Author: "Pétillon, Julien" / Topic: arthropoda - Searchworks@Jio Institute Digital Library Search Results

Your search keyword '"Pétillon, Julien"' showing total 26 results

Start Over Author "Pétillon, Julien" Topic arthropoda

26 results on '"Pétillon, Julien"'

1. eDNA for monitoring and conserving terrestrial arthropods: Insights from a systematic map and barcode repositories assessments.

Author: Leandro, Camila, Jay‐Robert, Pierre, and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: ARTHROPODA, SPIDER venom, CYTOCHROME oxidase, SPIDERS, BAR codes, ENVIRONMENTAL sampling, INSTITUTIONAL repositories
Abstract: In the past decade, environmental DNA (eDNA) assays have become an essential tool to investigate species presence with samples from the environment instead of collected specimens. eDNA sampling techniques have proved their worth in freshwater and marine studies; now, some trends emerge for their use in terrestrial habitats and particularly to study arthropods. After a systematic review of the literature, we illustrate and analyse the diversity of such studies and discuss their benefits and drawbacks.We identified the most relevant research themes and focused on (i) the taxa and environmental sample types targeted and (ii) the details of the survey scheme. In parallel, we also assessed the available number of sequences from cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI), 16S and 18S barcode regions for four major taxa (spiders, centipedes, springtails and insects) in relation to their diversity.We found strong taxonomic and geographic biases regarding coverage per barcode. eDNA research on terrestrial arthropods mainly focuses on insect species that affect humanity in a positive or negative way, and the availability of sequences is much higher for species from temperate‐developed countries than from tropical ones. Moreover, although a high variety of environmental samples are being used, most studies do not assess the barcode completeness of the target taxa nor compare the efficacy of eDNA monitoring technique to other well established and known traditional techniques.Careful workflow designs and comparisons are needed before giving any management or conservation advice as eDNA monitoring does not come without error. Strengths and weaknesses of eDNA assays for conservation are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2024
Full Text: View/download PDF

2. A comparison of two widely used methods for estimating taxonomic and functional diversities of epigeal arthropods in some temperate grasslands.

Author: Amiar, Dylan, Leandro, Camila, Courtial, Cyril, and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: ARTHROPOD diversity, PITFALL traps, GRASSLANDS, BODY size, ARTHROPODA, TRACE fossils
Abstract: Copyright of Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Published: 2023
Full Text: View/download PDF

