Citation
Taxonomy, ethology, and ecology of Phidippus (Araneae: Salticidae) in eastern North America

Material Information

Title:
Taxonomy, ethology, and ecology of Phidippus (Araneae: Salticidae) in eastern North America
Creator:
Edwards, Glavis Bernard, 1948- ( Dissertant )
Whitcomb, Willard H. ( Thesis advisor )
Walker, Thomas J. ( Reviewer )
Reiskind, Jonathan ( Reviewer )
Fry, Jack L. ( Degree grantor )
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publisher:
University of Florida
Publication Date:
Copyright Date:
1980
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vii, 354 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Abdomen ( jstor )
Courtship ( jstor )
Eggs ( jstor )
Female animals ( jstor )
Femur ( jstor )
Legs ( jstor )
Mating behavior ( jstor )
Palps ( jstor )
Species ( jstor )
Spiders ( jstor )
Arachnida -- Florida ( lcsh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Entomology and Nematology -- UF
Entomology and Nematology thesis Ph. D
Jumping spiders ( lcsh )
Phidippus
Spiders ( lcsh )
City of Lake Wales ( local )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )
Spatial Coverage:
United States -- Florida

Notes

Abstract:
The 16 species of Phidippus occurring in the eastern United States are redescribed and illustrated together for the first time. Thirteen of these species occur in Florida. First instars are briefly described for most of these species for the first time. Both field and laboratory hybrids of P. regius x P. otiosus and F backcrosses of hybrid females to males of both parent species are described. Hybrid males were sterile; hybrid females backcrossed to males of either parent species were significantly less fecund than either parent species. The two species are considered to be advanced sibling species which lack only the late stages of pre- and/or post zygotic isolating mechanisms (behavior and/or complete hybrid sterility) to completely separate each species. The courtship behavior of 13 of the 16 eastern species, as well as the P. otiosus x P. regius hybrid, are described, 8 for the first time. A new method of communication for salticids, sound (made by a stridulatory mechanism on each palpus) , is reported for P. mystaceus . A combined visual-vibratory display is reported for P. whitmani . Differences in prey-capture behavior are noted for adult Phidippus prof erred house flies and cabbage looper larvae. Cabbage looper larvae were captured by all species tested from an average distance of 5 - 6 mm, whereas average capture distances of house flies averaged 2-3.5 times this distance, depending upon the species of Phidippus . Prey-capture behavior was noticeably different depending upon the type of prey approached, with a much more stealthy approach used against house flies. Naive spiderlings, in similar prey-capture tests involving other types of prey, were shown to rely at least in part on experience after initial encounters with various prey types. In tests with small ants as the intended prey, the spiderlings initially attacked the ants, but were driven away by the ants. Spiderlings thereafter avoided ants for up to 4 days (the longest test), demonstrating learning of the basic trial-and-error type. That adult Phidippus generally avoid ants both in the field and laboratory is evidence that this type of learning is long-lasting. Preliminary investigations with 2 lizard species indicated that P. apacheanus was a generalized Batesian mimic of red and black species of the velvet ant genus Dasymutilla (Hymenoptera: Mutillidae) . Nearly all instars of P. apacheanus exhibited the red and black coloration; mimicry in adult males was most complete, as it included behavioral elements as well as color pattern similarity. Adult males of P. cardinalis are similar in color to males of P. apacheanus , and can probably also be considered Batesian mimics of Dasymutilla , although other possibilities are examined. Most species were found to occur in several habitats, but dominant in only one, or never dominant. In habitats with more than one dominant, the phenology of the dominants was different. Some microhabitat separation was exhibited, both between species and between immatures and adults of the same species. Prey included members of the orders Diptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Odonata, Orthoptera, Hemiptera, Homoptera and Araneae. Prey size was significantly correlated with spider size. Enemies included pompilid and sphecid wasps, acrocerid and mermithid parasitoids, mantispid and dipteran egg predators, hymenopteran egg parasites, predaceous fungi, frogs, lizards, birds, and other spiders. Mean reproductive rates correlated well with mean length of each species; P. clarus was an exception. Niche breadth varied widely among species, and overall niche overlap was low among species. Temperature in peninsular Florida probably is less critical than in most temperate areas; however, at least one activity, hunting, ceased at temperatures below 15° C.
Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1980.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographic references (leaves 334-353).
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Glavis Bernard Edwards, Jr.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
020728807 ( ALEPH )
07216164 ( OCLC )
AAB7741 ( NOTIS )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












TAXONOMY, ETHOLOGY, AND ECOLOGY OF Phidippus
(ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA













BY



GLAVIS BERNARD EDWARDS, JR.


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

1980


j















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

In a work of this scope, it is impossible to individually thank

every person who has contributed to its completion, but I do sincerely

thank every one of you.

I would like to single out my committee members: Dr. W. H. Whitcomb,

who tolerated the development of lines of research astray from his own;

Dr. Jonathan Reiskind, for his positive reinforcement and assistance;

and Dr. T. J. Walker, for demanding excellence.

Various types of technical assistance were provided by Mrs. Thelma

C. Carlysle, Mr. P. M. Choate, Dr. Jonathan Reiskind, and Dr. Robert Paul.

Special thanks are due Mrs. Katrina Vaughanfor typing the manuscript

and going to special effort to help make deadlines.

For identifications of prey and enemy records I thank Mrs. E. C. Beck,

and Drs. W. F. Buren, R. J. Gagne, E. E. Grissell, D. H. Habeck, F. W.

Harmston, L. A. Hetrick, K. W. Knopf, P. M. Marsh, F. W. Mead, E. L. Mock-

ford, J. C. E. Nickerson, C. W. Sabrosky, R. I. Sailer, L. A. Stange, T. J.

Walker, H. V. Weems, Jr., and R. E. Woodruff. Thanks are due the technical

staff of the Bureau of Entomology, Division of Plant Industry, for their

assistance and encouragement.

This list would not be complete without mentioning the dear friends

who have put up with me and helped in so many ways: Ron and Peggy

Williams, Earl Williams, Allen Mosler, Fred and Peggy Hansen, Anzle Mead,

Wanda Weintraub, Ruth Schaeffer, Mary Warren; my parents, Glavis and

Margaret Edwards, for their patient and continued support; and most of all,

my wife, Sue, who has managed to keep both of us going.

















TABLE OF CONTENTS


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ABSTRACT
CHAPTER

1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

2 TAXONOMY OF EASTERN Phidippus

Introduction
Key to Adult Male Phidippus of the
Eastern U. S.
Key to Adult Female Phidippus of the
Eastern U. S.
Subgenus Anipalpus, new subgenus
Subgenus Phidippus

3 IMMATURE STAGES OF Phidippus SPECIES

4 HYBRIDIZATION IN Phidippus SPECIES

Introduction
Methods
Laboratory Results
Ecological Factors Affecting Hybridization
Species Relationships, Geologic History,
and Speciation
Hybridizations Between Other Species

5 THE COURTSHIPS OF EASTERN Phidippus

Introduction
Methods, Materials, and Terminology
Results
Discussion

6 SOUND PRODUCTION BY COURTING MALES
OF Phidippus mystaceus (Araneae: Salticidae)

Introduction
Experimental Procedure
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Additional Observations

iii


PAGE

ii
v











7 DIFFERENTIAL ATTACK RESPONSES BY
Phidippus SPP. (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) TO
CONTRASTING PREY TYPES 151

Introduction 151
Materials and Methods 151
Results 153
Discussion 157

8 INSTINCT AND CONDITIONED LEARNING AS FACTORS
IN THE PREY-CAPTURE BEHAVIOR OF NAIVE SPIDERLINGS
(ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) 161

Introduction 161
Methods and Materials 161
Results and Discussion 164

9 MIMICRY IN Phidippus 177

Introduction 177
Methods 177
Results and Discussion 178

10 ECOLOGY OF Phidippus SPECIES 186

Introduction 186
Methods 190
Background 195
Results and Discussion 209
Resource Analysis 233
Species Summaries 243

11 SYNTHESIS 304


APPENDICES

A GLOSSARY 308
B PLACE NAMES 311
C LAKE EDGE HABITATS 312
D OTHER STUDY HABITATS 318
E PREY OF MUD DAUBERS 326
F NEW RECORDS OF PREY CAPTURED BY
SALTICIDS OTHER THAN Phidippus 327
G Attus otiosus HENTZ, 1846, (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE):
PROPOSED PRESERVATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS 331


REFERENCES CITED 334

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 354


CHAPTER


PAGE
















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


TAXONOMY, ETHOLOGY, AND ECOLOGY OF Phidippus
(ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA

By

Glavis Bernard Edwards, Jr.

December, 1980

Chairman: Dr. Willard H. Whitcomb
Major Department: Entomology and Nematology

The 16 species of Phidippus occurring in the eastern United States

are redescribed and illustrated together for the first time. Thirteen

of these species occur in Florida. First instars are briefly described

for most of these species for the first time.

Both field and laboratory hybrids of P. regius x P. otiosus and F

backcrosses of hybrid females to males of both parent species are des-

cribed. Hybrid males were sterile; hybrid females backcrossed to males

of either parent species were significantly less fecund than either parent

species. The two species are considered to be advanced sibling species

which lack only the late stages of pre- and/or post zygotic isolating

mechanisms (behavior and/or complete hybrid sterility) to completely

separate each species.

The courtship behavior of 13 of the 16 eastern species, as well as

the P. otiosus x P. regius hybrid, are described, 8 for the first time.

A new method of communication for salticids, sound (made by a stridula-

tory mechanism on each palpus), is reported for P. mystaceus. A combined

visual-vibratory display is reported for P. whitmani.

v









Differences in prey-capture behavior are noted for adult Phidippus

preferred house flies and cabbage looper larvae. Cabbage looper larvae

were captured by all species tested from an average distance of 5 6 mm,

whereas average capture distances of house flies averaged 2 3.5 times

this distance, depending upon the species of Phidippus. Prey-capture

behavior was noticeably different depending upon the type of prey ap-

proached, with a much more stealthy approach used against house flies.

Naive spiderlings, in similar prey-capture tests involving other types

of prey, were shown to rely at least in part on experience after initial

encounters with various prey types. In tests with small ants as the inten-

ded prey, the spiderlings initially attacked the ants, but were driven

away by the ants. Spiderlings thereafter avoided ants for up to 4 days

(the longest test), demonstrating learning of the basic trial-and-error

type. That adult Phidippus generally avoid ants both in the field and

laboratory is evidence that this type of learning is long-lasting.

Preliminary investigations with 2 lizard species indicated that P.

apacheanus was a generalized Batesian mimic of red and black species of

the velvet ant genus Dasymutilla (Hymenoptera: Mutillidae). Nearly all

instars of P. apacheanus exhibited the red and black coloration; mimicry

in adult males was most complete, as it included behavioral elements

as well as color pattern similarity. Adult males of P. cardinalis are

similar in color to males of P. apacheanus, and can probably also be

considered Batesian mimics of Dasymutilla, although other possibilities

are examined.

Most species were found to occur in several habitats, but dominant

in only one, or never dominant. In habitats with more than one domi-

nant, the phenology of the dominants was different. Some microhabitat

separation was exhibited, both between species and between immatures and









adults of the same species. Prey included members of the orders Dip-

tera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Odonata, Orthoptera,

Hemiptera, Homoptera and Araneae. Prey size was significantly correla-

ted with spider size. Enemies included pompilid and sphecid wasps,

acrocerid and mermithid parasitoids, mantispid and dipteran egg predators,

hymenopteran egg parasites, predaceous fungi, frogs, lizards, birds,

and other spiders. Mean reproductive rates correlated well with mean

length of each species; P. clarus was an exception. Niche breadth varied

widely among species, and overall niche overlap was low among species.

Temperature in peninsular Florida probably is less critical than in most

temperate areas; however, at least one activity, hunting, ceased at

temperatures below 150C.















CHAPTER 1
GENERAL INTRODUCTION


The present research can be best described as a multi-discipline

study of the biosystematics of members of the salticid genus Phidippus

in eastern North America, with emphasis on the species occurring in

Florida. It is a natural extension and expansion of previous research

(on the biology of P. regius; Edwards, 1975) and an offshoot of other

research (e.g., Whitcomb et al., 1963) implicating species of Phidippus

and other salticids, as well as many other spiders, as important preda-

tors in agro-ecosystems. The final organization is in reverse order

from how the research was initially conceived, from a study of the ecology

of each species to a comparison of certain behaviors to the redescriptions

and phylogenetic relationships of the species. The taxonomic section

is presented first to introduce and describe the species. It is followed

by ethological research, some of which (courtship behavior) is directly

related to the phylogeny. The ecology section describes the phenology

and both faunal and floral associations of the species. Finally, all

three sections are interwoven to form an overview of the genus.

Adult Phidippus are medium to large spiders (Figure 1-1) and often

brightly colored. Generally they are docile spiders, which will attempt

to hide or flee if threatened by the proximity of a human. Some can be

easily handled; the specific epithet of one species (audax, meaning bold

or audacious) was used to describe the manner of one of these spiders

which would hop onto a person's hand if the hand was placed down





2



carefully near the spider. That they can and will bite if carelessly

handled is demonstrated by numerous reports in California of people

bitten by P. formosus (=P. johnsoni). Elsewhere in the U. S., other

species occasionally have been reported to bite humans, to which I

can personally attest in the case of P. regius. The pain of the bite

is light to moderate and of short duration, usually not lasting more

than a few minutes. At least three species occur commonly about human

dwellings: P. johnsoni along the west coast, P. audax throughout the

eastern and central states, and P. regius in Florida.

Further introduction is best placed with the subject to which

it appertains.































(IK

' .?N



/ "t
l r*i *l.





IIL



I..


; I'







I *


Figure 1-1. Phidippus habitus (dorsal view).















CHAPTER 2
TAXONOMY OF ADULT Phidippus

Introduction


The genus Phidippus has not been revised since the Peckhams'

pioneering work (1901, 1909). Their 1909 paper, "Revision of the Atti-

dae of North America," still stands as the definitive work on nearctic

salticids, although numerous species and a few genera have been added

subsequently to the faunal list. Little further work has been done on

Phidippus other than new species descriptions, except for Bryant (1942),

who attempted to redescribe several species; unfortunately, her paper

contained several errors, and the single new species she described is

placed into synonymy herein. The type species of Phidippus is Salticus

variegatus Lucas = Phidippus audax (Hentz).

Genus Phidippus C. L. Koch, 1846

Attus Walckenaer (in part), 1805

Phidippus C. L. Koch, 1846

Phiale C. L. Koch (in part), 1846

Cyrtonota Simon (in part), 1864

Phidippia Simon, 1864

Megatimus Thorell, 1891

Dendryphantes (C. L. Koch, 1837) (in part), Peckham & Peckham, 1896

Synonymical listings indicate only the first use of a name prior to

1940. For complete listings before 1940 see Bonnet (1958). I have attemp-

ted to list all subsequent significant citations for species including

those of Roewer (1954), which are more recent than those of Bonnet even









though published earlier. For explanation of morphological structures

and abbreviations, see Appendix A (Glossary). For explanation of name

and place abbreviations, see Appendix B.

Medium to mostly large jumping spiders, 3.3 mm (small males) to 22

mm (large, gravid females). Integument of prosoma and prosomal appen-

dages sclerotized, reddish brown; ocular quadrangle darker; venter often

yellowish brown. Integumental surface highly reflective. Carapace width

.75 to .90 length, height .50 (females) to .67 (males) width. Ocular

quadrangle .40 to .50 carapace length, more coarsely reticulated than

surrounding integument. PME .30 to .40 distance from ALE to PLE (nearer

ALE). PLE row .75 to .90 carapace width. ALE row .56 to .85 carapace

width. Clypeus radius or less of AME. Central short, longitudinal

furrow within transverse depression just behind PLE row. Thoracic

slope .33 carapace length, approximately 450; cephalic area anterior

to PLE slanted slightly downward.

Distinct setal tufts present in ocular area, usually 2 or 4 (0-6)

situated one laterally below and lightly anterior to each PME, one half-

way between each PME and PLE dorsally (always present in females),

and/or a pair in the middle of the ocular quadrangle. Setal tufts are

present in all free-living individuals of the genus except 1st instars,

and, in several species, adult males. Scale-like setae ("scales")

usually present on palpi, legs, clypeus (in females), and on various

dorsal markings; sometimes covering most of dorsal surface and part of

abdominal venter. Black vestitural setae more or less covering all of

body surface, reduced on chelicerae and sometimes in ocular quadrangle.

Elongate black setae also covering body to lesser extent, concentrated

on lateral cephalic area and on anterior and lateral edges of ocular

quadrangle.









Chelicerae rugose, robust, slightly porrect especially in males,

and iridescent, usually gold-green-blue. Cheliceral promargin with 2

contiguous teeth (partially fused in male), retromargin with 1 tooth.

Endites convergent in females, divergent and with anterolateral cusp in

males. Labium longer than wide, 1/2 length of endites. Sternum slight-

ly narrower to as wide as labium anteriorly, narrowed sharply posteriorly,

4th coxae nearly touching.

Abdomen ovoid, with dorsal pattern which varies from species to

species, several variations on the presumed ancestral central dark

stripe overlain by 4 pairs of light spots. In many species the 2nd spot

pair is fused to form a central triangle. Usually with 2 pair of lateral

bands and a basal (anterior) band, which may be fused together. The

whole dorsum may be overlaid with red or gray scales which obscure the

pattern, especially in males. Venter with 4 rows of dots between epi-

gastric furrow and spinnerets; usually with light stripes bounding a

dark central stripe.

The legs have a structure also occurring in Dendryphantes sensu

latu that I have seen only in these 2 genera and in another dendryphan-

tine genus, Rhetenor. On the dorsal surface of the femur, patella, and

tibia are 2 longitudinal, subparallel depressions in the integument,

most pronounced on the patella. These depressions are very slight in

depth, but readily recognizable by the dense micro-reticulation of the

integument within the depression, much denser and finer than on the

surrounding integument. These depressions are also devoid of setae or

scales. The depressions run nearly the entire length of each segment,

except for the prolateral femoral one which is reduced to half the

length of the femur. It is tempting to speculate a sensory function for









this structure, but there appears to be no difference in sclerotization

from the surrounding integument, nor do there appear to be any glandular

structures associated with these depressions. They are even more reflec-

tive than the surrounding integument, and may function during inter-

individual recognition (occurs in both sexes) somewhat like the chelicerae,

which are much more coarsely reticulate over a larger surface. Another

possible, passive, use is that these small reflective spots may contribute

to an overall camouflage effect; they are more prominent on females

which do not have as extensive leg fringes which tend to hide these

structures.

Leg formula I, IV, II, III for males; IV, I, II, III (or IV, I,

III, II) for females. First pair of legs half again as stout and 2nd

legs slightly stouter than 3rd and 4th pairs. All legs fringed at least

ventrally, especially the first pair, much more developed in males.

Larger males may have proportionately larger and longer forelegs than

smaller conspecific males; this appears to be an allometric growth

phenomenon. Leg I of males usually fringed as follows: femur with black

fringes dorsally, and on pro- and retrolateral edges of venter (area

between ventral fringes glabrous and reflective distally); patella with

white brush and tibia with black brush covering pro-, retrolateral, and

ventral surfaces; metatarsus and tarsus with similar but reduced brushes,

white on proximal half and black on distal half of each segment. White

scales on prolateral surface on segments with white brushes (patella and

proximal halves of metatarsus and tarsus).

Palpal femora have 1-3 dorsal macrosetae each. Leg macrosetation

is restricted to the femur, patella, tibia, and metatarsus of each leg.

Based on the spacing of macrosetae and the arrangement of macrosetae in









other genera, the ancestral leg macrosetation is presumed to have been

arranged in 4 sets on the femur and tibia and 3 sets on the patella and

metatarsus. Otherwise the system of macroseta identification is similar

to that used by Platnick & Shadab (1975). Ventral macrosetae are usually

paired; dorsal and lateral macrosetae are single, with the dorsal macro-

setae along the midline of the segment. Lateral macrosetae are sometimes

marginal but are usually not identified as such unless confusion with

another seta could occur. Marginal macrosetae, when necessary, are

identified by the identification letters of both adjacent surfaces

(e.g., DP = dorsoprolateral). If only one of a ventral pair is present,

it is indicated as either pro- or retrolateral when distinguishable.

Typical macrosetation is as follows: femur I*D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-2,

tibia I*V 0-2-2-2, metatarsus I*V 0-2-2; femur II D*0-1-1-1, DP* 0-0-0-2,

DR 0-0-0-1, tibia II V 0-1R-2-2, P*0-0-l-0, metatarsus II* V 0-2-2;

femur III*D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-2, DR 0-0-0-1, patella III R 0-1-0, tibia

III V 0-1P-0-2*, P 0-0-1-0, R 0-1-1*-0, metatarsus III V 0-2-2*, P 0-1-2*,

R 0-1-2*, femur IV* D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-1, DR 0-0-0-1, patella IV R 0-1-0,

tibia IV V 0-1P-0-2*, P 0-0-1-0, R 0-1-1*-0, metatarsus IV V 0-2-2*,

P 0-1-2*, R 0-1-2*. Segments or individual sets of macrosetae marked

with an asterisk (*) are invariable or nearly so. Those not so marked

are more variable. Consistent differences from the above formula are

noted with species descriptions. Larger specimens tend to have a fuller

complement of macrosetae.

Scale-like setae, if present on legs, much denser on females and

encompassing all but ventral surface of legs. Scales on legs of males

predominantly on but not limited to legs I. Scales on palpi similar in

females to leg scales, in males situated differently, apparently situated

for display as it has evolved for each species.








Females have a well-sclerotized epigynum usually with well-

developed anterolateral rims forming guides or shields over spermathecal

duct openings, the latter usually bending away from each other. Males

have palpi each with a simple embolus; the tegulum has an anterior

rugose area (which I term the protegulum) associated with the embolus,

and an external loop of the sperm duct; and usually a simple lateral

(ectal) tibial apophysis.

The genus is most readily recognized by the possession of a dorsal

pair of setal tufts, iridescent chelicerae, conspicuous leg fringes, and

generally by their large size and dense vestitural setal covering.

Phidippus is a typical genus of the Salticidae: Dendryphantinae and is

most closely related to Dendryphantes sensu latu (i.e., including

Metaphidippus and Eris).

Figures 2-1 and 2-2 illustrate the body parts used in the descrip-

tions. Body measurements and ratios for the species under consideration

in this study are given in Table 2-1. Characters on which hypothetical

phylogeny are based are given in Table 2-2, and the resulting phylogeny

is illustrated in Figure 2-3.

The following species included in Phidippus by Chamberlin and Ivie

(1944), based on the descriptions by Walckenaer (1837) of Abbot's (1792)

unpublished illustrations, are considered to be nomena dubia; their

descriptions give little or no clue as to their specific identity, and

the types are illustrations which contribute little to their identifi-

cation. Also included here are species left in the genus Attus by

Chamberlin & Ivie ibidd), but which are probably juvenile Phidippus;

these latter are marked with an asterisk.








Table 2-1. Measurements and ratios of body parts of species of
Phidippus occurring in the eastern U. S. See Glossary (Appendix A)
for explanation of abbreviations. Ranges represent smallest (on left)
and largest specimens examined.


Phidippus ALE-PME ALE PLE
species, sex ALE-PLE CW CW CW


apacheanus d .33-.31 .67-.65 .84-.81 2.8-3.9
9 .32-.31 .63-.61 .84-.83 4.4-4.5

audax c .35-.32 .71-.59 .85-.75 2.9-5.5
9 .35-.30 .71-.56 .89-.78 3.4-5.4

borealis c .40-.35 .66-.64 .77-.76 3.1-3.5
9 .36-.38 .63-.62 .78-.77 3.7-3.9

cardinalis C .36-.31 .72-.64 .87-.82 3.0-3.9
9 .36-.32 .68-.62 .86-.85 3.6-4.2

clarus d .42-.39 .79-.69 .87-.84 2.5-3.9
9 .40-.35 .73-.69 .83-.80 3.1-5.0

insignarius ci .42-.39 .74-.69 .82-.83 2.3-3.1
9 .43-.40 .83-.69 .97-.88 2.3-3.3

mystaceus d .43-.41 .79-.71 .86-.84 2.7-3.4
9 .39-.36 .76-.71 .90-.89 3.4-4.2

otiosus d .39-.32 .69-.58 .83-.74 3.9-5.6
9 .41-.30 .73-.54 .88-.71 3.5-7.0

pius c .42-.37 .73-.70 .87-.84 2.6-3.2
9 .39-.38 .67-.68 .84-.86 2.8-3.1

princeps cf .39-.39 .75-.79 .87-.89 2.5-2.9
9 .41-.37 .68-.70 .83-.86 2.9-3.6

pulcherrimus d .39-.40 .82-.72 .89-.86 2.6-3.5
9 .43-.36 .84-.70 .89-.87 3.1-3.9

purpuratus c .36-.33 .70-.63 .89-.80 3.3-4.1
9 .34-.35 .72-.62 .90-.81 3.5-4.3

putnami C .42-.42 .86-.76 .94-.89 2.5-3.4
9 .43-.42 .82-.76 .95-.91 2.9-3.8

regius c .37-.31 .64-.49 .76-.63 4.2-7.5
9 .32-.36 .63-.55 .80-.72 4.9-6.7

whitmani c .42-.39 .77-.71 .85-.85 2.7-3.4
9 .42-.40 .78-.74 .89-.85 2.5-3.5

xerus C .37-.34 .75-.72 .89-.87 2.6-3.2


.38-.36 .76-.70 .90-.90


2.8-3.6








Table 2-1 extended.





CW
CL CL


.74-.78
.76-.77

.81-.87
.77-.78

.80-.76
.77-.80

.78-.83
.79-.83

.79-.82
.81-.85

.83-.79
.72-.81

.81-.84
.79-.81

.82-.88
.81-.93

.76-.78
.81-.74

.79-.70
.84-.78

.77-.77
.76-.84

.76-.87
.81-.80

.78-.77
.73-.81

.85-.90
.79-.80

.78-.79
.74-.73

.81-.76


3.8-5.0
5.7-5.9

3.6-6.3
4.5-7.0

3.9-4.6
4.9-4.9

3.8-4.7
4.5-5.1

3.2-4.8
3.8-5.9

2.8-3.9
3.1-4.0

3.3-4.0
4.3-5.2

4.8-6.4
4.3-7.8

3.5-4.1
3.5-4.2

3.2-4.1
3.4-4.7

3.3-4.5
4.1-4.6

4.4-4.7
4.3-5.3

3.2-4.4
4.0-4.4

4.8-8.3
6.2-8.3

3.5-4.3
3.4-4.8

3.2-4.2


.75-.78 3.7-4.6


.47-.46
.46-.45

.51-.45
.49-.41

.47-.43
.46-.43

.51-.49
.48-.49

.54-.50
.51-.47

.51-.47
.51-.50

.52-.49
.52-.46

.45-.43
.50-.46

.48-.51
.49-.42

.47-.45
.50-.46

.49-.47
.47-.49

.48-.50
.51-.46

.54-.49
.49-.50

.49-.42
.47-.38

.49-.49
.50-.45

.50-.46
.50-.49


5.18-10.63
7.08-13.35

4.36-15.24
4.48-18.10

4.90- 9.05
8.45-13.81

4.36- 9.52
6.00-14.29

3.27-10.10
4.29-14.17

4.91- 7.81
5.45- 9.90

4.91- 8.57
6.81-13.33

6.27-13.65
7.63-17.10

4.91- 8.72
6.00-10.48

4.36- 8.54
6.00-11.46

6.25- 8.54
8.48-11.98

5.18-10.48
8.18-14.76

5.18- 9.06
6.00-11.88

6.00-17.78
6.63-21.88

4.09- 9.58
5.18-11.56

5.90-10.20


7.25
10.69

8.39
10.93

7.58
10.96

6.90
10.06

6.37
8.48

6.32
7.65

6.96
9.84

10.04
13.10

6.21
7.79

6.75
8.34

7.32
9.87

8.31
10.07

6.94
8.98

11.78
14.80

6.38
8.05

7.70


8.60-11.70 10.20


X BL














CW


ALE

r /
SPL PME/
PLE
S0 0





























Figure 2-1. Diagrammatic illustration showing characters measured and
macrosetae of legs of Phidippus (dorsal view).





















palpus


endite -




labium -

sternum-




epigynum-


*ia
:atarsus


spinnerets


Figure 2-2. Diagrammatic illustration of Phidippus showing ventral
characters and leg macrosetae.










Table 2-2. Characters used to construct hypothetical phylogeny of
species of Phidippus in the eastern U. S. See Glossary (Appendix A)
for definitions of terms. Characters are considered primitive or
derived based on frequency of occurrence within Phidippus (more common
are considered more primitive) or by comparison with sister group
(Dendryphantes); characters shared between the two genera are consi-
dered more primitive.


Character


Primitive


Derived


Epigynum guides

Epigynum septum

Epigynum surface

Embolus shape

Lateral tufts

Abdomen spotted

Chelicera tubercle

Carapace transverse

Leg I fringe

2nd Abdominal spots

Epigynum surface

Leg I fringe

Ventral lateral str:

Ventral stripes

Ventral stripes

Embolus tip

Central tufts

Tibial apophysis


absent

absent

smoothly sloping

cylindrical

absent

yes

absent

bands absent

black & white

separate

smoothly sloping

black & white

ipes white

2 white

2 white

cylindrical

absent

simple


present

present

depressed centrally

sickle-shaped

present

no

present

present

white only

fused

elevated centrally

black & orange

black or gray

3 light gray

2 or 3 black

flared

present

bifid at tip


I




















































































cIOI

H1 'r
'rl H









Attus cinereus Walckenaer, 1837

A. dissimulator Walckenaer, 1837

A. excubitor Walckenaer, 1837

A. explorater Walckenaer, 1837*

A. fraudulentus Walckenaer, 1837

A. infestus Walckenaer, 1837*

A. insidiosus Walckenaer, 1837

A. investigator Walckenaer, 1837

A. latus Walckenaer, 1837


multivagus Walckenaer, 1837*

pileatus Walckenaer, 1837

pilosus Walckenaer, 1837

purpurarius Walckenaer, 1837

rimator Walckenaer, 1837

sagax Walckenaer, 1837

scrutator Walckenaer, 1837*

signatus Walckenaer, 1837

tridentiger Walckenaer, 1837


The descriptions of the following species are also equivocal:

Phidippus carolinus C. L. Koch, 1846 Attus rupicola Hentz, 1846

P. testaceus C. L. Koch, 1846 Attus sinister Hentz, 1850

Other species considered nomina dubia are listed with their sus-

pected synonyms.

Species misplaced in Phidippus

P. fasciatus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis fasciata (Koch & Berendt)

P. formosus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis fasciata (Koch & Berendt)

P. frenata Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis frenata (Koch & Berendt)

P. impressus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis melanocephala (Koch &

Berendt)

P. marginatus Koch & Berendt = orgopis marginata (Koch & Berendt)

P. melanocephalus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis melanocephala (Koch &

Berendt)

P. paululus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis frenata (Koch & Berendt)

P. pusillus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis frenata (Koch & Berendt)

P. bucculentus Gerstacker = Thyene bucculenta (Gerstacker)

P. inflatus Gerstacker = Thyene inflata (Gerstacker)









P. orbicularis Gerstacker = Thyene orbicularis (Gerstacker)

P. chrysis, Banks = Dendryphantes aurantius (Lucas)

P. disjunctus Banks = Dendryphantes disjunctus (Banks)

P. fartilis, Banks = Dendryphantes fartilis (Peckham & Peckham)

P. fraternus Banks = Dendryphantes aurantius (Lucas)

P. funebris Banks = Dendryphantes funebris (Banks)

P. luteus, Banks = Dendryphantes luteus (Peckham & Peckham)

P. marmoratus, Banks = Dendryphantes fartilis (Peckham & Peckham)

P. militaris, Peckham & Peckham = Dendryphantes marginatus

(Walckenaer)

P. molinor Chamberlin = Dendryphantes marginatus (Walckenaer)

P. multicolor Banks = Dendryphantes aurantius (Lucas)

P. nigropilosus Banks = Dendryphantes nigropilosus (Banks)

P. orichalceus Peckham & Peckham = Dendryphantes aurantius (Lucas)

P. capitatus, Banks = Dendryphantes galathea (Walckenaer)

P. parvus F. O. P.-Cambridge = Dendryphantes galathea (Walckenaer)

P. cyanidens C. L. Koch = Parnaenus cyanidens (C. L. Koch)

P. keratodes Hasselt = Hyllus keratodes (Hasselt)

The several species described from India by Tikader (e.g., 1974) as

Phidippus species do not belong in this genus; I am unable to place them

at present.

I have included in the keys to species alternate characters for

each species in cases where the destruction or absence of one character

might cause confusion. The reader should be aware of populations

variable in color pattern, especially of P. audax. I have attempted to

use characters which would avoid problems in the keys caused by color

pattern, although the latter character is used to some extent. Geographic









area is included where it might be helpful. The term "semi-encircled"

means that the periphery of the dorsum of the abdomen is covered with

colored scales except for the posterior end, which is covered by part of

the central black stripe. The dorsum of the carapace does not include

the clypeus, sides or thoracic slope.


Key to Adult Male Phidippus of the Eastern U. S.

1. Ocular setal tufts or crests present 2

1'. Ocular setal tufts or crests absent 8

2. Ocular quadrangle with pair of setal crests and single white

triangular spot, without setal tufts putnami

2'. Without crests or single spot, with 2 or 4 setal tufts 3

3. With 4 setal tufts, both dorsal and lateral 4

3'. With 2 dorsal setal tufts only 6

4. Ocular quadrangle with 3 red (rarely white or absent) spots arrang-

ed transversely, abdomen gray with white spots and very hirsute,

palpal tibial apophysis bifid at tip mystaceus

4'. Ocular quadrangle without spots, abdomen not gray or exceptionally

hirsute, palpal tibial apophysis simple 5

5. Leg I fringe white, abdomen orange to red; not in Florida

insignarius

5'. Leg I fringe black and orange, abdomen black with yellow to orange

spots; SE U. S., Atlantic coast to MD otiosus

6. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen red apacheanus

6'. Dorsum of carapace black, abdomen semi-encircled with tan or yellow

to red 7

7. Embolus projecting distally post protegulum; Canada and adjacent

states borealis








7'. Embolus not projecting distally post protegulum purpuratus

8. Embolus sickle-shaped 9

8'. Embolus not sickle-shaped 10

9. Carapace unmarked, dorsum of abdomen completely red (rarely brown

with white spots); not in Florida princeps

9'. Carapace with a short white band behind each PLE, abdomen semi-

encircled with red; SE U. S. pulcherrimus

10. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen orange to red 11

10'. Dorsum of carapace black, of abdomen variable 13

11. Posterior half abdominal dorsum with 2 pair of white spots, venter

with 3 black stripes, leg I fringe white whitmani

11'. Posterior half abdominal dorsun with 2 black stripes enclosing

2 pair white spots, venter otherwise, leg I fringe black and

white 12

12. Venter of abdomen with 3 gray stripes on pale background, embolus

flared distally cardinalis

12'. Venter of abdomen black, embolus slender and hooked

distally pius

13. Addomen with pair of red stripes, 2nd spot pair separate or

no spots clarus

13'. Abdomen without stripes, 2nd spot pair fused 14

14. White transverse bands behind PLE; small species, Florida

endemic xerus

14.' White submarginal bands below PLE or usually carapace unmarked 15

15. White posterior abdominal spots linear (all light spots may be

fused and yellow to orange), abdomen dorsum with metallic black

scales surrounding 8 quadrangular black spots audax









15'. White posterior abdominal spots oval, black areas monotonous,

without metallic scales; large species, SE U. S., Atlantic

coast to VA regius


Key to Adult Female Phidippus of the Eastern U. S.

1. Epigynum without anterolateral guides 2

1'. Epigynum with anterolateral guides 3

2. Ocular area with 6 setal tufts, quadrangle with a white or tan

triangular spot, abdomen brown with white spots putnami

2'. Ocular area with 4 or 6 setal tufts, quadrangle with 3 white spots

arranged transversely, abdomen gray with white spots, hirsute

mystaceus

3. Epigynum with deep transverse depression in middle third 4

3'. Epigynum without depression 6

4. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen yellow to red apacheanus

4'. Dorsum of carapace gray or black, of abdomen otherwise 5

5. Abdomen semi-encircled with tan to orange, 2nd spot pair fused;

Canada and adjacent states. borealis

5'. Abdomen gray, sometimes semi-encircled with white, 2nd spot pair

not fused purpuratus

6. Epigynum elevated immediately posterior to septum in center of

epigynal plate 7

6'. Epigynum essentially flat or gradually sloping upward posteriorly,

with or without distinct septum 8

7. Carapace with distinct submarginal bands, posterior abdominal spots

enlarged and quadrangular; SE U. S., Atlantic coast to MD otiosus









7'. Carapace rarely with distinct bands, usually either without markings

or covered with colored scales, posterior abdominal spots oval, not

enlarged; large species, SE U. S., Atlantic coast to VA regius

8. Abdominal venter white with black or gray lateral stripes, usually

with narrow median dark stipe; 2nd spot pair separate 9

8'. Abdominal venter black with or without lateral white stripes;

2nd spot pair fused or no dorsal pattern 12

9. Posterior abdomen with 2 pair white spots, dorsum of carapace

and abdomen red to brown, 3 black ventral stripes whitmani

9'. Posterior abdomen with 2 black stripes enclosing 2-3 pair white

spots, dorsum and venter variable 10

10. Two black ventral stripes (median stripe absent), abdomen dorsum

gold to reddish-brown, usually darker in central stripe between

spots clarus

10'. Three light gray ventral stripes, abdomen dorsum variable in

color 11

11. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen red to brown, width of posterior

epigynal notch 3 times its length, equal in width to distance between

duct openings cardinalis

11'. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen yellow to orange, width of posterior

epigynal notch 2 times its length, less in width than distance

between duct openings pius

12. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen brown, without paired spots (rarely

with fused 2nd pair and separate 3rd and 4th pairs, all white);

not in Florida princeps

12'. Dorsum otherwise 13









13. Ocular area with 4 distinct setal tufts, abdomen semi-encircled

with yellow to red 14

13'. Ocular area with 2 dorsal tufts only, the lateral setae not

concentrated into a tuft, but spread out into a weak fringe, abdomen

variable 15

14. Uniquely-shaped white spot in middle of ocular quadrangle, short

yellow-orange transverse bands behind PLE or entire carapace

encircled with gray and/or yellow-orange scales; Florida endemic

xerus

14'. No spot in ocular quadrangle, carapace with white submarginal bands

below PLE or carapace encircled with white scales; not in Florida

insignarius

15. Short white to tan transverse bands behind PLE or entire carapace

encircled with white or tan scales, abdomen semi-encircled with

yellow to red, black quadrangular spots present but mostly covered

by semi-encircling band of scales; SE U. S. pulcherrimus

15'. Carapace without markings or with white submarginal bands below

PLE, never encircled by scales, abdomen rarely semi-encircled by

white or orange, 2nd-4th pair spots rarely fused together and/or

orange, black metallic scales encircling 8 black quadrangular

spots. audax



Subgenus Anipalpus, new subgenus

The name of the subgenus is a contraction of "animated pedipalpus,"

referring to the unusual use of the palpi during courtship by males of

the included species. I designate Phidippus putnami as the type species

of this subgenus.








Two species in this subgenus occur in the eastern U.S., P. putnami

and P. mystaceus. Females of both species have 6 ocular setal tufts

(the central pair is occasionally missing). The epigyna of both species

lack guides; the spermathecal duct openings are in a narrow slit. The

emboli of the males have been modified (flattened) to fit into the slit.

Males of P. putnami have a double setal crest in the ocular quadrangle,

while males of P. mystaceus have a stridulatory organ on each palpus.

Males of both species have yellow fringes on the legs I. The subgenus is

characterized by the 6 tufts, the slit openings in the epigynum and the

flattened embolus.


