 ..................................................................... 88 3.25.2.1 Zodorion kossamos Bosmans, 2009 .......................................... 88 3.25.2.2 Zodarion thoni Nosek, 1905 ...................................................... 88 BÖLÜM IV TARTIŞMA VE SONUÇ ........................................................................ 90 KAYNAKLAR……………………………………………………………………....104 ÖZ GEÇMİŞ ............................................................................................................... 116 TEZ ÇALIŞMASINDAN ÜRETİLEN ESERLER .................................................... 117

WOS: 000263326400005, Nomisia anatolica sp.n. is described and illustrated from Turkey. Morphological features and detailed description based on collected material of Nomisia orientalis Dalmas, 1921 are presented. Nomisia negebensis Levy, 1995 is recorded for the first time from Turkey., Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [106T133]; Erciyes University Scientific Research Project Unit [FBT-07-81], We are very grateful to Dr. Francesca Di Franco (Italy) for the valuable comments on this paper. The authors acknowledge the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) (Project No. 106T133) and Erciyes University Scientific Research Project Unit (Project No. FBT-07-81) for financial support of this work. This paper includes data extracted from the doctoral thesis of the first author. We also thank Mr. Hakan Demir (Gazi University, Turkey), who collected some of the material presented in this paper.

WOS: 000267273800012, This faunistic list of ground spider fauna from Turkey includes published records and original data. Eleven species are new to Turkish araneofauna. With this Study, a total of 107 species belonging to 26 genera of Gnaphosidae have been recorded from Turkey until the present time. For each species zoogeographical distribution is given. A zoogeographical classification is constructed according to the Current distribution of species. The largest groups are those of the widely distributed Palearctic and Europian-Asian., Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [106T133]; Erciyes University Scientific Research Project Unit [FBT-07-81], The authors acknowledge the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) (Project No. 106T133) and Erciyes University Scientific Research Project Unit (Project No. FBT-07-81) for Financial support of this work. This paper includes sonic data of the doctoral thesis of the first author. We also thank Mr. Hakan Demir (Gazi University, Turkey), who collected some of the material presented in this paper. Maps Courtesy of www.theodora.com/maps, used with permission.

Bu çalışmada, Gnaphosidae familyasına ait Drassodes lapidosus (Walckenaer, 1802) ve Haplodrassus signifer (C.L. Koch, 1839) türleri ile Thomisidae familyasından Xysticus ulmi (Hahn, 1831) türünün karyolojik analizleri yapılmıştır. Bu türlerden Drassodes lapidosus (Walckenaer, 1802) türü hariç diğer iki türün karyolojik çalışmaları ülkemiz popülasyonlarından ilk kez yapılmıştır. Çalışmalar sonucunda Drassodes lapidosus (Walckenaer, 1802) ve Haplodrassus signifer (C.L. Koch, 1839) türlerinin diploid kromozom sayıları 2n♂=22 (20+X1X2) şeklinde, Xysticus ulmi (Hahn, 1831) türünün ise 2n♂=23 (21+X1) şeklinde bulunmuştur. Xysticus ulmi (Hahn, 1831) türünde diploid kromozom sayısı türün bilinen kromozom sayılarından farklı bulunmuştur., In this study the karyotype and sex chromosome system features of Drassodes lapidosus (Walckenaer, 1802) and Haplodrassus signifer (C.L. Koch, 1839) belonging to family of Gnaphosidae and Xysticus ulmi (Hahn, 1831) from Thomisidae were investigated. The karyological studies of all species except Drassodes lapidosus (Walckenaer, 1802) were studied for the first time in Turkish spider populations. As a result of this study, diploid choromosome numbers were found 2n♂=22 (20+X1X2) in Drassodes lapidosus (Walckenaer, 1802) and Haplodrassus signifer (C.L. Koch, 1839), 2n♂=23 (21+X1) in Xysticus ulmi (Hahn, 1831). Also, diploid chromosome number of Xysticus ulmi (Hahn, 1831) was different from the known.