3. Lycosa piochardi Simon 1876

Author: Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D., and Gavish-Regev, Efrat
Subjects: Arthropoda, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Lycosa piochardi, Biodiversity, Lycosidae, Taxonomy, Lycosa
Abstract: Lycosa piochardi Simon, 1876 Figs 1, 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D, 6D, G, 7D, G, 9C–L, 10C–L, 11E–F, 12D, 13–18, 21C–D, 22C–D, 23–27 Lycosa piochardi Simon, 1876: 72, pl. 3 figs 8–9 (&male; &female;, Syria). Tarentula piochardi infraclara Strand, 1915: 167 (&female;, Israel). Syn. nov. Tarentula piochardi – Kulczy&nacute;ski 1911: 51, pl. 2 figs 60–61 (&female;, Lebanon). Lycosa piochardi infraclara – Roewer 1955: 269. Lycosa piochardi – Nentwig et al. 2019: 40, fig. 6a–b (&female;). — Nadolny & Zamani 2020: 209, fig. 19 (&female;). — Zamani et al. 2021: 284, figs 7a–f, 8a–o (&female;, Iran). Lycosa piochardi infraclara – Nentwig et al. 2019: 40, fig. 6c–e (&female;, subspecies inquirenda). Diagnosis Male Tegular apophysis tip (TAT) bent posteriorly at ~90° (in L. hyraculus sp. nov. TA unbent posteriorly). CTA (Fig. 2D) serrated (in L. hyraculus CTA smooth-edged), not wider than TA (in L. praegrandis, Fig. 2E, CTA wider than TA). Tip of conductor membranous, triangular, smooth-edged (in the similar L. praegrandis it is semicircular and unevenly toothed) (Figs 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D, 6D, 7D, 12D, 13). Female Epigyne: septal pedicel reduced, septum subtriangular to trapezoidal, proportions vary greatly! Copulatory openings narrow, at anterior end of septum. Distal part of spermatheca (Fig. 10C–L) bent dorso-ventrally (in the similar L. praegrandis it is bent distally, so that the left spermatheca twists counterclockwise, Fig. 10M). Head of spermatheca elongated, not much wider than spermatheca. Both sexes distinguished from other levantine Lycosa by habitus: ocular area Holotype SYRIA • &female;; 1876; M.Ch. Piochard de la Brûlerie leg.; MNHN 2076 (not examined). Paratypes SYRIA • 5 &female;&female;; same collection data as for holotype; MNHN 1266 (examined) Other material examined EGYPT – Sinai • 1 &female;; Al-Qusaymah (Kadesh Barnea); [30.668° N, 34.366° E]; 13 Nov. 1967; P. Amitai leg.; HUJ INV-AR20838 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20839 • 1 &female;; Mt. Catherine; [28.56° N, 33.95° E]; 16 Aug. 1968; Tsabar leg.; HUJ INV-AR20860 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; 17 Jul. 1968; HUJ INV-AR20862 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; 16 Aug. 1968; HUJ INV-AR20861 ISRAEL and PALESTINE – Coastal Plain • 1 &male;; Ashdod sands; [31.763° N, 35.633° E]; 19 Jun. 2020; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20734 • 1 &male;; Be’eri; [31.42° N, 34.48° E]; 22 Sep. 2011; HUJ INV-AR20923 • 1 &female;; east Holon (near Yamit 2000); [32° N, 34.793° E]; 20 Jul. 2017; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20735 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; 28 Jul. 2018; HUJ INV-AR20782 • 1 juv.; ETSEL memorial monument, Lod; [31.9404° N, 34.8658° E]; 28 May 2014; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20779 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20780 • 1 &female;; Gaza area; [31.5° N, 34.46° E]; 1942; HUJ INV-AR20895 • 1 &male;; grove near Drezner st., Tel Aviv; [32.1295° N, 34.808° E]; 18 Jun. 2019; I.Armiach Steinpress leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20730 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20731 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20732 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20733 • 1 &female;; Hadera sands; [32.461° N, 34.885° E]; 23 Aug. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20759 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20760 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding;col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20761 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; 4 Jul. 2019; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20787 • 1 &female;; Hatsor; [31.77° N, 34.71° E]; 2008; HUJ INV-AR20897 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20898 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20899 • 1 &female;; Jaffa-Rehoboth; [31.95° N, 34.78° E]; May 1913; I. Aharoni leg.; SMFD2184 • 1 &female;; Kfar Bialik; [32.82° N, 35.087° E]; 17 Sep. 2018; HUJ INV-AR20913 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; 7 Sep. 2018; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20950 • 1 &female;; Mavo Ashdod; [31.84° N, 34.7° E]; 24 Aug. 2015; HUJ INV-AR20926 • 1 &male;; Nitzanim; [31.739° N, 34.623° E]; 11 Jul. 2017; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20683 • 1 &male;; Nitzanim sands; 7 Aug. 2017; B. Shacham leg.; HUJ INV-AR20572 • 1 &female;; Oranim boarding School, Rishon LeTsiyon; [31.944° N, 34.805° E]; 24 Aug. 2013; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20762 • 1 &female;; Ramat-Gan; [32.08° N, 34.81° E]; 1947; A. Shulov leg.; HUJ INV-AR 20526 • 1 &male;; Rehovot; [31.8992° N, 34.8363° E]; 5 Sep. 2019; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20788 • 1 &female;; Savyon; [32.04° N, 34.87° E]; 29 Sep. 1972; HUJ INV-AR20937 • 1 &female;; Superland, Rishon LeTsiyon; [31.9748° N, 34.74235° E]; 6 Sep. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20790 • 1 &female;; Talmei Menashe; [31.941° N, 34.853° E]; 28 May 2014; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20781 • 1 juv.; Tel Akko; [32.9212° N, 35.0877° E]; 20 Aug. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20736 • 1 &female;; Tel Baruch, Tel Aviv; [32.13° N, 34.789° E]; 22 Aug. 2020; D. Simon leg.; HUJ INV-AR20584 • 1 &female;; Tel Kofer, Tel Aviv; [32.04° N, 34.807° E]; 12 Oct. 2018; I.Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20685 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20686 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20687 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20688 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20689 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20690 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20691 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20692 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20693 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20694 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20695 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20696 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20697 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20698 • &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20699 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20700 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20701 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20702 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20703 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20704 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20705 • 1 &female;; Tel Michal, Herzlia; [32.162° N, 34.8° E]; 16 Jun. 2017; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; col. sub; HUJ INV-AR20716 • 1 &female;; Tira; [32.234° N, 34.934° E]; 17 Jun. 2019; A. Topper leg.; col. sub; HUJ INV-AR20548 • 1 juv.; Yashresh nature reserve, Rehovot; [31.9155° N, 34.8304° E]; 9 Mar. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20813. – Dead Sea Area • 1 &female;; Ein Feshkha; [31.716° N, 35.451° E]; 15 May 1935; A. Shulov leg.; HUJ INV-AR20530 • 1 &female;; Hawat Einot Kedem; [31.928° N, 35.4301° E]; 2 Jun. 2019; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20621 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20622 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20623 • 1 &female;; Jericho; [31.85° N, 35.46° E]; 12 Dec. 1987; P.Amitai leg.; HUJ INV-AR20837 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; 10 Nov. 1971; with juv.; HUJ INV-AR20904. – Galilee • 1 &female;; Adamit; [33.081° N, 35.21° E]; 10 Aug. 1964; HUJ INV-AR20903 • 1 &female;; Ahihud forest; [32.92° N, 35.19° E]; 10 Oct. 2017; B. Shacham leg.; HUJ INV-AR20556 • 1 &female;; Biq`at Qedesh; [33.13° N, 35.54° E]; 13 May 2015; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; HUJ INV-AR20588 • 1 &male;; Dishon; [33.085° N, 35.519° E]; 14 Aug. 2014; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; HUJ INV-AR20589 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20590 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20591 • &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20592 • 1 &female;; Eilon; [33.059° N, 35.224° E]; 24 Jul. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20763 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20764 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20765 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20766 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20767 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20768 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20769 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20770 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20771 • 1 &male;; Har Eliezer; [33.044° N, 35.55° E]; Sep. 1995; HUJ INV-AR20955 • 1 &female;; Kfar HaHoresh; [32.7° N, 35.27° E]; 9 Oct. 1968; Gershoni leg.; HUJ INV-AR20679 • 1 &male;; Kfar Kisch; [32.67° N, 35.45° E]; 19 Aug. 2008; HUJ INV-AR20917 • 1 &female;; Moreshet; [32.825° N, 35.232° E]; 23 Sep. 2018; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20924 • 1 juv.; Mt. Meron; [32.99° N, 35.41° E]; 9 Apr. 1967; Pener leg.; sub. female; HUJ INV-AR20853 • 1 &male;; Nahal Snir; [33.235° N, 35.676° E]; 9 Jul. 1992; R. Kasher leg.; HUJ INV-AR20854 • 1 &female;; Nahal Tzippori; [32.75° N, 35.19° E]; 30 Apr. 2018; D. Ben Natan leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20576 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20577 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; I. Tesler leg.; HUJ INV-AR20821 • 1 &female;; north Yiftah; [33.134° N, 35.548° E]; 9–17 Sep. 2015; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; HUJ INV-AR20633 • 1 juv.; Ramot Naftali; [33.1° N, 35.547° E]; 13 May 2014; sub. female.; HUJ INV-AR20905 • 1 &female;; Safed; [32.966° N, 35.491° E]; 2 Oct. 1967; Blondheim leg.; HUJ INV-AR20574 • 1 &female;; Yavne’el; [32.697° N, 35.5° E]; 1 Aug. 2019; Y. Zvik leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20869 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20870 • 1 &male;; Yuvalim; [32.877° N, 35.27° E]; 3 Aug. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20785 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; 30 Apr. 2017; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20783 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; 3 Aug. 2018; HUJ INV-AR20786 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; 30 Apr. 2017; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20784 • 1 &male;; Zar’it; [33.085° N, 35.51° E]; 9–18 Aug. 2014; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; HUJ INV-AR20634 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; 18 Aug. 2014; HUJ INV-AR20594 • 1 &male;; Zavit cave; [33.038° N, 35.306° E]; 23 Aug. 2018; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; HUJ INV-AR20598. – Golan Heights • 1 &female;; Horvat Susita; [32.777°, 35.663° E]; 26 Jul. 2018; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; HUJ INV-AR20607 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20608 • &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20609 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20610 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20611 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20612 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20613 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; sub. female; HUJ INV-AR20614 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20615 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20664 • 1 &female;; Nahal Yehudiya; [32.926° N, 35.7003° E]; 24 May 2015; B. Shacham leg.; HUJ INV-AR20567 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; [32.9221° N, 35.678° E]; 3 Jun. 2015; HUJ INV-AR20569 • 1 juv.; Odem Forest; [33.22° N, 35.75° E]; 14 Jun. 1972; P. Amitai leg.; sub. female; HUJ INV-AR20841 • 1 &female;; Qatsrin; [32.988° N, 35.677° E]; 7 Oct. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.v; HUJ INV-AR20791 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20792 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20793 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20794 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20795 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20796 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20797 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20798 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20799 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20800 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20801 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20802 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20803 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20804 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20805 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20806 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20807 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20808 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20809 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20810 • 1 &male;; Waset (Wassit); [33.139° N, 35.733° E]; 19 Jul. 1970; HUJ INV-AR20918. – Hermon • 1 juv.; Hermon; [33.3° N, 35.78° E]; 23 Jun. 2017; N. Givon leg.; HUJ INV-AR20834 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; [33.28° N, 35.75° E]; 6 Apr. 1967; P. Amitai leg.; sub. female; HUJ INV-AR20847 • 1 &female;; Hermon; [33.29° N, 35.759° E]; 1400 m a.s.l.; 2 Jun. 2017; A. Uzan leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20549 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; [33.28° N, 35.75° E]; 6 Apr. 1971; HUJ INV-AR20949 • 1 juv.; Hermon; [33.3043° N, 35.7882° E]; 2000 m a.s.l.; 9 Sep. 1971; Lebovits leg.; dolina; HUJ INV-AR20832 • 1 juv.; Hermon (dolina near peak 2072); 23 Jun. 2017; N. Givon leg.; HUJ INV-AR20833 • 1 &female;; Hermon (near upper chairlift station); [33.306° N, 35.784° E]; 9 Jun. 2019; D. David leg.; HUJ INV-AR20583 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; [33.3061° N, 35.7851° E]; 14 Jul. 2019; EGR, MC; HUJ INV-AR20674 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; [33.304° N, 35.789° E]; 23 Jun. 2017; I.Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20758 • 1 &female;; Nabi Hazuri; [33.251° N, 35.729° E]; 24 Aug. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20772 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20773 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20774 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20775 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20776. – Emeq Yizra'el • 1 &female;; Kfar Baruh Reservoir; [32.643° N, 35.218° E]; 16 Sep. 2019; I.Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20710 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20711 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20712 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20713 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20714 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20715 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; [32.641° N, 35.219° E]; 6 Feb. 2018; HUJ INV-AR20789 • 1 juv.; Sarid; [32.6674° N, 35.229° E]; 22 Jun. 2020; Y. Zvik leg.; sub. female; HUJ INV-AR20962. – Jordan Valley • 1 &female;; Ashdot Ya’akov; [32.66° N, 35.578° E]; 5 Aug. 1972; Zevi leg.; HUJ INV-AR20894 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; Oct. 1971; with eggsac; HUJ INV-AR20957 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20958 • 1 &female;; Ein Sukkot; [32.365° N, 35.547° E]; 11 May 2017; B. Shacham leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20557 • 1 &female;; Karei Deshe; [32.862° N, 35.536° E]; 16 Sep. 2013; HUJ INV-AR20910 • 1 &female;; Maoz Haim; [32.4935° N, 35.5517° E]; 30 Jan. 1943; A. Shulov leg.; HUJ INV-AR20534 • 1 &female;; Menahemia; [32.664° N, 35.5538° E]; 22 Sep. 2019; Y. Zvik leg.; HUJ INV-AR20871 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; 24 May 2017; sub. female; HUJ INV-AR20927 • 1 &male;; Nahal Hagal; [32.631° N, 35.554° E]; 21 Jun. 2015; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20921 • 1 &female;; Sde Eliyahu; [32.441° N, 35.514° E]; 23 Jun. 2019; Y. Zvik leg.; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20872 • 1 &female;; Southern Jordan Valley; [32.2471° N, 35.5588° E]; 23Apr. 2017; B. Shacham leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20564 • 1 juv.;same collection data as for preceding; [32.0446° N, 35.5166° E]; 24 Apr. 2017; HUJ INV-AR20566. – Judea • 1 juv.;`Ayn ad Duyuk (near Jericho); [31.8959° N, 35.4222° E]; 8 Jun. 1978; P. Amitai leg.; sub. female; HUJ INV-AR20848 • 1 &female;; Alon; [31.833° N, 35.352° E]; Jan. 2016; D. Waysman leg.; HUJ INV-AR20585 • 1 &female;; Arad; [31.26° N, 35.21° E]; 9 Dec. 2015; HUJ INV-AR20953 • 1 &female;; Arad Cemetery; [31.273° N, 35.229° E]; 31 Jul. 2018; J. Ballesteros Chaves leg.; HUJ INV-AR20822 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20823 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20824 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20825 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20826 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20827 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20828 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20829 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preced, Published as part of Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D. & Gavish-Regev, Efrat, 2022, Lycosa Latreille, 1804 (Araneae, Lycosidae) of Israel, with a note on Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904, pp. 1-54 in European Journal of Taxonomy 832 (1) on pages 27-43, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.832.1877, http://zenodo.org/record/6916850, {"references":["Simon E. 1876. Etudes arachnologiques. 4 e memoire. VII. Revision des especes europeennes du groupe de la Lycosa tarentula Rossi. Annales de la Societe entomologique de France (5) 6: 57 - 91.","Strand E. 1915. Dritte Mitteilung uber Spinnen aus Palastina, gesammelt von Herrn Dr J. Aharoni. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 81 (A 2): 134 - 171.","Kulczynski W. 1911. Fragmenta Arachnologica. XVI, XVII. Bulletin international de l'Academie des Sciences de Cracovie 1911: 12 - 75.","Roewer C. F. 1955. Katalog der Araneae von 1758 bis 1940, bzw. 1954. 2. Band, Abt. a (Lycosaeformia, Dionycha [excl. Salticiformia]). 2. Band, Abt. b (Salticiformia, Cribellata) (Synonyma-Verzeichnis, Gesamtindex). Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels.","Nentwig W., Blick T., Gloor D., Jager P. & Kropf C. 2019. Tackling taxonomic redundancy in spiders: the infraspecific spider taxa described by Embrik Strand (Arachnida: Araneae). Arachnologische Mitteilungen 58: 29 - 51. https: // doi. org / 10.30963 / aramit 5809","Nadolny A. A. & Zamani A. 2020. A new species of wolf spiders of the genus Lycosa (Aranei: Lycosidae) from Iran. Zoosystematica Rossica 29 (2): 205 - 212. https: // doi. org / 10.31610 / zsr / 2020.29.2.205","Zamani A., Nadolny A. A., Esyunin S. L. & Marusik Y. M. 2021. New data on the spider fauna of Iran (Arachnida: Araneae), part VIII. Zoosystematica Rossica 30 (2): 279 - 297. https: // doi. org / 10.31610 / zsr / 2021.30.2.279","Linnaeus C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species cum characteribus differentiis, synonymis, locis. Editio decima, reformata. Holmiae. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 542","Koch C. L. 1838. Die Arachniden. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744"]}
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