Phidippus putnami (Peckham & Peckham), 1883

Figures 2-4, 2-21

Attus putnamii Peckham & Peckham, 1883; type in MCZ, examined

Phidippus gracilis Keyserling, 1884 (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham,

1909)

Plexippus putnamii, Peckham & Peckham, 1888

Philaeus princeps (not Peckham & Peckham), Banks, 1892

Phidippus putnamii, Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909; Bryant 1942; Muma

1944, 1945; Bonnet, 1958; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Oehler, 1980

P. otiosus, Peckham & Peckham, 1909 (in part,? ; Plate 34, fig. 6a, f)

Dendryphantes putnami, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954


The female was illustrated as early as 1909 by the Peckhams, but

thought to be a variety of P. otiosus.

Males have yellow leg fringes and light metallic blue femur in more

northern specimens, mostly white leg fringes (with a few yellow setae)

and dark metallic blue femur in more southern specimens.









MALE: integument dark; carapace with white bar just below and

behind each PME, large white triangle between PLE, third white bar

(often rubbed off) anteriorly at apex of triangle, short white stripe

directly behind center of triangle; yellow fringe of setae over anterior

eyes, dense cover of bluish gray setae across anterior dorsal ocular

area; no ocular tufts, instead dorsal black setal crests originating

from between PME and PLE extending forward ental to PME almost to level

of ALE; chelicerae proximal half each side with scales in 3 vertical

white and 2 vertical red stripes, with a red transverse bar below

stripes, distal half iridescent blue covered with bluish-gray setae;

clypeus covered with red scales, fringed with white setae; palpal femur

covered dorsally with white scales, tibia with long ectal fringe of

white-tipped black setae, cymbium fringed with black setae and covered

dorsally with bluish-gray setae; leg I fringes all yellow or all white

except black setae mixed in on prolateral tibia, covered dorsally with

white scales; femur I dorsal fringe rudimentary, ventral setal fan pale

yellow, distal prolateral and ventral surfaces covered densely with

white scales and white or yellow prolateral setal fan, retrolatero-

ventral edge with elongate tuft of pale yellow setae, swollen ventrally,

light to dark metallic blue on pro-, retrolateral, and ventral surfaces;

dorsal abdominal markings white; venter of abdomen blue-black or black

bordered laterally by wide white stripes.

FEMALE: integument normal color; carapace with dorsal markings as

in male or covered with white scales, chelicerae covered with white

setae on proximal half, metallic green distal half; 6 ocular tufts, the

midocular pair somewhat smaller than the other 2 pair, rarely lacking;

clypeus, palpi, and legs with white setal fringes; abdominal integument

brown, bronze, or black, dorsal abdominal spots white or tan.









LEG MACROSETATION: no consistent differences; sometimes metatarsi

III & IV V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2.


Phidippus mystaceus (Hentz), 1846

Figures 2-5, 2-22

Attus mystaceus Hentz, 1846; type destroyed

Phidippus asinarius C. L. Koch, 1846; (synonymized by Marx, 1890)

Phidippus electus C. L. Koch, 1846; (synonymized by Marx, 1890)

Cyrtonota multivaga, Simon, 1864; not Attus multivagus Walckenaer,

1837, a NOMEN DUBIUM

Phidippus mystaceus, Emerton, 1877; Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Muma, 1944;

Muma & Jeffers, 1945; Bonnet, 1958; Specht & Dondale, 1960;

Whitcomb et al., 1963; Berry, 1970; Edwards, in Richman & Cutler,

1978; Oehler, 1980

Phidippus incertus Peckham & Peckham, 1901; type in MCZ, examined

(synonymized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909)

Dendryphantes mystaceus, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

Phidippus hirsutus Barrows, 1919; type in OSU, examined

(synonymized by Edwards, in Richman & Cutler, 1978)

P. incertus, Bryant, 1942; Warren et al., 1967

P. hirsutus, Bryant, 1942; Kaston, 1948; Whitcomb et al., 1963

Dendryphantes hirsutus, Roewer, 1954


Hentz's written description could fit either P. mystaceus or P.

purpuratus, but his illustration of the extra long setal tufts on the

carapace indicates that the species he was describing was P. mystaceus.

Stability of nomenclature also favors retaining P. mystaceus for this

species.








MALE: carapace integument with dark blue tinge, ocular area with 3

red-orange transverse spots; chelicerae iridescent green; 4 long ocular

tufts; clypeus with mixed yellow and white fringe over-hanging proximal

two-thirds of chelicerae; palpi with white lateral fringes on patella

and tibia, dorsal cymbium with white and yellow setae and central spot

of white and yellow scales; aplpi with short, blunt macrosetae encir-

cling tip; leg I femur lacks dorsal fringe, with dorsal subproximal

black setal tuft projecting anteriorly, venter with band of yellow

scales, prolateroventral fringe lacking, prolateral surface metallic dark

blue, dorsal distal edge of femur and all other segments covered with

yellow scales, all fringes yellow; legs II-IV with yellow scales on

distal segments and white scales on proximal segments; dorsum of abdomen

with pattern like female overlain with long gray setae; venter of

abdomen gray with 4 rows of pale dots.

A single dimorphic male of P. mystaceus is known. It is similar to

the typical males with the following differences: carapace covered

dorsally, laterally, and posteriorly with red scales, edged with yellow

scales posteriorly; rounded transverse integumental ridge in ocular

quadrangle (similar to P. toro Edwards); 4 typical setal tufts absent,

instead 2 central tufts in ocular quadrangle.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: integument

normal color, carapace covered with gray scales, ocular spots white

outlined in black; third pair weak ocular tufts often present between

ocular spots; clypeus covered with white scales, clypeus and palpi

fringed with white setae, overhanging chelicerae as in male; legs

covered with scales and having simple fringes, both white on females

from eastern states, both yellow on females from midwestern states.


I









LEG MACROSETAE: metatarsus III & IV V 0-1-2.


Subgenus Phidippus

The remainder of the species of the eastern U. S. belong to the

nominal subgenus. They are characterized by the usually cylindrical shape

of the embolus and well developed anterolateral epigynal rims forming

guides for the emboli. Most species have a longitudinal median septum

dividing the anterior 1/3 to 1/2 of the spigynum. The purpuratus group

has the protegulum extended ectanteriorly and the epigyna have a deep

transverse depression across the central third.


cardinalis group

Four species in this group (P. cardinalis, P. pius, P. whitmani,

P. clarus) occur in the eastern U. S. All are covered dorsally with

yellow to red or brown scales and have a bilineate dark stripe pattern

on the abdominal dorsum, and a trilineate dark stripe pattern on the

abdominal venter (central stripe usually absent in P. clarus). The

epigynum lacks a septum; the tegulum of the palpus is relatively narrow

compared to other species groups.


Phidippus cardinalis (Hentz), 1845

Figures 2-6, 2-23

Attus rufus Hentz, 1835; NOMEN NUDUM

Attus cardinalis Hentz, 1845 (d); type destroyed

Attus rufus Hentz, 1846 (9); type destroyed; NEW SYNONYMY

Plexippus rufus C. L. Koch, 1846 (synonymized by Marx, 1890)

Plexippus bivittatus C. L. Koch, 1846 (synonymized by Marx, 1890)

Phiale modest C. L. Koch, 1846 (synonymized by Banks, 1913)

Attus mccookii Peckham & Peckham, 1883; type in MCZ, examined; NEW

SYNONYMY









Phidippus ruber Keyserling, 1884; type in BMNH, examined (synonymized

with P. mccookii by Peckham & Peckham, 1909)

P. cardinalis, Peckham & Peckham, 1888; Wallace, 1950; Bonnet, 1958;

Richman & Cutler, 1978; Gertsch, 1979

Dendryphantes cardinalis, Simon, 1901; Roewer, 1954

Phidippus oaklandensis Tullgren, 1901 (synonymized by Petrunkevitch, 1911)

P. mccooki, Muma, 1944; Kaston, 1948; Whitcomb et al., 1963


Much confusion about the identities of P. cardinalis and P. mccooki

has existed since the Peckhams (1909) illustrated both species in

consecutive figures. I have never seen a male palp as illustrated for

P. mccooki. The drawing of the epigynum of this species appears to be a

good rendition of P. whitmani, whereas the description of the female

color pattern is that of P. pius. The type of P. mccooki is a female

with a typical P. cardinalis epigynum. I can only speculate that the

illustration of the P. mccooki male habitus is misplaced, and was meant

to be the initial entry under P. cardinalis. Cheliceral color in the

male of P. cardinalis agrees with Hentz's description and distinguishes

this species from P. apacheanus.

Although the Peckhams (1909) were unable to recognize P. rufus,

which they had previously attributed to what they renamed as P. whitmani,

Hentz's description must be of the female of P. cardinalis. Only 3

eastern species (P. cardinalis, P. pius, P. whitmani) have 3 ventral,

dark longitudinal stripes, and only 2 of these (P. cardinalis, P. pius)

have 2 short dorsal, dark longitudinal stripes broken by 2 pairs of

white spots. Since the type locality of P. rufus is Alabama, and the

red form of P. pius occurs east of the Appalachians, P. rufus must be P.

cardinalis.









MALE: integument reddish; carapace covered with red scales dor-

sally; chelicerae dark red proximal half,weakly iridescent blue distal

half; no ocular setal tufts clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae;

palpal femur with white or red scales on distal edge; leg I femur also

with white or red scales on distal edge (white on legs II-IV), petellar

brush black except white on proximal half of prolateral surface, white

scales on proximal half patella; scales on proximal halves metatarsus

and tarsus white to orange; dorsum of abdomen covered with red scales,

with 2 black stripes in posterior half overlaid with 2 pair white spots,

all of which may also be covered with red scales; venter of abdomen dark

gray.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 2 dorsal

setal tufts; white scales below lateral eyes, across proximal edge of

chelicerae, and on clypeus; clypeus also with dense fringe of white

setae; palpi fringed with white-tipped black setae; dorsum red to brown,

posterior stripes and spots not overlaid with red scales; venter of

abdomen pale with 3 narrow gray stripes.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II V 0-1R-1R or 0-0-2;

tibia III V 0-0-0-2, R 0-0-1-0; metatarsus III V 0-0-1 or 0-1-2,

R 0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2.


Phidippus plus Scheffer, 1906

Figures 2-7, 2-24

Phidippus pius Scheffer, 1906; type supposed to be in USNM, lost

P. plus, Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Bonnet, 1958; Edwards, 1977; Cutler,

1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978

Dendryphantes plus, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954









Phidippus abboti Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944; type in AMNH, examined

(synonymized by Edwards, 1977)

Dendryphantes abboti, Roewer, 1954

Phidippus abboti, Barnes & Barnes, 1955; Bonnet, 1958; Berry, 1970

Considerable variation in color pattern occurs in this species. In

the typical form, females are yellow and males are orange; this color

form holds throughout the northern range of the species and to the

southwest (from the eastern plains to New Jersey and south to Texas).

Southeast of the Appalachian Mountains, from Virginia to Florida, fe-

males are orange and males are red (P. abboti color form) and the amount

of black on the legs and palpi is increased. Toward the southwestern

portion of the range, in Texas, the black markings on the legs and palpi

are only faintly indicated.

Although the type of P. pius is lost, Scheffer's description leaves

no doubt as to which species he was describing.

MALE: integument yellow to red; carapace covered dorsally with

yellow to red scales, lacking in ocular area in red males; no ocular

setal tufts; clypeus with white setal fringe; palpi yellow to red,

cymbium black, femur black in red males, white lateral fringes on

patella, tibia, and cymbium; legs with black on ventral half of pro-

lateral surface of all femora, distal third patella, distal half tibia,

distal two-thirds metatarsus, distal half tarsus except for extreme

distal edge which is pale (red males have femur, tibia and metatarsus

all black), white scales sparsely on all legs and palpi; dorsum of

abdomen covered with yellow to red scales; 2 posterior stripes similar

to P. cardinalis and covered sparsely with metallic scales; venter pale

(orange males) to black (red males).









FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: integument

yellow to orange; 2 weak dorsal setal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed

with white setae; venter of abdomen with 3 narrow gray lines like P.

cardinalis.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II V 0-1R-lR-2; patella

III R 0-0-0, tibia III V 0-0-0-2, R 0-0-1-0, metatarsus III V 0-0-2;

tibia IV R 0-0-1-0, metatarsus IV V 0-0-2.


Phidippus whitmani Peckham & Peckham, 1909

Figures 2-8, 2-25

Phidippus paludatus C. L. Koch, 1846; NOMEN OBLITUM

P. rufus (not Hentz), Peckham & Peckham, 1889 (in part,dc)

Dendryphantes rufus, Simon, 1901

Phidippus whitmanii Peckham & Peckham, 1909

Dendryphantes whitmanii, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

P. whitmani, Comstock, 1912; Kaston, 1948; Bonnet, 1958; Berry, 1970;

Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Gertsch, 1979

P. insolens (not Hentz), Kaston, 1938a, b

Banks' description (1913) of the pinned type of P. paludatus

indicates it to be a specimen of P. whitmani. The latter name has been

used for the species ever since the Peckhams' description (1909), over

50 years ago.

Females are brown in the northern states, red in the southern

states. Southern males are more completely covered with red scales on

anterior dorsum of carapace, only anterior half of distance from PME to

AME exposed.

MALE: carapace covered with red scales dorsally except anterior to

PME, where dark integument is exposed, laterally and on thoracic slope








covered with white scales; chelicerae proximal half covered with white

setae, especially medially, distal half faintly metallic blue; no ocular

setal tufts; clypeus covered with white scales and setal fringe; palpi

with white fringe entire length laterally and on cymbium dorsally,

covered with white scales entire length dorsally; leg I-IV covered with

white scales, all fringes white; integument of all femora black; dorsal

abdomen covered with red scales, dorsal abdominal markings white; venter

of abdomen gray laterally, with 3 narrow black stripes enclosing 2 sub-

mesal white stripes.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: carapace

completely covered with red or brown scales dorsally; 2 weak dorsal

setal tufts; palpi fringed with white setae but lacking scales; dorsal

abdomen covered with red to brown scales except for white markings,

rarely with 2 black lines posteriorly like P. cardinalis and P. pius.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II V 0-1R-1P or 0-0-2;

patella III IV R 0-0-0, tibia III V 0-0-0-2, metatarsus III V 0-0-2,

P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-2.


Phidippus clarus Keyserling, 1884

Figures 2-9, 2-26

Attus podagrosus Hentz, 1846; type destroyed; NOMEN DUBIUM, NOMEN OBLITIM

Phidippus auctus C. L. Koch, 1846; specimens from Keyserling coll., BMNH,

examined; NOMEN OBLITUM

Phidippus castrensis C. L. Koch, 1846; NOMEN DUBIUM, NOMEN OBLITUM

Phidippus clarus Keyserling, 1884

P. clarus, Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Kaston, 1948; Wallace, 1950; Barnes

& Barnes, 1955; Bonnet, 1958; Whitcomb & Tadic, 1963; Whitcomb, 1963;

Berry, 1970; Richman & Cutler, 1978, Oehler, 1980









P. insolens (not Hentz), Peckham & Peckham, 1888

P. multiformis Emerton, 1891; type in HCZ, examined (synonymized by

Peckham & Peckham, 1909)

P. minutus Banks, 1892; type in MCZ, examined (synonymized by Peckham

& Peckham, 1909)

Philaeus princeps (not Peckham & Peckham), Banks, 1892

Phidippus bilineatus Tullgren, 1901 (synonymized by Roewer, 1954)

Phidippus clarconensis Tullgren, 1901 (synonymized by Wallace, 1950)

Dendryphantes insolens, Simon, 1901

D. multiformis, Simon, 1901

D. castrensis, Simon, 1901

Phidippus podagrosus, Banks, 1910

Dendryphantes clarus, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

P. rimator, Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944 (not Attus rimator Walckenaer, 1837

a NOMEN DUBIUM); Kaston, 1953, 1972, 1978; Snetsinger, 1954;

Cutler, 1977

Numerous other references cited in behavior or ecology sections.

The usage of P. rimator (Walckenaer) for this species, a name which

has become increasingly used for P. clarus, is completely unwarranted.

The single illustration by Abbot (1792) given the name Attus rimator by

Walckenaer (1837) was recognized as an immature by Chamberlin & Ivie

(1944) when they resurrected the name. It is well know that immatures

have been usually difficult, if not impossible given past techniques, to

identify to species. Furthermore, I have examined a color reproduction

of the copy of Abbot's drawing kept at the Museum of Comparative Zoology,

and cannot positively identify the drawing to genus, much less to

species; the dorsal pattern cannot be matched with any known species.









In saying this I might add that I have personally reared most of the

species of Phidippus occurring in the eastern U. S., including P.

clarus, and therefore have first hand acquaintance with their appearance

as immatures.

MALE: integument dark; no dorsal ocular tufts; clypeus and lateral

edges of palpi fringed with black setae; dorsum of palpal femur, patel-

la, tibia, and cymbium covered with white scales and setae; leg I femur

with dorsal fringe white, prolateroventral fringe absent, patella brush

black, proximal fourth of tibial brush white; dorsum of abdomen with

short white basal band, side stripe of red scales each side, dark

metallic central stripe; venter of abdomen dark gray with 3 black stripes,

the stripes sometimes enclosing a slight amount of white.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: integument

normal color; 2 weak dorsal tufts; white scales below eyes laterally and

densely covering clypeus, long white setal fringe on clypeus, palpi;

abdomen with variable coloration, lateral wide stripes tan, yellow, or

orange and median stripe tan, brown or black; venter of abdomen white

enclosed by lateral black stripes which meet posteriorly, sometimes with

faint median gray stripe.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0; metatarsus IV V 0-0-1 or

0-0-2.


audax group

The 5 eastern species in this group (P. audax, P. otiosus, P.

regius, P. xerus, P. insignarius) all have 4 setal tufts on the females

as opposed to 6 or 2 tufts on females of other groups. Lumping these

species together on the basis of number of setal tufts seems tenuous; P.

insignarius and probably P. xerus will likely be shown to belong to








other species groups when the fauna of the western U. S. becomes better

known. Males of the 3 other species all have a cheliceral tubercle,

which seems to be a shared, derived character. Behavioral data also

seems to relate these 3 species (see chapter on courtship).


Phidippus audax (Hentz), 1845

Figures 2-10, 2-27

Attus morsitans Walckenaer, 1805; NOMEN NUDUM, NOMEN DUBIUM

Salticus variegatus Lucas, 1833; type lost; petition to suppress

(Levi & Pinter, 1970) under consideration by the I.C.Z.N.

Attus audax Hentz, 1835; NOMEN NUDUM

A. tripunctatus Hentz, 1835; NOMEN NUDUM

A. morsitans Walckenaer 1837; NOMEN DUBIUM

A. audax Hentz, 1845; type destroyed; petition submitted to designate as

type species of genus (Levi & Pinter, 1970)

A. tripunctatus Hentz, 1846 (synonymized by Banks, 1893)

A. fasciolatus, Hentz, 1846 (synonymized by Banks, 1910)

Phidippus togatus C. L. Koch, 1846; NEW SYNONYMY

Phidippus purpurifer C. L. Koch, 1846

P. smaragdifer C. L. Koch, 1846

P. alchymista C. L. Koch, 1846

P. rufimanus C. L. Koch, 1846

P. dubious C. L. Koch, 1846

P. mundulus C. L. Koch, 1846

P. personatus C. L. Koch, 1846

P. concinnatus C. L. Koch, 1846 (Koch names synonymized by Banks, 1910)

P. morsitans, Peckham & Peckham, 1888 (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham,

1909)








P. rauterbergii Peckham & Peckham, 1888 (synonymized by Banks, 1916)

P. tripunctatus, Emerton, 1891

P. audax, Banks, 1893; Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Bonnet, 1958; Kaston,

1948, 1953, 1972, 1978; Levi & Levi, 1968; Cutler, 1977; Richman &

Cutler, 1978; Gertsch, 1979; Oehler, 1980

P. howardii Peckham & Peckham, 1896, NEW SYNONYMY

P. rauterbergii, Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909; Bonnet, 1958

P. howardi, Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909; Bonnet, 1958

P. variegatus, Peckham & Peckham, 1909 (the Peckhams considered audax

and variegatus to be 2 separate species); Kaston, 1938; Bryant, 1942

Dendryphantes audax, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

D. howardi, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

D. rauterbergii, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

Phidippus bryantae Kaston, 1945 (synonymized by Kaston, 1948)

Also mentioned in numerous behavioral and ecological papers which are

mentioned with their respective chapters.

Phidippus morsitans might also apply to P. regius C. L. Koch but

would be unavailable for that species also.

This is an extremely common species over most of eastern and mid-

western North America. It varies widely in both size and color pattern,

although at least some individuals of a particular population retain the

typical color pattern. Some individuals in Texas and Mexico reach

nearly 20 mm in length, perhaps in part due to the lack of competition

from a common, large species (like P. regius in Florida).

MALE: integument dark; carapace with or without lateral white sub-

marginal band of variable size extending behind and below PLE; anterior

face of each chelicera with subdistal tubercle; no ocular setal tufts;









clypeus fringed with black setae; palpal femur and patella with white

scales and setae dorsally, black setae laterally and on dorsal cymbium;

leg I with typical fringing; abdomen with spots white, yellow, or red,

either distinct or coalesced with each other or with lateral bands, most

of resulting patterns illustrated by Hill (1978); venter of abdomen with

outer rows of dots often overlain with white scales which encroach to

variable extent over median black stripe which is never completely

covered.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: no cusp on

chelicerae; 4 setal tufts; clypeus sparsely covered with white scales

and white setae; palpi fringed with black setae, some of which have

white tips.

LEG MACROSETAE: metatarsus III R 0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-2. Only

species with an individual with femur I DR 0-0-0-1.


Phidippus otiosus (Hentz), 1846

Figures 2-11, 2-28

Attus pulcher Walckenaer, 1837, p. 439

A. pulcher pallida Walckenaer, 1837, p. 439

A. peregrinus Walckenaer, 1837, p. 445

A. otiosus Hentz, 1846; type destroyed; petition for retention submitted

to I. C. Z. N. (see Appendix C)

Phidippus lunulatus C. L. Koch, 1846 (synonymized by Banks, 1910)

P. otiosus, Peckham & Peckham, 1888, 1901, 1909; Bryant, 1942; Murrill,

1942; Wallace, 1950, Bonnet, 1958; Anderson, 1966; Levi & Levi, 1968;

Kaston, 1972, 1978; Edwards et al., 1974; Muma, 1975; Edwards, 1977;

Richman, 1977; Hill, 1979; Gertsch, 1979









Dendryphantes otiosus, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

Phidippus dorsalis Bryant, 1942 (o'holotype); holotype in MCZ, examined;

NEW SYNONYMY

P. pulcher, Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944; Richman, 1978; Richman & Cutler, 1978

Dendryphantes pulcher, Roewer, 1954

Although P. pulcher (Walckenaer) has priority, the specific epithet

pulcher in various generic combinations has only been used 6 times in

the literature (3 in checklists), whereas P. otiosus (Hentz) has been

used over 20 times (7 in checklists). Usage favors retention of P.

otiosus.

MALE: carapace with very wide yellow to orange submarginal bands

from PME to near posterior edge, not meeting behind but partially cover-

ing thoracic slope; chelicerae with tubercle like P. audax; 4 setal

tufts; clypeus sparsely fringed with black setae; palpi covered with

yellow to orange scales and setae on dorsal and lateral femur, ectal

edge of patella; dorsal cymbium covered with black setae; leg I with

typical fringes except yellow to orange where normally white, prolatero-

ventral femur fringe lacks distal third, yellow setae and scales on

distal femur; legs II-IV with yellow scales on dorsal distal femur and

proximal patella; dorsal abdominal markings yellow, gold, or orange,

center stripe metallic black, green, or blue; venter of abdomen black.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: carapace

submarginal bands white to yellow; chelicerae without tubercle; ventral

edge of clypeus to entire face covered with white scales, weakly fringed

with yellow setae to strongly fringed with white overhanging proximal

third of chelicerae; palpi densely fringed laterally with white or

yellow setae; legs covered with white or yellow scales; abdomen integument









gray, tan, or black, dorsal abdominal markings white to yellow-orange;

venter of abdomen with broad black stripe with or without white border

which may encroach on middle of black band.

LEG MACROSETAE: metatarsus IV V 0-1-2.


Phidippus regius C. L. Koch, 1846

Figures 2-12, 2-13, 2-29

Phidippus regius C. L. Koch, 1846, p. 146

Attus regius, Walckenaer, 1847

Salticus sagraeus Lucas, 1857

Attus miniatus Peckham & Peckham, 1883 (synonymized by Edwards, 1975,

unpubl.; Richman & Cutler, 1978)

Phidippus miniatus, Peckham & Peckham, 1888, 1901, 1909

P. variegatus (not Lucas), Franganillo, 1930; Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944;

Wallace, 1950

P. regius, Bryant, 1943; Bonnet, 1958; Levi & Levi, 1968; Levi & Pinter,

1970; Muma, 1975; Cutler, 1977; Hill, 1977; Kaston, 1978; Richman &

Cutler, 1978; Edwards, 1975, 1979; Cutler, 1979; Gertsch, 1979

Dendryphantes regius, Simon, 1901; Roewer, 1954

D. miniatus, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

Phidippus tullgreni Wallace, 1950; NEW SYNONYMY (may be P. otiosus -

P. regius hybrid)

Richman & Cutler (1978) synonymized P. miniatus with P. regius on

the authority of the unpublished thesis of Edwards (1975). This species

has been involved in considerable confusion with P. audax over use of

the name P. variegatus and because of their similar appearance.

MALE: integument dark; carapace rarely with wide white submarginal

bands (possibly hybrid); chelicerae with tubercle like P. audax; no









ocular tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae; leg I femur

with distal prolateral white setae and scales; dorsal abdomen black with

white markings; venter of abdomen black.

FEMALE: carapace lacking scales or covered to variable extent with

gray, tan and/or orange scales, ocular quadrangle never completely

covered; chelicerae without tubercle, sometimes red-violet, may be

covered proximally with white scales; 4 ocular setal tufts; clypeus and

palpi with white fringes, clypeus covered with white scales; legs with

or without gray, tan or orange scales; dorsal abdomen black or dark

brown with or without covering of gray, tan, brown and/or orange scales;

dorsal markings white or pale orange, sometimes overlaid with tan or

orange scales, markings outlined with remnant of central dark band;

venter of abdomen black, bordered with stripes of white scales when

abdomen black dorsally.

LEG MACROSETAE: metatarsus IV V 0-1-2. P. regius, the largest

species represented, was most likely to have more macrosetae than normal;

especially the ventral subproximals on tibiae II-IV might be paired.


Phidippus xerus Edwards, 1978, emendation

Figures 2-14, 2-30

Phidippus xeros Edwards, 1978; holotype deposited in MCZ

P. xeros, Richman, 1979

A few specimens in collections were labeled P. workman. The

specific epithet was not latinized in the original description, and is

here emended. All known specimens of this species have been collected

in Florida.

MALE: integument dark; carapace with short white transverse bands

behind PLE; no ocular tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae;









palpi with dorsal white scales on femur and patella; leg I like P.

regius, except dorsal femur fringe of white-tipped black setae; dorsal

abdomen black with white markings; venter of abdomen black with 4 rows

pale dots.

FEMALE: integument normal color; carapace with markings like male

(except they are yellow) or usually (including clypeus and over anterior

eyes) covered with gray, yellow, and/or orange-yellow scales, except for

lower thoracic slope and ocular quadrangle (which has white spot in

center); 4 weak ocular setal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with

white; tibia I reddish on proximal half with white fringe; dorsal

abdominal markings orange-yellow to red-orange, or rarely lateral

stripes lacking and yellow spots and basal band present; venter of

abdomen like male.

LEG MACROSETAE: no consistent differences; ventral and lateral

medians on metatarsi III & IV variable.


Phidippus insignarius C. L. Koch, 1846

Figures 2-15, 2-30

Phidippus insignarius C. L. Koch, 1846, 1851

Philaeus monticola Banks, 1896 (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909)

Phidippus comatus Peckham & Peckham, 1901 (in part, C) (recognized by

Peckham & Peckham, 1909)

P. insignarius, Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Kaston, 1948; Muma, 1949;

Whitcomb & Tadic, 1963; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978

Dendrvnhantes insignarius, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

P. fraudulentus, Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944; not Attus fraudulentus

Walckenaer, 1837, a NOMEN DUBIUM

P. insigniarius, Bonnet, 1958









Bonnet (1958) noted that the correct Latin spelling of the specific

epithet is insigniarius. If Koch had misspelled the name unintentional-

ly, this correction would be valid. However, Koch used the same spelling

again in 1851, indicating he deliberately spelled the name without the

extra "i", therefore the original spelling must stand.

There are no authenticated records of P. insignarius occurring

anywhere in Georgia. If it does occur there, I would expect it to be in

the mountains of the northwest part of the state, certainly not in the

coastal plain of the southeast part from where Abbot made his drawings.

Attus fraudulentus Walckenaer could be an immature of any of several

southeastern species of Phidippus.

MALE: chelicerae weakly iridescent green; 4 ocular tufts, the

dorsal pair longer and denser than usual; carapace with submarginal

white band of scales extending well back on thoracic slope; clypeus

densely covered with white scales and with long white fringe overhanging

chelicerae; palpal femur, patella, tibia, and cymbium covered dorsally

with white setae; leg I dense white scale cover on prolateroventral

surface of femur, patella and tibia; leg I femur with weak dorsal fringe

of mixed black and white setae, prolateroventral fringe white and short,

retrolateroventral fringe white, very long and dense; all other leg I

fringes white, dorsal stripe of white scales from distal tip patella to

distal tip tarsus; legs II-IV similar but with progressively reduced

fringes and scales, leg IV lacking most scales; dorsum of abdomen with

pattern like female but overlain with orange scales; venter of abdomen

with median black stripe that narrows toward spinnerets, white stripes

on each side.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 4 normal

setal tufts; submarginal band less distinct than in male; white scales









covering clypeus; clypeus and palpi fringed with white setae; legs with

simple white fringes; abdomen with white basal band and lateral bands,

tan to orange wide stripes laterally, white central triangular spot and

white to orange posterior spots.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II 0-0-lR-1P or

0-0-1R-0; patella III R 0-0-0, tibia III 0-0-0-1P, metatarsus III P

0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-2.


princeps group

The 2 species in this group, P. princeps and P. pulcherrimus, are

closely related allopatric species. Both have large, sickle-shaped

emboli and a very long epigynal septum. Phidippus pulcherrimus is known

from Florida and the southern parts of Alabama and Georgia. Phidippus

princeps occurs from northeastern Texas and North Carolina north to

Minnesota and New England. This group is probably related to the audax

group, as evidenced by some similarities in color pattern.


Phidippus princeps (Peckham & Peckham), 1883

Figures 2-16, 2-31

Attus insolens Hentz, 1835; NOMEN NUDUM

A. insolens Hentz, 1845; type destroyed; NOMEN DUBIUM

Attus princeps Peckham & Peckham, 1883; type in MCZ, examined

Philaeus princeps, Peckham & Peckham, 1888

Phidippus brunneus Emerton, 1891; type in MCZ, examined (synonymized by

Bryant, 1942)

P. princeps, Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909; Kaston, 1948; Barnes &

Barnes, 1955; Bonnet, 1958; Berry, 1970; Cutler, 1977; Hill,

1977a, b; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Oebler, 1980








P. insolens, Peckham & Peckham, 1909 (in part, d); Muma & Jeffers, 1945;

?Muma & Muma, 1949

Dendryphantes princeps, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

P. dorsalis Bryant, 1942 (in part, 9); paratypes in MCZ, examined

The only eastern species that comes close to resembling Hentz's

description is the species now known as P. princeps. The name P.

insolens has been misused for P. apacheanus, although a badly rubbed

specimen of the latter species could fit the description.

MALE: integument nearly black; no ocular setal tufts; clypeus

sparsely fringed with black setae; palpi fringed laterally with black

setae, covered dorsally with white scales on femur and patella; leg I

distal prolaterodorsal femur with white scales and setae, distal half

patella with black fringe, all fringes unusually short; dorsum of

abdomen completely covered with red scales, rarely brown with white or

red central triangle and 2 pair posterior spots; venter of abdomen black

bordered with row of pale dots.

FEMALE: sparse cover of white scales on carapace and legs; 4

ocular setal tufts; clypeus densely covered with white scales and setae

especially along ventral edge; palpi fringed with white setae; dorsum of

abdomen usually unmarked brown, occasionally with white median stripe

running length of abdomen but not reaching either anterior or posterior

ends of abdomen, rarely with white triangle followed by 2 pair posterior

spots, or intermediate condition between central stripe and spots;

venter of abdomen with broad black stripe bordered laterally and posteri-

orly by white.

LEG MACROSETAE: tibia II V 0-1R-1R-2; tibia III & IV V 0-0-0-2,

metatarsus III & IV V 0-0-2.









Phidippus pulcherrimus Keyserling, 1884

Figures 2-17, 2-31

Phidippus pulcherrimus Keyserling, 1884; type in MCZ, examined

P. pulcherrimus, Marx, 1890; Banks, 1901, 1904, 1910; Peckham & Peckham

1909; Bonnet, 1958; Edwards, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Edwards

& Hill, 1978

Dendryphantes pulcherrimus, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

The anecdote by Hill (Edwards & Hill, 1978), proclaiming to be the

first description of the male of P. pulcherrimus, is incomplete.

MALE: carapace with short white transverse bands behind PLE; no

ocular setal tufts; clypeus with sparse black fringe; palpi fringed with

black setae, femur covered dorsally with white scales; dorsal leg I like

P. princeps; dorsal abdominal semi-encircling band yellow (1 specimen)

or red, spots white to red, metallic scales on black median stripe;

venter of abdomen black.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 2 dorsal

setal tufts; carapace with bands like male or entire carapace sparsely

covered with white to tan scales; clypeus with white scales and setae,

especially along ventral edge; palpi with white setal fringe, white

scales on tarsus and distal tibia; legs covered with white setae; dorsal

abdominal spots usually white, rarely yellow to orange; venter of

abdomen with wide black stripe with or without white borders laterally.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II V 0-1R-1R-2;

tibia III V 0-0-0-2, R 0-0-1-0; tibia IV V 0-0-0-2; metatarsus III &

IV V 0-0-2.


purpuratus group

Three species occurring in the eastern U. S. belong to the purpuratus










group. One species, P. borealis, ranges across northern North America

west from New Hampshire to Washington and Alaska. A primarily south-

western species, P. apacheanus, ranges east from California and Utah to

North Carolina and Florida. The third species, P. purpuratus, is

restricted to the eastern half of North America. All the species in

this group can be readily recognized by the forms of the genitalia. In

males, the protegulum is extended anteriorly on the ectal side. The

embolus is a short, notched structure which arises anteriorly, but

appears to be mentally attached to the extension of the protegulum. The

epigynum is like other members of the subgenus in the placement of

anterior guides but differs in having a deep, rectangular, transverse

depression across the central third.

The johnsoni group of western North America is intermediate between

this group and the audax group. In the johnsoni group, the protegulum

is less extended, the embolus longer, and the epigynum lacks the central

depression.


Phidippus apacheanus Chamberlin & Gertsch, 1929

Figures 2-18, 2-32

Phidippus bardus Peckham & Peckham, 1901; type in MCZ, examined; NOMEN

OBLITUM; NEW SYNDNYMY

P. insolens (not Hentz), Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909 (in part?)

Dendryphantes insolens Simon, 1901; Roewer, 1954

Phidippus ferrugineous Scheffer, 1904; type in MCZ, examined; NOMEN

OBLITUM; NEW SYNONYMY

Phidippus apacheanus Chamberlin & Gertsch, 1929; type in AMNH, examined

Phidippus nikites Chamberlin & Ivie, 1935; type in AMNH, examined;

NEW SYNONYMY









P. nikites, Muma, 1949; Bonnet, 1958

Dendryphantes apacheanus, Roewer, 1954

D. nikites, Roewer, 1954

P. apacheanus, Bonnet, 1958; Gardner, 1965; Levi & Levi, 1968; Cutler,

1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Edwards & Hill, 1978; Kaston, 1978;

Gertsch, 1979

P. paludatus (not C. L. Koch), Kaston, 1972

The Peckhams (1909) incorrectly synonymized P. bardus and P.

ferrugineous with P. insolens (Hentz). This confusion resulted in a

redescription of the species by Chamberlin & Gertsch (1929) as P.

apacheanus, by which name it has been known since; the lone exception

was Kaston (1972) who used P. paludatus C. L. Koch, but later recognized

and corrected his error (Kaston, 1978).

The males of P. apacheanus (described from Utah) and P. nikites

(described from California) are identical. The P. nikites type of

epigynum differs from the typical P. apacheanus epigynum in that the

central depression is shallow and not set off by a distinct rim. I

consider this only a variation; a single female from Florida had a P.

nikites type epigynum, but all other Florida specimens were typical.

Other specimens from the type locality of P. nikites were typical of P.

apacheanus (S. Johnson, personal communication, and specimens sent for

confirmation). A similar type of variation occurs in females of P.

borealis, and may represent a remnant recessive genetic representation

of a less derived condition. The epigynum of the female allotype of P.

nikites is somewhat shrivelled, which has changed the direction of the

openings to the spermathecal ducts, accounting for this difference as

noted in Chamberlin & Ivie's description.









MALE: integument dark; carapace covered with yellow to red scales

dorsally in ocular quadrangle and above thoracic slope; 2 dorsal setal

tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae; leg I patellar brush

black except white on proximal half of prolateral surface, white scales

on proximal half patella; scales on proximal halves metatarsus and

tarsus white to orange; abdomen covered dorsally with yellow to red

scales except for mid-dorsal black stripe, which may also be overlaid

with scales; venter of abdomen black, outer rows of pale dots more

conspicuous than inner rows.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: palpi with

lateral yellow fringes; tibia I proximal half reddish, legs with scat-

tered white scales; yellow to red dorsal scale cover may be reduced so

that spider appears to be black with yellow or red abdominal stripes and

a pale basal band; black central stripe may be indented by 0-3 pair of

yellow or red spots.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0; metatarsus III P 0-0-2, R 0-

0-2; tibia IV P 0-0-0-0, metatarsus IV V 0-0-0 or 0-1-2.


Phidippus borealis Banks, 1895

Figures 2-19, 2-33

Phidippus borealis Banks, 1895; 2 syntypes supposed to be at MCZ,

lost; Neotype designated, the larger of 2 specimens in a vial from

the type locality

Phidippus altanus Gertsch, 1934 (synonymized by Edwards, 1977)

P. altanus, Gertsch & Jellison, 1939; Chickering, 1944; Levi & Levi, 1951

P. borealis, Edwards, 1977; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978

Phidippus borealis was incorrectly synonymized with P. purpuratus

Keyserling. The types are lost; since Banks' original description was









somewhat equivocal, I have designated a neotype male from Crawford

Notch, New Hampshire, the type locality; it is deposited in the Museum

of Comparative Zoology.

MALE: 2 weak dorsal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black

setae; leg I patella and proximal half tibia reddish, both fringed with

black setae; dorsal abdominal markings tan to orange; venter of abdomen

black, inner rows of dots inconspicuous.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 2 dorsal

tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with white setae; leg I unicolorous,

not banded like male; dorsal abdominal markings white to orange.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0; tibia III V 0-0-0-2, R 0-0-1-

0; metatarsus III V 0-0-0 or 0-1-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2; tibia IV R 0-0-1-

0; metatarsus IV V 0-1-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2.


Phidippus purpuratus Keyserling, 1884

Figures 2-20, 2-33

Phidippus purpuratus Keyserling, 1884 (p. 489)

Phidippus albomaculatus Keyserling, 1884 (p. 491); syntypes in MCZ,

BMNH, examined; NEW SYNONYMY, Lectotype designated

P. galathea (not Walckenaer), Peckham & Peckham, 1888

P. mystaceus (not Hentz), Emerton, 1875, 1891

P. purpuratus, Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Kaston, 1948, 1978; Bonnet, 1958;

Whitcomb et al., 1963; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978

P. electus (not C. L. Koch), Banks, 1910, 1913; NOMEN DUBIUM

Dendryphantes purpuratus, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

Banks (1910) considered P. electus to be a synonym of P. albo-

maculatus (purpuratus). Later (1913) he examined the pinned type, found









it to be a juvenile, and made no comment on its identity. Other authors

have considered it a synonym of P. mystaceus. It probably cannot be

recognized.