WOS: 000357587200003, Abacoproeces topcui sp. nov. (Araneae: Linyphiidae) is described based on male specimens from Mersin Province in Turkey. Four species, namely Araeoncus tauricus Gnelitsa, 2005; Erigonoplus globipes (L. Koch, 1872); Megalepthyphantes pseudocollinus Saaristo, 1997; and Styloctetor romanus (O.P.-Cambridge, 1872), belonging to this family are new records for the spider fauna of Turkey. Styloctetor Simon, 1884 has been recorded as a new genus for Turkey. Data on collected localities, distribution throughout the world, and genitalia figures of each species are presented., Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [TBAK: 106T133], We are very grateful to the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) for its financial support of this work (Project No. TBAK: 106T133).

Niğde ili sınırları içerisinde yer alan Melendiz Dağları'ndan 2012-2013 yıllarının Temmuz-Haziran ayları arasında yapılan arazi çalışmalarında Gnaphosidae familyasına ait örümcek örnekleri toplanmıştır. İncelenen toplam 970 adet ergin birey ile Melendiz Dağları'ndan Gnaphosidae familyasına ait 16 cins ve 33 örümcek türü kayıt edilmiştir. Tespit edilen türlerden daha önce yalnız erkek bireyler üzerinden tanımlanmış olan Drassodes bifidus Kovblyuk & Seyyar, 2009 türünün dişi eşeyi ilk kez bu çalışma ile tespit edilmiştir. 14 tür İç Anadolu Bölgesi için ilk kez kaydedilmiştir. Ayrıca, Micaria bosmansi Kovblyuk & Nadolny, 2008 türü Türkiye faunası için yeni kayıttır. Ground spider specimens were collected by field studies from Melendiz Mountains located in the province of Niğde between July-June in 2012-2013. A total of 970 adults specimens were studied, 33 spider species belong to 16 genera in Gnaphosidae were recorded from Melendiz Mountains. Drassodes bifidus Kovblyuk & Seyyar, 2009 belonging to family Gnaphosidae was described male specimens. In the study, female specimens of this species was described only first time in the science world. 14 species have been recorded for the first time from Central Anatolian Region. Also, the species of Micaria bosmansi Kovblyuk & Nadolny, 2008 is a new record for Turkish spider fauna. 129

Niğde ili sınırları içerisinde yer alan Melendiz Dağları’ndan 2012-2013 yıllarının Temmuz-Haziran ayları arasında yapılan arazi çalışmalarında Gnaphosidae familyasına ait örümcek örnekleri toplanmıştır. İncelenen toplam 970 adet ergin birey ile Melendiz Dağları’ndan Gnaphosidae familyasına ait 16 cins ve 33 örümcek türü kayıt edilmiştir. Tespit edilen türlerden daha önce yalnız erkek bireyler üzerinden tanımlanmış olan Drassodes bifidus Kovblyuk & Seyyar, 2009 türünün dişi eşeyi ilk kez bu çalışma ile tespit edilmiştir. 14 tür İç Anadolu Bölgesi için ilk kez kaydedilmiştir. Ayrıca, Micaria bosmansi Kovblyuk & Nadolny, 2008 türü Türkiye faunası için yeni kayıttır., Ground spider specimens were collected by field studies from Melendiz Mountains located in the province of Niğde between July-June in 2012-2013. A total of 970 adults specimens were studied, 33 spider species belong to 16 genera in Gnaphosidae were recorded from Melendiz Mountains. Drassodes bifidus Kovblyuk & Seyyar, 2009 belonging to family Gnaphosidae was described male specimens. In the study, female specimens of this species was described only first time in the science world. 14 species have been recorded for the first time from Central Anatolian Region. Also, the species of Micaria bosmansi Kovblyuk & Nadolny, 2008 is a new record for Turkish spider fauna