4. Lycosidae Sundevall 1833

Author: Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D., and Gavish-Regev, Efrat
Subjects: Arthropoda, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Lycosidae, Taxonomy
Abstract: Key to large lycosids (Geolycosa, Hogna, Lycosa) of Israel and Palestine 1. First eye row as wide as second eye row (PME). Second eye row narrower than half of front of the carapace. Posterior eyes arranged in trapezoid................................................................................. 2 – First eye row narrower than second eye row (PME). Second eye row wider than half of front of carapace. Posterior eyes arranged in rectangle................................................................................. 3 2. Base of epigyne septum as wide as half of length of pedicel. Terminal apophysis with prolateral spur that is longer than half of width of bulb (incl. spur)................................................................................................................... Geolycosa vultuosa (C.L. Koch, 1838) Figs 2A, 3A, 4A, 5A, 6A, 7A, 8A – Base of epigyne septum as wide as length of pedicel. Terminal apophysis with prolateral spur that is shorter than half of width of bulb (incl. spur).............................................................................................................................................................. Hogna effera (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1872) Fig. 8F 3. Epigyne septum hammer-shaped, pedicel long. Terminal apophysis with prolateral spur......................................................................................................... Hogna (cf.) graeca (Roewer, 1951) Fig. 8E – Epigyne septum trapezoid, pedicel greatly reduced to absent. Terminal apophysis without prolateral spur........................................................................................................... Lycosa Latreille, 1804 …4 4. Ocular area less than one third of length of carapace. Tegular apophysis tip curving posteriorly at ~90°. Left spermatheca not twisting clockwise................................................................................ 5 – Ocular area longer than one third of length of carapace. Tegular apophysis tip directed retrolaterally and not curving posteriorly. Left spermatheca twisting clockwise................................................... 6 5. Crest of tegular apophysis ½ width of tegular apophysis. Conductor tip acute. Base of spermathecae parallel or subparallel, not helical...................................................... Lycosa piochardi Simon, 1876 Figs 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D, 6D, G, 7D, G, 9C–L, 10C–L, 11E–F, 12C, 13–18 – Crest of tegular apophysis>½ width of tegular apophysis. Conductor tip blunt. Base of spermathecae helical, twisting counterclockwise... Lycosa praegrandis C.L. Koch, 1836 Figs 2E, 9M, 10M, 12A (Not yet known from the southern Levant. May be present in nearby areas) 6. Tegular apophysis tip and crest of tegular apophysis distinct from one another. Septal pedicel present. Atria of epigyne visible........................................................................................................................... Lycosa hyraculus sp. nov. Figs 2C, 3C, 4C, 5C, 6C, F, 7C, F, 8C–D, 9B, 10B, 11C–D, 12C, 19 – Tegular apophysis tip indistinct from the crest and continuing line of crest of tegular apophysis........................................................ Lycosa gesserit sp. nov. Figs 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, 7B, 8B, 12B, 20 – Septal pedicel absent. Atria of epigyne not visible........... Lycosa sp. Figs 6E, 7E, 9A, 10A, 12A–B, Published as part of Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D. & Gavish-Regev, Efrat, 2022, Lycosa Latreille, 1804 (Araneae, Lycosidae) of Israel, with a note on Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904, pp. 1-54 in European Journal of Taxonomy 832 (1) on pages 10-11, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.832.1877, http://zenodo.org/record/6916850, {"references":["Koch C. L. 1838. Die Arachniden. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744","Simon E. 1876. Etudes arachnologiques. 4 e memoire. VII. Revision des especes europeennes du groupe de la Lycosa tarentula Rossi. Annales de la Societe entomologique de France (5) 6: 57 - 91.","Koch C. L. 1836. Die Arachniden. Dritter Band. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744"]}
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

5. Geolycosa Montgomery 1904

Author: Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D., and Gavish-Regev, Efrat
Subjects: Arthropoda, Geolycosa, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Lycosidae, Taxonomy
Abstract: Genus Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904 Type species Geolycosa latifrons Montgomery, 1904. Diagnosis Large lycosids; carapace elevated anteriorly; PME and ALE forming rectangle; septal pedicel on epigyne and spur on TA long (Zyuzin & Logunov 2000). Description Leg I strongest, nearly as long as IV, with thick scopulae on three terminal joints. Chelicerae large. Cephalic region of cephalothorax raised. 1 st eye row as wide as 2 nd eye row (PME). Otherwise, similar to Lycosa (Montgomery 1904). The type species with elongated epigynal septum and elongated palpal TA (Wallace 1942). Natural history Burrowing lycosids, not venturing far from their burrow (except mature males) (Wallace 1942). Distribution In its current composition Geolycosa is nearly cosmopolitan, recorded in all continents, except Antarctica, in tropical to temperate latitudes. Relationships Geolycosa is a polyphyletic genus, as shown by Piecentini et al. (2019). The morphology is possibly a convergence across Lycosinae, due to adaptation to a digging lifestyle. The type species is from North America, and it might not be related to the Old-World species. Composition 72 species are recorded in the World Spider Catalog (2022)., Published as part of Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D. & Gavish-Regev, Efrat, 2022, Lycosa Latreille, 1804 (Araneae, Lycosidae) of Israel, with a note on Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904, pp. 1-54 in European Journal of Taxonomy 832 (1) on pages 11-12, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.832.1877, http://zenodo.org/record/6916850, {"references":["Montgomery T. H. 1904. Descriptions of North American Araneae of the families Lycosidae and Pisauridae. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 56: 261 - 325.","Zyuzin A. A. & Logunov D. V. 2000. New and little-known species of the Lycosidae from Azerbaijan, the Caucasus (Araneae, Lycosidae). Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society 11: 305 - 319.","Wallace H. K. 1942. A revision of the burrowing spiders of the genus Geolycosa. The American Midland Naturalist 27 (1): 1 - 62. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 2421024","World Spider Catalog. 2022. World Spider Catalog. Version 22.5. Natural History Museum Bern. Available from http: // wsc. nmbe. ch [accessed 9 Dec. 2021]. https: // doi. org / 10.24436 / 2"]}
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

6. Geolycosa vultuosa

Author: Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D., and Gavish-Regev, Efrat
Subjects: Geolycosa vultuosa, Arthropoda, Geolycosa, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Lycosidae, Taxonomy
Abstract: Geolycosa vultuosa (C.L. Koch, 1838) Figs 1, 2A, 3A, 4A, 5A, 6A, 7A, 8A, 21A, 22A Lycosa vultuosa C.L. Koch, 1838: 102, figs 407–408 (D &male; &female;). Lycosa infernalis Motschulsky, 1849: 289, pl. 2 figs 1–2 (D &male;; N.B.: considered a nomen dubium by Zyuzin & Logunov 2000: 309). Trochosa infernalis Thorell, 1875: 172 (D &female;). Arctosa vultuosa – Simon 1864: 346. Trochosa infernalis – Lendl 1887: 37, 51, figs 1–15 (&male; &female;). Mimohogna vultuosa – Roewer 1955: 279. Lycosa vultuosa – Fuhn & Niculescu-Burlacu 1971: 202, figs 98a–b, 99a–f (&male; &female;). — Miller 1971: 154, pl. xxiii fig. 24, pl. xxiv fig. 5 (&male; &female;). — Loksa 1972: 51, figs 44c, 46c–d (&male; &female;). — Mcheidze 1997: 226, figs 474–475 (&male; &female;). Geolycosa vultuosa – Zyuzin & Logunov 2000: 308, figs 5–6, 10 (T &male; &female; from Lycosa). — Kovblyuk et al. 2012: 246, figs 8, 11, 14, 18, 21, 27, 30, 36, 39, 43 (&male; &female;). Diagnosis Large lycosids (carapace> 5 mm). 1 st eye row as wide as 2 nd eye row (PME). Front of cephalothorax square from above. 1 st eye row 0.5 width of bulb. The only species of Geolycosa in the Levantine region (Figs 1A, 2A, 3A, 4A, 5A, 6A). The only species in the Levant with a similar habitus is Hogna effera (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1872). It is generally smaller, with septal pedicel as long as width of septum base, TA smaller than 0.5 width of bulb. Material examined ISRAEL – Galilee • 2 &male;&male;; Karmiel; [32.9168° N, 35.2946° E]; 30 Dec. 2016; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20960, HUJ INV-AR20961. Natural history This is a burrowing species, found mainly in open, herbaceous habitats (Mcheidze 1997). Hibernation takes place in the burrow (at least in the north of its range) (Mcheidze 1997), juveniles emerge in springtime. Maturation takes about a year (Mcheidze 1997). The species is preyed upon by pompiliids, scorpions and centipedes, and the eggs are subject to mite infestations (Mcheidze 1997). The specimens examined in this study were found active in daytime in an urban meadow: one on the surface, the other in a burrow with a turret made of soil (Figs 7A, 19A, 21A, 22, Table 4). Distribution AZERBAIJAN, BULGARIA, GEORGIA, HUNGARY, IRAN, RUSSIA, TURKEY, UKRAINE (World Spider Catalog 2022), ISRAEL. According to Mcheidze (1997), also SYRIA. Records ISRAEL: Galilee (Karmiel) (Fig. 1). Relationships Geolycosa vultuosa is related to Geolycosa charitonovi (Mcheidze, 1997) and Geolycosa dunini Zyuzin & Logunov, 2000 (Zyuzin & Logunov 2000). The type species of Geolycosa (G. latifrons Montgomery, 1904) is of Nearctic distribution. It may not be congeneric with the Palearctic species ascribed to Geolycosa. As the revision work needed to find the correct phylogenetic placement of G. vultuosa is widely beyond the scope of this work, we refrained from moving G. vultuosa to a different genus., Published as part of Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D. & Gavish-Regev, Efrat, 2022, Lycosa Latreille, 1804 (Araneae, Lycosidae) of Israel, with a note on Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904, pp. 1-54 in European Journal of Taxonomy 832 (1) on pages 12-13, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.832.1877, http://zenodo.org/record/6916850, {"references":["Koch C. L. 1838. Die Arachniden. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744","Motschulsky V. 1849. Note on two venomous spiders from southern Russia. Bulletin of the Imperial Society of Naturalists in Moscow 1: 289 - 290.","Zyuzin A. A. & Logunov D. V. 2000. New and little-known species of the Lycosidae from Azerbaijan, the Caucasus (Araneae, Lycosidae). Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society 11: 305 - 319.","Thorell T. 1875. Descriptions of several European and North African spiders. Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps-Akademiens Handlingar 13 (5): 1 - 204.","Simon E. 1864. Histoire Naturelle des Araignees (Araneides). Librairie encyclopedique de Roret, Paris. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 47654","Lendl A. 1887. A Trochosa infernalis (Motsch.) parzasarol es parzasi szerveirol. Uber die Begattung und die Copulationsorgane von Trochosa infernalis Motsch. Termeszetrajzi Fuzetek 11 (1): 30 - 40, 51 - 57.","Roewer C. F. 1955. Katalog der Araneae von 1758 bis 1940, bzw. 1954. 2. Band, Abt. a (Lycosaeformia, Dionycha [excl. Salticiformia]). 2. Band, Abt. b (Salticiformia, Cribellata) (Synonyma-Verzeichnis, Gesamtindex). Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels.","Fuhn I. E. & Niculescu-Burlacu F. 1971. Fam. Lycosidae. In: Fauna Republicii Socialiste Romania 260 Arachnida Volumul V, Fascicula 3. Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romania, Bucharest.","Miller F. 1971. Pavouci-Araneida. Klic zvireny CSSR 4: 51 - 306.","Loksa I. 1972. Araneae II. Fauna Hungariae 109: 1 - 112.","Mcheidze T. S. 1997. Spiders of Georgia: Systematics, Ecology, Zoogeographic Review. Tbilisi Univ.","Kovblyuk M. M., Otto S., Marusik Y. M. & Ponomarev A. V. 2012. Redescription of the Caucasian species Geolycosa charitonovi (Mcheidze, 1997) (Araneae: Lycosidae), with the first description of the male. Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society 15 (8): 245 - 252. https: // doi. org / 10.13156 / arac. 2012.15.1.245","Simon E. 1876. Etudes arachnologiques. 4 e memoire. VII. Revision des especes europeennes du groupe de la Lycosa tarentula Rossi. Annales de la Societe entomologique de France (5) 6: 57 - 91.","Koch C. L. 1836. Die Arachniden. Dritter Band. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744","World Spider Catalog. 2022. World Spider Catalog. Version 22.5. Natural History Museum Bern. Available from http: // wsc. nmbe. ch [accessed 9 Dec. 2021]. https: // doi. org / 10.24436 / 2","Montgomery T. H. 1904. Descriptions of North American Araneae of the families Lycosidae and Pisauridae. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 56: 261 - 325."]}
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