I examined specimens labelled "Type" of P. albomaculatus from both

the Museum of Comparative Zoology and from the British Museum (Natural

History). A specimen at the MCZ has been labelled lectotype by L.

Pinter, and I so designate it.

MALE: integument dark; 2 weak dorsal setal tufts; clypeus and

palpi fringed with black setae; leg I all fringes black, with few white

setae below normally placed white scales on proximal halves patella,

metatarsus, and tarsus, femur prolateroventral fringe very short,

prolateral surface of femur with metallic green or blue reflections;

dorsal abdominal markings tan to red, spots usually less distinct than

in female; venter dark edged with white laterally.

FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 2 dorsal

setal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with white setae; integument of

abdomen dark gray, dorsal abdominal markings white or tan; venter of

abdomen black with or without lateral white stripes, inner rows of dots

conspicuous.

LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0; patella III R 0-0-0, tibia

III V 0-0-0-2, metatarsus III V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2;

metatarsus IV V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2.


~



































Figure 2-4. Phidippus putnami: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.













A





... X "' n f


I:
** r ~ .i







'. C .'
19








Bt
\j ~
P."^ "

/. -. \
/ ~ 1 '' fc ; .
'* '
"i.,-- **' " '
i} ^ !










l..


N.r~
*-; J4



































Figure 2-5. Phidippus mystaceus: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.















A
It










-'I





\'. I '.


to. C'_ 1~


ZdB

ZOB


* .4,



































Figure 2-6. Phidippus cardinalis: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.






























f.-



































Figure 2-7. Phidippus plus: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.








A


F.".
Ut>:
"^ -,-





'':;i \iiB



































Figure 2-8. Phidippus whitmani: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.






















































ij.w^


Pr *.<




































Figure 2-9. Phidippus clarus: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female,
D. Dorsal view of abdomen of male.



































Figure 2-10. Phidippus audax: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.


































Figure 2-11. Phidippus otiosus: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.













'"* A

r ;

a




4 /
'', --. /
i .





.* -,. i.
r:: .: -"



-" c
i I
:!* ---, .1
4 .4., v






C



7."4




j~~~ $ ~5"



































Figure 2-12. Phidippus regius: A. Dorsal view of female,
B. Dorsal view of abdomen of male.



































Figure 2-13. Phidippus regius: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum.


































































































/ ,



































Figure 2-14. Phidippus xerus: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female,
D. Dorsal view of abdomen of male.















.4i

'1 4


*" ~


B

' y l. j


































Figure 2-15. Phidippus insignarius: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.







































































*1 0 .. I,.
,.P6


-- : ("

'' ' "'

~ Y



































Figure 2-16. Phidippus princess: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum.






































Figure 2-17. Phidippus pulcherrimus: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.



































Figure 2-18. Phidippus apacheanus: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.


































Figure 2-19. Phidippus borealis: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.


































Figure 2-20. Phidippus purpuratus: A. Ventral view of male palp,
B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.
























































Figure 2-21. Distribution map of Phidippus putnami.

























































Figure 2-22. Distribution map of Phidippus mystaceus.
























































Figure 2-23. Distribution map of Phidippus cardinalis.





















































































Figure 2-24. Distribution map of Phidippus plus.


j
























































Figure 2-25. Distribution map of Phidippus whitmani.






















































Figure 2-26. Distribution map of Phidippus clarus.

























































Figure 2-27. Distribution map of Phidippus audax.
























































Figure 2-28. Distribution map of Phidippus otiosus.































































Figure 2-29. Distribution map of Phidippus regius.




Full Text

PAGE 1

TAXONOMY, ETHOLOGY, AND ECOLOGY OF Phidippus (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA BY GLAVIS BERNARD EDWARDS, JR. A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1980

PAGE 2

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In a work of this scope, it is impossible to individually thank every person who has contributed to its completion, but I do sincerely thank every one of you. I would like to single out my committee members: Dr. W. H. Whitcomb, who tolerated the development of lines of research astray from his own; Dr. Jonathan Reiskind, for his positive reinforcement and assistance; and Dr. T. J. Walker, for demanding excellence. Various types of technical assistance were provided by Mrs. Thelma C. Carlysle, Mr. P. M. Choate, Dr. Jonathan Reiskind, and Dr. Robert Paul. Special thanks are due Mrs. Katrina Vaughanfor typing the manuscript and going to special effort to help make deadlines. For identifications of prey and enemy records I thank Mrs. E. C. Beck, and Drs. W. F. Buren, R. J. Gagne, E. E. Grissell, D. H. Habeck, F. W. Harmston, L. A. Hetrick, K. W. Knopf, P. M. Marsh, F. W. Mead, E. L. Mockford, J. C. E. Nickerson, C. W. Sabrosky, R. I. Sailer, L. A. Stange, T. J. Walker, H. V. Weems, Jr., and R. E. Woodruff. Thanks are due the technical staff of the Bureau of Entomology, Division of Plant Industry, for their assistance and encouragement. This list would not be complete without mentioning the dear friends who have put up with me and helped in so many ways: Ron and Peggy Williams, Earl Williams, Allen Mosler, Fred and Peggy Hansen, Anzle Mead, Wanda Weintraub, Ruth Schaeffer, Mary Warren; my parents, Glavis and Margaret Edwards, for their patient and continued support; and most of all, my wife, Sue, who has managed to keep both of us going.

PAGE 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ABSTRACT CHAPTER GENERAL INTRODUCTION TAXONOMY OF EASTERN Phidippus Introduction Key to Adult Male Phidippus of the Eastern U. S. Key to Adult Female Phidippus of the Eastern U. S. Subgenus Anipalpus , new subgenus Subgenus Phidippus IMMATURE STAGES OF Phidippus SPECIES HYBRIDIZATION IN Phidippus SPECIES Introduction Methods Laboratory Results Ecological Factors Affecting Hybridization Species Relationships, Geologic History, and Speciation Hybridizations Between Other Species THE COURTSHIPS OF EASTERN Phidippus Introduction Methods, Materials, and Terminology Results Discussion SOUND PRODUCTION BY COURTING MALES OF Phidippus mystaceus (Araneae: Salticidae) Introduction Experimental Procedure Results Discussion Conclusion Additional Observations PAGE ii v 1 4 4 18 20 22 27 98 102 102 103 103 108 111 115 117 117 117 121 133 135 135 135 136 139 144 145

PAGE 4

CHAPTER 7 10 DIFFERENTIAL ATTACK RESPONSES BY Phidippus SPP. (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) TO CONTRASTING PREY TYPES Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion INSTINCT AND CONDITIONED LEARNING AS FACTORS IN THE PREY-CAPTURE BEHAVIOR OF NAIVE SPIDERLINGS (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) Introduction Methods and Materials Results and Discussion MIMICRY IN Phidippus Introduction Methods Results and Discussion ECOLOGY OF Phidippus SPECIES

PAGE 5

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy TAXONOMY, ETHOLOGY, AND ECOLOGY OF Phidippus (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA By Glavis Bernard Edwards, Jr. December, 1980 Chairman: Dr. Willard H. Whitcomb Major Department: Entomology and Nematology The 16 species of Phidippus occurring in the eastern United States are redescribed and illustrated together for the first time. Thirteen of these species occur in Florida. First instars are briefly described for most of these species for the first time. Both field and laboratory hybrids of P. regius x P. otiosus and F backcrosses of hybrid females to males of both parent species are described. Hybrid males were sterile; hybrid females backcrossed to males of either parent species were significantly less fecund than either parent species. The two species are considered to be advanced sibling species which lack only the late stages of preand/or post zygotic isolating mechanisms (behavior and/or complete hybrid sterility) to completely separate each species. The courtship behavior of 13 of the 16 eastern species, as well as the P. otiosus x P. regius hybrid, are described, 8 for the first time. A new method of communication for salticids, sound (made by a stridulatory mechanism on each palpus) , is reported for P_. mystaceus . A combined visual-vibratory display is reported for P_. whitmani .

PAGE 6

Differences in prey-capture behavior are noted for adult Phidippus prof erred house flies and cabbage looper larvae. Cabbage looper larvae were captured by all species tested from an average distance of 5 6 mm, whereas average capture distances of house flies averaged 2-3.5 times this distance, depending upon the species of Phidippus . Prey-capture behavior was noticeably different depending upon the type of prey approached, with a much more stealthy approach used against house flies. Naive spiderlings, in similar prey-capture tests involving other types of prey, were shown to rely at least in part on experience after initial encounters with various prey types. In tests with small ants as the intended prey, the spiderlings initially attacked the ants, but were driven away by the ants. Spiderlings thereafter avoided ants for up to 4 days (the longest test), demonstrating learning of the basic trial-and-error type. That adult Phidippus generally avoid ants both in the field and laboratory is evidence that this type of learning is long-lasting. Preliminary investigations with 2 lizard species indicated that P_. apacheanus was a generalized Batesian mimic of red and black species of the velvet ant genus Dasymutilla (Hymenoptera: Mutillidae) . Nearly all instars of P_. apacheanus exhibited the red and black coloration; mimicry in adult males was most complete, as it included behavioral elements as well as color pattern similarity. Adult males of P_. cardinalis are similar in color to males of P. apacheanus , and can probably also be considered Batesian mimics of Dasymutilla , although other possibilities are examined. Most species were found to occur in several habitats, but dominant in only one, or never dominant. In habitats with more than one dominant, the phenology of the dominants was different. Some microhabitat separation was exhibited, both between species and between immatures and

PAGE 7

adults of the same species. Prey included members of the orders Diptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Odonata, Orthoptera, Hemiptera, Homoptera and Araneae. Prey size was significantly correlated with spider size. Enemies included pompilid and sphecid wasps, acrocerid and mermithid parasitoids, mantispid and dipteran egg predators, hymenopteran egg parasites, predaceous fungi, frogs, lizards, birds, and other spiders. Mean reproductive rates correlated well with mean length of each species; _P. clarus was an exception. Niche breadth varied widely among species, and overall niche overlap was low among species. Temperature in peninsular Florida probably is less critical than in most temperate areas; however, at least one activity, hunting, ceased at temperatures below 15° C. vii

PAGE 8

CHAPTER 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION The present research can be best described as a multi-discipline study of the biosystematics of members of the salticid genus Phidippus in eastern North America, with emphasis on the species occurring in Florida. It is a natural extension and expansion of previous research (on the biology of P_. regius ; Edwards, 1975) and an offshoot of other research (e.g., Whitcomb et al., 1963) implicating species of Phidippus and other salticids, as well as many other spiders, as important predators in agro-ecosystems. The final organization is in reverse order from how the research was initially conceived, from a study of the ecology of each species to a comparison of certain behaviors to the redescriptions and phylogenetic relationships of the species. The taxonomic section is presented first to introduce and describe the species. It is followed by ethological research, some of which (courtship behavior) is directly related to the phylogeny. The ecology section describes the phenology and both faunal and floral associations of the species. Finally, all three sections are interwoven to form an overview of the genus. Adult Phidippus are medium to large spiders (Figure 1-1) and often brightly colored. Generally they are docile spiders, which will attempt to hide or flee if threatened by the proximity of a human. Some can be easily handled; the specific epithet of one species (audax , meaning bold or audacious) was used to describe the manner of one of these spiders which would hop onto a person's hand if the hand was placed down

PAGE 9

carefully near the spider. That they can and will bite if carelessly handled is demonstrated by numerous reports in California of people bitten by P_. formosus (=P. johnsoni ). Elsewhere in the U. S., other species occasionally have been reported to bite humans, to which I can personally attest in the case of P. regius . The pain of the bite is light to moderate and of short duration, usually not lasting more than a few minutes. At least three species occur commonly about human dwellings: P. johnsoni along the west coast, P. audax throughout the eastern and central states, and P. regius in Florida. Further introduction is best placed with the subject to which it appertains.

PAGE 10

Figure 1-1. Phldippus habitus (dorsal view)

PAGE 11

CHAPTER 2 TAXONOMY OF ADULT Phidippus Introduction The genus Phidippus has not been revised since the Peckhams ' pioneering work (1901, 1909). Their 1909 paper, "Revision of the Attidae of North America," still stands as the definitive work on nearctic salticids, although numerous species and a few genera have been added subsequently to the faunal list. Little further work has been done on Phidippus other than new species descriptions, except for Bryant (1942), who attempted to redescribe several species; unfortunately, her paper contained several errors, and the single new species she described is placed into synonymy herein. The type species of Phidippus is Salticus variegatus Lucas = Phidippus audax (Hentz) . Genus Phidippus C. L. Koch, 1846 Attus Walckenaer (in part), 1805 Phidippus C. L. Koch, 1846 Phiale C. L. Koch (in part), 1846 Cyrtonota Simon (in part) , 1864 Phidippia Simon, 1864 Megatimus Thorell, 1891 Dendryphantes (C. L. Koch, 1837) (in part), Peckham & Peckham, 1896 Synonymical listings indicate only the first use of a name prior to 1940. For complete listings before 1940 see Bonnet (1958). I have attempted to list all subsequent significant citations for species including those of Roewer (1954) , which are more recent than those of Bonnet even 4

PAGE 12

though published earlier. For explanation of morphological structures and abbreviations, see Appendix A (Glossary). For explanation of name and place abbreviations, see Appendix B. Medium to mostly large jumping spiders, 3.3 mm (small males) to 22 mm (large, gravid females). Integument of prosoma and prosomal appendages sclerotized, reddish brown; ocular quadrangle darker; venter often yellowish brown. Integumental surface highly reflective. Carapace width .75 to .90 length, height .50 (females) to .67 (males) width. Ocular quadrangle .40 to .50 carapace length, more coarsely reticulated than surrounding integument. PME .30 to .40 distance from ALE to PLE (nearer ALE). PLE row .75 to .90 carapace width. ALE row .56 to .85 carapace width. Clypeus radius or less of AME. Central short, longitudinal furrow within transverse depression just behind PLE row. Thoracic slope .33 carapace length, approximately 45°; cephalic area anterior to PLE slanted slightly downward. Distinct setal tufts present in ocular area, usually 2 or 4 (0-6) situated one laterally below and lightly anterior to each PME, one halfway between each PME and PLE dorsally (always present in females) , and/or a pair in the middle of the ocular quadrangle. Setal tufts are present in all free-living individuals of the genus except 1st instars, and, in several species, adult males. Scale-like setae ("scales") usually present on palpi, legs, clypeus (in females), and on various dorsal markings; sometimes covering most of dorsal surface and part of abdominal venter. Black vestitural setae more or less covering all of body surface, reduced on chelicerae and sometimes in ocular quadrangle. Elongate black setae also covering body to lesser extent, concentrated on lateral cephalic area and on anterior and lateral edges of ocular quadrangle.

PAGE 13

Chelicerae rugose, robust, slightly porrect especially in males, and iridescent, usually gold-green-blue. Cheliceral promargin with 2 contiguous teeth (partially fused in male), retromargin with 1 tooth. Endites convergent in females, divergent and with anterolateral cusp in males. Labium longer than wide, 1/2 length of endites. Sternum slightly narrower to as wide as labium anteriorly, narrowed sharply posteriorly, 4th coxae nearly touching. Abdomen ovoid, with dorsal pattern which varies from species to species, several variations on the presumed ancestral central dark stripe overlain by 4 pairs of light spots. In many species the 2nd spot pair is fused to form a central triangle. Usually with 2 pair of lateral bands and a basal (anterior) band, which may be fused together. The whole dorsum may be overlaid with red or gray scales which obscure the pattern, especially in males. Venter with 4 rows of dots between epigastric furrow and spinnerets; usually with light stripes bounding a dark central stripe. The legs have a structure also occurring in Dendryphantes sensu latu that I have seen only in these 2 genera and in another dendryphantine genus, Rhetenor . On the dorsal surface of the femur, patella, and tibia are 2 longitudinal, subparallel depressions in the integument, most pronounced on the patella. These depressions are very slight in depth, but readily recognizable by the dense micro-reticulation of the integument within the depression, much denser and finer than on the surrounding integument. These depressions are also devoid of setae or scales. The depressions run nearly the entire length of each segment, except for the prolateral femoral one which is reduced to half the length of the femur. It is tempting to speculate a sensory function for

PAGE 14

this structure, but there appears to be no difference in sclerotization from the surrounding integument, nor do there appear to be any glandular structures associated with these depressions. They are even more reflective than the surrounding integument, and may function during interindividual recognition (occurs in both sexes) somewhat like the chelicerae, which are much more coarsely reticulate over a larger surface. Another possible, passive, use is that these small reflective spots may contribute to an overall camouflage effect; they are more prominent on females which do not have as extensive leg fringes which tend to hide these structures. Leg formula I, IV, II, III for males; IV, I, II, III (or IV, I, III, II) for females. First pair of legs half again as stout and 2nd legs slightly stouter than 3rd and 4th pairs. All legs fringed at least ventrally, especially the first pair, much more developed in males. Larger males may have proportionately larger and longer forelegs than smaller conspecific males; this appears to be an allometric growth phenomenon. Leg I of males usually fringed as follows: femur with black fringes dorsally, and on proand retrolateral edges of venter (area between ventral fringes glabrous and reflective distally) ; patella with white brush and tibia with black brush covering pro-, retrolateral, and ventral surfaces; metatarsus and tarsus with similar but reduced brushes, white on proximal half and black on distal half of each segment. White scales on prolateral surface on segments with white brushes (patella and proximal halves of metatarsus and tarsus). Palpal femora have 1-3 dorsal macrosetae each. Leg macrosetation is restricted to the femur, patella, tibia, and metatarsus of each leg. Based on the spacing of macrosetae and the arrangement of macrosetae in

PAGE 15

other genera, the ancestral leg macrosetation is presumed to have been arranged in 4 sets on the femur and tibia and 3 sets on the patella and metatarsus. Otherwise the system of macroseta identification is similar to that used by Platnick & Shadab (1975) . Ventral macrosetae are usually paired; dorsal and lateral macrosetae are single, with the dorsal macrosetae along the midline of the segment. Lateral macrosetae are sometimes marginal but are usually not identified as such unless confusion with another seta could occur. Marginal macrosetae, when necessary, are identified by the identification letters of both adjacent surfaces (e.g., DP = dorsoprolateral) . If only one of a ventral pair is present, it is indicated as either proor retrolateral when distinguishable. Typical macrosetation is as follows: femur I*D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-2, tibia I*V 0-2-2-2, metatarsus I*V 0-2-2; femur II D*01-1-1, DP* 0-0-0-2, DR 0-0-0-1, tibia II V 0-1R-2-2, P*0-0-l-0, metatarsus II* V 0-2-2; femur III*D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-2, DR 0-0-0-1, patella III R 0-1-0, tibia III V 0-1P-0-2*, P 0-0-1-0, R 0-l-l*-0, metatarsus III V 0-2-2*, P 0-1-2*, R 0-1-2*, femur IV* D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-1, DR 0-0-0-1, patella IV R 0-1-0, tibia IV V 0-1P-0-2*, P 0-0-1-0, R 0-l-l*-0, metatarsus IV V 0-2-2*, P 0-1-2*, R 0-1-2*. Segments or individual sets of macrosetae marked with an asterisk (*) are invariable or nearly so. Those not so marked are more variable. Consistent differences from the above formula are noted with species descriptions. Larger specimens tend to have a fuller complement of macrosetae. Scale-like setae, if present on legs, much denser on females and encompassing all but ventral surface of legs. Scales on legs of males predominantly on but not limited to legs I. Scales on palpi similar in females to leg scales, in males situated differently, apparently situated for display as it has evolved for each species.

PAGE 16

Females have a well-sclerotized epigynum usually with welldeveloped anterolateral rims forming guides or shields over spermathecal duct openings, the latter usually bending away from each other. Males have palpi each with a simple embolus; the tegulum has an anterior rugose area (which I term the protegulum) associated with the embolus, and an external loop of the sperm duct; and usually a simple lateral (ectal) tibial apophysis. The genus is most readily recognized by the possession of a dorsal pair of setal tufts, iridescent chelicerae, conspicuous leg fringes, and generally by their large size and dense vestitural setal covering. Phidippus is a typical genus of the Salticidae: Dendryphantinae and is most closely related to Dendryphantes sensu latu (i.e., including Metaphidippus and Eris ) . Figures 2-1 and 2-2 illustrate the body parts used in the descriptions. Body measurements and ratios for the species under consideration in this study are given in Table 2-1. Characters on which hypothetical phylogeny are based are given in Table 2-2, and the resulting phylogeny is illustrated in Figure 2-3. The following species included in Phidippus by Chamberlin and Ivie (1944), based on the descriptions by Walckenaer (1837) of Abbot's (1792) unpublished illustrations, are considered to be nomena dubia ; their descriptions give little or no clue as to their specific identity, and the types are illustrations which contribute little to their identification. Also included here are species left in the genus Attus by Chamberlin & Ivie (ibid), but which are probably juvenile Phidippus ; these latter are marked with an asterisk.

PAGE 17

10 Table 2-1. Measurements and ratios of body parts of species of Phidippus occurring in the eastern U. S. See Glossary (Appendix A) for explanation of abbreviations. Ranges represent smallest (on left) and largest specimens examined. Phidippus ALE-PME species, sex ALE-PLE ALE CW PLE CW CW apacheanus

PAGE 18

Table 2-1 extended. 11 cw

PAGE 19

12 Figure 2-1. Diagrammatic illustration showing characters measured and macrosetae of legs of Phidippus (dorsal view) .

PAGE 20

13 palpus epigynum epigastric furrow coxa trochanter femur patella tibia metatarsus tarsus spinnerets Figure 2-2. Diagrammatic illustration of Phidippus showing ventral characters and leg macrosetae.

PAGE 21

14 Table 2-2. Characters used to construct hypothetical phylogeny of species of Phidippus in the eastern U. S. See Glossary (Appendix A) for definitions of terms. Characters are considered primitive or derived based on frequency of occurrence within Phidippus (more common are considered more primitive) or by comparison with sister group ( Dendryphantes ) ; characters shared between the two genera are considered more primitive. Character Primitive Derived 1.

PAGE 22

15

PAGE 23

16 Attus cinereus Walckenaer, 1837 A. multlvagus Walckenaer, 1837* A. dissimulator Walckenaer, 1837 A. pileatus Walckenaer, 1837 A. excubitor Walckenaer, 1837 A. pilosus Walckenaer, 1837 A. explorater Walckenaer, 1837* A. purpurarius Walckenaer, 1837 A. fraudulentus Walckenaer, 1837 A. rlmator Walckenaer, 1837 A. infestus Walckenaer, 1837* A. sagax Walckenaer, 1837 A. insidiosus Walckenaer, 1837 A. scrutator Walckenaer, 1837* A. Investigator Walckenaer, 1837 A. signatus Walckenaer, 1837 A. latus Walckenaer, 1837 A. trldentlger Walckenaer, 1837 The descriptions of the following species are also equivocal: Phidippus carolinus C. L. Koch, 1846 Attus rupicola Hentz, 1846 JP. testaceus C. L. Koch, 1846 Attus sinister Hentz, 1850 Other species considered riomina dubia are listed with their suspected synonyms. Species misplaced in Phidippus P_. fasciatus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis fasciata (Koch & Berendt) P_. formosus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis fasciata (Koch & Berendt) P.. frenata Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis frenata (Koch & Berendt) P_. impressus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis melanocephala (Koch & Berendt) P_. marginatus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis marginata (Koch & Berendt) P_. melanocephalus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis melanocephala (Koch & Berendt) P. paululus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis frenata (Koch & Berendt) _P. pusillus Koch & Berendt = Gorgopis frenata (Koch & Berendt) _P. bucculentus Gerst'acker = Thyene bucculenta (Gerst'acker) P. inf latus Gerstacker = Thyene inflata (Gerst'acker)

PAGE 24

17 P. orbicularis Gerstacker = Thyene orbicularis (Gerstacker) P. chrysis , Banks = Dendryphantes aurantius (Lucas) P. disjunctus Banks = Dendryphantes disjunctus (Banks) _P. fartilis , Banks = Dendryphantes fartilis (Peckham & Peckham) P_. fraternus Banks = Dendryphantes aurantius (Lucas) F_. funebris Banks = Dendryphantes funebris (Banks) F_. luteus , Banks = Dendryphantes luteus (Peckham & Peckham) P_. marmoratus , Banks = Dendryphantes fartilis (Peckham & Peckham) _P. militaris , Peckham & Peckham = Dendryphantes marginatus (Walckenaer) _P. molinor Chamberlin = Dendryphantes marginatus (Walckenaer) _P. multicolor Banks = Dendryphantes aurantius (Lucas) P. nigropilosus Banks = Dendryphantes nigropilosus (Banks) P. orichalceus Peckham & Peckham = Dendryphantes aurantius (Lucas) P_. capitatus , Banks = Dendryphantes galathea (Walckenaer) P_. parvus F. 0. P. -Cambridge = Dendryphantes galathea (Walckenaer) _P. cyanidens C. L. Koch = Parnaenus cyanidens (C. L. Koch) P. keratodes Hasselt = Hyllus keratodes (Hasselt) The several species described from India by Tikader (e.g., 1974) as Phidippus species do not belong in this genus; I am unable to place them at present. I have included in the keys to species alternate characters for each species in cases where the destruction or absence of one character might cause confusion. The reader should be aware of populations variable in color pattern, especially of P_. audax . I have attempted to use characters which would avoid problems in the keys caused by color pattern, although the latter character is used to some extent. Geographic

PAGE 25

18 area is included where it might be helpful. The term "semi-encircled" means that the periphery of the dorsum of the abdomen is covered with colored scales except for the posterior end, which is covered by part of the central black stripe. The dorsum of the carapace does not include the clypeus, sides or thoracic slope. Key to Adult Male Phidippus of the Eastern U. S. 1. Ocular setal tufts or crests present 2 1'. Ocular setal tufts or crests absent 8 2. Ocular quadrangle with pair of setal crests and single white triangular spot, without setal tufts putnami 2'. Without crests or single spot, with 2 or 4 setal tufts 3 3. With 4 setal tufts, both dorsal and lateral 4 3'. With 2 dorsal setal tufts only 6 4. Ocular quadrangle with 3 red (rarely white or absent) spots arranged transversely, abdomen gray with white spots and very hirsute, palpal tibial apophysis bifid at tip mystaceus 4'. Ocular quadrangle without spots, abdomen not gray or exceptionally hirsute, palpal tibial apophysis simple 5 5. Leg I fringe white, abdomen orange to red; not in Florida insignarius 5'. Leg I fringe black and orange, abdomen black with yellow to orange spots; SE U. S., Atlantic coast to MD otiosus 6. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen red apacheanus 6' . Dorsum of carapace black, abdomen semi-encircled with tan or yellow to red 7 7. Embolus projecting distally post protegulum; Canada and adjacent states borealis

PAGE 26

19 7'. Embolus not projecting distally post protegulum purpuratus 8. Embolus sickle-shaped 9 8'. Embolus not sickle-shaped 10 9. Carapace unmarked, dorsum of abdomen completely red (rarely brown with white spots) ; not in Florida princeps 9'. Carapace with a short white band behind each PLE, abdomen semiencircled with red; SE U. S. pulcherrimus 10. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen orange to red 11 10' . Dorsum of carapace black, of abdomen variable 13 11. Posterior half abdominal dorsum with 2 pair of white spots, venter with 3 black stripes, leg I fringe white whitmani 11'. Posterior half abdominal dorsun with 2 black stripes enclosing 2 pair white spots, venter otherwise, leg I fringe black and white 12 12. Venter of abdomen with 3 gray stripes on pale background, embolus flared distally cardinalis 12'. Venter of abdomen black, embolus slender and hooked distally pius 13. Addomen with pair of red stripes, 2nd spot pair separate or no spots clarus 13'. Abdomen without stripes, 2nd spot pair fused 14 14. White transverse bands behind PLE; small species, Florida endemic xerus 14.' White submarginal bands below PLE or usually carapace unmarked 15 15. White posterior abdominal spots linear (all light spots may be fused and yellow to orange) , abdomen dorsum with metallic black scales surrounding 8 quadrangular black spots audax

PAGE 27

20 15' . White posterior abdominal spots oval, black areas monotonous, without metallic scales; large species, SE U. S., Atlantic coast to VA regius Key to Adult Female Phidippus of the Eastern U. S. 1. Epigynum without anterolateral guides 2 1' . Epigynum with anterolateral guides 3 2. Ocular area with 6 setal tufts, quadrangle with a white or tan triangular spot, abdomen brown with white spots putnami 2'. Ocular area with 4 or 6 setal tufts, quadrangle with 3 white spots arranged transversely, abdomen gray with white spots, hirsute mystaceus 3. Epigynum with deep transverse depression in middle third 4 3'. Epigynum without depression 6 4. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen yellow to red apacheanus 4'. Dorsum of carapace gray or black, of abdomen otherwise 5 5. Abdomen semi-encircled with tan to orange, 2nd spot pair fused; Canada and adjacent states. borealis 5'. Abdomen gray, sometimes semi-encircled with white, 2nd spot pair not fused purpuratus 6. Epigynum elevated immediately posterior to septum in center of epigynal plate 7 6'. Epigynum essentially flat or gradually sloping upward posteriorly, with or without distinct septum 8 7. Carapace with distinct submarginal bands, posterior abdominal spots enlarged and quadrangular; SE U. S., Atlantic coast to MD otiosus

PAGE 28

21 7'. Carapace rarely with distinct bands, usually either without markings or covered with colored scales, posterior abdominal spots oval, not enlarged; large species, SE U. S., Atlantic coast to VA regius 8. Abdominal venter white with black or gray lateral stripes, usually with narrow median dark stipe; 2nd spot pair separate 9 8'. Abdominal venter black with or without lateral white stripes; 2nd spot pair fused or no dorsal pattern 12 9. Posterior abdomen with 2 pair white spots, dorsum of carapace and abdomen red to brown, 3 black ventral stripes whitmani 9'. Posterior abdomen with 2 black stripes enclosing 2-3 pair white spots, dorsum and venter variable 10 10. Two black ventral stripes (median stripe absent), abdomen dorsum gold to reddish-brown, usually darker in central stripe between spots clarus 10'. Three light gray ventral stripes, abdomen dorsum variable in color 11 11. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen red to brown, width of posterior epigynal notch 3 times its length, equal in width to distance between duct openings cardinalis 11'. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen yellow to orange, width of posterior epigynal notch 2 times its length, less in width than distance between duct openings pius 12. Dorsum of carapace and abdomen brown, without paired spots (rarely with fused 2nd pair and separate 3rd and 4th pairs, all white); not in Florida princeps 12'. Dorsum otherwise 13

PAGE 29

22 13. Ocular area with 4 distinct setal tufts, abdomen semi-encircled with yellow to red 14 13'. Ocular area with 2 dorsal tufts only, the lateral setae not concentrated into a tuft, but spread out into a weak fringe, abdomen variable 15 14. Uniquely-shaped white spot in middle of ocular quadrangle, short yellow-orange transverse bands behind PLE or entire carapace encircled with gray and/or yellow-orange scales; Florida endemic xerus 14'. No spot in ocular quadrangle, carapace with white submarginal bands below PLE or carapace encircled with white scales; not in Florida insignarius 15. Short white to tan transverse bands behind PLE or entire carapace encircled with white or tan scales, abdomen semi-encircled with yellow to red, black quadrangular spots present but mostly covered by semi-encircling band of scales; SE U. S. pulcherrimus 15'. Carapace without markings or with white submarginal bands below PLE, never encircled by scales, abdomen rarely semi-encircled by white or orange, 2nd-4th pair spots rarely fused together and/or orange, black metallic scales encircling 8 black quadrangular spots. audax Subgenus Anipalpus, new subgenus The name of the subgenus is a contraction of "animated pedipalpus," referring to the unusual use of the palpi during courtship by males of the included species. I designate Phidippus putnami as the type species of this subgenus.

PAGE 30

23 Two species in this subgenus occur in the eastern U.S., P. putnami and P. mystaceus . Females of both species have 6 ocular setal tufts (the central pair is occasionally missing) . The epigyna of both species lack guides; the spermathecal duct openings are in a narrow slit. The emboli of the males have been modified (flattened) to fit into the slit. Males of P_. putnami have a double setal crest in the ocular quadrangle, while males of P_. mystaceus have a stridulatory organ on each palpus. Males of both species have yellow fringes on the legs I. The subgenus is characterized by the 6 tufts, the slit openings in the epigynum and the flattened embolus. Phidippus putnami (Peckham & Peckham) , 1883 Figures 2-4, 2-21 Attus putnamii Peckham & Peckham, 1883; type in MCZ, examined Phidippus gracilis Keyserling, 1884 (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909) Plexippus putnamii , Peckham & Peckham, 1888 Philaeus princeps (not Peckham & Peckham), Banks, 1892 Phidippus putnamii , Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909; Bryant 1942; Muma 1944, 1945; Bonnet, 1958; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Oehler, 1980 P_. otiosus , Peckham & Peckham, 1909 (in part,? ; Plate 34, fig. 6a, f) Dendryphantes putnami , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 The female was illustrated as early as 1909 by the Peckhams, but thought to be a variety of P_. otiosus . Males have yellow leg fringes and light metallic blue femur in more northern specimens, mostly white leg fringes (with a few yellow setae) and dark metallic blue femur in more southern specimens.

PAGE 31

24 MALE: integument dark; carapace with white bar just below and behind each PME, large white triangle between PLE, third white bar (often rubbed off) anteriorly at apex of triangle, short white stripe directly behind center of triangle; yellow fringe of setae over anterior eyes, dense cover of bluish gray setae across anterior dorsal ocular area; no ocular tufts, instead dorsal black setal crests originating from between PME and PLE extending forward ental to PME almost to level of ALE; chelicerae proximal half each side with scales in 3 vertical white and 2 vertical red stripes, with a red transverse bar below stripes, distal half iridescent blue covered with bluish-gray setae; clypeus covered with red scales, fringed with white setae; palpal femur covered dorsally with white scales, tibia with long ectal fringe of white-tipped black setae, cymbium fringed with black setae and covered dorsally with bluish-gray setae; leg I fringes all yellow or all white except black setae mixed in on prolateral tibia, covered dorsally with white scales; femur I dorsal fringe rudimentary, ventral setal fan pale yellow, distal prolateral and ventral surfaces covered densely with white scales and white or yellow prolateral setal fan, retrolateroventral edge with elongate tuft of pale yellow setae, swollen ventrally, light to dark metallic blue on pro-, retrolateral, and ventral surfaces; dorsal abdominal markings white; venter of abdomen blue-black or black bordered laterally by wide white stripes. FEMALE: integument normal color; carapace with dorsal markings as in male or covered with white scales, chelicerae covered with white setae on proximal half, metallic green distal half; 6 ocular tufts, the midocular pair somewhat smaller than the other 2 pair, rarely lacking; clypeus, palpi, and legs with white setal fringes; abdominal integument brown, bronze, or black, dorsal abdominal spots white or tan.

PAGE 32

25 LEG MACROSETATION: no consistent differences; sometimes metatarsi III & IV V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2. Phidippus mystaceus (Hentz) , 1846 Figures 2-5, 2-22 Attus mystaceus Hentz, 1846; type destroyed Phidippus asinarius C. L. Koch, 1846; (synonymized by Marx, 1890) Phidippus electus C. L. Koch, 1846; (synonymized by Marx, 1890) Cyrtonota multivaga , Simon, 1864; not Attus multivagus Walckenaer, 1837, a NOMEN DUBIUM Phidippus mystaceus , Emerton, 1877; Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Muma, 1944: Muma & Jeffers, 1945; Bonnet, 1958; Specht & Dondale, 1960; Whitcomb et al. , 1963; Berry, 1970; Edwards, in Richman & Cutler, 1978; Oehler, 1980 Phidippus incertus Peckham & Peckham, 1901; type in MCZ, examined (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909) Dendryphantes mystaceus , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 Phidippus hirsutus Barrows, 1919; type in OSU, examined (synonymized by Edwards, in Richman & Cutler, 1978) P_. incertus , Bryant, 1942; Warren et al., 1967 P. hirsutus , Bryant, 1942; Kaston, 1948; Whitcomb et al., 1963 Dendryphantes hirsutus , Roewer, 1954 Hentz' s written description could fit either P_. mystaceus or P_. purpuratus , but his illustration of the extra long setal tufts on the carapace indicates that the species he was describing was P_. mystaceus . Stability of nomenclature also favors retaining P_. mystaceus for this species.

PAGE 33

26 MALE: carapace integument with dark blue tinge, ocular area with 3 red-orange transverse spots; chelicerae iridescent green; 4 long ocular tufts; clypeus with mixed yellow and white fringe over-hanging proximal two-thirds of chelicerae; palpi with white lateral fringes on patella and tibia, dorsal cymbium with white and yellow setae and central spot of white and yellow scales; aplpi with short, blunt macrosetae encircling tip; leg I femur lacks dorsal fringe, with dorsal subproximal black setal tuft projecting anteriorly, venter with band of yellow scales, prolateroventral fringe lacking, prolateral surface metallic dark blue, dorsal distal edge of femur and all other segments covered with yellow scales, all fringes yellow; legs II-IV with yellow scales on distal segments and white scales on proximal segments; dorsum of abdomen with pattern like female overlain with long gray setae; venter of abdomen gray with 4 rows of pale dots. A single dimorphic male of P_. mystaceus is known. It is similar to the typical males with the following differences: carapace covered dorsally, laterally, and posteriorly with red scales, edged with yellow scales posteriorly; rounded transverse integumental ridge in ocular quadrangle (similar to P. toro Edwards); 4 typical setal tufts absent, instead 2 central tufts in ocular quadrangle. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: integument normal color, carapace covered with gray scales, ocular spots white outlined in black; third pair weak ocular tufts often present between ocular spots; clypeus covered with white scales, clypeus and palpi fringed with white setae, overhanging chelicerae as in male; legs covered with scales and having simple fringes, both white on females from eastern states, both yellow on females from midwestern states.

PAGE 34

27 LEG MACROSETAE: metatarsus III & IV V 0-1-2. Subgenus Phldippus The remainder of the species of the eastern U. S. belong to the nominal subgenus. They are characterized by the usually cylindrical shape of the embolus and well developed anterolateral epigynal rims forming guides for the emboli. Most species have a longitudinal median septum dividing the anterior 1/3 to 1/2 of the spigynum. The purpuratus group has the protegulum extended ectanteriorly and the epigyna have a deep transverse depression across the central third. cardinalis group Four species in this group (P. cardinalis , P_. pius , P_. whitmani , P_. clarus ) occur in the eastern U. S. All are covered dorsally with yellow to red or brown scales and have a bilineate dark stripe pattern on the abdominal dorsum, and a trilineate dark stripe pattern on the abdominal venter (central stripe usually absent in P_. clarus ) . The epigynum lacks a septum; the tegulum of the palpus is relatively narrow compared to other species groups. Phidippus cardinalis (Hentz) , 1845 Figures 2-6, 2-23 Attus rufus Hentz, 1835; NOMEN NUDUM Attus cardinalis Hentz, 1845 ( d ) ; type destroyed Attus rufus Hentz, 1846 (?); type destroyed; NEW SYNONYMY Plexippus rufus C. L. Koch, 1846 (synonymized by Marx, 1890) Plexippus bivittatus C. L. Koch, 1846 (synonymized by Marx, 1890) Phiale modesta C. L. Koch, 1846 (synonymized by Banks, 1913) Attus mccookii Peckham & Peckham, 1883; type in MCZ, examined; NEW SYNONYMY

PAGE 35

28 Phidlppus ruber Keyserling, 1884; type in BMNH, examined (synonymized with _P. mccookii by Peckham & Peckham, 1909) P. cardinalis , Peckham & Peckham, 1888; Wallace, 1950; Bonnet, 1958; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Gertsch, 1979 Dendryphantes cardinalis , Simon, 1901; Roewer, 1954 Phidippus Oakland ens is Tullgren, 1901 (synonymized by Petrunkevitch, 1911) P. mccooki , Muma, 1944; Kaston, 1948; Whitcomb et al. , 1963 Much confusion about the identities of P_;_ cardinalis and P. mccooki has existed since the Peckhams (1909) illustrated both species in consecutive figures. I have never seen a male palp as illustrated for P. mccooki . The drawing of the epigynum of this species appears to be a good rendition of P_. whitmani , whereas the description of the female color pattern is that of P. pius . The type of P. mccooki is a female with a typical P_. cardinalis epigynum. I can only speculate that the illustration of the P_. mccooki male habitus is misplaced, and was meant to be the initial entry under P_. cardinalis . Cheliceral color in the male of P_. cardinalis agrees with Hentz's description and distinguishes this species from _P. apacheanus . Although the Peckhams (1909) were unable to recognize P. rufus , which they had previously attributed to what they renamed as P_. whitmani , Hentz's description must be of the female of P_. cardinalis . Only 3 eastern species _(P. cardinalis , P_. pius , P_. whitmani ) have 3 ventral, dark longitudinal stripes, and only 2 of these _(P_. cardinal is, P. pius ) have 2 short dorsal, dark longitudinal stripes broken by 2 pairs of white spots. Since the type locality of P_. rufus is Alabama, and the red form of P_. pius occurs east of the Appalachians, P_. rufus must be P_. cardinalis.