WOS: 000340918700001, Introduction: Chitin is a biopolymer that forms the exoskeleton of arthropods, and is found in the cell walls of fungi. It has a wide range of uses in fields such as cosmetics, pharmacy, medicine, bioengineering, agriculture, textiles and environmental engineering based upon its nontoxic, ecofriendly, biocompability and biodegradability characteristics. Commercially, chitin is obtained from processing the outer skeleton of Crustacea such as shrimp, crab, prawn and crayfish after they have been consumed as food. The study aims to examine the nature of bat guano and to determine if it is a practical source of chitin, which has not been done previously. Results: In this study, the chitin content of dry bat guano samples was found to be 28%. The bat guano, which was collected from Karacamal Cave, came from the bat species Rhinolophus hipposideros. The chitosan yield of this chitin was 79%. The chitin produced from the bat guano was determined to be in the alpha form according to Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) results. The crystallinity of the chitin and chitosan samples was calculated as 85.49 and 58.51% respectively by X-ray crystallography (XRD) experiments. According to scanning electron microscope (SEM) micrographs, the chitin and chitosan structures were shaped like nanofibers. The thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) results showed that both chitin and chitosan had two step weight losses, which are characteristic of these materials. The nitrogen content of the chitin and chitosan was 6.47 and 7.3% respectively according to the elemental analysis results. Conclusions: In this research, it has been observed that bat guano can be considered to be an alternative source of chitin and chitosan to crab, shrimp, crayfish and krill., Aksaray University BAP [2014-005], We would like to thank Prof. Dr. Ahmet KARATAS for bat species identification. This study was funded by Aksaray University BAP (2014-005).

WOS: 000321228800011, In this study, karyotypic and cytogenetic characteristics of Drassyllus praeficus (L. Koch, 1866) and Thanatus imbecillus (L. Koch, 1878) were investigated for the first time by examining mitotic and meiotic chromosomes obtained from gonad cells. The number and the sex chromosome system of D. praeficus and T imbecillus males was 2n = 22 (X(1)X(2)0) and 2n = 28 (X(1)X(2)0), respectively. D. praeficus had 10 autosomal bivalents and 2 univalent sex chromosomes, and T imbecillus had 13 autosomal bivalents and 2 univalent sex chromosomes during the first meiotic prophase and metaphase. Both species possessed acrocentric chromosomes in their karyotypes., Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [210T033], We are grateful to Assist. Prof. Dr. Recep Kara and Assist. Prof. Dr. Tulay Ezer (Nigde University, Arts and Science Faculty Biology Department) and to the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK, Project Number: 210T033) for providing support and equipment for taking photographs. We are also thankful to our anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions for improving the paper.

WOS: 000277433300014, Sultan Marsh (Turkey) is one of the largest wetland of the Middle East and Europe. The marsh was designated as a Ramsar Site, a Nature Conservation Area, and recently a National Park by Turkish Government. Despite its strong conservation status, the marsh has undergone rapid degradation in recent years. However, major changes have been observed in Sultan Marsh in the last two decades. The water spider, Argyroneta aquatica (CLERCK, 1757), was lastly observed in 2000 in the region. Since then, this species has not been observed in the marsh. Increased of pollution in Sultan Marsh is the most probable cause for lacking the species. It may be argued that the water spider can be used as an ecological indicator to determine environmental changes.

WOS: 000261906600012, A new species of Troglohyphantes Joseph, 1881 is described from Turkey. Differences between the new species and related species are discussed. The morphological characters to distinguish this species from the closely related species are indicated and illustrated. Notes on the habitat and some SEM photographs of this species arc also given., Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [106T133], We are very grateful to Dr Andrei V. TANASEVITCH (Russia) and Dr Fulvio GASPARO (Italy) for advice and valuable comments, and we acknowledge the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) for financial support of this work (Project No. 106T133). We also wish to thank Mr. Hakan DEMIR (Gazi University, Ankara), who collected some of the material used in this paper.

WOS: 000262207500013, The spider Phrurolithus festivus (C.L. Koch, 1835) and the family Corinnidae, to which the species belongs, are recorded from Turkey for the first time. The characteristic features of this species are described and illustrated and data regarding collecting sites and distribution all over the world are given. Localities of the collecting sites are plotted on a map., Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [106T133], The authors acknowledge the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) (Project No. 106T133) for financial support of this work.

WOS: 000259141400014, Walckenaeria aksoyi sp. n. (Araneae: Linyphiidae) is described based on males from Marmaris Province in Turkey.

WOS: 000347269100022, Four spider species, Agelescape caucasica Guseinov, Marusik & Koponen, 2005, Megalepthyphantes nebulosus (Sundevall, 1830), Micaria bosmansi Kovblyuk & Nadolny, 2008, and Phlegra cinereofasciata (Simon, 1868), are reported as new for the spider fauna of Turkey. Data on the collecting sites and the general distribution of each species are presented., Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [TBAK: 112T067], We are grateful to the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) for its financial support of this work (Project No. TBAK: 112T067).