7. Lycosa undetermined

Author: Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D., and Gavish-Regev, Efrat
Subjects: Arthropoda, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Lycosa undetermined, Lycosidae, Taxonomy, Lycosa
Abstract: Lycosa sp. Figs 1, 6E, 7E, 9A, 10A, 11A–B Diagnosis Female Epigyne: septal pedicel absent, septum trapezoidal, broader proximally, as wide as long. Copulatory openings not visible in ventral view (only Lycosa in the Levant without visible copulatory openings!) (Figs 6E, 7E, 9A, 10A, 11A–B). Male Unknown. Material examined ISRAEL – Arava Valley • &female;; Nahal Amatsyahu; [30.835° N, 35.275° E]; 13 Nov. 1988; B. Shalmon leg.; HUJ INV-AR20573. Description Female FEMALE MEASUREMENTS. AME diameter: 0.45; ALE diameter: 0.3; PME diameter: 1.1; PLE diameter: 1; carapace length: 7.1; carapace width: 5.2; carapace maximal height: 3; abdomen length: 10.7; leg I (Fe, Pa, Ti, Mt, Tr): 5.7, 2.7, 4.2, 3.7, 2.4; leg II: 5.4, 2.7, 4, 3.9, 2.3; leg III: 5.1, 2.5, 3.7, 4.9, 2.4; leg IV: 6.6, 2.4, 5.2, 7, 2.9. CARAPACE. Ocular area>&frac13; length of carapace, distinctly raised, making the carapace between PLE and fovea appear slightly concave in profile. COLOR. Carapace cream colored, darker on margins, with chocolate brown median bands, connecting to dark ocular area. Sternum yellow. Chelicerae reddish-brown. Abdomen cream colored with light brown chevrons dorsad. Abdomen venter with black patch posterior to epigastric fold, connecting to two parallel black bars stretching towards spinnerets (Π shaped patch). Spinnerets yellow. Legs yellow, infused with brown dorsad, yellow ventrad with two black bands on tibia, to reddish-brown distad, Coxae and trochanters yellow. Pedipalps yellow, to dark brown distad (Figs 6E, 7E). GENITALIA. Epigyne longer than wide. Septal pedicel absent, septum connects directly to epigyne. Septum trapezoidal, wider proximally, about as long as proximal part of epigyne. Copulatory openings not seen in ventral view. Spermatheca spiral-shaped, distal part arching laterally. Head of spermatheca slightly wider than sperm duct, oval, positioned anterior to copulatory opening (Figs 9A, 10A, 11A–B). LEGS. Metatarsus I ventral spination: 2 pairs + apical triplet. Tibia I ventral spination: 2 pairs + apical pair. Tarsus with scopula. Natural history A single female was collected in the hyperarid desert (annual precipitation L. gesserit sp. nov. and L. hyraculus sp. nov. Additionally, it is the only other specimen in our dataset, apart from the L. gesserit male, to exhibit a ventral patch on the abdomen shaped like the letter Π. As we could not know whether this is a new species or the female of L. gesserit, it is described here as Lycosa sp. only. Notes We executed at least five field trips to the locality where this specimen was collected, at different dates, and couldn’t find a single specimen of Lycosa any more. Since 1988, when the specimen was collected, intensive agriculture has changed the area, and this might have eradicated the habitat of this species., Published as part of Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D. & Gavish-Regev, Efrat, 2022, Lycosa Latreille, 1804 (Araneae, Lycosidae) of Israel, with a note on Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904, pp. 1-54 in European Journal of Taxonomy 832 (1) on pages 25-27, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.832.1877, http://zenodo.org/record/6916850, {"references":["Koch C. L. 1836. Die Arachniden. Dritter Band. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744","Simon E. 1876. Etudes arachnologiques. 4 e memoire. VII. Revision des especes europeennes du groupe de la Lycosa tarentula Rossi. Annales de la Societe entomologique de France (5) 6: 57 - 91."]}
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

8. Lycosa gesserit Steinpress & Cohen & Pétillon & Chipman & Gavish-Regev 2022, sp. nov

Author: Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D., and Gavish-Regev, Efrat
Subjects: Arthropoda, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Lycosidae, Lycosa gesserit, Taxonomy, Lycosa
Abstract: Lycosa gesserit sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: A5A1F6AD-14B4-488F-BC74-A2B5E240A86B Figs 1, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, 7B, 8B, 12B, 23–24 Diagnosis Male Recognized by pedipalp structure: TAT not bent posteriorly, directed retrolaterally. Contrasts with L. hyraculus sp. nov. by having TAT shorter than TAC (TAT as long as TAC in L. hyraculus sp. nov.). Contrasts with all other known males of Lycosa, with TAT bent posteriorly (Figs 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, 7B, 8B). Female Unknown. Etymology Species named after the order of Bene Gesserit, from Frank Herbert’s 1965 novel, Dune. Type material Holotype ISRAEL – Negev • &male;; Har Karkom; [30.28° N, 34.74° E]; 7 Sep. 2017; E. Gavish-Regev; col. sub.; collected at night; HUJ INV-AR20631. Description Male HOLOTYPE MEASUREMENTS.AME diameter:0.2;ALE diameter:0.18;PME diameter:0.8;PLE diameter:0.7; carapace length: 6.6; carapace width: 4.8; carapace maximal height: 2.1; abdomen length: 5.2; leg I (Fe, Pa, Ti, Mt, Tr): 5.5, 2.5, 4.9, 5.5, 2.8; leg II: 5.1, 2.3, 4.6, 5.3, 2.9; leg III: 4.9, 2.4, 4.1, 5.9, 2.3; leg IV: 6, 2.6, 5.5, 8.2, 3.4. CARAPACE. Ocular area>&frac13; length of carapace, distinctly raised, making the carapace between PLE and fovea appear slightly concave in profile. COLOR. Carapace cream colored, with dark brown median bands, darker on margins, connecting to dark ocular area. Perimeter light brown. Sternum grey. Chelicerae reddish-brown. Abdomen yellow infused with light brown dorsad, cardiac mark brown, darker on margins. Abdomen venter with black patch surrounding epigastric fold, connecting to two parallel black bars stretching towards spinnerets (Π shaped patch). Spinnerets brown. Legs cream colored, infused with brown dorsad, yellow-grey ventrad, to reddish-brown distad, with two black bands on tibia. Coxae dark grey, trochanters brown. Pedipalps yellow, to dark brown distad (Figs 6B, 7B, 8B). GENITALIA. Genital opening sclerotized, similar to subadult epigyne. Cymbium reddish-brown. Tegular apophysis (TA) lying flat on bulb, oriented retrolaterally. TAT highly sclerotized, dark brown, not bent posteriorly (unlike most other species of Lycosa), but slightly bent ventrad. Crest of TA (CTA) with smooth edge, and abrupt, rounded end at base of TAT. TAT shorter than width of CTA. Tip of conductor membranous, triangular, with smooth edges. Synembolus with large, slightly sclerotized lobe (SEL), on retrolateral edge (Figs 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 12B). LEGS. Metatarsus I ventral spination: 2 pairs + apical triplet. Tibia I ventral spination: 2 pairs + apical pair. Tarsus with scopula. Natural history This species is nocturnal. A single juvenile male was collected at night, in September, at 650 m a.s.l., in a stony plain near Har Karkom, a secluded tableland in the hyperarid desert (annual precipitation L. hyraculus sp. nov., it makes a burrow with a trapdoor. Shares habitat with L. piochardi. Reproductive season unknown. Distribution ISRAEL. Possibly endemic to the Har Karkom tableland or found throughout hyperarid zone. Records ISRAEL: Negev (Har Karkom) (Fig. 1). Relationships According to our molecular phylogeny, this species is the sister taxon of Lycosa hyraculus sp. nov., and closely related to Lycosa oculata, Lycosa aff. oculata 1 and Lycosa aff. oculata 2 (Figs21–24). Cephalothorax is similar to Lycosa macrophthalma Nadolny & Zamani, 2020 and it might be related to it as well. The single known male specimen was raised in the laboratory for two molts. This has probably affected the size of the adult spider. Even though we have observed an aberrant morphology in the genitalia of females grown in lab conditions, we have not observed the same in males, either of L. piochardi or of L. hyraculus sp. nov. We consider it highly probable that the diagnostic characters in the male’s pedipalp were not affected by the laboratory conditions. Although genitalia of other males of Lycosa grown in our laboratory did not show distortions (see discussion about distortions of female genitalia), we cannot dismiss the possibility that the pedipalps of specimens in the wild are somewhat different to the type specimen, which was raised in the laboratory. Notes The locality where the type was found is a remote and not easily reachable nature reserve, encircled by army training areas, that are closed to the public most of the year. There are only few occasions every year that access to the public is possible. As of the writing of this paper, we have not succeeded in collecting additional specimens., Published as part of Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D. & Gavish-Regev, Efrat, 2022, Lycosa Latreille, 1804 (Araneae, Lycosidae) of Israel, with a note on Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904, pp. 1-54 in European Journal of Taxonomy 832 (1) on pages 14-17, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.832.1877, http://zenodo.org/record/6916850, {"references":["Koch C. L. 1838. Die Arachniden. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744","Simon E. 1876. Etudes arachnologiques. 4 e memoire. VII. Revision des especes europeennes du groupe de la Lycosa tarentula Rossi. Annales de la Societe entomologique de France (5) 6: 57 - 91.","Nadolny A. A. & Zamani A. 2020. A new species of wolf spiders of the genus Lycosa (Aranei: Lycosidae) from Iran. Zoosystematica Rossica 29 (2): 205 - 212. https: // doi. org / 10.31610 / zsr / 2020.29.2.205"]}
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