PAGE 36

29 MALE: integument reddish; carapace covered with red scales dorsally; chelicerae dark red proximal half, weakly iridescent blue distal half; no ocular setal tufts clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae; palpal femur with white or red scales on distal edge; leg I femur also with white or red scales on distal edge (white on legs II-IV) , petellar brush black except white on proximal half of prolateral surface, white scales on proximal half patella; scales on proximal halves metatarsus and tarsus white to orange; dorsum of abdomen covered with red scales, with 2 black stripes in posterior half overlaid with 2 pair white spots, all of which may also be covered with red scales; venter of abdomen dark gray. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 2 dorsal setal tufts; white scales below lateral eyes, across proximal edge of chelicerae, and on clypeus; clypeus also with dense fringe of white setae; palpi fringed with white-tipped black setae; dorsum red to brown, posterior stripes and spots not overlaid with red scales; venter of abdomen pale with 3 narrow gray stripes. LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II V 0-1R-1R or 0-0-2; tibia III V 0-0-0-2, R 0-0-1-0; metatarsus III V 0-0-1 or 0-1-2, R 0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2. Phidippus pius Scheffer, 1906 Figures 2-7, 2-24 Phidippus pius Scheffer, 1906; type supposed to be in USNM, lost .P. pius , Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Bonnet, 1958; Edwards, 1977; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978 Dendryphantes pius , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954

PAGE 37

30 Phidippus abboti Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944; type in AMNH, examined (synonymized by Edwards, 1977) Dendryphantes abboti , Roewer, 1954 Phidippus abboti , Barnes & Barnes, 1955; Bonnet, 1958; Berry, 1970 Considerable variation in color pattern occurs in this species. In the typical form, females are yellow and males are orange; this color form holds throughout the northern range of the species and to the southwest (from the eastern plains to New Jersey and south to Texas) . Southeast of the Appalachian Mountains, from Virginia to Florida, females are orange and males are red (P. abboti color form) and the amount of black on the legs and palpi is increased. Toward the southwestern portion of the range, in Texas, the black markings on the legs and palpi are only faintly indicated. Although the type of P_. pius is lost, Scheffer's description leaves no doubt as to which species he was describing. MALE: integument yellow to red; carapace covered dorsally with yellow to red scales, lacking in ocular area in red males; no ocular setal tufts; clypeus with white setal fringe; palpi yellow to red, cymbium black, femur black in red males, white lateral fringes on patella, tibia, and cymbium; legs with black on ventral half of prolateral surface of all femora, distal third patella, distal half tibia, distal two-thirds metatarsus, distal half tarsus except for extreme distal edge which is pale (red males have femur, tibia and metatarsus all black), white scales sparsely on all legs and palpi; dorsum of abdomen covered with yellow to red scales; 2 posterior stripes similar to P_. cardinalis and covered sparsely with metallic scales; venter pale (orange males) to black (red males) .

PAGE 38

31 FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: integument yellow to orange; 2 weak dorsal setal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with white setae; venter of abdomen with 3 narrow gray lines like P_. cardinalis . LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II V 0-1R-1R-2; patella III R 0-0-0, tibia III V 0-0-0-2, R 0-0-1-0, metatarsus III V 0-0-2; tibia IV R 0-0-1-0, metatarsus IV V 0-0-2. Phidippus whitmani Peckham & Peckham, 1909 Figures 2-8, 2-25 Phidippus paludatus C. L. Koch, 1846; NOMEN OBLITUM P_. rufus (not Hentz) , Peckham & Peckham, 1889 (in part,cO De ndryphantes rufus , Simon, 1901 Phidippus whitmanii Peckham & Peckham, 1909 Dendryphantes whitmanii , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 P. whitmani , Comstock, 1912; Kaston, 1948; Bonnet, 1958; Berry, 1970; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Gertsch, 1979 P_. insolens (not Hentz), Kaston, 1938a, b Banks' description (1913) of the pinned type of P_. paludatus indicates it to be a specimen of P_. whitmani . The latter name has been used for the species ever since the Peckhams' description (1909), over 50 years ago. Females are brown in the northern states, red in the southern states. Southern males are more completely covered with red scales on anterior dorsum of carapace, only anterior half of distance from PME to AME exposed. MALE: carapace covered with red scales dor sally except anterior to PME, where dark integument is exposed, laterally and on thoracic slope

PAGE 39

32 covered with white scales; chelicerae proximal half covered with white setae, especially medially, distal half faintly metallic blue; no ocular setal tufts; clypeus covered with white scales and setal fringe; palpi with white fringe entire length laterally and on cymbium dorsally, covered with white scales entire length dorsally; leg I-IV covered with white scales, all fringes white; integument of all femora black; dorsal abdomen covered with red scales, dorsal abdominal markings white; venter of abdomen gray laterally, with 3 narrow black stripes enclosing 2 submesal white stripes. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: carapace completely covered with red or brown scales dorsally; 2 weak dorsal setal tufts; palpi fringed with white setae but lacking scales; dorsal abdomen covered with red to brown scales except for white markings, rarely with 2 black lines posteriorly like P_. cardinalis and P. pius . LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II V 0-1R-1P or 0-0-2; patella III IV R 0-0-0, tibia III V 0-0-0-2, metatarsus III V 0-0-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-2. Phidippus clarus Keyserling, 1884 Figures 2-9, 2-26 Attus podagrosus Hentz, 1846; type destroyed; NOMEN DUBIUM, NOMEN OBLITUM Phidippus auctus C. L. Koch, 1846; specimens from Keyserling coll., BMNH, examined; NOMEN OBLITUM Phidippus castrensis C. L. Koch, 1846; NOMEN DUBIUM, NOMEN OBLITUM Phidippus clarus Keyserling, 1884 P. clarus , Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Kaston, 1948; Wallace, 1950; Barnes & Barnes, 1955; Bonnet, 1958; Whit comb & Tadic, 1963; Whitcomb, 1963; Berry, 1970; Richman & Cutler, 1978, Oehler, 1980

PAGE 40

33 P_. insolens (not Hentz) , Peckham & Peckham, 1888 P. multiformis Emerton, 1891; type in TiCZ, examined (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909) P_. minutus Banks, 1892; type in MGZ, examined (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909) Philaeus princeps (not Peckham & Peckham), Banks, 1892 Phidippus bilineatus Tullgren, 1901 (synonymized by Roewer, 1954) Phidippus clarconensis Tullgren, 1901 (synonymized by Wallace, 1950) Dendryphantes insolens , Simon, 1901 I), multiformis , Simon, 1901 I), castrensis , Simon, 1901 Phidippus podagrosus , Banks, 1910 Dendryphantes clarus , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 _P. rimator , Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944 (not Attus rimator Walckenaer, 1837 a NOMEN DUBIUM) ; Kaston, 1953, 1972, 1978; Snetsinger, 1954; Cutler, 1977 Numerous other references cited in behavior or ecology sections. The usage of P_. rimator (Walckenaer) for this species, a name which has become increasingly used for P_. clarus , is completely unwarranted. The single illustration by Abbot (1792) given the name Attus rimator by Walckenaer (1837) was recognized as an immature by Chamberlin & Ivie (1944) when they resurrected the name. It is well know that immatures have been usually difficult, if not impossible given past techniques, to identify to species. Furthermore, I have examined a color reproduction of the copy of Abbot's drawing kept at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, and cannot positively identify the drawing to genus, much less to species; the dorsal pattern cannot be matched with any known species.

PAGE 41

34 In saying this I might add that I have personally reared most of the species of Phidippus occurring in the eastern U. S., including P_. clarus, and therefore have first hand acquaintance with their appearance as immatures. MALE: integument dark; no dorsal ocular tufts; clypeus and lateral edges of palpi fringed with black setae; dorsum of palpal femur, patella, tibia, and cymbium covered with white scales and setae; leg I femur with dorsal fringe white, prolateroventral fringe absent, patella brush black, proximal fourth of tibial brush white; dorsum of abdomen with short white basal band, side stripe of red scales each side, dark metallic central stripe; venter of abdomen dark gray with 3 black stripes, the stripes sometimes enclosing a slight amount of white. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: integument normal color; 2 weak dorsal tufts; white scales below eyes laterally and densely covering clypeus, long white setal fringe on clypeus, palpi; abdomen with variable coloration, lateral wide stripes tan, yellow, or orange and median stripe tan, brown or black; venter of abdomen white enclosed by lateral black stripes which meet posteriorly, sometimes with faint median gray stripe. LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0; metatarsus IV V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2. audax group The 5 eastern species in this group (P. audax , P_. otiosus , _P. regius , P_. xerus , P_. insignarius ) all have 4 setal tufts on the females as opposed to 6 or 2 tufts on females of other groups. Lumping these species together on the basis of number of setal tufts seems tenuous; _P. insignarius and probably _P. xerus will likely be shown to belong to

PAGE 42

35 other species groups when the fauna of the western U. S. becomes better known. Males of the 3 other species all have a cheliceral tubercle, which seems to be a shared, derived character. Behavioral data also seems to relate these 3 species (see chapter on courtship). Phidippus audax (Hentz) , 1845 Figures 2-10, 2-27 Attus morsitans Walckenaer, 1805; NOMEN NUDUM, NOMEN DUBIUM Salticus variegatus Lucas, 1833; type lost; petition to suppress (Levi & Pinter, 1970) under consideration by the I. C.Z.N. Attus audax Hentz, 1835; NOMEN NUDUM A. tripunctatus Hentz, 1835; NOMEN NUDUM A. morsitans Walckenaer 1837; NOMEN DUBIUM A. audax Hentz, 1845; type destroyed; petition submitted to designate as type species of genus (Levi & Pinter, 1970) A. tripunctatus Hentz, 1846 (synonymized by Banks, 1893) A. fasciolatus , Hentz, 1846 (synonymized by Banks, 1910) Phidippus togatus C. L. Koch, 1846; NEW SYNONYMY Phidippus purpurifer C. L. Koch, 1846 P. smaragdifer C. L. Koch, 1846 P. alchymista C. L. Koch, 1846 P_. ruf imanus C. L. Koch, 1846 P. dubiosus C. L. Koch, 1846 P. mundulus C. L. Koch, 1846 P. personatus C. L. Koch, 1846 P. concinnatus C. L. Koch, 1846 (Koch names synonymized by Banks, 1910) P_. morsitans, Peckham & Peckham, 1888 (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909)

PAGE 43

36 P. rauterbergii Peckham & Peckham, 1888 (synonymized by Banks, 1916) P_. tripunctatus , Emerton, 1891 P. audax , Banks, 1893; Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Bonnet, 1958; Kaston, 1948, 1953, 1972, 1978; Levi & Levi, 1968; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Gertsch, 1979; Oehler, 1980 P. howardii Peckham & Peckham, 1896, NEW SYNONYMY P. rauterbergii , Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909; Bonnet, 1958 P. howardi , Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909; Bonnet, 1958 P_. variegatus , Peckham & Peckham, 1909 (the Peckhams considered audax and variegatus to be 2 separate species); Kaston, 1938; Bryant, 1942 Dendryphantes audax , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 D. howardi , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 J), rauterbergii , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 Phidippus bryantae Kaston, 1945 (synonymized by Kaston, 1948) Also mentioned in numerous behavioral and ecological papers which are mentioned with their respective chapters. Phidippus morsitans might also apply to P_. regius C. L. Koch but would be unavailable for that species also. This is an extremely common species over most of eastern and midwestern North America. It varies widely in both size and color pattern, although at least some individuals of a particular population retain the typical color pattern. Some individuals in Texas and Mexico reach nearly 20 mm in length, perhaps in part due to the lack of competition from a common, large species (like P. regius in Florida). MALE: integument dark; carapace with or without lateral white submarginal band of variable size extending behind and below PLE; anterior face of each chelicera with subdistal tubercle; no ocular setal tufts;

PAGE 44

37 clypeus fringed with black setae; palpal femur and patella with white scales and setae dorsally, black setae laterally and on dorsal cymbium; leg I with typical fringing; abdomen with spots white, yellow, or red, either distinct or coalesced with each other or with lateral bands, most of resulting patterns illustrated by Hill (1978) ; venter of abdomen with outer rows of dots often overlain with white scales which encroach to variable extent over median black stripe which is never completely covered. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: no cusp on chelicerae; 4 setal tufts; clypeus sparsely covered with white scales and white setae; palpi fringed with black setae, some of which have white tips. LEG MACROSETAE: metatarsus III R 0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-2. Only species with an individual with femur I DR 0-0-0-1. Phidippus otiosus (Hentz) , 1846 Figures 2-11, 2-28 Attus pulcher Walckenaer, 1837, p. 439 A. pulcher pallida Walckenaer, 1837, p. 439 A. peregrinus Walckenaer, 1837, p. 445 A. otiosus Hentz, 1846; type destroyed; petition for retention submitted to I. C. Z. N. (see Appendix C) Phidippus lunulatus C. L. Koch, 1846 (synonymized by Banks, 1910) P. otiosus , Peckham & Peckham, 1888, 1901, 1909; Bryant, 1942; Murrill, 1942; Wallace, 1950, Bonnet, 1958; Anderson, 1966; Levi & Levi, 1968; Kaston, 1972, 1978; Edwards et al. , 1974; Muma, 1975; Edwards, 1977; Richman, 1977; Hill, 1979; Gertsch, 1979

PAGE 45

38 Dendryphantes otiosus , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 Phidippus dorsalis Bryant, 1942 ( o"holotype) ; holotype in MCZ, examined; NEW SYNONYMY P. pulcher , Chamber lin & Ivie, 1944; Richman, 1978; Richman & Cutler, 1978 Dendryphantes pulcher , Roewer, 1954 Although P_. pulcher (Walckenaer) has priority, the specific epithet pulcher in various generic combinations has only been used 6 times in the literature (3 in checklists) , whereas P_. otiosus (Hentz) has been used over 20 times (7 in checklists). Usage favors retention of P_. otiosus . MALE: carapace with very wide yellow to orange submarginal bands from PME to near posterior edge, not meeting behind but partially covering thoracic slope; chelicerae with tubercle like P_. audax ; 4 setal tufts; clypeus sparsely fringed with black setae; palpi covered with yellow to orange scales and setae on dorsal and lateral femur, ectal edge of patella; dorsal cymbium covered with black setae; leg I with typical fringes except yellow to orange where normally white, prolateroventral femur fringe lacks distal third, yellow setae and scales on distal femur; legs II-IV with yellow scales on dorsal distal femur and proximal patella; dorsal abdominal markings yellow, gold, or orange, center stripe metallic black, green, or blue; venter of abdomen black. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: carapace submarginal bands white to yellow; chelicerae without tubercle; ventral edge of clypeus to entire face covered with white scales, weakly fringed with yellow setae to strongly fringed with white overhanging proximal third of chelicerae; palpi densely fringed laterally with white or yellow setae; legs covered with white or yellow scales; abdomen integument

PAGE 46

39 gray, tan, or black, dorsal abdominal markings white to yellow-orange; venter of abdomen with broad black stripe with or without white border which may encroach on middle of black band. LEG MACROSETAE: metatarsus IV V 0-1-2. Phidippus regius C. L. Koch, 1846 Figures 2-12, 2-13, 2-29 Phidippus regius C. L. Koch, 1846, p. 146 Attus regius , Walckenaer, 1847 Salticus sagraeus Lucas, 1857 Attus miniatu s Peckham & Peckham, 1883 (synonymized by Edwards, 1975, unpubl.; Richman & Cutler, 1978) Phidippus miniatus , Peckham & Peckham, 1888, 1901, 1909 P. variegatus (not Lucas), Franganillo, 1930; Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944; Wallace, 1950 P. regius , Bryant, 1943; Bonnet, 1958; Levi & Levi, 1968; Levi & Pinter, 1970; Muma, 1975; Cutler, 1977; Hill, 1977; Kaston, 1978; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Edwards, 1975, 1979; Cutler, 1979; Gertsch, 1979 Dendryphantes regius , Simon, 1901; Roewer, 1954 D. miniatus , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 Phidippus tullgreni Wallace, 1950; NEW SYNONYMY (may be P_. otiosus P. regius hybrid) Richman & Cutler (1978) synonymized P_. miniatus with P_. regius on the authority of the unpublished thesis of Edwards (1975) . This species has been involved in considerable confusion with P_. audax over use of the name P_. variegatus and because of their similar appearance. MALE: integument dark; carapace rarely with wide white submarginal bands (possibly hybrid) ; chelicerae with tubercle like _P. audax ; no

PAGE 47

40 ocular tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae; leg I femur with distal prolateral white setae and scales; dorsal abdomen black with white markings; venter of abdomen black. FEMALE: carapace lacking scales or covered to variable extent with gray, tan and/or orange scales, ocular quadrangle never completely covered; chelicerae without tubercle, sometimes red-violet, may be covered proximally with white scales; 4 ocular setal tufts; clypeus and palpi with white fringes, clypeus covered with white scales; legs with or without gray, tan or orange scales; dorsal abdomen black or dark brown with or without covering of gray, tan, brown and/or orange scales; dorsal markings white or pale orange, sometimes overlaid with tan or orange scales, markings outlined with remnant of central dark band; venter of abdomen black, bordered with stripes of white scales when abdomen black dorsally. LEG MACROSETAE: metatarsus IV V 0-1-2. P. regius , the largest species represented, was most likely to have more macrosetae than normal; especially the ventral subproximals on tibiae II-IV might be paired. Phidippus xerus Edwards, 1978, emendation Figures 2-14, 2-30 Phidippus xeros Edwards, 1978; holotype deposited in MCZ _P. xeros , Richman, 1979 A few specimens in collections were labeled P_. workmani . The specific epithet was not latinized in the original description, and is here emended. All known specimens of this species have been collected in Florida. MALE: integument dark; carapace with short white transverse bands behind PLE; no ocular tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae;

PAGE 48

41 palpi with dorsal white scales on femur and patella; leg I like P. regius, except dorsal femur fringe of white-tipped black setae; dorsal abdomen black with white markings; venter of abdomen black with 4 rows pale dots. FEMALE: integument normal color; carapace with markings like male (except they are yellow) or usually (including clypeus and over anterior eyes) covered with gray, yellow, and/or orange-yellow scales, except for lower thoracic slope and ocular quadrangle (which has white spot in center); 4 weak ocular setal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with white; tibia I reddish on proximal half with white fringe; dorsal abdominal markings orange-yellow to red-orange, or rarely lateral stripes lacking and yellow spots and basal band present; venter of abdomen like male. LEG MACROSETAE: no consistent differences; ventral and lateral medians on metatarsi III & IV variable. Phidippus insignarius C. L. Koch, 1846 Figures 2-15, 2-30 Phidippus insignarius C. L. Koch, 1846, 1851 Philaeus monticola Banks, 1896 (synonymized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909) Phidippus comatus Peckham & Peckham, 1901 (in part, C) (recognized by Peckham & Peckham, 1909) P. insignarius , Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Kaston, 1948; Muma, 1949; Whitcomb & Tadic, 1963; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978 Dendrvphante.s insignarius , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 P. fraudulentus , Chamberlin & Ivie, 1944; not Attus fraudulentus Walckenaer, 1837, a NOMEN DUBIUM P. insigniarius, Bonnet, 1958

PAGE 49

42 Bonnet (1958) noted that the correct Latin spelling of the specific epithet is insigniarius . If Koch had misspelled the name unintentionally, this correction would be valid. However, Koch used the same spelling again in 1851, indicating he deliberately spelled the name without the extra "i", therefore the original spelling must stand. There are no authenticated records of P_. insignarius occurring anywhere in Georgia. If it does occur there, I would expect it to be in the mountains of the northwest part of the state, certainly not in the coastal plain of the southeast part from where Abbot made his drawings. Attus f raudulentus Walckenaer could be an immature of any of several southeastern species of Phidippus . MALE: chelicerae weakly iridescent green; 4 ocular tufts, the dorsal pair longer and denser than usual; carapace with submarginal white band of scales extending well back on thoracic slope; clypeus densely covered with white scales and with long white fringe overhanging chelicerae; palpal femur, patella, tibia, and cymbium covered dorsally with white setae; leg I dense white scale cover on prolateroventral surface of femur, patella and tibia; leg I femur with weak dorsal fringe of mixed black and white setae, prolateroventral fringe white and short, retrolateroventral fringe white, very long and dense; all other leg I fringes white, dorsal stripe of white scales from distal tip patella to distal tip tarsus; legs II-IV similar but with progressively reduced fringes and scales, leg IV lacking most scales; dorsum of abdomen with pattern like female but overlain with orange scales; venter of abdomen with median black stripe that narrows toward spinnerets, white stripes on each side. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 4 normal setal tufts; submarginal band less distinct than in male; white scales

PAGE 50

43 covering clypeus; clypeus and palpi fringed with white setae; legs with simple white fringes; abdomen with white basal band and lateral bands, tan to orange wide stripes laterally, white central triangular spot and white to orange posterior spots. LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II 0-0-1R-1P or 0-0-1R-0; patella III R 0-0-0, tibia III 0-0-0-lP, metatarsus III P 0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-2. princeps group The 2 species in this group, P_. princeps and P_. pulcherrimus , are closely related allopatric species. Both have large, sickle-shaped emboli and a very long epigynal septum. Phidippus pulcherrimus is known from Florida and the southern parts of Alabama and Georgia. Phidippus princeps occurs from northeastern Texas and North Carolina north to Minnesota and New England. This group is probably related to the audax group, as evidenced by some similarities in color pattern. Phidippus princeps (Peckham & Peckham) , 1883 Figures 2-16, 2-31 Attus insolens Hentz, 1835; NOMEN NUDUM A. insolens Hentz, 1845; type destroyed; NOMEN DUBIUM Attus princeps Peckham & Peckham, 1883; type in MCZ, examined Philaeus princeps , Peckham & Peckham, 1888 Phidippus brunneus Emerton, 1891; type in MCZ, examined (synonymized by Bryant, 1942) P. princeps , Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909; Kaston, 1948; Barnes & Barnes, 1955; Bonnet, 1958; Berry, 1970; Cutler, 1977; Hill, 1977a, b; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Oehler, 1980

PAGE 51

44 P. insolens, Peckham & Peckham, 1909 (in part, cf); Muma & Jeffers, 1945; ?Muma & Muma, 1949 Dendryphantes princeps, Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 P. dorsalis Bryant, 1942 (in part, 9); paratypes in MCZ, examined The only eastern species that comes close to resembling Hentz's description is the species now known as P_. princeps . The name P_. insolens has been misused for P_. apacheanus , although a badly rubbed specimen of the latter species could fit the description. MALE: integument nearly black; no ocular setal tufts; clypeus sparsely fringed with black setae; palpi fringed laterally with black setae, covered dorsally with white scales on femur and patella; leg I distal prolaterodorsal femur with white scales and setae, distal half patella with black fringe, all fringes unusually short; dorsum of abdomen completely covered with red scales, rarely brown with white or red central triangle and 2 pair posterior spots; venter of abdomen black bordered with row of pale dots. FEMALE: sparse cover of white scales on carapace and legs; 4 ocular setal tufts; clypeus densely covered with white scales and setae especially along ventral edge; palpi fringed with white setae; dorsum of abdomen usually unmarked brown, occasionally with white median stripe running length of abdomen but not reaching either anterior or posterior ends of abdomen, rarely with white triangle followed by 2 pair posterior spots, or intermediate condition between central stripe and spots; venter of abdomen with broad black stripe bordered laterally and posteriorly by white. LEG MACROSETAE: tibia II V 0-1R-1R-2; tibia III & IV V 0-0-0-2, metatarsus III & IV V 0-0-2.

PAGE 52

45 Phidippus pulcherrimus Keyserling, 1384 Figures 2-17, 2-31 Phidippus pulcherrimus Keyserling, 1884; type in MCZ, examined P. pulcherrimus , Marx, 1890; Banks, 1901, 1904, 1910; Peckham & Peckham 1909; Bonnet, 1958; Edwards, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Edwards & Hill, 1978 Dendryphantes pulcherrimus , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 The anecdote by Hill (Edwards & Hill, 1978), proclaiming to be the first description of the male of P_. pulcherrimus , is incomplete. MALE: carapace with short white transverse bands behind PLE; no ocular setal tufts; clypeus with sparse black fringe; palpi fringed with black setae, femur covered dorsally with white scales; dorsal leg I like P_. princeps ; dorsal abdominal semi-encircling band yellow (1 specimen) or red, spots white to red, metallic scales on black median stripe; venter of abdomen black. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 2 dorsal setal tufts; carapace with bands like male or entire carapace sparsely covered with white to tan scales; clypeus with white scales and setae, especially along ventral edge; palpi with white setal fringe, white scales on tarsus and distal tibia; legs covered with white setae; dorsal abdominal spots usually white, rarely yellow to orange; venter of abdomen with wide black stripe with or without white borders laterally. LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0, tibia II V 0-1R-1R-2; tibia III V 0-0-0-2, R 0-0-1-0; tibia IV V 0-0-0-2; metatarsus III & IV V 0-0-2. purpuratus group Three species occurring in the eastern U. S. belong to the purpuratus

PAGE 53

46 group. One species, P_. borealis , ranges across northern North America west from New Hampshire to Washington and Alaska. A primarily southwestern species, P_. apacheanus , ranges east from California and Utah to North Carolina and Florida. The third species, P. purpuratus , is restricted to the eastern half of North America. All the species in this group can be readily recognized by the forms of the genitalia. In males, the protegulum is extended anteriorly on the ectal side. The embolus is a short, notched structure which arises anteriorly, but appears to be entally attached to the extension of the protegulum. The epigynum is like other members of the subgenus in the placement of anterior guides but differs in having a deep, rectangular, transverse depression across the central third. The johnsoni group of western North America is intermediate between this group and the audax group. In the johnsoni group, the protegulum is less extended, the embolus longer, and the epigynum lacks the central depression. Phidippus apacheanus Chamberlin & Gertsch, 1929 Figures 2-18, 2-32 Phidippus bardus Peckham & Peckham, 1901; type in MCZ, examined; NOMEN OBLITUM; NEW SYNONYMY P_. insolens (not Hentz) , Peckham & Peckham, 1901, 1909 (in part?) Dendryphantes insolens, Simon, 1901; Roewer, 1954 Phidippus ferrugineous Scheffer, 1904; type in MCZ, examined; NOMEN OBLITUM; NEW SYNONYMY Phidippus apacheanus Chamberlin & Gertsch, 1929; type in AMNH, examined Phidippus nikites Chamberlin & Ivie, 1935; type in AMNH, examined; NEW SYNONYMY

PAGE 54

47 P. nikites , Muma, 1949; Bonnet, 1958 Dendryphantes apacheanus , Roewer, 1954 _D. nikites , Roewer, 1954 P. apacheanus , Bonnet, 1958; Gardner, 1965; Levi & Levi, 1968; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978; Edwards & Hill, 1978; Kaston, 1978; Gertsch, 1979 P. paludatus (not C. L. Koch), Kaston, 1972 The Peckhams (1909) incorrectly synonymized P_. bardus and P_. ferrugineous with .P. insolens (Hentz) . This confusion resulted in a redescription of the species by Chamberlin & Gertsch (1929) as P. apacheanus , by which name it has been known since; the lone exception was Kaston (1972) who used P. paludatus C. L. Koch, but later recognized and corrected his error (Kaston, 1978) . The males of _P. apacheanus (described from Utah) and _P. nikite s (described from California) are identical. The P_. nikites type of epigynum differs from the typical P_. apacheanus epigynum in that the central depression is shallow and not set off by a distinct rim. I consider this only a variation; a single female from Florida had a P_. nikites type epigynum, but all other Florida specimens were typical. Other specimens from the type locality of P. nikites were typical of P_. apacheanus (S. Johnson, personal communication, and specimens sent for confirmation). A similar type of variation occurs in females of P_. borealis, and may represent a remnant recessive genetic representation of a less derived condition. The epigynum of the female allotype of P_. nikites is somewhat shrivelled, which has changed the direction of the openings to the spermathecal ducts, accounting for this difference as noted in Chamberlin & Ivie's description.

PAGE 55

43 MALE: integument dark; carapace covered with yellow to red scales dorsally in ocular quadrangle and above thoracic slope; 2 dorsal setal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae; leg I patellar brush black except white on proximal half of prolateral surface, white scales on proximal half patella; scales on proximal halves metatarsus and tarsus white to orange; abdomen covered dorsally with yellow to red scales except for mid-dorsal black stripe, which may also be overlaid with scales; venter of abdomen black, outer rows of pale dots more conspicuous than inner rows. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: palpi with lateral yellow fringes; tibia I proximal half reddish, legs with scattered white scales; yellow to red dorsal scale cover may be reduced so that spider appears to be black with yellow or red abdominal stripes and a pale basal band; black central stripe may be indented by 0-3 pair of yellow or red spots. LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0; metatarsus III P 0-0-2, R 00-2; tibia IV P 0-0-0-0, metatarsus IV V 0-0-0 or 0rl-2. Phidippus borealis Banks, 1895 Figures 2-19, 2-33 Phidippus borealis Banks, 1895; 2 syntypes supposed to be at MCZ, lost; Neotype designated, the larger of 2 specimens in a vial from the type locality Phidippus altanus Gertsch, 1934 (synonymized by Edwards, 1977) P. altanus , Gertsch & Jellison, 1939; Chickering, 1944; Levi & Levi, 1951 P. borealis , Edwards, 1977; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978 Phidippus borealis was incorrectly synonymized with P_. purpuratus Keyserling. The types are lost; since Banks' original description was

PAGE 56

49 somewhat equivocal, I have designated a neotype male from Crawford Notch, New Hampshire, the type locality; it is deposited in the Museum of Comparative Zoology. MALE: 2 weak dorsal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae; leg I patella and proximal half tibia reddish, both fringed with black setae; dorsal abdominal markings tan to orange; venter of abdomen black, inner rows of dots inconspicuous. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 2 dorsal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with white setae; leg I unicolorous, not banded like male; dorsal abdominal markings white to orange. LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0; tibia III V 0-0-0-2, R 0-0-10; metatarsus III V 0-0-0 or 0-1-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2; tibia IV R 0-0-10; metatarsus IV V 0-1-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2. Phidippus purpuratus Keyserling, 1884 Figures 2-20, 2-33 Phidippus purpuratus Keyserling, 1884 (p. 489) Phidippus albomaculatus Keyserling, 1884 (p. 491); syntypes in MCZ, BMNH, examined; NEW SYNONYMY, Lectotype designated _P. galathea (not Walckenaer) , Peckham & Peckham, 1888 P. mystaceus (not Hentz) , Emerton, 1875, 1891 _P. purpuratus , Peckham & Peckham, 1909; Kaston, 1948, 1978; Bonnet, 1958; Whitcomb et al. , 1963; Cutler, 1977; Richman & Cutler, 1978 _P. electus (not C. L. Koch), Banks, 1910, 1913; NOMEN DUBIUM Dendryphantes purpuratus , Petrunkevitch, 1911; Roewer, 1954 Banks (1910) considered P_. electus to be a synonym of P. albomaculatus (purpuratus ) . Later (1913) he examined the pinned type, found

PAGE 57

50 it to be a juvenile, and made no comment on its identity. Other authors have considered it a synonym of P. mystaceus . It probably cannot be recognized. I examined specimens labelled "Type" of _P. albomaculatus from both the Museum of Comparative Zoology and from the British Museum (Natural History). A specimen at the MCZ has been labelled lectotype by L. Pinter, and I so designate it. MALE: integument dark; 2 weak dorsal setal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with black setae; leg I all fringes black, with few white setae below normally placed white scales on proximal halves patella, metatarsus, and tarsus, femur prolateroventral fringe very short, prolateral surface of femur with metallic green or blue reflections; dorsal abdominal markings tan to red, spots usually less distinct than in female; venter dark edged with white laterally. FEMALE: similar to male with following differences: 2 dorsal setal tufts; clypeus and palpi fringed with white setae; integument of abdomen dark gray, dorsal abdominal markings white or tan; venter of abdomen black with or without lateral white stripes, inner rows of dots conspicuous. LEG MACROSETAE: femur II DR 0-0-0-0; patella III R 0-0-0, tibia III V 0-0-0-2, metatarsus III V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2; metatarsus IV V 0-0-1 or 0-0-2.

PAGE 58

Figure 2-4. Phidippus putnami : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 59

52 B |ft# 1.

PAGE 60

Figure 2-5. Phldippus mystaceus : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 61

54 ^OP^^tf B

PAGE 62

Figure 2-6. Phidippus cardinalis : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 63

56 B

PAGE 64

Figure 2-7. Phidippus pius : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 65

58 ' gp •• i*M«4 B

PAGE 66

Figure 2-8. Phidippus whitmani : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 67

60 jUkJmk B

PAGE 68

Figure 2-9. Phidippus clarus : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female, D. Dorsal view of abdomen of male.

PAGE 69

62 m a^ /.*•'/= B^ "-/ If if. B »'% #8'•4i^i : *^ D

PAGE 70

Figure 2-10. Phidippus audax : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 71

64 &:r*m B \

PAGE 72

Figure 2-11. Phldippus otlosus : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 73

66 J&z&ii "-4rar /

PAGE 74

Figure 2-12. Phidippus regius : A. Dorsal view of female, B. Dorsal view of abdomen of male.

PAGE 75

68 B

PAGE 76

Figure 2-13. Phidippus regius : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum.

PAGE 77

70 B

PAGE 78

Figure 2-14. Phidippus xerus : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female, D. Dorsal view of abdomen of male.

PAGE 79

72 B /-..-

PAGE 80

Figure 2-15. Phidippus insignarius : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 81

74 B #^^

PAGE 82

Figure 2-16. Phidippus princeps : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum.

PAGE 83

76 * B

PAGE 84

Figure 2-17. Phidippus pulcherrimus : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 85

78 ^^ri^g^^VT^wTS^A-frf-r**^ 1 ^ • m. i c .i ! &i*ss5!$

PAGE 86

Figure 2-18. Phidippus apacheanus : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 87

80 &r£& v ^yET i^# . B

PAGE 88

Figure 2-19. Phidippus borealis : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 89

82 i te A *£

PAGE 90

Figure 2-20. Phidippus purpuratus : A. Ventral view of male palp, B. Ventral view of female epigynum, C. Dorsal view of female.

PAGE 91

84 *\ f^iSP \ vjfc \>* ;^ •-,B

PAGE 92

85 Figure 2-21. Distribution map of Phidippus putnami .

PAGE 93

86 Figure 2-22. Distribution map of Phidippus mystaceus .

PAGE 94

87 Figure 2-23. Distribution map of Phidippus cardinalis ,

PAGE 95

Figure 2-24. Distribution map of Phidippus pius ,

PAGE 96

89 Figure 2-25. Distribution map of Phidippus whitmani .

PAGE 97

90 Figure 2-26. Distribution map of Phidippus clarus .

PAGE 98

91 Figure 2-27. Distribution map of Phidippus audax .

PAGE 99

92 Figure 2-28. Distribution map of Phidippus otiosus .

PAGE 100

93 . N^ Figure 2-29. Distribution map of Phidippus regius .

PAGE 101

94 Figure 2-30. Distribution maps of Phidippus insignarius (closed circles) and Phidippus xerus (open circles).

PAGE 102

95 Figure 2-31. Distribution maps of Phidippus princeps (closed circles) and Phidippus pulcherrimus (open circles).

PAGE 103

96 Figure 2-32. Distribution maps of Phidippus apacheanus (closed circles) and Phidippus borealis (open circles).

PAGE 104

97 Figure 2-33. Distribution map of Phidippus purpuratus ,

PAGE 105

CHAPTER 3 IMMATURE STAGES OF Phidippus SPECIES Peckham and Peckham (1909) and Kaston (1948) illustrated some of the immature stages of P_. clarus , and Kaston (ibid) described some penultimate specimens of P_. cardinalis (as P_. mccookii) and P_. whit man i . Bailey (1968) and Taylor and Peck (1975) measured carapace width for instars of P. audax, and the latter authors also illustrated some of the instars. Edwards (1975) measured carapace width for instars of P. regius . The lack of ability to identify immature stages of spiders has been a hindrance to workers attempting ecological studies (Turnbull, 1973) and for those working on the effects of spiders on pest populations in agro-ecosystems (e.g., Whitcomb et al. , 1963). For the most part, immatures have color patterns similar to adult females, and the pattern becomes more similar with each succeeding instar. The most difficult stage to determine to species is the first free-living instar, which in most species has a dark body with no scale pattern. The leg segments distal to the femur are usually much paler in color than the rest of the spiderling. This report is preliminary in many ways, since characters of all instars of all species studied have not yet been quantified. Below I list known color patterns of first instars: P_. apacheanus body black, distal leg segments black _P. audax , P_. pulcherrimus , P. regius body black, distal leg segments red 98

PAGE 106

99 _P. clarus , _P. otiosus body brown, distal leg segments light brown _P. putnami body brown, distal leg segments light brown, small white scale patches at back of ocular quadrangle and on each side of abdomen _P. whitmani body black, distal leg segments pale yellow P_. xerus body brown, distal leg segments distinctly orange Those species with the same color pattern are usually separated either by season of occurrence, habitat, or microhabitat . In a preliminary study of the leg macrosetae of successional instars of P. regius , definite differences between instars were noted for the first seven instars (Table 3-1) . Macrosetae were added with each successive molt. Postembryos lacked macrosetae, and first instars had only a few macrosetae, establishing completely only the dorsal femoral sets and the ventral set of metatarsus I. The second instar added macrosetae to tibia II and metatarsus III, and increased the number on metatarsi II and IV. The third instar added a dorsoprolateral macroseta to all femora, and increased the number on tibia I and metatarsi II, III and IV, completing the set on metatarsus II. The fourth instar completed the full complement of macrosetae on the femora, added setae to all tibiae, and increased by one the number on metatarsus III. The fifth instar added the full complement of setae on patellae III and IV and tibia I, and increased the number on tibiae II, III, and IV and on metatarsi III and IV. The sixth instar completed sets of macrosetae on tibiae II and IV and metatarsi III and IV, while the seventh instar completed the macrosetal complement on tibia III, producing the adult macrosetation pattern.

PAGE 107

100 Since most species of Phidippus mature in 6-8 instars, and penultimate males can be distinguished by their swollen pedipalpi, this method of instar determination is likely to be a more accurate method than measurement of carapace width, since variable growth patterns of individuals result in a size range overlap in the later instars. Randall (1978) found that the macrosetal patterns of the femora of the green lynx spider, Peucetia viridans (Hentz), were virtually 100% reliable for determining individuals of this species to instar.