9. Lycosa hyraculus Steinpress & Cohen & Pétillon & Chipman & Gavish-Regev 2022, sp. nov

Author: Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D., and Gavish-Regev, Efrat
Subjects: Arthropoda, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Lycosa hyraculus, Lycosidae, Taxonomy, Lycosa
Abstract: Lycosa hyraculus sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 8BA7C78F-E972-41B9-B7AC-C65ECA9B67E2 Figs 1, 2C, 3C, 4C, 5C, 6C, F, 7B, F, 8B–D, 9B, 10B, 11C–D, 12C, 19, 21B, 22B, 23–24 Diagnosis Male TER not bent posteriorly, directed retrolaterally. Contrasts with L. gesserit sp. nov. by having TAT as long as CTA (TAT as shorter than CTA in L. gesserit). Contrasts with all other known males of Lycosa, with TER bent posteriorly (Figs 2C, 3C, 4C, 5C, 6C, F, 7C, 19). Female Recognized by combination of characters: ocular area:>&frac13; length of carapace, distinctly raised, making the carapace between PLE and fovea appear slightly concave in profile. Epigyne: septal pedicel reduced, septum trapezoidal, broader proximally, wider than long. Copulatory openings narrow, at anterior end of septum. Carapace resembles L. oculata, L. suboculata, and L. macrophthalma, but in these species the septum is longer than wide. Carapace also resembles Lycosa sp., but in this species the copulatory openings are not visible in ventral view. Epigyne similar to L. piochardi and L. baulnyi, but in these species the ocular area is not distinctly raised, and is Hyrax. This species often leaves the entrance to its burrow open. This behavior reminded the authors of an Israeli nursery rhyme, in which “the little hyrax forgot to close the door”. Type material Holotype ISRAEL – Negev • &male;; Sede Zin; [30.854° N, 34.773° E]; 13 Aug. 2016; I. Steves leg.; HUJ INV-AR20818. Paratype ISRAEL – Negev • &female;; same collection data as for holotype; HUJ INV-AR20817. Other material examined EGYPT – Sinai • 1 juv.; Al-Qusaymah (Kadesh Barnea); [30.668° N, 34.366° E]; 13 Nov. 1967; P. Amitai leg.; HUJ INV-AR20840 • ISRAEL – Negev • 1 &female;; Ha-Ro’a Campsite; [30.876° N, 34.784° E]; 14 Jun. 2015; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; HUJ INV-AR20658 • 1 &male;; Haluqim ridge; [30.86° N, 34.77° E]; 24 Jul. 2018; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20663 • 1 juv.; Hawat Even Ari; [30.786° N, 34.77° E]; 3 Jan. 2018; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20942 • 1 &male;; Mamshit; 7 Nov. 2017; A. Uzan leg.; HUJ INV-AR20553 • 1 juv.; Midreshet Ben-Gurion; [30.854° N, 34.773° E]; 22 Oct. 2018; I. Armiach Steinpress leg.; HUJ INV-AR20737 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20738 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20739 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20740 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20741 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20742 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20743 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20744 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20745 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20746 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20747 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20748 • 1 &female;; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20749 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20750 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20757 • 1 &male;; Mishor Yamin; [31.003° N, 35.1° E]; 11 May 2014; S. Aharon leg.; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20855 • 1 &male;; Shivta camp; [30.9245° N, 34.6244° E]; 22 Oct. 2018; O. Erlichman leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20835 • 1 juv.; Tel Jaulan, Yeruham; [30.985° N, 34.904° E]; 10 Oct. 1962; P. Amitai leg.; HUJ INV-AR20836 • 1 &female;; Yeruham; [30.985° N, 34.9° E]; 1 Apr. 2017; A. Novikova leg.; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR 20523 • 1 juv.; same locality as for preceding; 29 Jul. 2018; E. Gavish-Regev leg.; col. juv.; HUJ INV-AR20616 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20620 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20617 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20618 • 1 &male;; same collection data as for preceding; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20619 • 1 &female;; same locality as for preceding; 2 Jun. 2016; E. Zvik; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20665 • 1 juv.; same locality as for preceding; 19 Jul. 2019; Y. Zvik leg.; col. sub.; HUJ INV-AR20868 • 1 &male;; Yeruham Park; 2 Jun. 2016; Y. Zvik leg.; HUJ INV-AR20874 • 1 juv.; same collection data as for preceding; HUJ INV-AR20875. Description Male HOLOTYPE MEASUREMENTS. AME diameter: 0.4; ALE diameter: 0.35; PME diameter: 1.25; PLE diameter: 0.99; carapace length: 9.71; carapace width: 7.28; carapace maximal height: 3.59; abdomen length: 6.9; leg I (Fe, Pa, Ti, Mt, Tr): 7.9, 3.54, 6.45, 6.48, 3.67; leg II: 7.31, 3.7, 5.58, 6.93, 3.76; leg III: (missing), 2.88, 5.03, 6.82, 3.57; leg IV: 8.99, 3.56, 7.14, 9.35, 4.07. VARIATION IN MALES COLLECTED AS ADULTS (n = 2, all other male adults collected as juveniles). AME diameter: 0.28–0.44; PME diameter: 0.9–1.19; carapace length: 0.78–10.03; carapace width: 0.59–7.75; carapace maximal height: 2.78–3.36; abdomen length: 5.9–6.5; leg I (Fe, Pa, Ti, Mt, Tr): 6.44–7.7, 3.02– 3.68, 5.5–6.7, 5.84–7.3, 3–3.23; leg II: 6.19–8.2, 2.7–3.6, 5–6.36, 5.66–7.36, 3.1–3.8; leg III: 5.85–7.66, 2.4–3.36, 4.5–5.72, 6.2–7.58, 2.8–3.43; leg IV: 7.5–9.42, 2.8–3.59, 6.06–10, 8.03–10.33, 4.03–4.26. CARAPACE. Ocular area>&frac13; length of carapace, distinctly raised, making the carapace between PLE and fovea appear slightly concave in profile. COLOR. Carapace cream colored, with light brown median bands, radiated and darker on margins, connecting to dark ocular area. Perimeter light brown. Sternum black. Chelicerae reddish-brown. Abdomen yellow infused with light brown dorsad, cardiac mark brown, darker on margins. Abdomen venter black posterior to epigastric fold. Genital opening brown. Spinnerets black. Legs cream colored, infused with brown dorsad, yellowish ventrad, to reddish-brown distad, with two black bands on tibia. Coxae dark grey, trochanters brown. Pedipalps yellow, to dark brown distad (Figs 6C, 7C, 8C–D). COLOR VARIATION IN MALES (n = 5). Abdominal black patch sometimes traspezoidal, narrow distad; sometimes short, not reaching spinnerets. Spinnerets sometimes grey, brown or yellow. GENITALIA. Genital opening sclerotized, similar to subadult female epigyne. Cymbium reddish-brown. Tegular apophysis (TA) lying flat on bulb, oriented retrolaterally. TAT highly sclerotized, dark brown, not bent posteriorly (unlike most other species of Lycosa), slightly bent ventrad. CTA with smooth edge, and abrupt, rounded end at base of TAT. Tip of conductor membranous, triangular, with smooth edges. Synembolus with small, slightly sclerotized lobe (SEL), on retrolateral edge (Figs 2C, 3C, 4C, 5C, 19). LEGS. Metatarsus I ventral spination: 2 pairs + apical pair. Tibia I ventral spination: 2 pairs + apical pair. Tarsus with scopula. Female PARATYPE MEASUREMENTS. AME diameter: 0.44; PME diameter: 1.6; carapace length:10.97; carapace width: 7.96; carapace maximal height: 3.96; abdomen length: 10.88; leg I (Fe, Pa, Ti, Mt, Tr): 8.18, 3.75, 6.07, 5.62, 3.1; leg II: 7.56, 3.7, 5.56, 6.03, 3.1; leg III: 6.34, 3.28, 5, 6.72, 3.29; leg IV: 8.25, 3.66, 6.84, 8.66, 3.75. VARIATION OF AN ADDITIONAL FEMALE COLLECTED AS ADULT (n = 1, all other female adults collected as juveniles). AME diameter: 0.55; PME diameter: 1.35; carapace length: 10.7; carapace width: 8.2; carapace maximal height: 4.02; abdomen length: 9.98; leg I (Fe, Pa, Ti, Mt, Tr): 8, 3.9, 6.3, 5.5, 3.17; leg II: 8.06, 4, 5.87, 6.26, 3.6; leg III: 7.45, 3.6, 5.56, 6.94, 3.53; leg IV: 9.64, 3.7, 7.46, 10.2, 4.23. CARAPACE. Similar to male. COLOR. Similar to male. No significant variation observed (Figs 6F, 7F, 8C). GENITALIA. Epigyne longer than wide. Septal pedicel reduced, narrower than septum. Septum trapezoidal, wider proximally, about as long as proximal part of epigyne. Copulatory openings narrow, flanking septal pedicel. Spermatheca dark brown, compact, distal part arching laterally. Head of spermatheca distinctly wider than sperm duct, subcircular, positioned anterior to copulatory opening (Figs 9B, 10B, 11C–D). LEGS. Similar to male. Natural history This species is nocturnal. Females were collected March, June, August and September. Males collected June, August and September. Subadult females were collected April and June. Subadult males were collected May, July and September. Juveniles were collected January, June, July and October (Table 4). Reproductive season unknown. This species inhabits loess soils in arid desert environments (annual precipitation 75–200 mm). The burrow usually with a modification in the form of a thin, flexible door made of silk and soil, and hinged to the entrance with silk. Rarely an object such as a piece of soil crust or a flat stone can be used as a door. The door is often left open. The spiders are usually found at night, standing near the burrow, rarely on rocks or vegetation. Captive specimens accept a wide variety of insects, similar to other species of Lycosa (Steves et al. 2017) (Figs 8C–D, 21B, 22B). Distribution EGYPT, ISRAEL. Records EGYPT: Sinai (Al-Qusaymah (Kadesh Barnea)). ISRAEL: Negev (Ha-Ro’a Campsite, Haluqim ridge, Hawat Even Ari, Mamshit, Midreshet Ben-Gurion, Mishor Yamin, Sede Zin, Shivta camp, Yeruham) (Fig. 1). Relationships According to our molecular phylogey, this species is the sister taxon of Lycosa gesserit sp. nov., and closely related to Lycosa oculata, Lycosa aff. oculata 1 and Lycosa aff. oculata 2. The cephalothorax is morphologically similar to Lycosa macrophthalma Nadolny & Zamani, 2020 and the species might be related to it as well (Figs 23–24)., Published as part of Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D. & Gavish-Regev, Efrat, 2022, Lycosa Latreille, 1804 (Araneae, Lycosidae) of Israel, with a note on Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904, pp. 1-54 in European Journal of Taxonomy 832 (1) on pages 18-25, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.832.1877, http://zenodo.org/record/6916850, {"references":["Koch C. L. 1838. Die Arachniden. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744","Simon E. 1876. Etudes arachnologiques. 4 e memoire. VII. Revision des especes europeennes du groupe de la Lycosa tarentula Rossi. Annales de la Societe entomologique de France (5) 6: 57 - 91.","Koch C. L. 1836. Die Arachniden. Dritter Band. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744","Steves I., Pinshow B., Berliner P. & Krasnov B. R. 2017. The Possible Role of Trapdoors in Maintaining Favorable Thermal and Hydric Conditions in Spider Burrows. PhD thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. Available from https: // primo. bgu. ac. il / [accessed 17 Jun. 2022].","Nadolny A. A. & Zamani A. 2020. A new species of wolf spiders of the genus Lycosa (Aranei: Lycosidae) from Iran. Zoosystematica Rossica 29 (2): 205 - 212. https: // doi. org / 10.31610 / zsr / 2020.29.2.205"]}
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

10. Lycosa Latreille 1804

Author: Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D., and Gavish-Regev, Efrat
Subjects: Arthropoda, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Lycosidae, Taxonomy, Lycosa
Abstract: Genus Lycosa Latreille, 1804 Type species Lycosa tarantula (Linnaeus, 1758). Diagnosis Large lycosids; anterior eye row clearly shorter than PME; epigyne septum tongue-shaped or rhomboid, confined to posterior half of epigyne; septal pedicel reduced or absent; TA wide and flat, ending with a distal process (TAT) directed retrolaterally to posteriorly (Zyuzin & Logunov 2000). Description Large lycosids (body length over 12 mm). Carapace sloping posterior to ocular area. Carapace margins with thick pubescence (Zyuzin 1990). Chelicerae with three retromarginal teeth. AER recurved. PME wider than AER. Abdomen venter usually with black markings. Sexual dimorphism weak. Posterior part of epigynal septum widened and clearly outlined. Septal pedicle fused with genital groove or wholly absent. This contrasts with other large Lycosinae (Hogna, Geolycosa), having a clearly outlined pedicle. Cymbium asymmetrical. Tegular apophysis wide and flat, with an elongated distal process, directed retrolaterally to posteriorly. Embolus thin, long, with narrow epiconductor. Natural history Generalist predators, typical of open habitats. Most species are burrowing, but some seem to be vagrant (Planas et al. 2013). The burrow entrance is usually modified with a door or a turret (an elevated structure made of silk and vegetation, surrounding the entrance). Activity is mostly nocturnal. Reproductive season recorded in the summer and autumn. Distribution Known from the Mediterranean Basin, eastern Europe, Middle East, central Asia and Japan (World Spider Catalog 2022). Relationships Lycosa s. str. is related to Hogna Simon 1885 (Piacentini & Ramírez 2019). According to Zyuzin & Logunov (2000), Lycosa is closely allied with Alopecosa pictilis (Emerton, 1885), A. sibirica (Kulczyn´ski, 1908), A. solivaga (Kulczyn´ski, 1901) and A. hirtipes (Kulczyn´ski, 1908)., Published as part of Steinpress, Igor Armiach, Cohen, Mira, Pétillon, Julien, Chipman, Ariel D. & Gavish-Regev, Efrat, 2022, Lycosa Latreille, 1804 (Araneae, Lycosidae) of Israel, with a note on Geolycosa Montgomery, 1904, pp. 1-54 in European Journal of Taxonomy 832 (1) on pages 13-14, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.832.1877, http://zenodo.org/record/6916850, {"references":["Linnaeus C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species cum characteribus differentiis, synonymis, locis. Editio decima, reformata. Holmiae. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 542","Zyuzin A. A. & Logunov D. V. 2000. New and little-known species of the Lycosidae from Azerbaijan, the Caucasus (Araneae, Lycosidae). Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society 11: 305 - 319.","Zyuzin A. A. 1990. Studies on burrowing spiders of the family Lycosidae (Araneae). I. Preliminary data on structural and functional features. Acta Zoologica Fennica 190: 419 - 422.","Montgomery T. H. 1904. Descriptions of North American Araneae of the families Lycosidae and Pisauridae. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 56: 261 - 325.","Koch C. L. 1838. Die Arachniden. C. H. Zeh'sche Buchhandlung, Nurnberg. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 43744","Simon E. 1876. Etudes arachnologiques. 4 e memoire. VII. Revision des especes europeennes du groupe de la Lycosa tarentula Rossi. Annales de la Societe entomologique de France (5) 6: 57 - 91.","Planas E., Fernandez-Montraveta C. & Ribera C. 2013. Molecular systematics of the wolf spider genus Lycosa (Araneae: Lycosidae) in the Western Mediterranean Basin. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 67 (2): 414 - 428. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. ympev. 2013.02.006","World Spider Catalog. 2022. World Spider Catalog. Version 22.5. Natural History Museum Bern. Available from http: // wsc. nmbe. ch [accessed 9 Dec. 2021]. https: // doi. org / 10.24436 / 2","Piacentini L. N. & Ramirez M. J. 2019. Hunting the wolf: a molecular phylogeny of the wolf spiders (Araneae, Lycosidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 136: 227 - 240. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. ympev. 2019.04.004"]}
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

11. Agraecina salsicola Bosmans & Boubakri 2020, sp. n

Author: Boubakri, Abir, Bosmans, Robert, Pétillon, Julien, and Achouri, Mohamed Sghaier
Subjects: Arthropoda, Liocranidae, Agraecina salsicola, Arachnida, Agraecina, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Taxonomy
Abstract: Agraecina salsicola Bosmans & Boubakri sp. n. (Figs 1–4) Type material. Holotype &male; and 2&male; paratypes from TUNISIA, Ariana, Kalaât Landaluz (3702’51’’N, 1006’20’’E), spring 2018, pitfalls in salt marsh, leg. A. Boubakri, deposited in MNHN. Diagnosis. Agraecina salsicola sp. n. is closely related to A. hodna from Algeria, but clearly differs by the strongly elongated tibial apophysis and the relatively short median apophysis (Figs 2–3). Etymology. The species was collected in a salt marsh, hence the name salsicola. Description. Measurements (n=3; holotype in parentheses): Total length 4.2–5.0 (5.0); prosoma 1.60–2.15 (1.81) long, 1.16–1.60 (1.56) wide. Leg measurements in Table 1. Colour: Carapace yellowish-brown, with anastomosing greyish stripes; legs yellowish-brown; abdomen pale grey, somewhat darkened antero-dorsally (Fig. 1). Eyes: Anterior median eyes slightly smaller than other eyes, separated by half their diameter, from the anterior lateral eyes by their diameter; posterior eyes separated by their diameter. Chelicerae with 3 pro- and 2 retromarginal small teeth. Legs spinous, as in all other species of the genus, typically tibiae and metatarsi with 3 and 2 pairs of ventral spines, respectively. Male palp (Figs 2–4): Tibial apophysis elongated, nearly linear, 1.6 times longer than the tibia’s length without apophysis, in lateral view with 2 bends; median apophysis S-shaped, relatively short compared to other Agraecina species; embolus threadlike, representing one-fifth of a circle, as in the other species of the genus. Female: Unknown. Distribution. Only known from the type locality (Fig. 5). Habitat. A coastal salt marsh dominated by Salicornia europaea L., Atriplex halimus L. and Tamarix canariensis L. (Figs 6–7).
Published: 2020
Full Text: View/download PDF

12. Multiple reproductive events in female wolf spiders Pardosa hyperborea and Pardosa furcifera in the Low-Arctic: one clutch can hide another.

Author: Viel, Nathan, Mielec, Cecilie, Pétillon, Julien, and Høye, Toke T.
Subjects: WOLF spiders, PLANT phenology, GROWING season, DISTRIBUTION (Probability theory), GLOBAL warming, LIFE history theory, ARTHROPODA, CALANUS
Abstract: Changing abiotic conditions can affect the phenology of animals and plants with implications for their reproductive output, especially in rapidly changing regions like the Arctic. For instance in arthropods, it was recently shown that females of the spider species Pardosa glacialis (Thorell 1872) (Lycosidae) are able to produce two clutches within one growing season in years when snowmelt occurs particularly early. This phenomenon could be widespread in northern latitudes, and here we investigated the voltinism of two other very abundant species of wolf spiders in the Low-Arctic, Pardosa hyperborea (Thorell 1872) and Pardosa furcifera (Thorell 1875), over the period 2015–2017. Whilst a bimodal pattern in the clutch size frequency distribution was only revealed for P. hyperborea, we were able to show that both species can produce a second clutch over the active season by using information on the embryonic stages. We also observed significantly larger first than second clutches. We argue that information about the embryonic stage can be critical for evaluating evidence of wolf spider populations producing more than one clutch in a season. Our study provides evidence that bivoltinism could be a more widespread pattern than expected in Arctic wolf spiders. It remains to be investigated what the trophic consequences of such patterns are in a global warming context. We thus highlight the need for a coordinated framework for such further studies, integrating and relating various functional traits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2022
Full Text: View/download PDF

13. Challenges and opportunities of species distribution modelling of terrestrial arthropod predators.

Author: Mammola, Stefano, Pétillon, Julien, Hacala, Axel, Monsimet, Jérémy, Marti, Sapho‐Lou, Cardoso, Pedro, Lafage, Denis, and Real, Raimundo
Subjects: *SPECIES distribution, *ARTHROPODA, *BUTTERFLIES, *PREDATORY animals, *GROUND beetles, *POLLINATORS, *DISEASE vectors, *CONSERVATION biology
Abstract: Aim: Species distribution models (SDMs) have emerged as essential tools in the equipment of many ecologists, useful to explore species distributions in space and time and answering an assortment of questions related to biogeography, climate change biology and conservation biology. Historically, most SDM research concentrated on well‐known organisms, especially vertebrates. In recent years, these tools are becoming increasingly important for predicting the distribution of understudied invertebrate taxa. Here, we reviewed the literature published on main terrestrial arthropod predators (ants, ground beetles and spiders) to explore some of the challenges and opportunities of species distribution modelling in mega‐diverse arthropod groups. Location: Global. Methods: Systematic mapping of the literature and bibliometric analysis. Results: Most SDM studies of animals to date have focused either on broad samples of vertebrates or on arthropod species that are charismatic (e.g. butterflies) or economically important (e.g. vectors of disease, crop pests and pollinators). We show that the use of SDMs to map the geography of terrestrial arthropod predators is a nascent phenomenon, with a near‐exponential growth in the number of studies over the past ten years and still limited collaborative networks among researchers. There is a bias in studies towards charismatic species and geographical areas that hold lower levels of diversity but greater availability of data, such as Europe and North America. Conclusions: Arthropods pose particular modelling challenges that add to the ones already present for vertebrates, but they should also offer opportunities for future SDM research as data and new methods are made available. To overcome data limitations, we illustrate the potential of modern data sources and new modelling approaches. We discuss areas of research where SDMs may be combined with dispersal models and increasingly available phylogenetic and functional data to understand evolutionary changes in ranges and range‐limiting traits over past and contemporary time‐scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2021
Full Text: View/download PDF

14. Drivers of taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversities in dominant ground-dwelling arthropods of coastal heathlands.