PAGE 108

101 Table 3-1. Leg raacrosetae of instars 1-7 of Phidippus regius . Macrosetal codes are the same as those used for adult Phidippus (see Chapter 2). Values in parentheses indicate variation. Sample size was four individuals for each instar. Macrosetal additions to the previous instar are underlined. First instar femur I, II, III, IV D 0-1-1-1; tibia I V 0-0-2-0; metatarsus I V 0-2-2, II, IV V 0-1-1 Second instar femora unchanged; tibia I V 0-0-2-0, II V 0-0-1R-0 ; metatarsus I V 0-2-2, II V 0-1-2^, III V 0-0-1 , IV V 0-0-1, R 0-0-1 Third instar femur I, II, III, IV D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-1 ; tibia I V 0lR(2) -2-lP, II V 0-0-1R-0; metatarsus I V 0-2-2, II V 0-2-2, III V 0-0-2^, P 0-0-2 , R 0-0-1 , IV V 0-0-2, P 0-0-2 , R 0-0-1 Fourth instar femur I D 0-1-1-1, DR 0-0-0-2^, II, III D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-2, DR 0-0-0-1 , IV D 0-1-1-1, DP 0-0-0-1, DR 0-0-0-1 ; tibia I V 0-2UR)-2-2, II V 0-0-1R-0, P O-Q-l-0 , III P 0-0-1-0, R 0-0-l(0)-0 , IV V 0-0-0-2 (1R ), r o-Q-i-0 ; metatarsus I, II V 0-2-2, III V 0-0-2, P 0-0-2, R-0-0-2^ IV V 0-0-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-1 Fifth instar femora unchanged; patella III, IV R 0-1-0 ; tibia I V 0-2-2-2, II V 0-0-(_lR)-lR2(lP ), P 0-0-1-0, III V 0-0-0-2 (IP), P 0-0-1-0, R 0-0(l)-l-0, IV V 0-0-0-2, P 0-0-1-0 , R 0-1-1-0; metatarsus I, II V 0-2-2, III V 0-1-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0-2, IV V 0-1-2, P 0-0-2, R 0-0(1) -2 Sixth instar femora unchanged; patella unchanged; tibia I V 0-2-2-2, II V lR(0)-2(lR)-2, P 0-0;-0, III V 0-0-0-2, P 0-0-1-0. R 0-l(0)-l-0, IV V 0-1P-0-2, P 0-0-1-0, R 0-1-1-0; metatarsus I, II V 0-2-2, III V 0-2(l)-2, P 0-l(0)-2, R 0-0-2, IV V 0-1-2, P 0-l(0)-2, R 0-1-2 Seventh instar femora unchanged; patellae unchanged; tibia I, II unchanged, tibia III V 0-0-0-2, P 0-0(l)-l-0, R 0-1-1-0, IV V O-lp-0-2, P 0-0-1-0, R 0-1-1-0; metatarsus I, II unchanged, metatarsus III V 0-2-2, P 0-l(0)-2, R 0-l(0)-2, IV V 0-1-2, P 0-1-2, R 0-l(0)-2 (essentially adult macrosetae pattern established)

PAGE 109

CHAPTER 4 HYBRIDIZATION IN Phidippus SPECIES Introduction Hybridization in arthropods has been known for several decades. Much of the early work on Drosophila by Dobzhansky and Patterson and their respective coworkers was reviewed by Patterson and Stone (1952). Clarke and Sheppard (1953) crossed four species of swallowtails (Papilionidae) in the laboratory. The contention of early taxonomists was that interspecies hybridization was unimportant to the evolution of species. This view was challenged by Sailer (1954), who, using his own data on crossing of 2 species of Euschistus (Pentatoraidae) and reanalyzing data of earlier workers, demonstrated that hybridization could be a highly influential factor in affecting evolution of species, and even in creating new species. Spider hybrids have been infrequently reported (Gerhardt, 1928; Bonnet, 1933; Locket, 1939). Dondale (1964, 1967) used hybridization experiments as an aid in species determinations in Philodromus (Philodromidae) . Below I report on laboratory hybridization of Phidippus otiosus X P. regius and the subsequent discovery of hybridization under natural conditions between these two species. Speciation events are hypothesized based on geographic distribution of the two species. Laboratory crosses of other species of Phidippus are also noted and their significance discussed. 102

PAGE 110

103 All laboratory crosses were obtained by the methods described under the courtship behaviors of other species (Chapter 5), and the descriptions of hybrid courtship are reported there. Rearing of hybrid offspring followed the procedure described by Edwards (1975). Maturation rates and sizes of F crosses were compared with parent species. Matings were attempted between F males and females, and F individuals were backcrossed to both parent species. Fecundity of hybrids and backcrosses was compared to parent species. Laboratory Results Crosses Three out of three attempted crosses of P_. otiosus males X P. regius females from Alachua County were successful and produced viable offspring. Offspring from two of the crosses were reared; male hybrids were significantly smaller than males of P_. regius and P_. otiosus reared under similar conditions and the hybrid males matured in fewer instars than either of the parent species. Of 80 original offspring, 4 died as juveniles, 24 became males, and 52 became females. This sex ratio is approximately 1:2 in favor of females, whereas the sex ratio of P_. regius is typically about 1:1. Although Pinter and Walters (1971) reported the 2n chromosome complement of males of 3 species of Phidippus (P. regius , P_. audax , and P_. j ohn soni ) to be 20 autosomes + X X„0, Wayne Maddison (personal communication) has found the chromosomes of P_. audax and P_. purpuratus to be 26 + X X 0, as has been noted for most of the 35 species of salticids reported in the

PAGE 111

104 literature (e.g., Painter, 1914; Mittal, 1964). If the sex chromosomes were involved in the determination of the unusual sex ratio, one might have expected the females rather than the males to be the affected sex, due to the sex determining mechanism (males are X X 0, females are X.. XX„X„ / • Although theoretically, hybrid males should be partially fertile when backcrossed to parent species, evidence presented below indicates that they were sterile or at least incapable of reproducing. This could be due to a number of factors: premature maturation could affect the number or viability of sperm, small size and/or hybrid courtship could cause rejection by females, and hybrid structure of embolus or palpal tibial apophysis could prevent successful copulation. The latter case was observed in the single successful courtship of a female P_. regius by a hybrid male. The male was unable to engage the epigynum of the female, even after repeated attempts. A single attempted cross of a P_. otiosus male with a P_. regius female from Palm Beach County was unsuccessful. This female accepted a P_. regius male immediately prior to rejecting the P_. otiosus male, and subsequently accepted an F hybrid male (which was unable to copulate; see above) immediately after rejecting the P_. otiosus male. Phidippus otiosus has not been reported from south of Lake Okeechobee; the southernmost record is a male from Archbold Biological Station near Lake Placid, Highlands County. Muma (1975) reported P_. otiosus from Polk County. The geographic significance is discussed below. Three attempted reciprocal crosses with P_. regius males X P_. otiosus females resulted in two successful matings but no offspring, and in the third encounter, the male killed the female.

PAGE 112

105 Eight F male X F female crosses were attempted. On three occasions the females refused to mate, on four occasions females killed the male, and one male successfully copulated but no offspring were produced. The small size of the males apparently contributed both to their inability to defend themselves and to their rejection by females. Female predation on males prior to copulation is probably a strong selective pressure on males too small to defend themselves. In most cases, the large chelicerae and enlarged legs I of the male are used to repel a frontal attack by a female (Hill, 1977a); but small males do not have sufficient strength to fend off a female's attack. Supportive evidence is provided in later discussion of other attempted crosses. Two hybrid F females were backcrossed to parent species males, one each to a P_. regius male and to a j?. otiosus male. Total viable offspring (measured by number of eggs hatched) for the backcross to the P_. regius male was 8 in the first eggsac, and 42 in the second eggsac, a total of 50. The number of viable offspring for the backcross to the P_. otiosus male was 36, 16, and 8 in the first, second, and third eggsacs, respectively, a total of 60. Total infertile eggs were not counted, but few were noted. Hybrids were described by Edwards (1975). To briefly summarize, 7 females looked like _P. otiosus with dorsal abdominal spots like _P. regius , whereas F males looked like P. regius with carapace bands and dorsal abdominal spots like _P. otiosus ; the markings of males were very pale orange, not white like J?, regius or deep orange like _P. otiosus . Results of F backcrosses are incomplete as laboratory populations, reared in an outside insectary, were killed by exposure to the sun's rays as the angle of the sun changed in the fall. However, a few males did

PAGE 113

106 mature before the colonies were destroyed. Fourteen males and 4 males, as a result of F 1 backcrosses to P_. otiosus and P_. regius males, respectively, matured before destruction of the colony. Offspring of backcrosses to P. otiosus were evenly divided between males that looked like F 1 males and males that looked very much like _P. otiosus males (the main difference in the latter males from _P. otiosus males was the exaggerated color pattern which was more brightly orange and gold than a normal P_. otiosus male) . Offspring of backcrosses to P_. regius resulted in 2 males that looked like an F male, and 2 males that looked like P_. regius males (except that the carapace bands were still present; all of the markings were pure white as in a normal P. regius male) . This last mentioned form was of great interest, as it was essentially identical in pattern to the species described as Phidippus tullgreni by Wallace (1950) , and was also the same as occasional males previously determined to be a rare color form of P_. regius . Field Records As part of a rearing program designed to compare life histories of various species of Phidippus (not reported here) , I began rearing offspring from 5 different females of P_. regius , each collected from a different locality. After only a few instars, it became apparent that the offspring of the female from a very xeric habitat in Levy County (a turkey oakrosemary area, just across the Alachua County line) were different in appearance than offspring of the other females, and were very similar to the F hybrids I had reared earlier. When some of these offspring matured, they were determined probably to be the result of either a direct mating with a P_. otiosus male, or of a male from a second or third generation removed backcross from an earlier hybridiza-

PAGE 114

107 tion. The latter situation was considered a possibility since most of the males resembled the F.-backcross males more than they did F. males from the laboratory crosses, i.e., most of the males had white markings and only a few showed the pale orange tint present in the laboratoryreared F males. Since I began collecting P. regius 8 years ago, I have collected several dozen males and examined approximately 200 others in various collections. Of these specimens, 7 had white carapace bands. As mentioned above, F -backcross males were very similar to the fieldcollected males with white carapace bands. I therefore had to consider the possibility that these 7 males were exhibiting introgressive characters as a result of a previous hybridization in their ancestry. I was able to collect one of these males in the xeric hammock which constituted one of the three primary study sites (see Chapter 10 and Appendix D) . This male was crossed with a gray female also from Alachua County. The female made 2 eggsacs, neither of which was fertile (in fact, no distinct eggs were formed). This result seems to be additional evidence supporting the hypothesis that hybrid males are sterile. The only field-collected female that I would consider a hybrid was a specimen collected in Ocala National Forest, Marion County. It essentially had the appearance of P. otiosus , but the posterior abdominal spots were intermediate in shape with P_. regius . Females of P. regius almost always have either an unmarked carapace, or the carapace is almost completely covered with scales. Occasionally (in about the same proportion as males) females have pale yellowish or white carapace bands which are similar to those of P. otiosus . Possibly these females also represent earlier introgressive matings.

PAGE 115

108 Much of the above was more or less speculative, since what occurs in nature does not necessarily follow what might be manipulated in the laboratory. It is possible that the variation apparently exhibited by P. regius could be the result of true genetic polymorphism. A similar polymorphism in presence or absence of white carapace bands is well documented for the related P_. audax (Kaston, 1948). Strong evidence supporting the validity of the preceding discussion of hybridization in natural situations was provided by Dr. John F. Anderson, who collected a male •_. otiosus in copula with a female J?, regius , 19 September 1980, on a small tree at the interface of a field and swamp forest at the south end of Newnan's Lake. Ecological Factors Affecting Hybridization My first hypothesis for hybridization between P_. otiosus and P_. regius was based on the fact that I had collected apparent hybrids in xeric woods habitats. Since the populations of the two species were likely to be and seemed to be at very low densities in xeric habitats, the chances of a female going unmated once maturity was reached were increased. A female should, eventually, rather mate with a related species and produce some viable offspring, than to not mate and be totally without offspring. Another factor is that a female is more likely to mate if it is in a nest when found by a male (Jackson, 1976); in Jackson's laboratory experiments, even already mated females occasionally remated under these circumstances. (I have on one occasion found a male J?, regius cohabiting with an obviously gravid conspecific female, lending support to the possibility that multiple matings of a single female occasionally occur under natural conditions.) Of course, the implication is that a male has an increased chance of mating with a

PAGE 116

109 non-specific female if he finds her in a nest. Other crosses between species under similar circumstances are reported below. Using the clue provided by Anderson, who found a hybridizing pair in copula in an obviously non-xeric environment, I rechecked the habitat data for the seven white-banded males of P_. regius . They were found in one of three situations: lake edge, xeric hammock, and open pine flatwoods. Because P. otiosus is a canopy species, while P_. regius is an old field species that moves onto shrubs and palmettoes as an adult and then to various trees to reproduce, two types of opportunities are presented for interaction: 1) When P_. regius females are searching for shelter under tree bark in which to lay their eggs, they may be encountered by P. otiosus males searching for conspecific females that are also searching for nesting sites in the smae situations at the same time; opportunity for this type of interaction would be most frequent at interfaces of fields and woods along lake shores, where P_. otiosus is most abundant. 2) In open woodlands, young P_. regius develop in the herb zone, but if there is no shrub or mature palmetto understory, the adult P_. regius move directly to the trees instead. Here they are directly competing with P_. otiosus for food and nesting sites for a longer period of time than in the first situation. In one such situation, a slash pine plantation in Duval County, P_. regius has apparently completely displaced P. otiosus in the trees (R. A. Belmont, personal communication and specimens brought in for identification from the canopy of the pine plantation, obtained with the use of a cherry-picker at 50' height in the top of the canopy) . Phidippus regius has been taken from the top of coconut palms by similar means in South Florida (J. A. Reinert, collector), where P_. otiosus does not occur. Muma (1975) reports both species from citrus groves, another instance of a single-layered canopy.

PAGE 117

110 It is perhaps in this second situation that my original hypothesis is partially valid, since conditions favorable to P_. regius may permit it to exclude P_. otiosus . In certain arid habitats, for example xeric hammock (which has little shrub understory) , environmental factors may be stringent enough to keep populations of both species at low levels, allow them to coexist, and thus improve the chances for crossbreeding. Sailer's (1954) contention that introgression may be important to the evolution of species seems to apply for one character of P_. otiosus . This species increases in mean length from the northern part of its range to the southern part, which, considering its potential competitors, is just the reverse of what might be expected. In Maryland, _P. otiosus is the same size as the synchronic P. mystaceus , the other primary canopy species in the region. Since both of these species are apparently uncommon in the region, perhaps the populations are small enough so that the resources are not limiting and therefore no competition is occurring. In the other situation, P_. otiosus approaches the size of P_. regius where the two species occur together. Since these two species are also synchronic, and P_. regius can potentially displace P_. otiosus in certain circumstances, one might expect that _P. otiosus would evolve toward smaller size in order to reduce competition for food and nesting sites. Although other factors may be involved that are not readily apparent (such as competition with other medium-sized canopy salticids like Dendryphantes pineus , Metacyrba undata , or Thiodina sylvana ) , one feasible explanation of large size in P_. otiosus is the introgression of genes for large size from P. regius . This would imply a massive period of interbreeding over one time period or frequent hybridization presently, discussed in the following section.

PAGE 118

Ill Species Relationships, Geologic History, and Speciatlon Although I have emphasized in the above discussion the ability of P_. otiosus and P_. regius to hybridize, I have said nothing about their actual relationship. They in fact appear to be sister species, and a comparative examination of their genitalia (see Chapter 2) reveals a great deal of similarity between the two species. However, although the basic structures of the body markings are similar, the color patterns are quite different. In contrast, the color patterns of the sister species (?) _P. cardinalis and P_. pius are nearly identical, yet the male genitalia are quite different. These two opposite extremes seem to represent a principle that has not been commented on in the literature (P. Perkins, personal communication), but is apparently a widespread phenomenon. That is, closely related species differ greatly in the form of the genitalia or in their appearance. An example of the former is the species of Mycotrupes (Scarabeidae) , which are similar metallic green or blue in appearance, but have amazingly complex genitalia which look completely different from species to species; an example of the latter is a species pair of Cicindela which have nearly identical genitalia, but one species is extremely hirsute, while the other species is nearly glabrous and highly iridescent (personal observation and P. M. Choate, personal communication). While the principle may be generally applicable, this particular interpretation seems to apply most readily to visually-oriented animals. It should be applicable to any twodimensional system including genitalia as one dimension, e.g., cricket song similarities versus genitalic similarities, and therefore is a testable hypothesis. The ranges of P_. otiosus and P. regius overlap to great extent (see maps Chapter 2). Phidippus otiosus ranges a little farther north

PAGE 119

112 than P_. regius , whereas the range of P_. regius includes the southern tip of Florida, the Florida Keys, and the Greater Antilles. The geologic history of Florida has been one of alternate island formation and reconnection throughout the Cenozoic with little agreement as to whether or not the peninsula was totally submerged. At least there seems to be agreement that a peninsula existed in late Pliocene, and that four periods of island formation occurred during the Pleistocene, at least two of which caused major island formation (MacNeil, 1950). Certain groups of lizards (Carr, 1940), snakes (Highton, 1956), scarabs ( Mycotrupes ; also see above) (Hubbell, 1954), cicindelids (P. M. Choate, personal communicaton; one of the two species of Cicindela mentioned above has a distribution which corresponds with Red Hill Island of the Pleistocene Aftonian Interglacial stage), grasshoppers (Hubbell, 1956), and wolf spiders (Wallace, 1942; McCrone, 1963; Brady, 1972) have endemic Florida species with distributions roughly corresponding to the division of the Florida peninsula into islands during the Pleistocene. McCrone hypothesized that the Aftonian Interglacial isolated three populations of Geolycosa (Lycosidae) , on the Trail Ridge, Lake Wales, and Red Hill island groups. Since these spiders are fossorial they probably dispersed little from their centers of origin during the subsequent Kansan Glacial stage. During the next Interglacial, the Yarmouth, the Trail Ridge islands were connected to the mainland, although extensive swamp prevented gene flow, and Lake Wales Ridge and Red Hill Island were connected, allowing gene flow between these populations. The net result was the formation of two new species from the parent Geolycosa pikei (Marx) of the mainland: C;. patellonigra Wallace in north-central Florida, and CI. xera McCrone; the latter species was further divided into subspecies corresponding morphologically with the initial geographic isolation of the Lake Wales island group from Red Hill Island.

PAGE 120

113 Island formation can be used to hypothesize the speciation process separating P_. regius from P. otiosus . A different interpretation of the significance of island formation from Geolycosa must be presented, since Phidippus species have much greater dispersal ability than species of Geolycosa , and only one new species evolved (actually three new species evolved, but P_. xerus and P_. pulcherrimus are not closely related to P_. regius and are the result of isolation of parts of populations of different parent species) . Assuming P. otiosus to be the parent species, since it has the more northern distribution, it would have been isolated on the mainland during the Aftonian Interglacial, with isolated populations in the same three island groups mentioned above. But the distance of Red Hill Island from the Lake Wales island group, and the distance between the Lake Wales and western Tampa Bay island groups, was probably insufficient to maintain isolation of the populations in this region, since the ballooning early instars could easily travel this distance if the wind was favorable. Therefore, probably two populations were isolated, a northern and a southern. Edwards (1975) noted a marked delineation in color pattern of P_. regius females which corresponds well with this hypothetical isolation pattern. Females from Alachua County north were either black or gray, whereas females from Marion County south were either orange or brown. The gray and brown forms may represent various intergrades of the black and orange populations which are nearly pure at the northern and southern extremes, respectively, of their ranges. This may be a relative function of actual gene distribution or selection for various colors. Evidence for the latter is found in various other animals. Animals in wet forested habitats tend to be darker than rela-

PAGE 121

114 tives in open arid habitats. Scarabs of the genus Phanaeus in Florida are dark in river swamp and metallic green and copper in xeric open woodlands (P. M. Choate, personal communication); Phidippus otiosus is darker in river swamp and cypress dome habitats than in xeric open woodlands (personal observation). Color selection in _P. regius may be for darker females in the extensively forested north Florida area, and oranger females in the sandy open xeric scrub areas of central and south Florida. I have collected gray females from tropical forest in south Florida, which adds further support to the general observed pattern of color distribution with habitat association. During the Kansan Glacial stage, when the populations were reconnected, gene flow on the sibling north-central population would come from both north and south. Some genetic isolation must have occurred prior to this time due to the gene complexes of the isolated populations adapting to the peripheral habitats in the absence of gene flow from the mainland population (genetic isolation of this type is discussed by Mayr, 1954). The more northern isolated population would be subject to greater hybridization pressure due to its proximity to the parent population. Also, the swamp barrier of the Yarmouth Interglacial would be ineffective in preventing gene flow between mainland and Trail Ridge populations. The southern population would again be isolated at this time. Presumably, the southern population was at one time connected to or was able to disperse to the Greater Antilles; females of P. regius in the Caribbean are generally orange. Since the two populations of _P. regius apparently interbred freely upon reuniting, it can be assumed that the conditions of their separate isolations and respective gene pools were so similar that reproductive isolation between the two populations was not achieved. Their rapid

PAGE 122

115 and extensive dispersal ability was probably also a factor in reuniting populations once the peninsula had reformed. This pattern of isolation and speciation could explain why northern females of _P. regius , which historically have more often been associated with _P. otiosus , were more likely to mate with _P. otiosus males than were the southern _P. regius females which rejected a JP. otiosus male, despite the fact that the reverse (behavior isolation in sympatric populations) would be expected. The amount of introgression of JP. otiosus into_P. regius is certainly like to be greater in the northern population of _P. regius , perhaps enough so that pre-copulatory reproductive isolating mechanisms are broken down, at least under certain circumstances, e.g., low population densities. Southern females of P. regius would be far less likely to be affected by introgression, and might be expected to be more discriminating in choosing mates. Hybridizations Between Other Species P. regius X P. audax A male of _P. audax from Arkansas was placed in a petri dish with a nesting, virgin _P. regius female from Alachua County (P. regius does not occur in Arkansas, but_P. audax occurs in Florida). The P_. audax male was able to enter the nest and attempt mating; however, he was apparently unable to copulate, i.e., he could not engage the epigynum with the palpal tibial apophysis. The female did not produce offspring. P. princeps X P. pulcherrimus Seven Type 1 (visual) courtships were observed between members of these sister species; three were P_. pulcherrimus males X P. princeps females and four were P_. princeps males X P. pulcherrimus females. Only one courtship was successful, between a_P. pulcherrimus male and _P. prin -

PAGE 123

116 ceps female, and it culminated in a successful mating. This particular female was feeding during courtship, and did not successfully fend off the male as did the non-feeding females in the other pairings. The female that mated died 20 days after mating without making an eggsac, which is less than the average 30 days reported for P. regius to make an eggsac after mating (Edwards, 1975). Therefore the results of the mating were inconclusive. Laboratory-reared males of _P. princeps are usually small when compared with females and they are subject to intense predation by females during laboratory mating experiments. I have observed a single case of post-copulatory predation by a female of a male immediately following copulation after Type I (visual) courtship. Hill (1977a) noted several instances of post-copulatory predation after Type II (tactile) courtships; he also noted, however, that Type II courtship was a much more successful mating strategy thau Type I courtship in terms of mating duration. P. apacheanus X P. cardinalis These two species are synchronic and syntopic, and both appear to mimic mutillids. The males also have similar courtships (see Chapter 5). On two occasions, I placed males of P_. cardinalis with females of P_. apacheanus . All were field collected, an adult and an immature of each species; the latter were reared to maturity in the laboratory. Both males of _P. cardinalis were smaller than average. Both males began courting the females. The females watched for a few seconds, then approached, attacked, and killed the males. In both instances it was clear that the males were too small to defend themselves.

PAGE 124

CHAPTER 5 THE COURTSHIPS OF EASTERN Phidippus Introduction The known courtships of salticids have recently been reviewed by Jackson (1976) and Richman (1977). The courtships of only 9 species of Phidippus have been described (with a tenth in preparation; Jackson, in manuscript) (Peckham & Peckham, 1889; Kaston, 1936; Snetsinger, 1955; Gardner, 1965; Dewey, 1965; Bailey, 1963; Taylor and Peck, 1975; Edwards, 1975; Richman, 1977; Jackson, 1978b). Jackson (1977a, 1978a, b) described 2 types of courtship employed by male P_. Johns on i under the following 3 conditions: Type I courtship with adult females outside nests, Type II courtship with adult females inside nests, and Type II courtship plus cohabitation with subadult females inside nests. These courtship strategies appear to be utilized throughout the genus, as several of the species in this study were found to cohabit in the field. The present work reviews and redescribes the courtships of 5 species, and describes for the first time the courtships of 8 additional species. Courtship of a hybrid (P. otiosus XV. regius ) is also described. All eastern U. S. species of Phidippus are represented except P. borealis, J?, insignarius , and _P. pius , which were unavailable for study. The courtship of P. m ystaceus , which includes a new method of communication for salticids, is dealt with in greater detail in the following chapter. Methods, Materials and Terminology Observations of courtship were made in one of two ways: Either a male and female were released onto a formica-covered table top about 10 117

PAGE 125

118 cm apart, or a male was introduced into a petri dish containing a female and her nest. If in the former case the event was to be filmed, the table top was covered with a sheet of construction board marked with a grid containing 1 cm graticules. Timing of movements was made with the sweep hand of wrist watch for sequences of observed movements, or by counting frames in filmed courtships and converting to seconds. The analyses of courtships for each species are composites of both observed and filmed courtships. Due to the fact that sample sizes for most species were small, only ranges are given for particular measures of positioning or movement, unless this figure is misleading, in which cases the means are also given. The mean was closely associated with the median (e.g., range 1-3, mean = 2 indicates that most of the time the measurement was 2; range 1-3, mean =1.5 indicates measurements were usually 1 or 2) . This is important to remember, since all measures of movement were integers except for the actual timing of events. Femora I were either perpendicular to the substrate (90°) or angled forward (<90°); they were also held close to the body (0°) or held away from the body (45°+). The distal segments of leg I (patella, tibia, metatarsus, tarsus) were always at a different angle than the femur since the leg was bent at the femur-patella joint; usually the distal segments were in a straight line, but in a few species a second bend occurred at the tibia-metatarsus joint. In the latter cases, the figure for the metatarsus-tarsus angle is given in Table 1, and the patellatibia (mid-leg) angle is discussed in the text. In most species, the distal leg was turned outward at the femur-patella joint; the amount of this positioning is measured in degrees from each leg I to the midline (sagittal plane) of the spider. A flick is defined as a sudden upward

PAGE 126

119 Table 5-1. Courtships of eastern Phidlppus species, describing major types of movements and positioning of appendages used by males to signal females. Details are described in the text. Asterisk indicates forward movement lacks a lateral component. Letter R indicates leg I is rotated. # filmed // observed femur I to substrate (°) femur I to spider (°) distal leg I to substrate (° ) distal leg I to spider midline (° ) 10-20 peak of flick (°) # leg movements/sequence // paired alternate palp movements /sequence // lateral moves/sequence // sequences time of sequences (sec.) time of pause (sec.) 2

PAGE 127

Table 5-1 extended. 120 4 2 90 45 7 90 20 45-85 30-40 90 35 1 4 45-60 45 20 2-4 3-4 x=2.5 x-3.2 4-7 x=5 1 6+ 2.0 4.5-7 3-5 4-14 x=7 3-4 1 9-10 1-1.5 2.2 3-9 x=3.6 1 5 90 45 0-40 70 1-3 x=2 1 6+ 1-2.5 1.5-6 1 4 45 10 15 25 2 2-3 1 16 1-1.5 1.0 2 40 45 -10 45 70 1 2 5 90 75 90 1-2 2? 1

PAGE 128

121 movement of an appendage, which in most species is brought immediately back down to the original position of the appendage. The amplitude of a flick varies among species. A sequence of movement is defined as any actions occurring consecutively or simultaneously. Each sequence is separated by a pause in which no leg movement occurs. Results General Similarities Males, even though they have several species-specific components to courtship, have certain components in common. The palpi are always held to the sides of the chelicerae, which exposes the iridescent surface of the chelicerae. Only in P. putnami , which has cheliceral scale and setal patterns, do the palpi cross in front of the chelicerae (also in the closely related J?, femoratus ; R. R. Jackson, personal communication) . Stage II courtship (Crane, 1949) is also essentially the same among all species; T?. mystaceus assumes a similar position early in Stage I. In Stage II courtship, the legs I are extended forward parallel to touch the female and the whole body is lowered close to the substrate, whereas in Stage I the prosoma is elevated and the legs I are positioned or moved otherwise in a species-specific manner. Although the abdomen may appear to be shifted from side-to-side during the zigzag approach of males of most species, this position appears to result from reattaching the dragline to the substrate at the end of each sequence of lateral stepping movements. When the spider changes direction, the release of silk for the dragline may not occur as fast as the spider is moving, resulting in the abdomen, which turns easily on the pedicel, being held back by the pull of the attached dragline. While this could be done deliberately, there do not appear to be any abdominal modifications

PAGE 129

122 intended for use in courtship. Likewise, abdomen bobbing by males did not appear to have any particular significance to courtship and usually occurred in an erratic fashion. It often occurred in conjunction with the specific sudden movement of an anterior appendage and may be an artifact of a sudden increase in hemolytic pressure intended to move the appendages, since spiders have an open circulatory system. Abdomen bobbing also occurs during mating, with each expansion and contraction of the hematodocha. Males began courting from 3-6 cm from females, although Kaston (1936) reported three of the species reexamined here (P. audax , P_. clarus , P_. purpuratus ) began courting as far away as 10 cm. Several species, during a lateral movement sequence which angled toward the female, partially retreated at the end of a sequence. The lateral movement was in the form of an asymmetrical arc. The behavior of females during courtship consists of a set of actions, which, as they are not as directly involved in species specific recognition as are the movements performed by males, are essentially the same from species to species. Jackson (1978b) has described the set of behaviors used by female P_. johnsoni during attempted courtship by males, and although all of the behaviors described by Jackson have not been observed for each species considered here, it seems likely that these behaviors will be found to apply generally throughout the genus. To briefly summarize these movements, adult females outside nests, upon the approach of a courting male, may strike at the male with fangs or forelegs, may raise the forelegs to block an attempted mount by the male, may remain motionless and allow mounting and mating, or may decamp (run away). Adult and subadult females inside nests have a similar

PAGE 130

123 repertoire of behaviors; additionally they have a variety of percussionary activities utilizing the legs and/or body, as well as the option of holding the entrance to the silken chamber closed with their forelegs. Phidippus mystaceus Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae covered with white fringe proximally, iridescent green dis tally; clypeus fringe white and yellow; palpi with white fringes and dorsal cymbial spot of mixed yellow and white scales; legs I fringed with yellow ventrally, covered with yellow scales (especially venter of femur) except lateral sides of femur, and with black tuft on dorsum of femur; 4 dorsal setal tufts. Type I courtship . Stage I courtship is divided into two stages; la, whish is similar to Stage I in other species, and lb, which is a stage in which sound is produced. Stage lb is elaborated on in the following chapter. Stage la is sometimes omitted altogether in the courtship sequence. In one instance (first courtship) the stages were alternated several times. When it occurs, Stage la is unusual in that the legs I are bobbed or rotated slightly (films are inconclusive) and continuously while lateral movement occurs. Lateral movements usually consists of one change of direction (0-3) with virtually no pause when changing direction during a sequence. Pauses between sequences were fairly long; the legs I continued to be bobbed and the palpi stridulated during pauses. Lateral movements were much wider than other species (2-2.5 cm vs 0.5-1 cm for other species).

PAGE 131

124 Phidippus putnami Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae striped with red and white scales proximally, covered with blue-gray scales distally; clypeus with red scales and white fringe; palpi with blue-gray and white scales; legs I fringed ventrally with yellow or variegated with black, white and yellow, and venter of femur metallic blue, with ventral yellow tuft; dorsal setal crests. Type 1 courtship . The courtship of this species is quite slow, equalled or surpassed in length only by that of P_. whitman! and Stage lb of _P. mystaceus , both of which are otherwise quite different. At the beginning, both legs are bobbed alternately, then one begins rotating and the other stops. After a long pause, the other leg begins rotating. During each rotation of a leg I, the male advances directly toward the female, initially as much as 1.5 cm per move, later only a few mm as he nears the female. The palpi keep up a steady, alternate rotation, crossing in front of the chelicerae beginning with an upward, inward motion. One rotation occurs every 2 sec. and continues whether the male is moving or stationary; palpal movement continues until Stage II begins. The courtship of _P. putnami differs from other species in its long pauses, alternate rotation of legs, and rotation of palpi. Phidippus otiosus Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent green-blue; clypeus fringe black; palpi black and orange, legs I fringed with black and orange; 4 ocular tufts. Female chelicerae are iridescent orangegold-green, a unique color combination that may be important for recognition of the female by the male.

PAGE 132

125 Type I courtship . The legs I are held away from the body and fairly high. The single flick per sequence occurs at the beginning of lateral movement; it is not quite vertical nor are the legs I quite parallel. The flick is relatively soft, i.e., is not a quick up-and-down jerky movement, but rather a smooth upward movement after which the legs I are gradually dropped back to their original position. The palpi are moved back-and-forth alternately just as the movement sequence ends. Some individual variation exists in timing of movement and pauses, but in all cases the pause is about twice the length of the movement sequence. The courtship is similar to that of P_. regius , except the flick is softer, the legs I are not spread as wide or brought as high, and the movement sequence faster. The anterior decorations also have different coloration than P_. regius . Phidippus regius Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent green-blueviolet; clypeus fringe black; palpi black and white; leg I fringed with black and white; no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . The legs I are held wide and moderately high. The flick is a quick, strong up-and-down movement, bringing the legs I straight up and parallel, then quickly back to their original position. The flick occurs at the beginning of the lateral movement sequence, and palpal movement as in P_. otiosus occurs at the end of the sequence. Some individual variation occurs in timing, but sequences averaged only slightly longer than pauses. Although similar to _P. otiosus , the courtship of P_. regius was more extreme in its position and movements, and the timing of the lateral movement sequences was longer and similar in duration to the pauses

PAGE 133

126 between sequences. Large males, with their allometrically larger legs I, held the legs I closer together and lower than normal, and did not raise them as high during the flick. Phidippus otiosus X Phidippus regius hybrid Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent green-blue; clypeus fringe black; palpi black and white; legs I fringed with black and white; no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . Although parts of the courtships of both parent species were sometimes mixed in various ways, most often the courtship of the hybrids was as follows: The femora were held straight up and the distal part of the leg was spread very wide and parallel to the substrate. The flick was at the beginning of the lateral movement, and was very high and parallel, usually hard like P_. regius , sometimes soft like P. otiosus . The palpi were moved at the end of the sequence as in both parent species. The pause was at least twice as long as the lateral movement sequence. Overall, the position and movement of the legs I and the coloration was like P_. regius , but the timing of movements and pauses was like P_. otiosus . Phidippus audax Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent gold-greenblue; clypeus fringe black; palpi black and white; legs I fringed with black and white, no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . At the beginning of courtship the legs I are waved alternately; occasionally this type of movement is maintained throughout Stage I. Usually, however, the legs 1 become synchronized on the second or third lateral movement sequence. The legs I are held close to the body, moderately spread at the femur-patella joint, and

PAGE 134

127 distally held about 20° above parallel to the substrate. The flick is a short upward inward movement, bringing the tarsi halfway between parallel and touching one another. Usually two but up to four flicks may occur beginning as the lateral movement starts. The palpi move at the end of the movement sequence as in .P. otiosus . The lateral movements and pauses are both quick, the pauses slightly longer. The combination of femora held close to the body, moderate upward angle to the distal legs I (intermediate between J?, princeps and P_. pulcherrimus ) , and double flick are distinctive for P_. audax . Phidippus xerus Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent gold-green; clypeus fringe black; palpi black and white; leg I fringed with black and white, no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . The legs I are held partially forward, away from the body; distally the legs I are parallel both to the substrate and to each other. Usually three quick upward inward flicks are done consecutively at the beginning of each lateral movement sequence; these are done so smoothly that they appear to be 3 consecutive rotations, and they may be, but the film is inconclusive on this point. The palpi are moved as in P_. otiosus , but at the same time as the leg movements. The pause is nearly twice as long as the lateral movement sequence. The relatively low position of the femur, the double parallel position of the distal leg segments, the triple smooth flick, and the timing of the palpal movements are diagnostic of the courtship of P.

PAGE 135

128 Phidippus princeps Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent green; clypeus fringe black; palpi black and white; leg I fringed with black and white; no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . The femora I are held straight up and close to the body. The legs I are held apart a variable distance, varying with individuals. The legs I are held moderately high; the usually double flick is upward and inward, so that the tarsi are halfway between parallel and touching, and occurs at the beginning of the lateral movement sequence. The palpi are moved twice each alternately at the end of the movement sequence. Pauses are 1.5-2 times longer than movement sequences; neither are particularly quick, although there is some individual variation. The higher leg position and higher flick distinguish the courtship of P_. princeps from those of the similar P_. pulcherrimus and _P. audax . Phidippus pulcherrimus Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent green; clypeus fringe black; palpi black and white; leg I fringes black and white; no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . The femora I are held partially forward, the distal segments of legs I only slightly apart and slightly angled away from the substrate. The double flick occurs at the beginning of each lateral movement sequence, and is short and straight up. Palpi are moved at the end of sequence as in P_. princeps . Alternation of movement and pause is quick. The courtship of P_. pulcherrimus is very similar to the closely related P_. princeps ; the legs I are held much lower and the flick is of less amplitude and is straight upward, lacking the inward component of the flick of both P_. princeps and P. audax .