Author: Hacala, Axel, Lafage, Denis, Prinzing, Andreas, Sawtschuk, Jérôme, and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: GROUND beetles, SPANNING trees, BEETLES, ARTHROPODA
Abstract: Although functional and phylogenetic diversities are increasingly used in ecology for a variety of purposes, their relationship remains unclear, and this relationship likely differs among taxa, yet most recent studies focused on plants. We hypothesize that communities may be diverse in functional traits due to presence of: many phylogenetic lineages, trait divergence within lineages, many species and random functional variation among species, weak filtering of traits in favorable environments, or strong trait divergence in unfavorable environments. We tested these predictions for taxa showing higher (ants), or lower (spiders, ground beetles) degrees of competition and niche construction, both of which might decouple functional traits from phylogenetic position or from the environment. Studying > 11,000 individuals and 216 species from coastal heathlands, we estimated functional as minimum spanning trees using traits related to the morphology, feeding habits and dispersal, respectively. Relationships between functional and phylogenetic diversities were overall positive and strong. In ants, this relationship disappeared after accounting for taxonomic diversities and environments, whereas in beetles and spiders taxonomic diversity is related to functional diversity only via increasing phylogenetic diversity. Environmental constraints reduced functional diversity in ants, but affected functional diversity only indirectly via phylogenetic diversity (ground beetles) and taxonomic and then phylogenetic diversity (spiders and ground beetles). Results are consistent with phylogenetic conservatism in traits in spiders and ground beetles. In ants, in contrast, traits appear more phylogenetically neutral with any new species potentially representing a new trait state, tentatively suggesting that competition or niche construction might decouple phylogenetics from trait diversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2021
Full Text: View/download PDF

15. Non-native spiders change assemblages of Hawaiian forest fragment kipuka over space and time.

Author: Pétillon, Julien, Privet, Kaïna, Roderick, George K., Gillespie, Rosemary G., and Price, Don K.
Subjects: *SPACETIME, *TROPICAL forests, *SPIDERS, *INTRODUCED species, *LAVA flows, *BIRD breeding, *ARTHROPODA, *ENDEMIC animals
Abstract: We assessed how assemblages of spiders were structured in small Hawaiian tropical forest fragments (Hawaiian, kipuka) within a matrix of previous lava flows, over both space (sampling kipuka of different sizes) and time (comparison with a similar study from 1998). Standardized hand-collection by night was carried out in May 2016. In total, 702 spiders were collected, representing 6 families and 25 (morpho-)species. We found that the number of individuals, but not species richness, was highly correlated with the area of sampled forest fragments, suggesting that kipuka act as separate habitat islands for these predatory arthropods. Species richness was significantly lower in the lava matrix outside the kipuka compared to the kipuka habitats, although there was no statistical difference in species composition between the two habitats, largely because of similarity of non-native species in both habitats. Over the last 20 years, the abundance of non-native spider species substantially increased in both kipuka and lava habitats, in marked contrast to the vegetation that has remained more intact. With endemicity of terrestrial arthropods reaching over 95% in native forests, non-native predatory species present a critical challenge to the endemic fauna. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2020
Full Text: View/download PDF

16. Contrasted responses of dominant ground-dwelling arthropods to landscape salt-marsh fragmentation.

Author: Puzin, Charlène and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: *FRAGMENTED landscapes, *ARTHROPODA, *WOLF spiders, *PITFALL traps, *GROUND beetles, *AMPHIPODA
Abstract: In spite of their highly patchy distribution, the effects of landscape configuration on specialist biodiversity has been little studied in salt marshes. We investigated the impact of patch size on the abundance of specialist arthropods in two contrasted salt-marsh environments. Dominant ground-active species were sampled by pitfall traps in increasing areas of natural vegetation (dominated by Atriplex portulacoides) along two transects surrounded by either grazed (dominated by Puccinellia maritima) or invasive (dominated by Elymus athericus) vegetation. Spatially- and temporally-replicated sampling took place in the Mont Saint-Michel Bay (Western France) during 2012. Three dominant species, the wolf spider Pardosa purbeckensis (Araneae, Lycosidae), the ground beetle Pogonus chalceus (Coleoptera, Carabidae) and the beach-hopper Orchestia gammarellus (Amphipoda, Talitridrae), constituted 96% of all arthropods caught (N = 66,299). Patch size only had an effect on the carabid and on the amphipod, with large patches more populous than small ones, reinforcing the idea that the effects of fragmentation are stronger for species with limited mobility. Environment had a significant effect on the population density of all species, with systematically more individuals in patches surrounded by invaded than by grazed salt marshes, which confirms the particularly negative impact of over-grazing on salt-marsh biodiversity. This study finally suggests that both invasive species and grazing impact salt-marsh biodiversity also at a landscape scale. • The effects of landscape on arthropods has been little studied in salt marshes. • The response of populations to fragmentation was assessed for 3 dominant species. • Patch size of natural vegetation had an effect on low-mobility species only. • More individuals were found in patches surrounded by invaded than by grazed marshes. • Results suggest that disturbances impact arthropods also at a landscape scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2019
Full Text: View/download PDF

17. Broad-scale rather than fine-scale environmental variation drives body size in a wandering predator (Araneae, Lycosidae).

Author: Hein, Nils, Pétillon, Julien, Pape, Roland, Feilhauer, Hannes, Vanselow, Kim A., and Löffler, Jörg
Subjects: BODY size, WOLF spiders, SPIDERS, PREDATORY animals, ARTHROPODA
Abstract: Body size is one of the most important individual traits, determining various other life-history traits, including fitness. Both evolutionary and ecological factors shape the body size in arthropods, but the relative contribution of abiotic drivers acting at different spatial scales has been little investigated. We aimed to identify the importance of two broad-scale variables (study region and elevation) in shaping body size of the free-running and locally abundant wolf spider Pardosa palustris (Linnaeus 1758), in contrast to the fine-scaled variable topographic position. Therefore, we set up transects along environmental gradients in the arctic-alpine ecosystems of Norway, which we analyzed using a random forest approach to identify the relative importance of topographic position, elevation, and study region on body size of P. palustris. Our approach revealed that research region was the best explanatory variable, followed by elevation and topographic position. Differences in body size were most likely a consequence of the pronounced differences in season length and the ability of P. palustris to avoid local unfavorable environmental conditions due to its high mobility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2019
Full Text: View/download PDF

18. Small and large spatial scale coexistence of ctenid spiders in a neotropical forest (French Guiana).

Author: Pétillon, Julien, Leroy, Boris, Djoudi, El Aziz, and Vedel, Vincent
Subjects: *ARTHROPODA, *RAIN forests, *SPECIES diversity, *INSELBERGS, *CTENIDAE
Abstract: While spiders constitute the most abundant and diverse arthropods in many habitats, they remained under-studied, especially in tropical rainforests. The goal of this study is to assess the spatial distribution of the spider family Ctenidae by assessing associations of species diversity and population traits among different habitat conditions. Fieldwork was carried out during 2013 in habitats varying in flooding frequency (plateau vs. flooded forest) and elevation (inselberg vs. lowland) in the Nouragues National Natural Reserve, French Guiana. Assemblage composition, population structure, and trait measurements of one dominant species were assessed using hand collection in replicated quadrats. We found strong effects on ctenid assemblages attributable to both elevation and flooding, with changes in relative abundance of species among habitats, but few correlated densities between species. At the population level, main differences in species distribution between and within habitats were detected only when juveniles were taken into account. No effect of elevation was found on the measurements of traits of the dominant species, but legs were proportionally shorter in flooded habitats, suggesting reduced active dispersal in these habitats. Our study highlights the value of complementary of measures of diversity and traits at different biological scales in Ctenidae. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2018
Full Text: View/download PDF

19. Spider assemblage structure in a neotropical rainforest-inselberg complex: ecological and methodological insights from a small-scale intensive survey.

Author: PRIVET, KAÏNA, COURTIAL, CYRIL, DECAENS, THIBAUD, DJOUDI, EL AZIZ, VEDEL, VINCENT, YSNEL, FREDERIC, and PÉTILLON, JULIEN
Subjects: INSELBERGS, FOSSIL spiders, RAIN forests, INSECT ecology, ARTHROPODA, SPECIES diversity
Abstract: Despite the huge diversity tropical arthropods represent, factors shaping their communities are still poorly known, especially at small spatial scales. In this study, we aimed at providing ecological and methodological insights from a short and intensive field sampling of spiders, a highly diverse group of predators. We investigated how sampling methods, habitat type and day-time affect diversity and composition of spider assemblages. The standardized sampling protocol was applied in a tropical rainforest in French Guiana, where both ground- and vegetation-dwelling (up to 2.5 meters) assemblages were sampled during day and night using supposedly complementary methods at low and high (granitic hills called inselbergs) elevations. Observed and estimated richness of vegetation-dwelling spiders, as well as their species composition, did not differ between methods (sweep netting vs. beating). Species richness was much lower in pitfall traps than in litter samples, which suggests a low mobility of grounddwelling spiders and reveals the inadequacy of the former method compared to the latter. Spider assemblage in the vegetation of inselberg was two times poorer than in lowland forests and dominated by different families, probably due to harsher habitat conditions there. Strongly different patterns were here highlighted between vegetation and ground-dwelling spider assemblages, the latter being less diversified than in the vegetation which deserves further attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2018

20. Physiological costs during the first maternal care in the wolf spider Pardosa saltans (Araneae, Lycosidae).

Author: Ruhland, Fanny, Pétillon, Julien, and Trabalon, Marie
Subjects: *WOLF spiders, *PARDOSA, *ARTHROPODA, *INVERTEBRATES, *REPRODUCTION
Abstract: Many arachnids like other terrestrial arthropods, provide extensive maternal care. Few studies have quantified the underlying physiological costs of maternal care. We investigated how maternal care affects the free-moving wolf spider’s ( Pardosa saltans ) energy requirements. We described in detail their basic reproduction biology (i.e. carrying cocoon and young) and we evaluated the variation in the females’ energy reserves during maternal care. Our results show that mothers guard eggs until hatching and then guard their spiderlings for 27–30 more days. Laboratory observations indicated that spiderlings start leaving the maternal abdomen gradually 5–7 days after hatching. Females carry an egg sac (cocoon) that can weigh up to 77% of their post-reproduction weight and carry young that weigh 87–100% of their body mass. Females lost weight over time despite regular food intake, while carrying cocoon and young; but their weights increased gradually during the dispersal of young. The contributions of proteins, glucose and triglycerides to maintain females’ energy were calculated. Their energetic state varied during maternal care, in particular lipid levels declined, during the care of spiderlings when the females’ predatory behaviour was inhibited. Our results show that the maternal care provided by P. saltans females is particularly costly physiologically, during the 30 days following egg sac formation and development of spiderlings, even when food is available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2016
Full Text: View/download PDF

21. Disentangling the influence of local and landscape factors on alpha and beta diversities: opposite response of plants and ground-dwelling arthropods in wet meadows.