PAGE 136

129 Phidippus clarus Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent green; clypeus fringe black; palpi black and white; leg I fringe black and white; no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . The femora I are held forward and away from the body. The distal segments of legs I are held wide at the femur-patella joint and slanted slightly toward the substrate (below parallel). A single flick occurs at the beginning of lateral movements sequence and covers 80° of arc (each leg) . The legs I are straight up and parallel at the peak of the flick, then rapidly dropped back down. The palpi are held wide and downward without any movement. The timing varies with individuals, but generally the pause is about 3 times as long as the movement sequence. The low, wide leg position and the quick, high amplitude flick easily distinguish the courtship of P_. clarus . Phidippus cardinalis Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae dull red proximally, slightly iridescent blue distally; clypeus fringe black; palpi black; legs fringed with black and white; no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . The legs I are held high (the highest of any species studied), close to the body, and parallel to each other. The mid-leg is bent forward at a 60° angle from the substrate and 45° outward; the distal 2 segments are bent straight upward at a 70° angle. The single, sometimes double, flick at the beginning of a lateral movement sequence brings the legs I straight upward and inward so that the tarsi touch or cross. Palpal movement could not be confirmed by the films, but in one instance 2 alternate pair of palpal movements seemed to occur at the end of a movement sequence. Each lateral movement was

PAGE 137

130 quick, but the intervening pauses were much longer, usually 5-6 sec. The courtship of _P. cardinalis is similar to the related P_. whitmani , but differs in holding the legs higher and lacking the vibratory component. Also similar is the courtship of _P. apacheanus , but _P. cardinalis holds the legs I close to the body, not away from the body as does P_. apacheanus . Type II courtship . On one occasion a male performed a vibratory courtship while entering a nest occupied by a female. I was unable to observe details of this courtship, and note here only that _P. cardinalis does have a Type II courtship. Phidippus whitmani Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae black, with proximal median white fringes, slightly iridescent blue distally; clypeus with white scales and fringes; palpi white; leg I fringes white; no ocular tufts. Type I courtship . The legs I are held close to the body, the femora straight up. The distal segments of leg I are moderately high, angled outward slightly at the femur-patella joint. Usually 1 or 2 inward upward flicks bring the legs I parallel or rarely touching tarsi; the peak of the flick is held for 3-5 seconds, then the legs I are gradually returned to their original position. Simultaneous with each flick, the whole body is vibrated. The stance of the supporting 3 pairs of legs is exceptionally wide. The prosoma is held high and the abdomen angled downward. The palpi are angled outward about 30°, except the cymbia which were about 45° (in one instance the cymbia were bent upward 90°, parallel with the substrate). Movement time was very quick and consisted of the quick flicks and vibrations, and a shuffle forward straight at the female. Pause time varied considerably among individuals

PAGE 138

131 but was always quite long. Although there is no lateral movement in this courtship, one individual rocked back and forth in place several times at the beginning of the courtship, then commenced the usual flick and vibrate advance. The courtship of P_. whitmani , although showing some similarities to the related _P. cardinalis in leg position and flicking, is very distinctive. The positioning of the palpi, the slow return of a high flick, and especially the vibrations are all unique. The positioning of the support legs and the vibrations seem remarkably similar to those reported for the courtship of a sparassid, Heteropoda venatoria (L.), by Rovner (1980) . Phidippus whitmani is the only species which lives exclusively on forest leaf litter, a substrate that is used by lycosids to transmit and amplify vibrations during courtship (Rovner, 1967). There is considerable circumstantial evidence that the vibratory part of the courtship is a signal sent through the substrate to the female; it may be the single most important component of the courtship (since most of the male's courtship time is spent motionless) and merits further investigation. Type II courtship . Five males were observed performing a vibratory courtship while attempting to enter nests of females (some were occupied, some were empty). The entire body was vibrated while the male was engaged with the silk. One male performed 9 consecutive vibrations, averaging about 1.2 vibrations per sec. A second male vibrated 3 times consecutively. The other males performed multiple sequences of vibrations (pauses between sequences averaged about 3 sec), which I terminated after 6, 5, and 5 sequences, respectively. The ranges and mean number of vibrations per sequence were as follows: 9-12, x=10; 2-4, x=3; 6-12,

PAGE 139

132 x=7.6. See the end of the following chapter for further discussion of vibratory courtship. Phidippus apacheanus Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent green; clypeus fringe black; palpi black; leg I fringe black and white; 2 dorsal tufts. Type I courtship . During the single partial courtship I filmed, the legs I were held fairly low, the femora held away from the body. The single flick was upward and inward, the tarsi nearly touching. The palpi were moved twice each alternately at the end of a movement sequence. The pause was about 3 times as long as the movement sequence. The courtship is similar to that of P. cardinalis , but the legs are held away from the body and usually not parallel to each other. The highly iridescent chelicerae are strikingly different from the dull chelicerae of P_. cardinalis . Possibly the part of the courtship I observed was a transitional stage between Stage I and Stage II, as the legs I were held much lower than described by Gardner (1965). Individual or geographic variations may also be the reason for the observed differences. Phidippus purpuratus Anterior decorations of male . Chelicerae iridescent gold-greenblue; clypeus fringe black; palpi black; leg I fringe black and white; 2 dorsal tufts. Type I courtship . The legs I are held in an unusual fashion, the femora close to the body and straight up, the mid-legs parallel to the substrate and bent out 45°, and the distal segments straight forward and angled upward 30°. The flick is single or double, upward and inward and at the beginning of the lateral movement sequence. If double, the second flick is held up briefly before returning to original position.

PAGE 140

133 The palpi did not appear to move, although the film did not show them well. Timing was a little slower than most of the quicker courtships; the pause was about twice as long as the movement sequence. The peculiar angles of the leg segments are the most distinguishing feature of the courtship of P_. purpuratus . Discussion The Type I courtships of P. mystaceus and P_. putnami were clearly different in method (the types of movements of the legs I and palpi) from all of the other species observed, supporting their phylogenetic separation from the other species based on morphology (see Chapter 2) . However, the courtships of J?, mystaceus and P_. putnami were as different from each other as they were from the other species, indicating that these two species may not belong to the same phylogenetic line. Further examination of related species will be necessary in order to determine the relationship of these two species. Jackson (in prep.) has found that the apparent sister species of .P. putnami (JP. femoratus Peckham & Peckham of western North America) has a courtship very similar to that of P_. putnami . In the subgenus Phidippus , similarities among courtships generally agreed with morphological groupings. The courtships of P.. audax, P_. otiosus , _P. regius , P_. princeps , P_. pulcherrimus , J?, purpuratus , and P_. xerus differ only in details. The courtships of the related P_. cardinalis and P_. whitmani are very similar; _P. whitmani appears to have evolved a vibratory component in connection with its leaf litter habitat. The courtship of P. apacheanus is more like the unrelated P. cardinalis than like the related P_. purpuratus , and the courtship of ?_. clarus has

PAGE 141

134 more in common with those like _P. audax than to its apparent morphological relatives, the P. cardinalis group (this latter group holds the legs I high, while the other species drop the legs I to a lower position after a high flick) . Overall, courtship behavior was a good indicator of phylogenetic relationship based on morphology. This finding agrees with that of Richman (1977), who examined one or a few representatives of several genera. The pitfalls of leaning too much on behavioral data are also pointed out; within a single genus, three phylogenetic lines of courtship development are apparent, two of which include components unknown for other salticids (stridulation and vibration) , and the third line demonstrates a behavior (palpal rotation by P. putnami ) which is known only from one species group of Pellenes , an unrelated genus also containing several lines of courtship development (Richman, 1977).

PAGE 142

CHAPTER 6 SOUND PRODUCTION BY COURTING MALES OF Phidippus mystaceus (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) The courtship rituals of male salticids generally are considered to be visually-oriented, despite the fact that a primarily tactile type of courtship has been demonstrated for 2 species of Phidippus (Edwards, 1975; Jackson, 1977a). In addition, chemotactic cues probably assist a male in locating a female in most species of jumping spiders (Richman, 1977) . Males of Phidippus mystaceus (Hentz) produce sound as an integral part of their courtship. The sound, produced by means of a palpal stridulatory mechanism, is the first known case of this type for a salticid, although a similar stridulatory organ has been reported for lycosid spiders (Rovner, 1975). The only other reports of a salticid producing sound were by Bristowe (1958) , who reported that Euophrys frontalis (Walckenaer) made a "distinct sound as the tarsal claws (of the legs I of the male) hit the ground...," and by Bristowe and Locket (1926), who had reported earlier on the same species, but had implicated the legs II as the sound producers. In either case, it was not clear if the sound produced by E. frontalis was an integral part of the courtship or incidentally produced by the movement of the legs. Experimental Procedure Four females and 2 males, offspring of P. mystaceus female collected in Oklahoma, were reared to maturity from an eggsac containing 12 eggs. 135

PAGE 143

136 The spiders were housed separately in 9 x 1 cm plastic petri dishes; twice a week they were provided with water by moistening a wad of cotton within the dish and were fed larvae of the cabbage looper, Trichoplusia ni (Hubner) . Two different techniques were used for observing courtships: 1) the male was placed directly into a female's petri dish, on the side opposite the female, or 2) the male and female were placed 5-15 cm apart on a 30 x 10 cm section of a live-oak branch, in order to simulate natural conditions. Temperature ranged from 24-26 °C for all sessions. Six separate filming and/or recording sessions lasted 10-90 min. each. Films were made using a Beaulieu Super-8-mm movie camera and an Auricon Pro 600 16-rnm movie camera. Sound recordings were made with a Sony TC-756-2 reel-to-reel tape recorder and a Turner S22D microphone. The audiospectrogram was produced on a Kay 7029A Sound Spectrograph. Results Courtships were observed for one of the males (the second male was killed by the first female with which he was placed) . Typically a male placed into the petri dish housing a female almost immediately begins palpating the female's draglines and her abandoned nests, continuing this palpal exploration until he detects the female visually. If the female is not inside a nest when first seen by the male (usually from 3-6 cm), the male begins producing a soft, audible trill that is systematically repeated. By apparently engaging the substrate with enlarged setae (macrosetae) encircling apical, whorled setae on the tips of the palpal cymbia (similar to those observed on lycosids by Rovner, 1975; Figure 6-1), leverage is produced which enables a stridulatory mechanism on the palpus to be operated. This mechanism consists of a

PAGE 144

137 plectrum-like projection of the tibial apophysis which fits into a bowlshaped area on the cymbium containing a complicated file system. The entire mechanism is located laterally (ectally) ; in lycosids it is located dorsally. Also, lycosids have the file on the tibia facing a cymbial plectrum, the reverse of the condition in J?, mystaceus . The file system of _P. mystaceus consists of 2 types of adjacent file fields which blend into one another. Within the concavity is a fan-shaped file, while along the distal edge of concavity is a linearly-arranged file similar to lycosid files. Neither file is as well-defined as the lycosid files. The individual ridges of P. mystaceus ' files are rounded whereas those of lycosids have distinct edges; however, in P_. mystaceus , both types of file are overlaid with numerous short ridges of variable length (Figure 6-2). For each sound sequence, both palpi become engaged nearly simultaneously by a backward movement in which the palpi appear to be dragged along the surface of the substrate for a distance of about 1 mm. Halfway through the backward movement, the cymbia are bent backward at an angle to the palpal tibiae (Figure 6-3). At the end of the backward movement, the palpi remain stationary for a fraction of a sec. while the cymbia are rotated outward. The palpi may be returned to their most anterior position by reversing the sequence of backward movement. Only when the palpi are in their most anterior position are they clearly off the substrate. A single cycle of palpal movement is approximately 0.8 sec. (5 frames at 6 frames per sec). Audiospectrograms indicate that 13-20 (x = 17, n = 8) paired stridulations are made consecutively, separated by pauses subequal to the sound sequences (Figure 6-4) . Alternation of stridulations and pauses occurs at the rate of 1.6 sound sequences per second.

PAGE 145

138 Simultaneous with the initiation of sound production, the male extends his legs I forward, positioning them just above and parallel to the substrate, and spread approximately 40° apart. The tarsi and metatarsi are turned upward about 15° and occasionally flicked upward together. (On one occasion, at a distance of about 1 cm from the female, the tarsi and metatarsi were flicked continuously for several sec. at approximately 2 flicks per sec). The male's approach is usually direct, without the zigzag movement (lateral stepping movement) characteristic of some other Phidippus species and many other salticids. Forward movement is slow and halting, the male often remaining in one spot for several min. Total courtship time is long compared to the rapid advance of the males of some Phidip pus species, on 3 occasions lasting approximately 8 min. before the female terminated the courtship by leaving the vicinity. These 3 longest courtships reached an advanced stage, wherein the male brought his legs I closer together, touched the female, and attempted to mount her; however, none of the 4 females allowed their male sibling to mate them. Instead, each raised her legs I to repel him, and, if the male was persistent, lunged sharply forward with open fangs, struck downward with the legs I, and forced him backward; the female then left the vicinity. On two occasions, the male performed a zigzag display; once prior to assuming his stridulatory stance, and once in the middle of courtship after several sequences of stridulation. In the first instance, the zigzag display was brief, lasting less than 30 sec. and consisting of 4 changes of direction, with a pause between each lateral move. In the second instance, during mid-courtship, 7 multiple zigzags occurred which included 1-3 changes of direction during each lateral stepping sequence; total elapsed time was about 3 min.

PAGE 146

139 If the female is initially in and remains in a nest when the male is introduced into the petri dish, the male continuously palpates the substrate, interspersing sequences of stridulation. Upon finding the nest sheltering the female, the male attempts to gain entrance by probing and pulling at the silk with his legs I, interspersing sequences of palpal vibration on the silk. (Note: other species known to use a tactile courtship vibrate their entire body) . I could not determine the movement pattern of this palpal vibration, but the palpi were not in contact with the petri dish and no audible sound was produced. After the preceding research was completed, I collected two antepenultimate P. mystaceus and reared them to maturity (October, 1979). A courtship and mating was observed for this pair, but it was neither filmed nor recorded. Courtship appeared in all respects to be identical to that of the Oklahoma male, including type of sound, stance, and the rapid upward flicking of the tarsi and metatarsi at less than 1 cm distance from the female. Mating occurred in the female's nest and lasted 87 min. until the female left the nest. Upon separating, the male renewed courtship, initially showing a single lateral stepping sequence as in the Oklahoma male. The female avoided the male, and the pair was separated. Discussion Known reproductive behavior of the males of species of Phidippus involves a male locating a female by visual or chemotactic means, a visually-oriented courtship by the male consisting of a series of movements with the legs I and palpi (usually while advancing in a zigzag path), mounting of the female by the male, and mating. Typically the male is conspicuously marked with bright and/or contrasting colors both

PAGE 147

140 anteriorly and dorsally; the anterior patterns are displayed during courtship. Unlike most other species, both males and females of P_. mystaceus are cryptically-colored gray spiders that live in trees (Specht and Dondale, 1960; Warren et al. , 1967, as P. incertus ; see Edwards, 1977, for nomenclatorial comments); males have mostly anteriorlyoriented modifications (Figure 6-5). While anterior modifications are probably used by each sex to identify the other (especially the female recognizing the male as a conspecific and potential mate) from distances of a few centimeters, visual identification at longer distances would seem to be severely handicapped by cryptic coloration. A mechanism which increased the male's chances of locating a female could be selected for under these circumstances. The role of acoustic or vibratory signals in the courtship of P. mystaceus probably evolved with cryptic coloration. As selection for cryptic coloration increased in association with exploitation of a new microhabitat (most Phidippus species live in the herb-shrub zone), the role of visual communication was in part supplanted by sound during courtship. The use of sound, whether airborne or substrate-borne, has several advantages over conventional visual courtship, because sound extends the male's communicatory distance from a few centimeters to over a meter (based on the audible component available to the human ear) . Sound is transmitted well through solids, and considering that in this case sound is produced on the substrate, vibrations through this medium may be the most important sound component for female-to-male orientation (as Rovner, 1967, showed to be the case for wolf spiders). By orienting toward the male upon perception of the sound, the female might sooner visually detect and be able to evaluate the male as a prospective mate, and thus sooner choose to wait for or flee from him. The advantages gained by the

PAGE 148

141 male by increasing his communicatory distance might be: 1) alerting a receptive female to his presence at a greater distance, possibly causing her to remain in the vicinity for a longer period of time (and perhaps inhibiting her predatory instincts) , so that the male has a greater chance of finding and courting her; 2) based on many observations of P_. mystaceus and of other Phidippus species, non-receptive females usually avoid advancing males; thus, by alerting a female to his presence at a greater distance, a male would reduce the chance of triggering an aggressive response by a non-receptive female. As evidence for these probable advantages, analysis of courtships showed that the male began courting a female from 2-4 times further away when unconfined (on the live-oak branch) than did other species of Phi dippus when observed under unconfined experimental conditions (Edwards, 1975). At the greater distances, only sound was used initially by a _P. mystaceus male upon sighting a female, indicating that this form of communication was important in alerting a female to his presence. Sound was also used alternately with palpal exploration of the silk when the male was in contact with the female's draglines in the petri dish, even though she was not visible. Under natural conditions, a male likely would often encounter a female's dragline prior to locating her; he could maximize his chances of mating by beginning to signal immediately, regardless of whether or not the female was visible to him. The male's initial palpal exploration of the female's silk draglines and nests has been noted for other salticids (Richman, 1977). Hill (1977a, b) demonstrated the presence of whorled setae on the tarsi and palpal cymbia of other species of Phidippus , and, noting the similarity of these setae to insect pheromone receptors, hypothesized that those setae were contact chemoreceptors. Judging from the behavior of the male

PAGE 149

142 .P. mystaceus (which has the same type of whorled setae on its palpal cymbia; Figure 6-1), this hypothesis may well be correct; the presence of a contact pheromone on the silk could indicate to a male that a female was, or had been, in the vicinity. The behavior in _P. mystaceus of engaging the palpi against the substrate is probably derived from similar behavior among its relatives. Males of other species of Phidippus move their palpi up and down or back and forth during courtship. This behavior appears to preadapt them for engaging the substrate, since only a slight change in the amplitude and/ or attitude of these movements would bring the palpi into contact with the substrate. The same movement occurs more intensely and rapidly when a male encounters silk made by a female, in association with chemotactile exploration; it is likely that this is the evolutionary pathway of the development of the use of sound in _P. mystaceus . The behavioral application of the palpi to the substrate by F_. mystaceus appears to differ from lycosids in that P. mystaceus moves the tips of the palpi while stridulating during each brief sound sequence, whereas the lycosids apparently remain attached in one place to the substrate for a prolonged sequence of sound production. The presence of a linearly-arranged file on the distal edge of the cymbial bowl was indicated by a few large ridges (at 75X) . Subsequent S.E.M. photomicrographs showed a fan-shaped file system which was barely discernible at 100X. As noted earlier, both files were overlaid with minute ridges. It is possible that the larger ridges are responsible for the lower frequencies observed on the audiospectrogram, and the smaller ridges produce the higher frequency wavelengths.

PAGE 150

143 By simulating the direction of palpal movement with a model, it is apparent that the backward movement would cause the fan-shaped file to be drawn across the plectrum, while the rotary movement would bring the linear file into contact with the plectrum. The fan shape of the proximal file would accomodate the arc-shaped movement as the palpus is bent on the backward stroke. Despite the differences in arrangement and shape of the larger ridges, the ultrastructure of the two files is similar and they seem to produce the same sound. The entire sequence appears to be reversible; in fact, the timing of a complete palpal movement (approximately 0.8 sec.) is remarkably close to half the number of sound sequences per sec. (1.6), suggesting that two stridulatory actions are made with each palpus, one on the back stroke, and a second by reversing the action on the return stroke. The files appear to be oriented so that they could be stroked from either direction. Examination of Figure 6-4 will show one sound sequence is exactly 0.8 sec, equally divided between sound and pause. The shape and arrangement of the macrosetae at the tip of the cymbium are such that a downward, forward pressure would engage them with the substrate. By dragging the palpus backward, enough leverage is apparently produced to move the fan-shaped file across the relatively stationary plectrum; however, the backward movement and bend of the palpus also may be a prerequisite to positioning the macrosetae into the substrate. Once the palpus is anchored in the substrate, the cymbium is rotated laterally outward, then the direction of movement is reversed. The structure involved in sound production by rotating is the linear file; the cymbium must be rotated sideways due to the lateral position of the file. The mechanics of sound production with the linear file are similar to those

PAGE 151

144 of the lycosids with respect to the palpus anchored by macrosetae and the similar file structure, by P. mystaceus differs from the lycosids in the location of the stridulatory organ, the type of movement needed to engage the file, and the reversed positions of the file and plectrum. The stridulatory mechanisms known in other spiders incorporate plectrum and file systems on opposing faces of the chelicerae and palpi, legs I and II, carapace and legs I, carapace and abdomen (Gertsch, 1979), or between palpal tibia and tarsus (Rovner, 1975). In each of these cases, either the plectrum is moved across a stationary file, or both plectrum and file are moved together. The stridulatory mechanism of P. mystaceus differs from all of these in that the primary moving part is the file. Although the plectrum is passively moved in space during the movement of the palpus to engage the substrate, the cymbium containing the files is actively moved against the plectrum on the tibia. When the palpus is fixed on the substrate with the macrosetae, again it is the cymbium that is moved against the stationary plectrum. Conclusion The use of stridulation to produce sound by P. mystaceus appears to represent a third method of communication for salticids (a fourth method if the tarsal percussion of Euophrys frontalis is a valid communicatory process) . Despite the fact that females used for the present research failed to respond favorably to courtship by their sibling male, the behavioral and morphological evidence in the male of a functional role for sound production during courtship is substantial.

PAGE 152

145 Additional Observations A third method of sound production in spiders, vibration (producing a "buzz" similar to that of a fly) , has been demonstrated for the sparassid spider, Heteropoda venatoria (L.) (Rovner, 1980). In the same paper, low amplitude appendage oscillations resulting in a faint whirring sound were reported for Lycosa rabida Walckenaer. Phidippus whitmani Peckham and Peckham employs entire-body (?) vibration (lacking an audible component, but with a widely-spaced stance similar to H. venatoria ) during its Type I visual courtship (Edwards, unpublished). This is probably an adaptation to its microhabitat (mesophytic leaf litter) , the same substrate used for vibratory signalling by many lycosids. I have noted another vibratory behavior that also seems similar to that of H. venatoria during the Type II tactile courtship of Phidippus regius C. L. Koch, while the male is contacting the nest of the female (Edwards, 1975) . Subsequent laboratory observation showed a similar behavior for J?, whitmani , although the timing of vibratory sequences was different than those of P. regius , probably a species-specific difference. Jackson (1977) reported a similar behavior for P. johnsoni (Peckham and Peckham) and suggested a similarity in some respects to the vibratory courtships of web-building spiders. I suspect that the vibratory courtships of Phidippus species, although not producing an audible component that I could detect, may be more like the courtships of H. venatoria than like web-builders (perhaps these latter two are similar?) and should be further investigated. It is curious that all known forms of non-tactile direct inter-individual communication not involving vision in salticids involve the production of acoustic or vibratory signals. In the case of P. mystaceus and P. whitmani , both types of communication are used simultaneously, although the two species produce vibrations in different ways.

PAGE 153

146 Figure 6-1. Distal ectal view of palpus of P. mystaceus , showing macrosetae (M) used to engage substrate (100X) .

PAGE 154

147 Figure 6-2. Stridulatory organ of male _P. mystaceus , showing fanshaped file (F), linear file (L) , and plectrum (P) .

PAGE 155

148 Figure 6-3. Diagrammatic illustration of movement of left palpus by male P. mystaceus during stridulation. A. Anterior position. B. Backward movement, during which cymbium is bent backward, moving fan-shaped file across plectrum. C. Rotary movement, during which macrosetae are engaged in substrate and cymbium is rotated outward. F = File cavity, T = Tibial apophysis.

PAGE 156

149 CSJ oo LILBJlJlElD.ELrLS_OJU3J3Ja_S_a_ 0)0 a) rj 3-° 60 ^

PAGE 157

150 1 . m& *.' •/ '>*• Figure 6-5. Anterior view of male _P. mystaceus .

PAGE 158

CHAPTER 7 DIFFERENTIAL ATTACK RESPONSES BY Phidippus SPP. (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) TO CONTRASTING PREY TYPES Hollis and Branson (1964) first recorded differential responses by a salticid to different types of live prey. They observed Phidippus audax (Hentz) attempting to capture the salticid Metacyr ba undata (DeGeer) by jumping at the intended prey, but not jumping when capturing Tenebrio larvae. Gardner (1965) noted slight differences in the approach of juvenile P. coccineus Peckham & Peckham to Drosophila and Calliphora . Edwards et al. (1974) described different attack methods used by the salticid Corythalia canosa (Walckenaer) (= Stoidis aurata (Hentz)) when attacking various ant species. Field and laboratory observations of prey capture by Phidippus regius C. L. Koch (Edwards 1975) indicated that this salticid utilized different methods of approach and capture for larval Lepidoptera and adult Diptera. These 2 prey types have frequently been reported in the natural diet of foliage-dwelling species of Phidippus (Whitcomb et al. 1963, Warren et al. 1967, Jackson 1977). In the present research, 7 species of Phidippus were analyzed for differences in attack behavior due to these 2 types of prey and to the species of spider. Materials and Methods Adult and subadult Phidippus (Fig. 7-1) were obtained from their natural habitats in Florida, except for 6 P. clarus and 2 P. putnami (captured in Missouri) ; some adults of P. regius , P. otiosus , and P. 151

PAGE 159

152 apacheanus were laboratory-reared from eggsacs of females captured in Florida. The spiders were individually housed in 90 X 10 mm plastic petri dishes and were provided with fresh water by means of a small, moist wad of cotton in the dish. Only adult spiders were tested. Proffered prey were 4th and 5th instar larvae of the cabbage looper, Trichoplusia ni (Hubner) , and adults of the house fly, Musca domestica (L.). Individual tests were conducted in the following manner: 1) a single cabbage looper (hereafter referred to as looper) was placed directly into the petri dish housing a spider, or 2) first a spider and then a house fly (hereafter referred to as fly) were placed in a 90 X 20 mm glass petri dish (because the 10-mm-deep petri dishes overly restricted the flies' flight). I measured the distance the spider jumped to capture its prey by refering to a sheet of graph paper lined with 1 mm graticules positioned under the petri dish. Measurements were made from the point where the chelicerae of the spider had been located just prior to a jump to the part of the prey nearest the spider. I estimated my accuracy of measurement to be 1 mm for the capture of loopers and + 2 mm for flies. The position of the spider in respect to the prey at the time of attack was also recorded. The spider was considered to be anterior to a looper if the spider's sagittal plane was in front of the 3rd pair of true legs, posterior to the looper if behind the mid-abdominal prolegs, and lateral if in-between. Similarly, the spider was considered to be anterior to the fly if in front of the cervix, posterior to the fly if behind the pedicel, and lateral if in-between. Most spiders were offered both types of prey, but the number of times each type of prey was tested for each spider varied. Capture distances were compared for the 2 types of prey using Students' t test; differences

PAGE 160

153 among species of Phidippus were examined by using a 1-way analysis of variance, Duncan's Multiple Range Test for unequal sample size, and Chisquare (p<0.05 for all tests unless otherwise indicated). Results Spiders attacked loopers from significantly shorter distances than they attacked flies (Fig. 7-1). Typically, upon seeing a moving looper, a spider would rapidly approach to within 10-12 mm, then pause and watch the intended prey. If the looper continued to move, the spider would circle until it was directly in the looper' s path, stalk forward a few mm, leap, and then bite the looper in the dorsum of the thorax. If the looper changed its direction of movement as the spider was preparing to jump, the spider would reposition itself. If the looper stopped moving after the spider had already seen it but before the spider approached it, the spider might approach and attack the posterior or the anterior end while the looper was stationary, or might attack any part of the looper that moved. On 5 occasions (out of 225) involving 3 species (P . regius (3) , P. otiosus , P. audax ) , a spider walked directly to a looper and captured it without jumping (0 mm). In contrast to captures of loopers, which were predominantly made from anterior to a looper, captures of flies by most species of Phidippus tested occurred with similar frequencies from all directions (Fig. 7-2). Upon seeing the fly (mean distance approx. 60 mm), the spider would move stealthily, although rapidly (approx. 1-2 cm/sec) to within 25-30 mm of the fly. Regardless of the direction of attack, the spider almost always captured the fly by biting it in the thorax near the wing bases. Over 50% of successful attacks on flies were initiated from directions other than anterior to the flies for all Phidippus species tested.

PAGE 161

154 P. regius C. L. Koch T=48 P. otiosus (Hentz) T=32 P_„ apacheanus Chamber lin &. Gertsch T=10 P„ audax (Hentz) T=26 P_. clarus Keyserlin^ T=15 P. pulcherrimus Keyserling T=18 P_ putnami (Peckham & Peckham) T=13 captured prey: cabbage looper * :]_=jo, nj_» * + * house fly #3! ti=38, n,=65 t 2 =38, n 2 =50 nb t^-21, n x =22 t 2 =16, n 2 =20 ^b t 1 =9, n,=17 t 2 =6, n 2 =18 ^^bc ti=23, n x =40 t 2 =18, n 2 =3D be ti-14, n x =23 t 2 =12, n 2 =20 £.=17, nj-40 t 2 =14, n 2 =30 _-^b t 1 =ll, n 1 =18 t 2 =13, n 2 =30 distance jumped (mm) Figure 7-1. Comparison of capture of cabbage looper and house fly by Phidippus species. Diagram consists of mean, 95% confidence interval, and range. Diagrams accompanied by the same letter (a,b,c) are not significantly different (Duncan's Multiple Rnage Test, p 0.01). T = total # of spiders of that species tested, t-^ and t 2 = total spiders of that species tested for cabbage looper and house fly, respectively. Likewise, n and n„ = total captures of cabbage looper and house fly, respectively. Spider species listed by descending mean length; only P_. regius and _P. otiosus are significantly larger than the other species,

PAGE 162

155 O CO T— 1

PAGE 163

156

PAGE 164

157 Four species (P. regius , P. otiosus , P_. apacheanus , P_. putnami ) captured flies from distances significantly greater than P_. pulcherrimu s; P. audax and P. clarus were intermediate in capture distance. On 2 occasions, individuals of P. putnami refused to attack loopers offered to them, but subsequently captured flies. Loopers were always captured on the first attempt, but flies were often successful in evading a spider 1 or more times. I observed that some unsuccessful attacks were caused by the collision of the spider with the lid of the glass petri dish in mid-jump. This happened when the fly was on the side or top of the petri dish and the spider jumped from the bottom of the dish. Misses caused by collision with the glass were detected in 17% of all capture attempts in which one or more misses occurred. Phidippus audax and P_. apacheanus appeared to be more successful than most other species at capturing flies on their first try (Table 7-1). Although female Phidippus were slightly larger than males, there were no significant differences between sexes within a species for preycapture distance. Discussion All species of Phidippus tested appeared to be highly capable of distinguishing between loopers and flies. It seemed that the size, shape, and/or speed of movement of the intended prey influenced the method of approach and capture utilized by a spider; this observation agrees with those reported by Gardner (1964) of P_. clarus and Drees (1952) and Land (1972) for other salticids. It is not known whether this distinction between types of prey is an innate response or is a result of trial-and-error conditioning; however, judging by the markedly

PAGE 165

158 different approaches used, the spiders had in some manner evaluated the motility of the prey prior to attacking it. Usually a spider would watch the potential prey for a few seconds before approaching it, but a spider alternately might begin its approach as soon as a moving prey attacted its attention. In these instances, perhaps the prey was evaluated during the early, rapid stage of approach. In either case, apparently the spider can quickly recognize a generalized shape, associate it with motile ability, and then initiate its own appropriate response. Not only does a spider's attack sequence adjust for prey motility, but it is also deftly accomplished so as to minimize the prey's defenses. When attacked from the posterior, a looper strikes hard with its head capsule and also attempts to smear saliva on its attacker, but adult spiders simply use their forelegs to fend away the looper 's head until the spider's venom takes effect (however, I have observed this defensive maneuver on the part of the looper to be sometimes effective against young P. regius ) . A spider's normal attack immobilizes the looper 's head, preventing the looper from utilizing any defense except writhing (which I have observed to also be occasionally effective against young P. regius when the mass of the looper was considerably greater than that of the spiderling) . Under natural conditions, a writhing looper that was released would escape by dropping from the foliage. In addition, the petri dish deprives the looper of a similar defensive maneuver, that of dropping from the plant on a silken thread. The early instars of the cabbage looper are known to use this method of escape effectively when approached within 2-3 mm by the small salticid Hentzia palmarum (Hentz) (R. B. Skinner, personal communication). Since mean capture distances of loopers for each species of Phidippus were

PAGE 166

159 greater than 5 mm, it would seem that individual adult Phidippus normally circumvent this last defensive maneuver by jumping from a distance farther away than the looper's "early warning system" can detect. Flies are notorious for their quick escape flight. Spiders attacked flies by moving in a straight line directly toward the fly, regardless of the orientation of the fly in respect to the spider. Adjustments in direction were made only if the fly changed position. (In respect to changing position, I suspect that Gardner's (1965) observations of difference in the attack of _P. coccineus on Drosophila and Calliphora are due to the fact that Calliphora move faster across the field of vision of the spiders, therefore more often exposing their posterior to attack.) Spiders made no attempt to orient toward the anterior of the flies; to do so would probably have alerted a fly. Phidippus pulcherrimus , which had the shortest mean capture distance for flies, also had the poorest success at capturing flies on the first try. This contrast may be related to the spider's relatively small size, and the difficulty in its closer approach resulting in its greater tendency to attack from posterior to the fly. The little evidence available indicates that _P. putnami may prefer fly-like prey, perhaps in part explaining why the mean capture distance for flies of this species was significantly greater than the comparably-sized _P. pulcherrimus . Considering the relatively low expenditure of energy used in the pursuit of a lepidopterous larva (and sometimes in addition the availability of a considerable amount of biomass relative to the spider), it would seem to be a good strategy to specialize on lepidopterous larvae; in fact, some Phidippus may actively seek out this type of prey in preference to others, although this has yet to be demonstrated. One

PAGE 167

160 disadvantage of this feeding strategem would be increased competition with more specialized predators, e.g., nabids, some reduviids, of this particular type of prey. Another disadvantage is that lepidopterous larvae do not normally occur in a regular distribution, so that search time would be increased for a specialist (especially a non-winged specialist) on this prey type. On the other hand, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Hemiptera, and other smaller, winged and wingless prey are usually more numerous. A spider would be more likely to encounter prey in one of these latter categories. Although its pursuit time would be increased, its search time probably would be drastically reduced if it could capture many smaller prey. While many web-weaving spiders probably specialize to some extent on prey capture (e.g., Eberhard, 1975), the optimum strategy for a vagrant spider would be to take advantage of whatever prey was most available. In the case of a visual hunter like a Phidippus , modifications in its own behavior which would allow the hunter to recognize and circumvent different defensive behaviors by different prey types would certainly seem beneficial to the predator's survival. The demonstration here of different attack responses to contrasting types of prey indicates that species of Phidippus , probably in conjunction with their visual mode of hunting, have evolved the ability to disciminate between various potential prey organisms, and are able to modify their own attack behaviors to maximize the success of an attack on any particular prey individual.

PAGE 168

CHAPTER 8 INSTINCT AND CONDITIONED LEARNING AS FACTORS IN THE PREY-CAPTURE BEHAVIOR OF NAIVE SPIDERLINGS (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) As shown previously (Chapter 7) , adult Phidippus demonstrated behaviors when attacking adult Musca domestica (L.) that were quite different from their attack behaviors against larval Trichoplusia ni (Hiibner) . In an effort to determine whether or not these differences were instinctive, a result of conditioned learning, or a combination of both, naive Phidippus regius C. L. Koch first instar spiderlings (first free-living instar, after Vachon, 1957; Galiano, 1967; second instar of other authors) were tested against prey classes comparable to those used for adult Phidippus , as well as aphids and ants. Ants are known to be consistently fed upon by relatively few spiders (Levi, 1957; Hoelldobler, 1969; Edwards et al., 1974). Methods and Materials Individual spiderlings of P. regius were isolated and provided with water in individual petri dishes as described for adult Phidippus . Spiderlings were fed only during test situations. All were assumed to never have captured free-living prey, although some may have fed on infertile eggs (Valerio, 1974; Edwards, 1975). Spiderlings do not generally feed on each other while associated with the eggsac. Tests ranged over a period of 7 days, with no more than 1 prey offered per group per day. Spiderlings from 3 eggsacs were tested on 3 different occasions. Groups of 10 or more spiderlings from eggsacs A and B were tested against 3 of the following types of prey: 1) 2nd instar cabbage loopers, 161

PAGE 169

162 Trichoplusia ni (Hiibner) , 2) winged or vestigial-winged Drosophila melanogaster Meigen, 3) minor workers of the ants Pheidole metallescens Emery and Pheidole dentata Mayr, 4) robust, powdery-blue aphids of an undetermined species. Prey size ranged approximately from 0.25 the mass of the spiderlings in the case of the smaller ants to 1.5 times the spider ling's mass in the case of the aphids and loopers. Spiderlings from eggsac C were tested only with vestigial-winged Drosophila and loopers. Single prey individuals were placed into a 90 x 10 mm plastic petri dish. A spiderling was placed into the same dish immediately after (when Drosophila were prey) or before (all other prey) the introduction of the prey. Each test lasted at least 30 min. (unless the prey was captured sooner), during which time all interactions of the spiderling and prey were recorded. Distances of attempted captures were measured as described for adult Phidippus . All other test conditions were as described for adult Phidippus . Each group of spiderlings from a specific eggsac was subjected to a different type of initial prey. The second prey offered to a group was always different than the first prey. The third prey offered was either unlike any previous prey, or the same as the first. For one group (A) , a fourth prey was tested (loopers) which was the same as the second prey. No group was tested twice on the same day. Prey categories were tested with the following groups of spiderlings: 1 2 1) winged Drosophila A. ; 2) vestigial-winged Drosophila B, C. , C , C„, C~; 3) aphids -A.; 4) ants A., A , A„, B; 5) loopers A„ , A , A,, 1 2 B, C. , C. , C„, C . Subscripts indicate successive tests, superscripts indicate successive tests with same group of spiderlings.

PAGE 170

163 Spiderlings from eggsac A were divided into 3 initial groups for the first prey. Subsequent prey were not offered to specific groups due to within-group mortality, but were instead offered to composite groups made up of spiderlings from groups which had been given a different type of prey in an immediately preceding test. The only exception was the fourth prey offered (A ) which was the same as the second prey (loopers) for all individuals tested. Spiderlings from eggsac B were divided into three groups and only tested once. Spiderlings from eggsacs A and B were between 21 and 28 days old. Spiderlings from eggsac C were tested in an effort to determine the effects of age, since spiderlings upon emerging from an eggsac normally disperse by ballooning as their first activity. These spiderlings emerged at day 9 and were divided into 3 groups which were tested with first prey as follows: 10 days (C. ) , 12 days (Cp , and 14 days (C 3 ) . 2 Subgroups of C. were given a second prey on day 12 (C..; day 10 denoted by C,), but they prey were reversed. Student's t test was used to evaluate each pair-wise group comparison of prey-capture distances. Prey categories were then lumped regardless of group or sequence and tested in the same manner. Success of first attempt against different prey was compared with Chi-square. Direction of capture was recorded and compared with data for adult P_. regius . Level of significance was considered to be 0.05. Since there were no significant within-group differences in distance jumped between capture attempts and actual captures, the former category was used so as to enlarge the sample size. The most meaningful comparisons due to reasons discussed in the results were the following: comparison of first prey of groups C. (10-

PAGE 171

164 day-old), C 2 (12-day-old) , C (14-day-old) , and second prey of C (CI") ; comparison of inexperienced and experienced spiders with various prey; and comparison of lumped prey groups, regardless of sequence offered to spiderlings. Results and Discussion Effects of Age Early instars of many spiders, including immatures of species of Phidippus (Click, 1939, 1960; Horner, 1974) are known to disperse by ballooning. Dispersal occurs within a few days after leaving the eggsac and has been reported on numerous occasions, following a period of communal gregariousness which is presumed to be a period of acclimatization to the environment (Burch, 1979). The potential functions of dispersal are well-known, yet results of dispersal, such as the actual distance dispersed or even the nature of ballooning (whether it is obligatory or facultative) are poorly known (Crosby and Bishop, 1936; Kaston, 1948). In order to assess the effects of age on hunting behavior, 3 groups of 20 spiderlings each from eggsac C were offered prey during a period of time in which they would normally be dispersing. The results are presented in Table 8-1. Spiderlings normally attempt to balloon as soon as they leave the eggsac (personal observation) . The response of P_. regius naive spiderlings was initially good (15/20 attempted prey capture; 11 successful) when the first prey was offered on day 1 after emergence from the eggsac; only 7/20 attempted prey capture when the first prey was offered on day 3 (with only 3 successes) , and 17/20 (with 16 successes) attempted prey capture when the first prey was offered on day 5 (Table 8-1) . This trend is opposite that found by Forster (1977b) , who found a peak in pursuit and captures

PAGE 172

165 between days 2-3 after emergence for a New Zealand salticid, Trite aurlcoma (Urquhart) , which was continuously presented with prey. It agrees with her observation of one group of spiderlings not fed until the third day, few of which showed hunting responses; however, in another group she observed, 80% of the spiderlings caught prey on either the third or fourth day, and she noted considerable variation between broods. The apparent age effect on attempted prey capture is modified when the time of capture is considered. Only 2 of the 20 spiderlings of group C 1 (10-day-old) attempted to attack prey in less than 10 minutes from introduction of the prey. Five spiderlings made no attempts, and the 15 spiderlings which did attack did so an average of 42.7 min. (SE=9.5) for the 7 spiderlings attacking loopers, and an average of 16.9 min. (SE=2.6) for the 8 spiderlings attacking Drosophila (flies). These times were significantly different between types of prey (p<.02). Probably the more rapid movement of the flies caused a significantly sooner response by the spiderlings; yet, unlike older spiderlings or adults tested which usually responded in less than a minute to a prey stimulus, these spiderlings continuously wandered about the petri dish until eventually regarding a fly or looper as prey. During the wandering stage, the spiderlings would sometimes encounter the intended prey, but would either avoid contact or react defensively by raising the legs I and backing away (especially if the fly or looper was moving directly 2 toward the spiderling) . The same group (C ) offered prey 2 days later (on day 12) was less likely to attack prey, and another group (C„) offered first prey on day 12 was the least likely to attack prey. Group C , offered first prey on day 14, was both most likely to attack prey and most successful at capturing prey.

PAGE 173

166 Five of the 8 spiderlings that had attacked loopers (C ) also 2 attacked flies (C.; 2 successes). Four of the 8 spiderlings that had attacked flies (C ) later attacked loopers; in addition, 2 spiderlings 1 2 which did not attack flies (C ) attacked loopers (C ; all 6 attacks successful). In some instances where the spiderlings pursued flies in 1 2 either C or C , it was clear the spiderlings could not complete the hunting sequence because the flies moved too fast or too erratically. This observation agrees with Forster's (1977b). 2 For those spiderlings which attacked prey, C 1 and C~ were not significantly different than C. in the time taken for the first attack for either flies or loopers, respectively (C could not be compared for loopers) . I cannot explain why C spiderlings were successful at switching 2 from dispersal behavior, whereas the same group 2 days later (C ) and another group (C„) were less inclined to hunt and even less successful, given the same opportunity. But it was clear that the initial reaction from emergence from the eggsac through day 12 was of dispersal. I confirmed this by using spiderlings of the same age from another eggsac as a control: when set free, these spiderlings at once began climbing various plants and released silk in ballooning attempts. Attempted capture by C spiderlings were significantly sooner than C and C for loopers (X=4.9 min. , SE=2.1). Attempted captures of flies by C. were not significantly different in average time of first attack than any of the other groups in this test sequence. Two conclusions are suggested by these results: 1) by day 14, spiderlings normally have already completed dispersal and are more attentive to slower prey, and 2) the faster movement of flies is more likely to attract the attention

PAGE 174

167 of spider lings, regardless of their age or dispersal tendencies. This latter conclusion might in part explain Forster's (1977b) findings with Trite using Drosophila as prey; however, a more likely explanation is that since Trite are restricted in habitat, their dispersal is limited to leaving the immediate vicinity of the eggsac, and they begin to hunt sooner. Successful capture of loopers on the first attempt (81%) was significantly greater than for flies (41%) (p<.01). This result is the same found for adult Phidippus tested with similar prey, and reflects the relative ease of capture of slower prey. Forster (1977b) found that Trite were more successful at capturing Drosophila when the flies were less active. Effects of Type of Prey Groups from eggsacs A and B were between 21 and 28 days old when tests began. Presumably they were past the primary dispersal stage. I did not keep records of times of attack for these groups, but I did note that attack responses were generally less than 3 min. , often less than 30 sec, and therefore generally much sooner than spiderlings from eggsac C, supporting the contention that dispersal behavior is strongest soon after leaving the eggsac. Results from A and B were compared with C„, since this group of spiderlings was also considered to be in a postdispersive stage. Comparative results are presented in Table 8-2, and sizes of prey and spiderlings are compared in Figure 8-1. As with the experiments with spiderlings from eggsac C and with adults, captures of loopers were significantly more likely than captures of flies, or any other prey, on the first attempt. Success of capture of both categories of flies and

PAGE 175

168 of aphids was at or near 40% on the first attempt, similar to capture of flies by spiderlings from eggsac C (41% initial success) . Difficulty with flies was due to their speed of movement, but difficulty with the slow-moving aphids (Table 8-4) was because the aphids used their long legs to kick away attacking spiderlings. Only 4 of 10 aphids were captured during the initial 30 min. of the test, but 3 other aphids were eventually captured within 4 hr. Results for prey categories lumped together regardless of group or sequence are presented in Table 8-3. Almost all categories of prey were significantly different from one another for mean distance jumped by spiderlings during capture attempts when the prey categories were lumped together. The only exception was between vestigial-winged Drosophila and aphids, which were similar in size and general configuration. While comparison of lumped categories was overall an excellent representation of attack distances by spiderlings for particular prey species, certain effects of offering sequential prey and between-group variability were masked. Aphids were attacked from significantly greater distances than loopers in all comparisons except with A„ and A. . Ants were attacked by group A. from significantly greater distances than loopers except when compared with A„ and A. ; group B did not attack ants from significantly greater distances than any group attacking loopers. Group A 1 attacked ants from significantly greater distances than group B, a case of between-group variability. Capture of aphids by group A. was also significantly greater than attacks of ants by group B, but not significantly greater than attacks of ants by A.. Flies were attacked from significantly greater distances than loopers for all comparisons except B-A„ and C--A . All flies were attacked from significantly greater distances than ants. Aphids were not attacked from signifi-

PAGE 176

169 cantly different distances than vestigial-winged flies. Loopers were not attacked from significantly different distances between any groups except C -A . Vestigial-winged flies were not attacked from significantly different distances between groups. Winged flies were attacked from significantly greater distances than any other type of prey. Analyzing the above comparisons gives the following conclusions: 1) group B tended to attack from closer distances than other groups; between-group variability was noted by Forster (1977b); 2) winged flies present a stimulus that causes spiderlings to increase their attack distance when compared to similar wingless prey; recent evidence suggests that some property of the wings themselves is the stimulus (Edwards, 1980) ; 3) previous experience with other types of more mobile prey (A„) significantly increases the attack distance of spiderlings when given loopers as prey; when loopers were one of the previous prey categories along with other types of prey, attack distances were increased when loopers were given as prey, but to a lesser extent (A,). Previous experience, therefore, does seem to affect capture distance. This result agrees with the findings of Forster (1977b), who states, "it must be concluded that jumping spiders become progressively more adept (at hunting) ." One aspect of gaining experience with prey is that of encountering noxious prey. A predator would waste less time and risk less injury if it could remember previous encounters with particular types of prey and avoid those which had been noxious or difficult to subdue. To test the ability of spiderlings to remember noxious prey, I tested them using ants as prey. Ants are generally avoided by spiders except for spiders

PAGE 177

170 which specialize in capturing ants (Levy, 1957; Hoelldobler, 1969). Species of Phidippus as a rule do not attack ants (Edwards et al., 1974; see Chapter 10 for exceptions) . Most (16/20) spiderlings (A! and B) attacked ants when the ants were first offered as prey, averaging 2 attacks per spiderling (range 0-5). Often a spiderling's first attack would be short (this was also observed when flies were prey); it appeared to underestimate the ant's (and flies') speed of movement. When an attack was successful in contacting the ant, the ant defended itself with its mandibles and sting, and probably also gave off an alarm odor. Spiderlings would immediately release the ants and back away; there were only 2 exceptions, when spiderlings caught ants by the dorsum of the abdomen, rendering the ants helpless. Usually the spiderling would attempt one or two more captures, which were unsuccessful, then it would watch the ant for several sec. without further attacks. Sometimes a spiderling would touch an ant with the legs I, then back away. Many spiderlings struck at approaching ants with the legs I to drive the ants away, but the ants usually attacked in response. The spiderlings would run away and avoid further contact. On 3 occasions, ants were able to retaliate to such an extent that the spiderlings were forced to defend themselves. One P. metallescens bit the spiderling on the right leg I, but released its hold when the spiderling let go of the ant. A second P_. metallescens bit the right palp of a spiderling and attempted to sting; the fighting pair rolled over so that the spiderling was on its back; the spiderling pulled its palp free and attempted to escape, but the ant bit the right tarsus III and held on; a tug-of-war ensued, during which the spiderling attempted

PAGE 178

171 to bite the ant, then finally pulled its leg free and escaped; the spiderling turned and watched the ant for several sec, and subsequently strongly avoided all contact. In a third such encounter, a P. dentata worker (P. dentata are larger than P. metallescens but smaller than the spiderlings) bit and held onto the right leg I of an attacking spiderling the spiderling was unable to pull free and instead autotomized its own leg to escape. The loss of a leg did not seem to seriously hamper the spider's mobility, and a short time later it captured a looper. The last encounter occurred during a pilot experiment to see if spiderlings were less likely to attack the larger P. dentata . Two of 3 spiderlings attacked P. dentata when this ant was offered as first prey. It seemed unlikely that the species of ant made any difference since the 2 species were related, so P. dentata was used in subsequent tests for groups which had been offered P. metallescens as the first prey, since the latter species was unavailable for further tests. None of the 8 spiderlings offered ants on 2 consecutive days (A 2 ) attacked the ants on the second day. All exhibited strong avoidance responses and, when confronted by an ant, struck at it with the legs I, then ran away. Spiderlings of group A3 were offered loopers as second prey, ants as first and third prey. All had the same response to ants on their second encounter with ants (3 days after the first encounter) as did the spiderlings from group A 2 ; the one exception was a spiderling that made a single attack, but immediately released the ant and thereafter behaved like the other spiderlings. One spiderling avoided the ant when its second encounter with an ant was on the fourth day after the first encounter. These results show that the spiderlings: 1) will initially attack any suitably-sized prey, 2) will remember unfavorable encounters with

PAGE 179

172 certain types of potential prey, and 3) will remember which potential prey caused these unfavorable encounters, subsequently avoiding encounters with this type of organism. Chemotactic as well as visual cues may be utilized, as evidenced by the tapping of the ants by the legs I of the spiderlings. The salticid Corythalia canosa (Walckenaer) can even distinguish between different types of ants of similar size ( Prenolepsis and Crematogaster ) which belong to different subfamilies (Edwards et al. , 1974). Chemotactic cues or perhaps even odor may have been important in the differentiation of these 2 ants, as the different subfamilies they belong to use different chemicals for defense and alarm (Hermann, 1969). The experiments with ants show that not only do spiderlings become more proficient at capturing prey, but they also become more discriminating in what they will attack.

PAGE 180

173 cu u u u
PAGE 181

174 IM

PAGE 182

175 Table 8-3. Prey offered to Phidippus regius spiderlings, comparing lumped responses of spiderlings to prey regardless of sequence or group prey was offered to. Prey are ranked by size and motility (see Figure 8-1). Statistics are total number of attacks, mean distance of attack (in mm), and standard error of the mean; statistics followed by the same letter are not significantly different. Distance Motility Size Attacked Rank Rank Winged flies _ n=25 X= 6.32 ± 0.43, a Vestigial-winged flies n=54 X= 3.43 ± 0.23, b Ants n=38 X= 2.33 ± 0.17, c Loopers n=67 X= 1.84 ± 0.18, d Aphids n=9 X= 3.44 ± 0.65, b

PAGE 183

176 Winged Fly (Drosophlla ) Vestigial-Winged Fly (V/W Drosophila ) Ant (Pheidole dentata) Looper (Trichoplusia ni ) P. regius 1st Ins tar 2 mm Figure 8-1. Diagrammatic illustrations of prey offered to naive P. regius first instars, showing size relative to spiderling.

PAGE 184

CHAPTER 9 MIMICRY IN Phidippus Introduction Many animals are known to use mimicry in a number of ways (Wickler, 1968). Although numerous spiders are cryptically-colored and resemble inanimate objects or part of the substrate they inhabit (Kaston, 1948), few are known to specifically mimic other organisms. A few salticids mimic beetles (Kaston, 1948), especially of the family Chrysomelidae. Members of at least 8 spider families mimic ants (Reiskind and Levi, 1967); especially numerous in this respect are members of the families Clubionidae and Salticidae. Males of the mygalomorph family Atypidae appear to mimic pompilid wasps. No specific spider mimics of velvet ants (Mutillidae) have been reported, although Reiskind (1969) implicated some species of Castianeira (Clubionidae). Mutillid females would seem to be ideal models with their potent sting and aposematic coloration. Here I present evidence that certain species of Phidippus , perhaps most of the species in the genus, mimic mutillid wasps. The spider stage most often implicated as a mimic is the adult male, although juveniles and females appear also to be mimics in some species. Methods A preliminary experiment to test the value of aposematic coloration in Phidippus apacheanus was conducted with two lizard species, Anolis carolinensis Voight and Sceloporus undulatus (Latreille) . The lizards were of mixed age groups, but all except one Sceloporus male appeared to 177

PAGE 185

178 be either juvenile or young adult. Each day in captivity the lizards were fed 1 cabbage looper larva, Trichoplusia ni (Hiibner) , in order to ascertain that they were feeding and in reasonably good condition. A wooden frame box 25 x 31 x 40 cm with 5 hardware cloth sides was used. Three lizards were placed in the box (2 A. carolinensis , 1 S_. undulatus ) in one of three test situations. The lizards fed freely on cabbage loopers under such conditions; it was therefore concluded that testing of multiple individuals simultaneously in one cage was a valid procedure. The lizards used for each test were different individuals, and there was only 1 replicate of each test. The 3 groups of lizards were offered one of the following: a female Dasymutilla mutata (Blake), a penultimate male Phidippus apacheanus , or both simultaneously. I made periodic observations of encounters. Each test lasted 24 hours, after which the prospective prey was removed and the lizards released. Results and Discussion No predation occurred in any of the above tests. The lizards largely remained stationary on the sides of the cage. The mutillid would alternate between walking around the bottom of the cage and not moving. The spider would walk anywhere in the cage or remain still in an edge or corner. The lizards would sometimes watch the moving mutillid, but made no attempt to approach it. Sometimes the lizards would approach the spider, but they made no attempt to capture it, even when the spider assumed a defensive stance, thus betraying its identity as a non-mutillid. Perhaps the lizards already had experience with mutillids, although mostly young individuals were used to reduce the chance of this possibility. If they were inexperienced with mutillids, then either the

PAGE 186

179 test situation affected their behavior or they have an innate aversion to aposematically-colored arthropods • The lizards were chosen because of their abundance and availability, and also because they represented some of the most likely vertebrate predators of Phidippus species. There is at least one record of a Sceloporus preying on a Phidippus (Gertsch and Woodbury, 1930) . Another reason for using these particular lizard species is that A_. carolinensis is primarily arboreal, whereas S_. undulatus is more terrestrial. A close relative of the latter species, S_. woodi (Stejneger), is almost exclusively terrestrial (Carr, 1940). Significantly perhaps, S^. woodi occurs where P_. apacheanus is most abundant, in sand pine scrub areas. I have never seen a Phidippus individual of any age or size make a silken bridge-line from one plant to another, and only once observed an individual use a bridge-line made by another spider. This may be due in part to the relatively large size of these spiders as adults, not necessarily because of their weight (which the silk could probably support) , but because of the exposure to predators such a maneuver would allow. More than likely, the foraging behavior of the spiders and the relative spacing of plants in the preferred habitats have also been factors in selection against bridge-making. Most arboreal species of Phidippus hunt primarily up and down the main stem of a plant, and in order for the spider to move from one plant to another, a second plant must be either touching or within jumping range, or the spider has to walk across the ground. Since most species live in semi-xeric to xeric habitats and the relative density of plants is low, traversing from plant to plant involves a considerable amount of travel on the ground. This has been observed for P_. audax (Tessler, personal communication) in

PAGE 187

180 old fields (primary mesophytic situations) and probably occurs often in the xeric sand hill and sand pine habitats in Florida. It is in the primary successional stage of the latter habitat that P_. apacheanus is most abundant in Florida. This habitat most resembles the conditions of its desert habitat in the southwestern U. S., where a number of congeneric apparent mutillid mimics occur. The color pattern of adult JP. apacheanus most resembles that of the western mutillid Dasymutilla f lammif era Mickel; both model and mimic are solid red dorsally with black appendages. The large D. occidentalis (L.) of the eastern U. S. may be the model for eastern populations of P_. apacheanus . Most of the western species of Phidippus alleged to mimic mutillids are red only on the dorsum of the abdomen and black elsewhere, as are the sympatric Dasymutilla magnif ica Mickel and IK_ nogalensis Mickel. Both sexes of the western Phidippus octopunctatus (Peckham & Peckham) are gray dorsally, as are the sympatric Dasymutilla magna (Cresson) and .D. nocturna Mickel. The above-mentioned mutillids, medium to large in size (15 20 mm average), are about 5 10 mm longer than their alleged mimics. However, in life, mutillids run with their heads down, somewhat hidden by the thorax. The truncate anterior edge of the mutillid thorax becomes effectively the front of the animal, which is matched in shape by the front of the spider. The tucked head of the mutillid also makes the mutillid appear shorter, thus more similar to the mimic in size. The fact that lizards (assuming they are among the most important vertebrate predators) have limited home ranges is important to the development of mimicry in Phidippus . It seems necessary that the predator, model, and mimic all occur together for the mimic to gain any advantage by being a mimic (although another possibility is examined

PAGE 188

181 later). In this case, the mutillids would presumably teach the lizards about the painful effects of trying to eat a velvet ant, the lizards would retain a visual image of the aposematic coloration of the mutillid, and would refrain from attempting to eat anything with a similar color pattern. This is particularly significant for P_. apacheanus , since all except the first free-living instar have a red and black color pattern. Although the spiders are primarily arboreal, some of the smaller species of Dasymutilla are also partly arboreal; therefore a broader base of potential predators can learn about mutillids (hence the testing of both arboreal and terrestrial lizards) . I found that in the Florida State Collection of Arthropods, collections of mutillids revealed that the smaller species of Dasymutilla were present from May through August, the same time as immatures of P_. apacheanus , whereas the large _D. occidentalis was present from May through October, the latter month when _P. apacheanus matures. This synchronization of different stages of the mimic with different models has been taken to an even higher specialization by some ant mimics (Reiskind, 1970). Although J% apacheanus seems adapted to being a mutillid mimic throughout most of its life cycle, the same cannot be said of its sympatric congener, P_. cardinalis . Only the adult male of _P. cardinalis resembles a mutillid, and it matures the same time and in the same habitats as _P. apacheanus . The immature stages of 7_. cardinalis are pale yellow and blend well with dead stems and grasses in the xeric habitat. In the subadult stages they turn orange and finally red as adults. Adult females are colored much like the males north of the range of P_. apacheanus , but where the two spiders occur together in

PAGE 189

182 Florida, at least, the females of P_. cardinalis are more cryptic in coloration. I suspect that the reason both Phidippus species do not mimic mutillids throughout their life cycle is that the combined populations of the juvenile stages would create a surplus of mimics, which would negate the advantage to being a mimic by too often presenting a palatable item to the predator population. The evolutionary result is that one species is a mimic, the other cryptic, in the immature stages. While it is not difficult to hypothesize the evolution of this system, it is difficult to understand why each particular species evolved the way it did. The following evidence is available: P_. cardinalis is an eastern species, P_. apacheanus a southern and western species. However, where they occur together in Florida, P_. apacheanus maintains somewhat higher population levels in the juvenile stages. In the western U. S., where P_. cardinalis does not occur, P_. apacheanus has a developmental color progression similar to that of _P. cardinal is, with young immatures yellow, subadults orange, and adults red. The geographic origin of P_. apacheanus is unclear, but it seems to be more numerous in the southwestern states. Also, occurrence of yellow females is frequent in the western populations, but extremely rare in eastern populations. This may reflect an increased selection for cryptic coloration, as reflected in juvenile color patterns of western populations, or mimicry of yellow mutillids. The eastern Dasymutilla occidentalis occurs rarely in a yellow form. In the northern part of the range of P. cardinalis , the reason for this species to have a changing color pattern is probably lack of sufficient numbers of models to support a larger mimic population.

PAGE 190

183 Where P. apacheanus and P_. cardinalis are sympatric in the southeastern U. S., mutillid populations are fairly high. The species which seems to be genetically the most variable, P_. apacheanus , has taken best advantage of the increased model population by increasing its number of mimics, i.e., the juveniles which mimicked mutillids had a higher survival rate and genetically passed on this phenotypic advantage to succeeding generations. Lacking any other evidence, I would have chosen P_. apacheanus as the most likely to increase its mimic population, as individuals of this species are bolder and more aggressive than individuals of P_. cardinalis , a possible preadaptation to the types of behavior that enhance mimicry. With the more aggressive and genetically flexible species, P_. apacheanus , filling the increased allowance for mimics, P_. cardinalis is restricted from also changing its color pattern, because its survival depends on not flooding the area with mimics. Mimicry in P_. cardinalis could still occur late in the life cycle because the combined populations of the two species would be lower in the adult stage due to juvenile mortality. Males of P. cardinalis average smaller than those of P. apacheanus , which are only about half the size of the supposed model, _D. occidentalis ; the mutillid itself is uncommon in October. Perhaps size is unimportant relative to the similarity of the mimics' color patterns to mutillids, which may be sufficient to discourage predators. However, another possibility is that the predators have already learned about mutillids during the summer when P_. apacheanus is a mimic as a juvenile, and this protection carries into the adult stage, where it is further amplified by the peculiar mutillid walk, which is mimicked by the adult males of both Phidippus species. But the question of what P_. cardinalis

PAGE 191

184 is mimicking must be asked. Since P_. cardinalis did not have a mimic stage during the hypothetical learning period of the predator when mutillids were relatively abundant, it could not have been synchronically mimicking the velvet ants (barring the possibility that males mimic the few remaining and much larger D. occidentalis ) . The primary advantage to P. cardinalis males would seem to be their resemblance to the memory of a velvet ant retained by a lizard. Since there is no evidence that either spider species is other than relatively innocuous, no Mullerian mimicry can be occurring. In one further case of apparent mutillid mimicry, Phidippus whitmani, a relative of P_. cardinalis , has a bright red dorsum and inhabits mesophytic leaf litter. At times, P. whitmani is extremely abundant, even as adults. Both sexes of P. whitmani are bright red south of the Appalachian Mountains, whereas only males are red in the northern part of the range and females are brown. Juveniles have a similar color pattern to females of their respective regions. Assuming a greater number of mutillids on the warmer end of a longitudinal gradient would help explain the greater number of red P. whitmani in the southern states. What remains unexplained is the apparent lack of mutillids in the mesophytic habitat; possibly, the velvet ants are behaviorally cryptic (they hide in the litter) or the habitat is unsuitable, perhaps too moist for the life cycle of the mutillids or of their prey. Here seems to be a case where the mimic far outnumbers the model. Another factor is the apparent dearth of diurnal, terrestrial, vertebrate predators. The possiblility must be considered that P_. whitmani gains its greatest protection from transient predators (i.e.,

PAGE 192

185 birds) which have gained experience with mutillids in other habitats. While it is difficult to postulate mimicry in the absence of a sufficient model, _P. whitmani is sympatric-allotopic to its close relative _P. cardinalis , and their common ancestor may have had a similar color pattern. One complicating factor to this hypothesis is that _P. whitmani is also allochronic to j\ cardinalis , i.e., it matures in spring whereas J?, cardinalis matures in the fall. Phidippus whitmani may not be mimicking Dasymutilla at all, but rather the similar genus Pseudomethoca , which also appears in the spring. Obviously, a considerable amount of additional research is needed both on the biology of mutillids and on the relationships of various species of Phidippus to genera and species of mutillids. One final observation: I recently have noticed that color patterns of such neotropical salticid genera as Freya , Frigga , and Phiale are remarkably similar to such neotropical mutillid genera as Atillum , Cephalomutilla , Darditilla , Hoplocrates , Hoplognathoca , Hoplomutilla , and Traumatomutilla . Further research may show that mutillid mimicry may be at least as common as ant mimicry within the Salticidae.

PAGE 193

CHAPTER 10 ECOLOGY OF Phidippus SPECIES "A sower went forth to sow, and when he sowed, some seeds fell by the wayside and the birds came and devoured them. Some fell upon stony places where they had not much earth and forthwith they sprang up; but they had no depth of earth, and when the sun was up they were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away. Some fell among thorns, and the thorns sprang up and choked them. Others fell into good ground and brought forth fruit, some a hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold." St. Matthew 13:3-8 Introduction The above quote, first used in an ecological context by Dondale (1975) in reference to naturally dispersing arachnids, also reflects on the nature of survival of organisms. They must cope with predators and competitors in order to survive, and their ultimate success depends on the quantity and quality of resources they are able to locate and utilize. Researchers in the last two decades, inspired by Hutchinson's (1959) famous question, 'Why are there so many kinds of animals?', have conducted numerous investigations of interspecific differences in use of resources. Most of these studies have assumed that competition is the major selective force limiting similarity among species. Various theoretical aspects have been discussed by MacArthur and Levins (1967), Schoener (1969, 1975), Colwell and Futuyma (1971), Vandermeer (1972), Pianka (1974), May (1975), Pielou (1975), and Hurlbert (1978). Connell (1975), Wiens (1977), and Caswell (1978) have discussed factors, such as predation and environmental variability, which can be more important 186

PAGE 194

187 than competition in regulating community composition. Many of these studies have been on various vertebrate groups, such as lizards (Schoener, 1968, 1970; Pianka, 1975), birds (MacArthur, 1958; Cody, 1968, 1974; Davis, 1973; Diamond, 1975), and rodents (DeLong, 1966; Brown, 1971, 1975). Marine invertebrates have been studied by Connell (1970), Kohn (1971), and Dayton (1971). Resource utilization of some terrestrial invertebrates has been analyzed by Rathcke (1976) and Malas and Wallace (1977) for insects, and Williams (1970) for scorpions. Both Van Hook (1971) and Moulder and Reichle (1972) have attempted to quantify the role of spiders in trophic level regulation of communities. Investigations of resource partitioning in spiders have been limited to a few papers by Kuenzler (1958), Enders (1974), Gertsch and Riechert (1976), Uetz (1975, 1977), and Turner and Polis (1979). Enders (1974) noted vertical stratification between two species of orbweavers in the immature stages. Gertsch and Riechert (1976) demonstrated spatial and temporal differences among closely related species of several spider families. Uetz (1977) concluded that spiders of the forest floor cursorial guild coexisted because of their distributions in space and time, and because of differences in sizes of prey utilized. Turner and Polis (1979) found similar time differences in a guild of herb zone ambushing spiders; they calculated niche overlap values and found little evidence of competition; due to the lack of limiting resources, they hypothesized that interference competition was a major factor in coexistence among guild members. Enders (1975) discussed theoretical comparisons of web-weavers versus salticids based on attack distance and prey size, and he (Enders, 1976) discussed the use of Dyar's Constant (equal to the minimum size differences between predators specializing on prey size proposed by Hutchinson, 1959) as a measure of difference in size

PAGE 195

188 between instars of a species and its relation to the prey-capture strategy of various species. He also came to the conclusion that interference competition could be a proximate cause for patterns of spider phenology and distribution. Supportive evidence was presented by Edgar (1969), who reported that Lycosa (Pardosa ) lugubris was its own worst enemy. Other lycosids are known to prey extensively on conspecifics (e.g., Yeargan, 1975) and Turner (1979) found conspecifics of the oxyopid Peucetia viridans were the fourth major prey species. Jackson (1977b) noted conspecific predation by the salticid Phidippus johnsoni . Luczak has analyzed communities of both web (1963) and wandering (1966) spiders in different strata; however, few studies of taxonomically closely related organisms have been conducted. MacArthur's (1958) warblers are a classic example. Among insects, comparisons of closely related leafhoppers (Ross, 1957), bumble bees (Brian, 1957), and butterflies (Clench, 1967) have been made. Of the spiders, three different species of lycosids (Kuenzler, 1958), two species of araneids (Enders, 1974), and an oxyopid with four species of thomisids (3 in the genus Misumenops ; Turner and Polis, 1979) have been compared. No previous comparisons have been specifically aimed at salticid species, although basic comparisons of phenology and spatial distribution have been made by a number of authers (e.g., Gertscand Riechert, 1976). This type of information has been given by a number of authors (e.g., Kaston, 1948) for Phidippus species; data are summarized below for each species. Also included is a summary of other biotic factors affecting species of Phidippus reported in the literature. The purposes of the ecological research presented here were twofold. First, I documented the major biotic factors affecting each species:

PAGE 196

189 habitat, microhabitat , phenology, reproductive capacity, food, and enemies. Second, I compared the data among species for evidence of competition or resource subdivision, especially for species occurring in the same habitats. Members of the genus Phidippus , especially in eastern North America, exhibit phenotypical characteristics which make them unusually suited to comparative autecological studies. Even though a graded series of species based on mean and range of body length of adults can be made (see Chapter 2), the means of all the species, with the exception of the largest species, P. regius , are not significantly different. Since body length is strongly correlated with body weight, which is the most widely accepted measure of size, and since the overall structures of the species are similar, all the species can be considered essentially the same size; P_. regius can be included also, with the exception of its last 2 instars, which are larger than the other species; P_. otiosus is also usually slightly larger than most of the species as adults. The conversions of body length to weight based on body shape developed by Zug and Zug (1979) give very good estimates when compared to actual weights of Phidippus species given by Anderson (1978). Thus, with one or two exceptions, adults of different species occurring together at the same time are probably feeding on similar-sized prey. Analyses of prey size by different species under these circumstances may be superfluous, and habitat differences may be more important. But the opposite is the case when immatures of one species occur with adults of another. The same habitat resources could be shared if prey were different. These are examples of the types of ecologically significant comparisons analyzed later.

PAGE 197

190 Methods Field Observations Three areas in Alachua County, Florida, were chosen for field observations based on differences in habitat and species composition. These were: 1) along the north edge of Burnt Pond at Camp McConnell (YMCA camp) , 2) a pine-oak f latwoods north of Cross Creek in the Lochloosa Wildlife Refuge, and 3) a mixed xeric hammock-ecotonal area west of Gainesville. These habitats are described in Appendices C and D. The sites were chosen after extensive field work during research on the life history of Phidippus regius (Edwards, 1975), and, following the completion of this work, a number of field trips (many in collaboration with D. B. Richman) made in an attempt to determine the salticid fauna of Florida. Factors affecting choice of research sites were: 1) Burnt Pond unlimited food supply and uniform habitat patches; 2) f latwoods a population of P_. pulcherrimus , about which literally nothing was known; and 3) mixed xeric hammock apparent high species diversity and high species evenness. Research in these 3 primary areas was conducted from the spring of 1976 through the winter of 1977, on a weekly, biweekly, or monthly basis, depending on factors discussed below. A second habitat was studied near Burnt Pond during the fall and winter in the same time period. Secondary areas, in particular along Newnan's Lake and in Ocala National Forest (see Appendices C and D) , were studied during the spring and summer of 1977, on a biweekly or monthly basis. Observations were conducted in other areas at irregular time intervals prior, during, and subsequent to the time of concentrated field work. Much of the data on rare or habitat-restricted species was collected during these latter

PAGE 198

191 observations. More time was spent in habitats which produced more data per time expended; thus a bias toward Burnt Pond will be noted both because of frequency of predation observed, and because of the structured habitat which allowed for various analyses and observations of spiderplant associations. Population sizes were made by actual counts of spiders observed (sometimes supplemented by sweep net samples). Turner and Polis (1979) also used this method; they examined all of the vegetation in their research area. This was feasible since the primary habitats studied were relatively small in area. I had originally intended to compare three sampling methods: d-vac, sweep net, and sight count (concurrent with hand collecting); however, this proved to be infeasible for the following reasons. The d-vac may be a suitable sampling device for row crop monocultures, such as soybeans (LeSar and Unzicker, 1978), but it is woefully inadequate as a sampling device in a heterogeneous environment. It is incapable of evenly sampling mixed shrubby habitats, and has the same problem in some habitats which it would seem well suited for. At Burnt Pond, the grass was so thick but fragile that in sampling even a small area (e.g., 20 m^) , the d-vac would accumulate so much vegetative material that the vacuum suction was reduced. Under these circumstances, I observed larger specimens of Phidippus to fall out of the d-vac after being initially picked up. The d-vac was therefore taking samples biased toward smaller individuals. Howell and Pienkowski (1971) observed that Salticidae and Thomisidae were more difficult to pick up with a d-vac than with a sweep net in alfalfa. I had intended also to estimate prey populations with d-vac samples, but with the failure of this method to give reliable results for spider populations, the

PAGE 199

192 d-vac was abandoned. Notes on apparent relative prey abundance are given where appropriate. Turnbull (1973) states, "it is dismaying to find (the sweep net) still in use (as a sampler of populations)." He gives several examples of the inherent biases of this sampling method; however, he notes that Luczak and Wierzbowska (1959) have come to opposite conclusions: "Selectivity of the scoop (sweep net) method is always of a similar type and does not give differentiated deformations in the picture of the quantitative dynamics of ground flora spiders." I must agree with this latter view in terms of sampling for Phidippus , since, although the method is somewhat biased for age class (as pointed out later) , the strata sampled are the same strata that I would have sampled by visual means. Field workers often develop a "search image" for the organisms they study, much like the objects of study (often predators), which supposedly form search images for their prey. The efficiency of this system can be high, as an understanding of the behavior patterns and knowledge of likely locations of object organisms contributes heavily to the success of the observation system. It can also lead to biases based on previous experience. But since the heterogeneity of a small sampling area is limited, so is the margin for potential error; therefore I consider sweep net sampling to be a short-cut method for determining the number of individuals in an area and to be roughly equivalent to the number of individuals I would have found if I had spent a longer amount of time searching the same stratum by visual means. At infrequent intervals, I spot-checked this assumption. On one occasion, a sweep sample captured 15 specimens of immature P_. pulcherrimus . Subsequent inspection immediately following the sweep revealed only one additional specimen

PAGE 200

193 in the area sampled. I was confident that I would have been able to find these specimens by visual searching, given the same sampling area. Also, I note again the superiority of the sweep net to the d-vac in capturing Salticidae reported by Howell and Peinkowski (1971). Most supplemental sweeping was done in secondary research areas, as most of the time spent in primary areas was observation time. Where both types of samples were taken at a site, the samples are lumped together. This is justified by the preceding discussion. Two strategies of observation were employed. In areas where population densities of target species were low (based on difficulty of visual location and subsequent confirmation by sweeping), continuous observation of single individuals was the method utilized. Observation times ranged from Sg-3 hours, depending on the ultimate outcome of the activity pattern of the spider. In areas where population densities were high (e.g., Burnt Pond), the maximum number of significant encounters was optimized by moving slowly but steadily from individual to individual. The average amount of time spent per individual per day was about 10 minutes, and ranged from instantaneous (e.g., spider observed with prey at first sighting; spider with eggsac) to one hour. Activity patterns of individuals presumably hunting for prey were recorded. Individuals engaged in activities judged to be significant (e.g., prey capture; guarding eggsacs) were collected and brought back to the laboratory, where they were either preserved or maintained by procedures described in earlier chapters. Individuals and their prey were usually preserved, their lengths measured, and their lengths converted to approximate weights according to the conversion tables given by Zug and Zug (1979). Linear regression was used to correlate the significance

PAGE 201

194 of prey size to spider size. Number of eggs per eggsac were counted, and when possible, percent infertile eggs was also noted. Field-collected eggsacs were allowed to hatch in the laboratory in order to ascertain infertility rates and to obtain parasites. Eggsacs were categorized as first, second, third or fourth batches laid by a particular female based on number of eggs in the batch, known seasonal reproductive period, and in some cases, known previous reproductive history of the female in question. Comparisons of reproductive capability were made using Student's t test, and were based on the first eggsac, since the number of eggsacs varies between individuals and between species. This method will tend to underestimate the differences between species, since larger species have more eggsacs and more eggs per eggsac. Comparisons of various other biotic categories among species were made in the following ways: 1) prey were lumped into orders, 2) characteristics of plant structure and specific plant associations were both analyzed, and 3) phenology of adults was compared using distributions of adults by month. Measures of nich overlap were made using the method of Pianka (1974), while niche breadth was calculated based on the formula used by Levins (1968). Both of these methods were used by Turner and Polis (1979) to analyze data for ambushing spiders. Uetz (1975) used the Shannon-Weaver index (Shannon, 1948) and Pielou's (1966) measure of equitability for a study of litter spiders. Hurlbert (1978) enumerates the reasons why overlap indices fail as measures of competition, but equalization (e.g., in interspecific size) of some of the parameters in this study may offset some of the inherent uncertainness of these measures.

PAGE 202

195 Background Phidippus apacheanus Habitats . Muma and Muma (1949) found P. apacheanus (reported as P_. nikltes ) in the herb stratum of grass prairie in Nebraska, dominated by big and little bluestem ( Andropogon furcatus and A. scoparius ) , blue gramma ( Bouteloua gracilis ) and bluegrass ( Poa pratensis ) . Fitch (1963) reported P_. apacheanus from Kansas in low population numbers from hot and dry areas; it seemed to prefer rocky habitat with short grass prairie or pasture. Specific collections were made from bare ground, gravel road, fence post, barn, and a limestone slab in open woods. Gardner (1965) observed P_. apacheanus in Utah in a sagebrush community, on sagebrush ( Artemisia tridentata ) , rabbitbrush ( Chrysotham nus nauseous ) , and four-winged saltbrush ( Atriplex canescens ) . Carpenter (1972) found P_. apacheanus in Texas to be abundant in arid areas on shrubs and bushes, especially the thorny kinds like mesquite and cactus, and on tall annuals like sunflowers. She reported that nests were made on the undersides of sunflower leaves and among the joints and thorns of cactus; the females were sedentary in nests, while the males wandered during the day on leaves and twigs. Jung and Roth (1974) reported P. apacheanus from upper canyons of the Chiricahua Mountains of Arizona, in areas of mixed pines, live oak, and manzanita. Museum records add 1 specimen from gum weed and 33 specimens from a heron rookery in Utah. Prey . None reported. Enemies . None reported. Phenology and Reproduction . Carpenter (1972) reported cohabitation by _P. apacheanus during September.