Author: Lafage, Denis, Maugenest, Sébastien, Bouzillé, Jan-Bernard, and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: WET meadow ecology, ARTHROPODA, SPECIES diversity, PLANT communities, BIODIVERSITY, LANDSCAPES
Abstract: A large number of studies have tried to understand the determinants of local species richness, i.e. α-diversity. Studies dealing with β-diversity are considerably less numerous but their number has increased in the recent years. In this study, we assessed the relative importance of local and landscape (i.e. composition and connectivity) variables in explaining α- and β-diversities (species turnover and nestedness) of three highly diverse groups, differing in mobility and dispersal: plants, spiders, and carabids. Sampling took place in 2013, using suction samplers for arthropods and phytosociological relevés for vegetation, in 77 hay meadows distributed along 200 km of the Loire Valley (France). We found plant α-diversity to be driven by local factors, whereas spider and carabid α-diversities were mostly determined by landscape factors (by composition and connectivity, respectively). Nestedness was negligible for the three groups. Plant β-diversity was also mainly influenced by local factors, whereas spider β-diversity was driven by landscape factors (composition and connectivity, equally). Surprisingly, carabid β-diversity was mainly influenced by local factors and landscape connectivity. Despite these differences, plant, spider, and carabid β-diversities were not different, suggesting comparable dispersal abilities and/or a low connectivity at large scale, which is in accordance with the high species turnover observed here. Managing biodiversity in meadows consequently necessitates acting at local and landscape scales, the first targeting plants and the second arthropods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2015
Full Text: View/download PDF

22. Impact of cutting date on carabids and spiders in a wet meadow.

Author: Lafage, Denis and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: *GROUND beetles, *SPIDERS, *WET meadows, *GRASSLANDS, *ARTHROPODA
Abstract: Highlights: [•] Grassland mowing had negative effects on carabids in the long- and on spiders in the short-term. [•] Cutting date in itself had few effects on spiders and carabids. [•] Even late dates were deleterious for ground-dwelling arthropods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2014
Full Text: View/download PDF

23. Can urban consolidation limit local biodiversity erosion? Responses from carabid beetle and spider assemblages in Western France.

Author: Varet, Marion, Burel, Françoise, and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: GROUND beetles, ARTHROPODA, SPIDERS, BIODIVERSITY, WINDBREAKS, shelterbelts, etc., BIOINDICATORS
Abstract: During the last decades, urban consolidation has been developed to minimize spatial expansion of cities, yet very few studies investigated whether it would actually reduce some negative effects of urbanization on biodiversity. In this study, we compared the invertebrate assemblages associated with two distinct urban forms (compact vs. conventional), focusing on two arthropod taxa often used as bioindicators, and dominant in urban habitats: spiders and carabid beetles. The following parameters were estimated: assemblage composition, species richness, activity-density total, per species (excluding seldom-recorded species) and per size class. The field collection was performed in 2009 using pitfall traps randomly set in hedgerows within 6 sites (representing 251 traps). A total of 4,413 spiders belonging to 117 species and 2,077 adult carabid beetles belonging to 39 species were collected. We found few significant differences in carabid beetle and spider assemblages between the two urban forms. The species richness of both groups was independent from the neighborhood design. Only four species of carabid beetles and ten of spiders significantly reacted to the neighborhood design, and no difference was found among the two designs for all other species. Large carabid beetles were more abundant and small spiders less abundant in the new neighborhood design compared to the conventional one. For both carabid beetles and spiders, no difference in assemblage composition was found between neighborhood designs. We therefore conclude that urban consolidation, by permitting a higher human density with similar arthropod assemblages, could contribute to reduce biodiversity loss in cities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2014
Full Text: View/download PDF

24. Influence of abiotic factors on spider and ground beetle communities in different salt-marsh systems.

Author: Pétillon, Julien, Georges, Anita, Canard, Alain, Lefeuvre, Jean-Claude, Bakker, Jan P., and Ysnel, Frédéric
Subjects: SALT marsh ecology, INSECT communities, SPECIES distribution, ARTHROPODA, SPIDER populations, GROUND beetles, ENDANGERED ecosystems, ECOLOGICAL niche
Abstract: Copyright of Basic & Applied Ecology is the property of Urban & Fischer Verlag and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Published: 2008
Full Text: View/download PDF

25. Complementarity of rarity, specialisation and functional diversity metrics to assess community responses to environmental changes, using an example of spider communities in salt marshes.

Author: Leroy, Boris, Le Viol, Isabelle, and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: *SPIDERS, *GLOBAL environmental change, *GRAZING, *INSECT communities, *SALT marshes, *ARTHROPODA
Abstract: The study of community responses to environmental changes can be enhanced by the recent development of new metrics useful in applied conservation: relative rarity, ecological specialisation and functional diversity. These different metrics have been critically assessed independently, but are rarely combined in applied conservation studies, especially for less-studied taxa such as arthropods. Here we report how these different metrics can complement each other by using the response of spider communities to environmental changes in salt marshes as an example. Sampling took place using pitfall traps in salt marshes of the Mont St Michel Bay (France) during 2004 and 2007. The sampling design was spatially replicated (3 plots per treatment and 4 traps per plot) and encompassed four habitat treatments: control, sheep grazing, cutting (annual, in summer) and invasion by the plant Elymus athericus . We observed contrasting responses of spider communities to the different treatments: grazing had a negative impact on both rarity and functional diversity but a positive impact on specialisation; cutting had a negative impact on the three metrics; and invasion only had a negative impact on rarity and specialisation. These contrasting responses emphasise the necessity of using different complementary community metrics in such conservation studies. Consequently, rarity-, specialisation-, and functional-based indices should be applied simultaneously more frequently, as they potentially provide additional complementary information about communities. Such complementary information is the key to better-informed conservation choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2014
Full Text: View/download PDF

26. Farming system and landscape characteristics differentially affect two dominant taxa of predatory arthropods.

Author: Djoudi, El Aziz, Marie, Alexia, Mangenot, Angélique, Puech, Camille, Aviron, Stéphanie, Plantegenest, Manuel, and Pétillon, Julien
Subjects: *AGRICULTURE, *ARTHROPODA, *PREDATION, *LANDSCAPES, *GROUND beetles, *INSECT ecology, *SPIDERS
Abstract: Despite the role generalist predators may play in biological regulation, the influence of landscape composition in shaping their assemblages remains little studied, especially when landscape interacts with local factors. In this study, we investigated the effects of farming systems along gradients in landscape elements on the structure and composition of carabid and spider assemblages. Twenty pairs of organic vs. conventional spatially-matched fields were sampled in 2013 along increasing percentage covers of organic farming and semi-natural habitats in the landscape. A total of 24241 spiders and 27767 carabids belonging to 120 and 75 species respectively were collected by pitfall traps. Farming systems locally had a strong influence on the community structure (activity-density and species richness) and composition for both spiders and carabids. Structure of spider assemblages was mostly affected by local and landscape factors, whereas that of carabids was more driven by landscape variables and the interaction of the two levels. Spider and carabid community compositions were mostly determined by field farming systems and wood percentage around the field. Our study underlines the importance of landscape context in shaping assemblages of predatory arthropods, and suggests that mechanisms behind the distribution of individual species strongly differ between spiders and carabids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Published: 2018
Full Text: View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources

See catalog results

Searchworks

Select search scope, currently: Articles

Catalog

books, media & more in Jio Institute collections

Articles

journal articles & other e-resources

Refine your results

26 results on '"Pétillon, Julien"'

1. eDNA for monitoring and conserving terrestrial arthropods: Insights from a systematic map and barcode repositories assessments.

2. A comparison of two widely used methods for estimating taxonomic and functional diversities of epigeal arthropods in some temperate grasslands.

3. Lycosa piochardi Simon 1876

4. Lycosidae Sundevall 1833

5. Geolycosa Montgomery 1904

6. Geolycosa vultuosa

7. Lycosa undetermined

8. Lycosa gesserit Steinpress & Cohen & Pétillon & Chipman & Gavish-Regev 2022, sp. nov

9. Lycosa hyraculus Steinpress & Cohen & Pétillon & Chipman & Gavish-Regev 2022, sp. nov

10. Lycosa Latreille 1804

11. Agraecina salsicola Bosmans & Boubakri 2020, sp. n

12. Multiple reproductive events in female wolf spiders Pardosa hyperborea and Pardosa furcifera in the Low-Arctic: one clutch can hide another.

13. Challenges and opportunities of species distribution modelling of terrestrial arthropod predators.

14. Drivers of taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversities in dominant ground-dwelling arthropods of coastal heathlands.

15. Non-native spiders change assemblages of Hawaiian forest fragment kipuka over space and time.

16. Contrasted responses of dominant ground-dwelling arthropods to landscape salt-marsh fragmentation.

17. Broad-scale rather than fine-scale environmental variation drives body size in a wandering predator (Araneae, Lycosidae).

18. Small and large spatial scale coexistence of ctenid spiders in a neotropical forest (French Guiana).

19. Spider assemblage structure in a neotropical rainforest-inselberg complex: ecological and methodological insights from a small-scale intensive survey.

20. Physiological costs during the first maternal care in the wolf spider Pardosa saltans (Araneae, Lycosidae).

21. Disentangling the influence of local and landscape factors on alpha and beta diversities: opposite response of plants and ground-dwelling arthropods in wet meadows.

22. Impact of cutting date on carabids and spiders in a wet meadow.

23. Can urban consolidation limit local biodiversity erosion? Responses from carabid beetle and spider assemblages in Western France.

24. Influence of abiotic factors on spider and ground beetle communities in different salt-marsh systems.

25. Complementarity of rarity, specialisation and functional diversity metrics to assess community responses to environmental changes, using an example of spider communities in salt marshes.

26. Farming system and landscape characteristics differentially affect two dominant taxa of predatory arthropods.

Catalog

Searchworks

Select search scope, currently: Articles Catalog books, media & more in Jio Institute collections Articles journal articles & other e-resources

Search

Search Constraints

Refine your results

Search Limiters

Topic

Publication Year Range

Language

Publication Type

Journal

Region

Database

Publisher

26 results on '"Pétillon, Julien"'

Search Results

Catalog

Select search scope, currently: Articles

Catalog

books, media & more in Jio Institute collections

Articles

journal articles & other e-resources