PAGE 203

196 Phidippus audax Habitats . The most frequently reported member of the genus from agricultural crops is P. audax . It has been found in alfalfa (Howell and Pienkowski, 1971; Wheeler, 1973), cotton (Kagan, 1943; Clark and Glick, 1961; Whitcomb et al., 1963), sorghum (Bailey, 1968; Bailey and Chada, 1968), and soybeans (LeSar and Unzicker, 1978). Whitcomb and Tadic (1963) and Warren et al. (1967) took P_. audax in nests of the fall webworm ( Hyphantria cunia) , often on black walnut ( Juglans nigra ) or persimmon ( Diospyros virginiana ) . Phidippus audax has been collected from peat meadows (Lowrie, 1942), mixed meadows (Cutler, 1965), old fields (Levi and Field, 1954; Cannon, 1965), overgrown pasture (Tolbert, 1975), and prairie (Muma and Muma, 1949). Other authors have reported it from forest border and mixed forest-prairie (Gibson, 1947; Peck, 1966), from young pines (Martin, 1966; Peck et al. , 1971), apple trees (Specht and Dondale, 1960; McCaffrey and Horsburgh, 1980), on the holly Ilex opaca (Lamore, 1958), and under tree bark (Kaston, 1948; Fitch, 1963; Hollis and Branson, 1964). Several authors have noted the ubiquitous distribution of this species: it has been found in all successional stages of a beech-maple forest (Elliott, 1930); from pine dune, black oak dune, and beech-maple climax (Lowrie, 1948); abundant in field edges, prairie remnants, prairie groves, and waste areas (Snetsinger, 1955); common in a wide range of habitats but most often in dry open woods and grassland, nesting in ironweed ( Vernonia interior ) and milkweed ( Asclepius kansana ) (Fitch, 1963); extremely common under stones and boards, on trees, etc. (Kaston, 1948); and in all habitats studied, even the most desert-like, in Wichita County, Texas (Carpenter, 1972). Comstock (1940), Lowrie (1942), and Carpenter

PAGE 204

197 (1972) all note that P. audax is more abundant in moist or humid areas. Most records were from the herb-shrub zone, but Kaston (1948), Muma and Muma (1949), and Fitch (1963) reported specimens on the ground as well. Several authors reported P. audax from barns, houses, and other buildings. Museum records added the following associations (one record unless indicated otherwise): ground, trash, under rocks (3), grass (2),. garden, herbs, lawn (2), field, Kudzu (2), roadside, brick pile, sawdust pile, river bank, reservoir, bluff, nests in top of rushes (2), reed in rice field, barley field, bayshore (3), lake shore (2), live oak area (3) , palmetto in cypress swamp (Texas) , date palm (Texas) , bromeliad (Mexico), avocado grove (2), under bark (12), under bark of black walnut, under bark of cottonwood ( Populus fremontii ) , on a clothesline, and on buildings (30). Prey . Representatives of the orders Odonata, Orthoptera, Hemiptera, Homoptera, Neuroptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, and Araneae have all been reported as prey of P_. audax (Table 10-3) . The most notable are various pests, including bugs ( Lygus spp.), the boll weevil ( Anthonomus grandis ) , the bollworm ( Heliothis zea ) , the pink bollworm ( Pectinophora gossypiella ) , the fall webworm ( Hyphantria cunea) and the sorghum midge ( Contarinia sorghicola ) (Table 10-3) . Enemies . Several Hymenoptera of the families Pompilidae and Sphecidae, other spiders, and lizards have been reported as predators of P . audax (Table 10-4) . Phenology and Reproduction . Kaston (1948) noted that P_. audax overwinters in the penultimate and younger instars in Connecticut, in hibernating aggregations of up to 30 individuals. He reported that adults matured in late April and early May, and eggs were laid in June

PAGE 205

198 and July; three eggsacs had 67, 88, and 150 eggs respectively, and two more together (laid by the same female?) had 252 eggs. Gibson (1947) reported maturity in late May, eggs laid in early July, and overwintering as immatures or adults in Tennessee. Snetsinger (1955) observed mature males as early as mid-March in Illinois (and noted that a few had matured in late fall of the previous year) . He recorded cohabitation and mating from early May to midJune, and eggs were laid from midJune to late July; one female laid 3 consecutive eggsacs containing 85, 42, and 28 eggs, respectively. The Peckhams (1909) counted 90-166 eggs in sacs from the Britcher collection. Anderson (1978) reported a mean of 223 eggs for 4 eggsacs from Florida. Phidippus borealis Habitats . Levi and Levi (1951) report P_. borealis (as P. altanus ) to be abundant under the bark of standing dead trees in wet woods along the Snake River in Wyoming. The same authors (op. cit., 1955) report this species at Ptarmigan Falls, Glacier National Park, Montana. Museum records add the following associations: beach (2), grass and bark (2), near river (2), wet woods (2), in woods under bark (12), under bark (7; 1 with eggs), and under bark of dead aspen. Prey . None reported. Enemies . None reported. Phenology and Reproduction . Gertsch (1934) collected adult specimens in June and July in Wyoming, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. Phidippus cardinalis Habitats . Muma (1944) reported P_. cardinalis (as _P. mccookii ) from bushes and trees in open woodland and shaded field in Maryland. Kaston

PAGE 206

199 (1948) reported J?, cardinalls (as P_. mccookii ) as uncommon in Connecticut; it occurred on bushes, pine trees, and sandhill grass. Lowrie (1942, 1948) found a few specimens in black oak dune, but 34 in a peat meadow. Peck (1966) took P_. cardinalis in a mixed forest-prairie situation, while Peck et al. (1971) found it rarely on young pines. Whitcomb et al. (1963) collected the species in cotton. Museum records added the following associations: sandhill (Florida), under stones, field, herbs (2), under log at edge of woods, in log in woods, woods, slash pine woods, on a sidewalk, and on buildings (2). Prey . None reported. Enemies . None reported . Phenology and Reproduction . Kaston (1948) reports adults of P_. cardinalis were taken in Connecticut from late May to October. Phidippus clarus Habitats . Barnes and Barnes (1955) reported that _P. clarus was the most abundant spider species in the southeastern Piedmont abstract broomsedge community dominated by Andropogon virginicus . Berry (1970) also found P_. clarus in the broomsedge community, but also in the transition and forest communities. Barnes (1953) found P. clarus rarely in non forest maritime communities in North Carolina, Muma and Muma (1949) collected _P. clarus in grass prairie, Cutler (1965; as P_. rimator ) swept it from mixed meadow, Dondale (1971) considered it a resident rare species in grassland meadow in Ontario, and Judd (1965, 1977) found it on bushes in a bog and in nests in rolled leaves of the milkweed Asclepias syriaca . Kaston (1948) reported it as very common on tall grass and bushes, Tolbert (1975) found it in an overgrown pasture, and Elliott (1930) considered it typical of the transition stage between field and

PAGE 207

200 beech-maple forest. Lowrie (1942, 1948), in studies of dune succession, found _P. clarus in 8 different successional stages, but most commonly in black oak dune and peat meadow. Drew (1967) found P. clarus in old fields and gardens, and in the herb-shrub zone of upland hardwood forest, while Snetsinger (1955; as P_. rimator ) found it to be abundant in field edges, prairie remnants, prairie groves, and waste areas. Fitch (1963) considered _P. clarus abundant in tall-grass prairie, brome grass pasture, and old fields with broad-leaved herbs like sunflower and ironweed. Dowdy (1951) took a few JP. clarus in the herb zone (dominated by Andro pogon virginicus ) of an oak-hickory community, Peck (1966) found it in a mixed forest-prairie, and Peck et al. (1971) found it in a pine plantation. Whitcomb and Tadic (1963) and Warren et al. (1967) found P.. clarus in fall webworm nests. Research on crops has discovered P. clarus in alfalfa (Howell and Pienkowski, 1971), corn (Everly, 1938; as P. multiformis ) , and cotton (Whitcomb et al. , 1963). Dondale (1956) and McCaffrey and Horsburgh (1980) found P_. clarus on apple trees. Museum records add the following associations: golf course herbs, high grass (2), pasture (8), garden (6), tall grass and weeds (8), high prairie (5); along creek (2), pond, bog, cedar bog (2), and lake; bottomland pine and hardwood litter, pine barrens, lowland pine, and oak-hickory forest herbs; vines, raspberries (2), orchard (2), and on a building; gravid females on Salix sp. and Saracenia sp. , and females with young on Cornus sp. , Rhus sp. and Solidago sp. Prey . Reportedly P_. clarus has been found eating members of the orders Orthoptera, Hemiptera, Homoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera, and Araneae. It preys on the bollworm, Heliothis zea (Table 10-3). Enemies . Reported to be preyed upon by Hymenoptera of the families Pompilidae and Sphecidae as food for their young (Table 10-4) .

PAGE 208

201 Phenology and Reproduction . Kaston (1948) reports adults in Connecticut maturing in late June and early July and found through early October. He observed mating in June, and a single eggsac containing 75 eggs in July. Snetsinger (1955) in Illinois found males from early June through mid-August; females matured in late June and were present until early November. He found mating from late June through early August, with eggs laid from late August through mid-October; he thought the newly-hatched spider lings might overwinter in the eggsac. Both Snetsinger (1955) and Fitch (1963) observed cohabitation; Fitch records pairs together in late July and early August. Phidippus insignarius Habitats . Barnes (1953) listed P_. insignarius (as P. fraudulentus ) from nonforest maritime communities in North Carolina, while Muma and Muma (1949) found it in prairie in Nebraska. Kaston (1948) reported it to be uncommon in Connecticut on brush and loose stones in wooded areas. Gibson (1947) collected 179 specimens from all strata (ground to tree) of a river-terrace forest in Tennessee. Lowrie (1942, 1948) reported it from 7 different habitats in studies of sand dune succession near Chicago; it was by far most numerous in the black oak dune stage, and also common in the peat meadow. Whitcomb and Tadic (1963) stated they found P_. insignarius in fall webworm nests in Arkansas. Museum records add the following associations: cantrap (2), upland prairie (3), oaksavannah prairie, witchhazel stem, along creek, in bog with eggs, and on a building. Prey . None reported. Enemies . None reported. Phenology and Reproduction . Gibson (1947) reported maturation in late May, eggs laid in early July, and the overwintering stages were

PAGE 209

202 immatures and adults. Kaston (1948) found adults from June to September; a female with an eggsac containing 47 eggs was found in late June, and another female with an eggsac (from which most of the spiderlings had already left) was found in July. Phidippus mystaceus Habitats . Kaston (1948) noted that P_. mystaceus was rare in Connecticut. Cannon (1965) found it in an overgrown old field in Ohio, while Carpenter (1972) found it to be uncommon but widespread in drier areas, on mesquite bushes, salt cedar shrubs, patches of sunflowers, and in wild plum thickets in Texas. Berry (1970) considered P. mystaceus a member of the forest community in North Carolina, Peck et al. (1971) found it in a pine plantation, and it has been taken from fall webworm nests by Whitcomb and Tadic (1963) and Warren et al. (1967) (who erroneously reported it as P_. carolinensis and _P. incertus , respectively) . whitcomb et al. reported it from cotton (along with its synonym, _P. hirsutus ) in Arkansas, and Specht and Dondale (1960) beat it from apple trees. Museum records add the following associations: ground (2), gravid females under stones (2), meadow herbs, shrubs, mesquite ( Proso pis julif lora ) , low tree branch in woods, woods, American elm, on a fence, and on a building (3). Prey . Reported to feed on larvae of Lepidoptera; in particular, the bollworm ( Heliothis zea ) and the fall webworm ( Hyphantria cunea ) (Table 10-3). Enemies . Collected as food for young by members of the family Sphecidae (Hymenoptera) (Table 10-4) . Phenology and Reproduction . Berry (1970) took P_. mystaceus in May.

PAGE 210

203 Phidippus otiosus Habitats . Abbot (1792) states that a specimen was found on an oak tree (Richman, 1978). Muma (1975) reported the species from citrus groves. Museum records add the following associations: water hyacinth (2 immatures) , pine bark, under hickory bark (female), live oak bark (2 females), on building (2). Prey . None reported. Enemies . None reported. Phenology and Reproduction . None reported. Phidippus pius Habitats . Scheffer (1905) first recorded the species from rocky grassland in Kansas. Fitch (1963) also recorded the species from Kansas in xeric situations, "chiefly on barren soil of eroded upland fields." He also noted it from fence posts and a barn. Carpenter (1972) found the species in Texas to be rare; she found a male on a salt cedar bush. Both Barnes and Barnes (1955) and Berry (1970) reported P_. pius (as P. abboti ) as uncommon in southeastern piedmont broomsedge communities. No habitat data included with museum records. Prey . None reported. Enemies . Used as food for young by Sphecidae (Hymenoptera) , and eaten by a cattle egret (Aves) (Table 10-4) . Phenology and Reproduction . Barnes and Barnes (1955) collected P. pius between June and early August, and Berry (1970) collected it in July. Cutler (1979) found 34 and 16 eggs in consecutive eggsacs of a single female. Phidippus princeps Habitats. Muma and Muma (1949) reported P_. princeps from prairie in Nebraska. Barnes and Barnes (1955) found it in southeastern piedmont

PAGE 211

204 broomsedge communities, but Berry (1970), working in the same area, found it in the transitional zone between field and forest. Lowrie (1942, 1948) found it in pine woods, black oak dune, and beech-maple forest, but most often in a peat meadow. Cutler (1965) reported it from a park in the Bronx, while Peck (1966) reported it from mixed forestprairie, and Dowdy (1951) reported it (as P_. insolens ) on litter and herbs in an oak-hickory community in Missouri. Dondale (1971) considered J?, princeps as a rare resident species of a grassland meadow in Ontario, and Peck et al. (1971) found it on young pines in Arkansas. Kaston (1948) found P_. princeps fairly common in Connecticut on bushes and tall grass, but Fitch (1963) considered it rare in Kansas; he found it in dry, fairly open woodland. Wheeler (1973) collected it in alfalfa, while Everly (1938; as P. insolens ) collected it in corn. McCaffrey and Horsburgh (1980) beat it from apple trees. Warren et al. (1967) took it in fall webworm nests. Museum records add the following associations: gravel road, railroad track (2 males), under rock, pitfall in woods (8), ground in weeds, bluegrass, sedges, dried leaf on sedges with eggs, meadow (3 immatures) , pasture (2 immatures) , old field (4 immatures), field (12 immatures), along highway, by pond, by creek, on Saracenia flava (16), on oak, and on building. Prey . None reported. Enemies . Wasps of the families Pompilidae and Sphecidae (Hymenoptera) have been reported using individuals of P_. princeps as food for their young (Table 10-4) . Phenology and Reproduction . Berry (1970) collected adults in April and June in North Carolina, Kaston (1948) reported maturity in late April and early May with adults found through July in Connecticut. Barnes

PAGE 212

205 and Barnes (1955) collected adults between June and early August, while Cutler (1965) reported a pair in September. Kaston (1948) reports courtship at the end of April and a female guarding an eggsac with 115 eggs in late May. Two other eggsacs had only 43 eggs and 27 young, respectively. Phidippus pulcherrimus Habitats . None reported. Prey . None reported. Enemies . None reported. Phenology and Reproduction . A single female was taken in March by Banks (1904) at Biscayne Bay, Florida. Phidippus purpuratus Habitats . Kaston (1948) found J?, purpuratus to be common in Connecticut on talus slopes and under stones and boards on the ground. Drew (1967) found it in Michigan under stump fragments, bark, stones, and boards in both field and forest. Whitcomb et al. (1963) reported it from cotton fields in Arkansas, while Dondale (1956) took a male from an apple tree. Museum records add a female with eggs taken from a hole in a cement post in Florida. Prey . None reported. Enemies . Individuals of P_. purpuratus have been reported taken by Pompilidae and Sphecidae (Hymenoptera) as food for their young (Table 10-4) . Phenology and Reproduction . Kaston (1948) collected mature males from May to November, and females from May to September. He states (after Emerton) that they overwinter as adults. Mating occurred in June,

PAGE 213

206 and females guarding eggs were found in July and August; three eggsacs contained 100, 114, and 155 eggs, respectively. The Peckhams (1909) report 140 young in an eggsac in the Britcher collection. Kaston notes that there is evidence that females may make 2 eggsacs in a season. Phidippus putnami Habitats . Muma (1944) reports P_. putnami as common on trees, bushes, and weeds in fields and orchards in Maryland. Fitch (1963) collected a male on a gravel driveway in reestablished prairie in Kansas. Warren et al. (1967) took it from fall webworm nests in Arkansas. Museum records add the following associations: pine, rosemary (penultimate male, Florida), and a Mahonia bush (Texas). Prey . This species is known to prey on the fall webworm, Hyphan tria cunea (Lepidoptera) (Table 10-3) . Enemies . Individuals of j>. putnami have been taken by Pompilidae and Sphecidae (Hymenoptera) as food for their young (Table 10-4) . Phenology and Reproduction . Fitch (1963) collected an adult male in August. Phidippus regius Habitats . Muma (1975) reported P_. regius from citrus groves. Edwards (1975) found it to be primarily an old field species, with adults showing a preference for palmettoes. Museum records add the following associations: ground (3), cane, lakeshore pasture, field by pond, swamp, waste land (2), highway poles (7), cement posts (12: 3 gravid females and 9 immatures) , under bark (5) , under bark of Pinus palustris , and on buildings (2) .

PAGE 214

207 Prey . Larvae of Lepidoptera and adult Diptera have been reported as prey (Table 10-3) . Enemies . Fungi have been found to attack the adults (Table 10-4) . Phenology and Reproduction . Edwards (1975) reported the primary season of maturation and breeding to be in the fall. One female made an eggsac containing 335 eggs. Five other females averaged 190, 131, 87, and 85 eggs, for the first, second, third, and fourth eggsacs, respectively. Anderson (1978) reported a single female laid an eggsac with 570 eggs. Phidippus whitmani Habitats . Berry (1970) considered _P. whitmani a member of the forest community in North Carolina, Cutler (1965) found it in a park in New York, and Peck (1966) took it from a forest with some prairie influent in Missouri. Lowrie (1948) reported it from black oak dune near Chicago, and Gibson (1947) found it in Tennessee in river-terrace forest, but more common in the drier oak-hickory, in all strata. Kaston (1948) found it on bushes and weeds, and males were conspicuous on exposed rock surfaces. Barnes (1953) listed it from nonforest maritime communities, and Fitch (1963) reported it as uncommon in dry, open places, especially on broad-leaved herbs in old pastures, and also on fence posts and a barn. (Neither of the latter two reports seem likely; I have to question the determinations of the species involved.) Museum records add the following associations: short grass, sweet fern, near creek, in dead leaves, leaf litter, leaf mold, woods, beating oak, tent of Malacosoma america num (eastern tent caterpillar; 1 male), and on a building (2). Prey . None reported.

PAGE 215

208 Enemies . Individuals of P_. whitmani are reportedly used as food for young by Pompilidae and Sphecidae (Hymenoptera) (Table 10-4) . Phenology and Reproduction . Gibson (1947) reported P_. whitmani to overwinter as immatures. Kaston (1948) states they overwinter in the penultimate instar and mature in early May. Males disappear by the end of June, but females can be found through October. One female was found guarding an eggsac containing 69 just hatched young in a rolled leaf on the ground during August. Berry (1970) found adults in June, July, and October, while Cutler (1965) reports an immature female in late September. Phidippus xerus Habitats . Edwards (1978) reported young immatures on small woody shrubs in timbered sandpine scrub, while older immatures and adults were collected on young scrub oaks. Prey . None reported. Enemies . None reported. Phenology and Reproduction . Edwards (1978) reported adult males in late June and early July, with most females maturing in late July and August and found from mid-June through early September.

PAGE 216

209 Results and Discussion Habitats No species was restricted to a single habitat, and in almost every habitat, at least three and often five or more species coexisted. However, no more than two species in any one habitat were significantly more numerous than the other species within the habitat; the more numerous species in a habitat are considered the dominant species for that particular habitat (Table 10-1) . Habitats are considered to be general indicators of the range of tolerance of abiotic factors for each species. To a great extent, soil type may be the single most influential factor, and the water table level is also important. These two factors determine the types of plants growing in a particular area, which will determine the amount of canopy and, therefore, the amount of exposure to the sun, which will affect the temperature and available moisture at ground surface level and above. Three species, P. mystaceus , P. pius , and P_. purpuratus , are too insufficiently known from Florida to be able to make any conclusions about their habitat associations. Combining literature reports with the little available data from Florida gives the following generalizations: P_. mystaceus inhabitats a variety of sub-canopy and canopy communities, P_. pius is primarily an old field inhabitant, and P_. purpuratus lives in fields and open woods like many of the the other species. Some of the species, i.e. , P. audax , P. clarus , and P. whitmani , were not found in truly xerophytic environments, although they might occur in habitats that were periodically dry. Other species, i.e., P_. apacheanus , P_. cardinalis , and P. xerus , were never found in hydrophytic habitats. Most of the species showed fairly wide tolerances for habitat over two or all three major habitat subdivisions.

PAGE 217

210 Microhabitats I grouped the known specific plant (and other) associations (Table 10-2) into seven classifications based on general type of plant (e.g., shrub, tree) and plant structure (e.g., palm, tree) (Table 10-3). Chisquare analysis showed clear preferences for certain types of plant associations for most of the species of spiders. In the case of P_. regius , clear differences in preferred plant associations were exhibited between younger immatures and the older categories. All stages of P. whitmani preferred litter. All stages of P. audax and P. clarus , and the immature stages of P. regius , preferred grass and herbs; a large number of P_. pulcherrimus immatures were in this association also. Adults of _P. clarus were equally as likely to be found on woody perennials as on grass and herbs, and immatures of _P. apacheanus were as likely to be found on woody herbs as on shrubs. Immatures of P. pulcherrimus and P_. putnami were most likely to be found on shrubs, while adults of P_. pulcherrimus tended to favor lower strata than adults of _P. putnami . Trees were clearly favored by immatures and adults of P. otiosus . Subadults and adults of P_. regius were associated with various palms, but adults were equally as likely to be on trees, buildings, or, to a lesser extent, shrubs. Almost all adult P_. regius on grasses, herbs, and woody perennials were males, presumably wandering in search of females. The lower strata were preferred by P_. cardinalis (all four records from the ground were males) , while P_. xerus favored the lower woody strata. Phenology Frequency of occurrence by month and sex is illustrated in Figure 10-1. Males typically mature 2-4 weeks before females; this is

PAGE 218

211 accomplished by the males maturing in an average of one less instar than females. Females are somewhat larger and probably need the extra growth period for development of their larger size and for ovarian development. The earlier development of males increases their chances of locating and cohabiting with a subadult female, improving the males chances of reproducing and reducing the chance of an aggressive encounter with a female (see Chapters 4 and 5) . Phidippus regius females begin to lay eggs about a month after maturing and mating in the laboratory (Edwards, 1975); most of the other species are believed to have a similar reproductive cycle, although those species which overwinter as mated females (including jP. regius ) probably are able to delay egglaying for several months. The earliest peak maturation period is for P. pulcherrimus , in March and April. Maturation for _P. audax , _P. princeps , and P_. whitmani is primarily May and June. Phidippus borealis , P. insignarius , and P. pius mature in June and July, while P. clarus, P. purpuratus, P. putnami , and J?, xerus become adult in July and August. Phidippus apacheanus and P. mystaceus mature in September and October, while P. cardinalis, P. otiosus , and _P. regius become adult from September through November. The subtropical climate of peninsular Florida may have affected the reproductive periods of populations of three species. Phidippus pulcherrimus matures one to two months earlier than its northern sister species, I?, princeps , perhaps due to earlier warm temperatures. Populations of _P. audax exhibit summer and fall peaks of maturation as well as a spring peak; this is interpreted as increased survival of offspring from second and third eggsacs, which are maturing at different times than their older siblings. The longer growing period due to more warm

PAGE 219

212 days probably contributes to the success of the later offspring. Finally, P. regius has a second peak of maturation in the spring in south Florida, probably due to reasons similar to those stated above for P_. audax . Unusual opportunities for interaction between species exist due to the atypical additional maturation dates of the above species, especially P_. audax . Recently, a few authors (e.g., Uetz, 1977) have noted that the larger of syntopic congeners matures and reproduces earlier in the year, so that the immature stages of the larger species are always larger than immatures of the smaller species, generally by a factor as large or larger than the ratio (1.28) proposed by Hutchinson (1959); presumably they utilize different sized prey. However, this generalization has been proposed for groups of genera (e.g., in lycosids, gnaphosids, and thomisids) which are restricted to a single microhabitat (leaf litter). The largest species of Phidippus (P. regius , P_. otiosus ) mature the latest in the year of any of the Florida species; the species of Phidippus are distributed unequally among several microhabitats. Apparently, competition for prey size is less critical than in the groups restricted to a single microhabitat. Enemies The most consistently observed predators of spiders are Pompilidae and Sphecidae (Table 10-4) which stock their burrows or mud nests with paralyzed spiders as food for the wasps' developing young. Phidippus species have been frequently reported as prey of both of the above groups, but in low numbers. Sphecids of the genus Trypargilum appear to specialize on vagrant spiders, especially salticids. In a collection

PAGE 220

213 I made of nests of the mud-dauber Trypargilum clavatum , 78% of the 161 specimens collected were salticids (Appendix E) . Phidippus otiosus was represented by 26 specimens, and P_. audax by 2 specimens. Mantispids are well known as spider egg predators, although they have been infrequently reported for salticids. In this study, Mantispa viridis was taken from eggsacs of several Phidippus species. The most severely affected was P_. clarus , with M. viridis taken from A of the 26 field-collected eggsacs in this study. Three other M. viridis were taken in a sample of 20 eggsacs of P_. clarus in an earlier study not included in the results presented here. Two M. viridis were taken from a single eggsac of P. otiosus . Figure 10-2 shows an M. viridis emergence. Another group of egg predators were chloropids. Maggots of Pseudogaurax signatus (previously reported for web-weaving spiders; Eason et al. , 1967) were found in 14 eggsacs of P. clarus , ranging from 3-18 per eggsac (average of 8). In one instance, 8 maggots and a specimen of M. viridis were found in the same eggsac. Another eggsac contained 2 maggots and a M. viridis . The maggots are considered predators because they destroyed several eggs apiece. Egg predators usually destroyed most of the eggs, leaving only 10-53 eggs (average of 20) to hatch into spider lings. Hymenopteran egg parasites of Phidippus opifex have been reported: Tetrastichus phidippi Burks (Eulophidae; Burks, 1963), Arachnophaga picea (Riley) (Eupelmidae: Howard, 1892), and Idris saitidis (Howard) (Scelionidae: Howard, 1890). Both Eupelmidae and Scelionidae of the same genera reported above were found in this study. An undetermined parasite that has not been collected is also reported, probably belonging to one of the above families. Eggsacs parasitized by this species

PAGE 221

214 have been found with the parasites already emerged; the eggs were hollowed out and a circular emergency hole was cut on one side. An eggsac of P. regius contained 101 parasitized eggs, and 1 infertile egg; an eggsac of P. otiosus had 73 parasitized eggs, 2 infertile eggs, and 24 young. No young survived in the P_. clarus eggsac parasitized by Arachnophaga aldrlchi . A single dipteran parasitoid ( Sarcophaga davidsonii Coquillett) has been reported on P_. opifex by Coquillet (1892). Although Acroceridae are widely known as spider parasitoids (Schlinger, 1960; Eason et al. , 1967) the report here of an as yet undetermined Ogcodes species emerging from a juvenile of _P. princeps is only the second for the genus. Jackson (1976) reported an acrocerid emerging from a specimen of P. johnsoni . I previously reported (Edwards, 1975) two species of fungi attacking P. otiosus and _P. regius . A third fungus species, Gibellula leio pus, is now reported attacking P. audax . Mermithid nematodes have been reported attacking other, usually terrestrial, spiders (e.g., lycosids; Eason, 1969). Two field-collected P. otiosus, an adult male and a subadult female, died in the laboratory when larval mermithids emerged from the spiders' abdomens. Since I>. otiosus is arboreal and the life cycle of mermithids is closely tied to the soil, how these spiders became parasitized is open to speculation. Of all the species of Phidippus in this study, _P. otiosus is the species I would have least likely suspected to be parasitized by mermithids, yet it is the only species from which this type of parasitoid was recovered. Various vertebrate predators of Phidippu s species have been reported in the literature. During the course of this study, the only evidence of vertebrate predation appeared to be on two eggsacs of

PAGE 222

215 _P. clarus , which were mostly missing due to the presence of a large circular hole in the middle, as though a bird's beak had pierced each eggsac. I report these as ?Aves in Table 10-4. Subsequent to my research, an immature Phidippus was taken from the stomach of an individual of the tree frog Hyla cinerea (A. Freed, personal communication). Prey Arthropods fed on by species of Phidippus belonged to the insect orders Odonata, Orthoptera, Hemiptera, Homoptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera, and Hymenoptera; Phidippus species also fed on other spiders (Table 10-5) . One of the 2 prey records for P_. apacheanus was another spider, 17 of 94 records (18%) for _P. audax were of other spiders, and 1 of 8 and 1 of 31 records were of spiders for _P. pulcherrimus and P_. regius , respectively. Spiders have also been reported as prey of P. clarus (Fitch, 1963; Tolbert, 1975). The percent predation on other spiders by P. audax compares favorably with that observed for P. johnsoni (11 of 33 records were of spiders; Jackson, 1977b). Jackson observed three instances of conspecific predation by P_. johnsoni females on males. I also observed three instances of conspecific predation by P_. audax , but they were by females on another female (1 record) and on subadult females (2 records). I did not observe conspecific predation by P. audax until the chironomid population was suddenly severely reduced in mid-August of 1976 at Burnt Pond; all three cases of conspecific predation were observed on the same day. Steve Tessler (personal communication) found eight cases of conspecific predation by P_. audax females on other females on eaves of old buildings where females were making eggsacs. This suggests that competition for nesting sites was occurring.

PAGE 223

216 Prey was distributed over several orders for those species of Phidippus for which more than a few records were available. Generally records were evenly distributed among prey orders, but a few instances of concentration on particular prey were noted. Chironomids constituted 55% of the recorded prey for P, audax , and 18% were other spiders which were also feeding primarily on chironomids. Nine records (10%) of prey captured by _P. audax were of the cantharid Chauliognathus marginatus . Smaller immatures of P_. regius tended to feed on nematoceran and acalypterate Diptera (26%), while subadults and adults tended to feed on adult and larval Lepidoptera, large Hemiptera, and large Orthoptera (55%) One interesting record was of an adult male P_. regius feeding on an adult of Diaprepes abbreviatus , a weevil pest of citrus and sugar cane. Predation of the chironomid Glyptotendipes paripes was recorded for J?, clarus , P_. otiosus , P_. pulcherrimus , and J?, regius , as well as by the salticids Dendryphantes marginatus and Metaphidippus galathea (Appendix F) , in numbers approximately proportional to the relative abundances of these species in lake edge habitats. Webs of the various orb-weaving spiders, especially Tetragnatha species, captured many thousands of this same chironomid. Prey size was significantly correlated with spider size in terms of both weight and length. Figures 10-3 and 10-4 illustrate and compare these correlations for _P. audax and P_. regius ; prey of both species was represented by a substantial sample size. Prey of P_. regius increased in size to a greater extent than did prey of _P. audax as spider size increased; this reflects both a difference in types of prey taken by the two species, and the larger ultimate size of P_. regius . For the species with smaller sample sizes, P. clarus (n=4) showed very high

PAGE 224

217 correlations with both weight (r=.996) and length (r=.997); P. pul cherrimus (n=7) showed significant correlation with length (r=.795) but not with weight. The other species did not show significant correlations with either length or weight. Reproduction Isolated observations of egg clutch size (see Background) have been observed for several species of Phidippus , but no systematic comparison has been made. In Table 10-6, I compare species of Phidippus for known clutch sizes and number of clutches using a combination of fieldcollected and laboratory data. Some unusually high infertility rates may be due to dessication under laboratory conditions. Data for P_. insignarius and P_. purpuratus are drawn from literature records, and included for comparative purposes. Calculating reproductive potential is difficult since for most species, number of clutches and clutch size are poorly known. In this study, reasonable estimates of reproductive potential are available for P_. audax , P. clarus , P. otiosus , and P_. regius ; the reproductive capacities of P. pulcherrimus , P_. whitmani , and _P. xerus are probably fairly accurately indicated as well. Assuming females produce the maximum number of eggsacs observed for a particular species, the mean (and maximum) reproductive capacities were 245 (292) for P_. audax , 358 (555) for P_. clarus , 350 (673) for P_. otiosus , and 402 (715) for P. regius ; for the smaller species, reproductive capacities were 59 (61) for P_. pulcherrimus , 95 (121) for P. whitmani , and 47 (48) for P. xerus . The mean for P_. audax compares well with means from different populations of P_. audax bred in the laboratory by Taylor and Peck (1975); the results for P. whitmani match the single observation reported by Kaston (1948).

PAGE 225

218 Since good estimates of the reproductive capacities of all species of Phidippus under study could not be made, I compared clutch size of the first eggsac among species. Significant differences (Table 10-6) in clutch size were found among species, indicating that larger species had larger clutches. A significant correlation between mean clutch size of the first eggsac and mean length of females provided corroboration (r=.815) (Figure 10-5; Florida records for P. clarus ommitted) . The only species which did not fit the correlation pattern between body size and clutch size was P_. clarus . Inclusion of the data for P_. clarus from Florida in the correlation analysis disrupted the correlation so that it was not significant (r=.547). However, when I substituted the clutch size (75 eggs) observed for a P_. clarus female in Connecticut (Kaston, 1948), the correlation was hardly affected (r=.8ll). This anomaly suggests that the reproductive rates of P. clarus in Florida have been adjusted due to some evolutionarily significant pressure. This pressure is almost certainly from egg predators and parasites; 14 of 24 eggsacs of P_. clarus in this study were attacked by arthropod egg predators and parasites. While egg parasites destroyed most or all of the eggs within an invaded eggsac, eggsacs attacked by egg predators almost always had at least 10% and up to 33% survival and emergence of spiderlings, whether the egg predators were mantispids, maggots, or both. This is significant theoretically, because the egg predators do not appear to be maximally exploiting a limited resource as they would be expected to do. For some unknown reason, the maximum number of eggs eaten is less than available. While one present theory would suggest that parasitism could be combated by producing more and smaller eggs, the smae strategy would be useless against egg predators, as the same amount of energy would be available. On the other hand, if the egg predators have an upper limit to eggs

PAGE 226

219 eaten, a female _P. clarus could produce fewer eggsacs with more normalsized eggs per eggsac, which would increase the number of young surviving egg predation; at the same time, the females would be expending more energy per eggsac, which would adversely affect the number of eggsacs they could produce. This hypothesis may explain the phenomena discussed in the following paragraphs. Two females of P_. clarus , which had their first eggsacs mostly destroyed by a combination of maggots and mantispids, made two and one subsequent eggsacs, respectively, in the laboratory, with surprising results. One female laid 247 eggs in the second eggsac and 168 eggs in the third eggsac (415 total) and the other female made a second eggsac which contained 247 young and 44 infertile eggs (291 total) . The first total exceeds the mean reproductive capacity (for 3 eggsacs) for Florida females not affected by parasites, and the second total is nearly equal the maximum number of eggs reported for a first clutch of _P. clarus . The number of eggs was over twice that for second or third eggsacs, respectively, made by females whose first eggsacs were not preyed upon. Two conclusions are suggested from egg clutch size of ]?. clarus in Florida: 1) clutch sizes have been significantly increased due to pressure from egg predators and parasites, and 2) under the proper conditions (i.e., if sufficient food is acquired after destruction of the first eggsac), females can totally replace their normal reproductive output. This suggests that females rarely reproduce to their full potential, for which explanations must be sought. One obvious answer is that they starve to death first: in almost every case, a JP. clarus female collected with her first eggsac had a severely shrunken abdomen; a few were found dead in the eggsac. I have only a few records of _P. clarus making a second eggsac in the field in late fall. One observation which

PAGE 227

220 may be an alternate reproductive strategy was of a I>. clarus female at Burnt Pond, with an eggsac on a dogfennel which I could see had fly pupae in it. When I returned a week later, this eggsac was abandoned, and what appeared to be the same female had constructed another eggsac in another dogfennel about a meter away. Upon examining the first eggsac, I found two fly pupae and about ten spiderlings. I have observed the phenomenon of premature death for every one of the smaller species I have kept which produced eggsacs in the laboratory: P_. princeps , P. pulcherrimus , J?, putnami , P_. whitmani , and P. xerus . The females will catch and eat prey if it approaches the opening to the nest, but they will rarely leave the nest to catch prey. Most wild females do not have the body reserves left to produce another eggsac, and few have the stregnth to hunt in order to replenish the reserves, so they starve to death. I have observed this to some extent in the larger species, also, such as P_. audax and P_. regius , but not on the first eggsac. In the field, I have found abandoned eggsacs of P. audax , P_. regius , and P_. putnami which still contained as yet undispersed first instar spiderlings. Other questions about the reproduction of P. clarus remain unanswered. The first one concerns the exposed placement of the eggsac. Possibly competition with other species for nesting sites in the past history of P_. clarus was responsible for the present choice of nesting sites. However, instead of competing (and losing) for better nesting sites, P_. clarus may have followed the line of least resistance by making its eggsacs in a place and manner similar to its molting nests. Immatures of several species make silken shelters and molting nests in herbaceous plants; P_. clarus may be best adapted to using these particular plants for nests during their reproductive season.

PAGE 228

221 The second question, concerning P_. clarus in particular and not only other Phidippus but other spiders in general which remain with the eggsac until the young hatch: Why is there such a high parasite and predation rate on the eggs? Most earlier researchers have presumed that the females primary function is to guard the eggs from predators and parasites; this function may work well against transient arthropod predators, e.g., coccinellids, but apparently females are somewhat ineffective at protecting the eggs from specialized predators and parasites. Evidence from two sources indicates another primary function for eggguarding females. Eason (1964) reported that female wolf spiders take extremely good care of their eggsacs, mending holes cut or torn in the eggsac; the females even must open the eggsac so the young can emerge, a phenomenon known only for wolf spiders. I have noted previously (Edwards, 1975) that eggsacs of P_. regius from which females were removed failed to hatch due to dessication. Both of these examples imply that one of the primary functions of parental care is to prevent the eggs from dessicating. This would explain in proximate terms why Phidippus females must stay with the eggs until they hatch, and explain why females often do not survive their first eggsac; after undergoing the energetically expensive construction of the eggsac and egg laying, the females must protect the eggs from dessication (by periodically adding more silk; apparently silk loses its water retention properties with time) for about two weeks until the eggs hatch. Females usually stay with the postembryos until they molt to first instars, another 10-14 days. By this time the female has gone without food for nearly a month, and her energy reserves are about spent. The ultimate causes of this reproductive strategy may be related to the life style of these spiders. Probably since webs are not used in prey capture, the spiders have not evolved the capacity for producing the elaborate eggsacs

PAGE 229

222 found in some of the araneids and theridiids; therefore the salticids would seem to have substituted time expenditure to compensate for their lack of specialized silk, even though they probably expend the maximal amount of silk available. Generalities about expected reproduction by field populations can be made by considering each species' phenology, size, and known clutch production. Smaller species and species in more temperate areas would be expected to produce no more than two eggsacs due to either small reproductive capacities or seasonal limitations. Larger species, and species with high reproductive capacities that begin reproducing relatively early in the year in warmer climates, would be expected to produce as many as three eggsacs. Populations Prey populations . Prey were no where near as numerous in other habitats as they were in lake edge habitats. As expected, spider populations were also lower in non-lake edge habitats. Spider populations . With the exception of the lake edge habitats, where populations were estimated in July, and the pine flatwoods habitat, where populations of P_. pulcherrimus were readily followed (Figure 10-6), data on pupulations of species over time was inconclusive. I found only a few first instars for any species; P. pulcherrimus was best represented for this stage. I found a single P. apacheanus first instar on the ground, and the same stage for other species was usually found in very low herbaceous vegetation or near ground level on taller vegetation. The grasses Echinochloa and Sacciolepis along the edges of lakes have elongate decumbent stems; the dense growth of these grasses provides a distinct microhabitat with greater humidity than the higher parts of the

PAGE 230

223 plant. At Burnt Pond, I found Habrocestum bufoides Chamber lin and Ivie, a species characteristic of mesophytic forest litter, on the ground under the decumbent stems. Probably the youngest instars of P. audax were in this microhabitat ; I did observe a few sitting on top of the decumbent part of the plant stems. However, it was impossible to observe directly in this microhabitat, and sampling would have been extremely difficult for a number of reasons. For several species, more adults were observed than were subadults; this is probably due to the relative ease of finding females in nesting sites for some species. Rather than trying to estimate population sizes where biases in sampling indicated more older stages than younger stages, I used comparisons of absolute numbers of individuals observed during the total research period to give comparative relative abundances for use in measures of, e.g., niche breadth. Table 10-7 gives the numbers of each species found in primary and secondary study habitats. Discounting the anomalies presented by low numbers of first instars and high numbers of adults, general population trends can be presented. As expected, population sizes (with the exception of P_. audax ) decreased with increased age of spider lings. A noticeable drop occurred in P. pulcherrimus after the fourth instar. This corresponds well with the instars (third through fifth) of P. otiosus taken by Trypargilum clavatum (Appendix E) , and indicates that these stages may be severely affected by mud dauber predation. All stages of P. audax from the fourth instar and older were numerous in the lake edge habitats. Populations of all species seemed to remain fairly constant from year to year; the only changes were the addition or subtraction of species due to plant successional stages. Certain species were associated with plant successional

PAGE 231

224 stages, but this is discussed later (See Species Summaries). The only significant change in population numbers that I have observed over several years of collecting and observation was the Newnan's Lake population of P. audax , which was severely reduced following a rise in the water level of the lake, flooding most of the study area. The population of JP. otiosus , a canopy species in the same area, was unaffected. Field Behaviors Ambush hunting . This sit-and-wait hunting strategy was observed in use by individuals of P. apacheanus , P_. audax , P. cardinalis, P. clarus , P_. otiosus , P. pulcherrimus , and P. regius . Typically, the spider would sit facing the ground on the main stem (or occasionally a large side stem) on tall grass, herbs or small shrubs, a few cm below the top of the plant (often under a flower or leaf petiole) . Here the spider would sit motionless (for a few min. to three hours), unless a movement by another arthropod attracted its attention. Apparently the spider would scan the area below its position; arthropods moving below could be observed and analyzed as potential prey. Once I observed a female JP, audax waiting near the top of an Echinochloa stem; it spotted a subadult conspecific moving through the vegetation below; it rapidly stalked down the stem to about two cm above the subadult, which was unaware of the female approaching from above; the female leaped on and killed the subadult. Ambush hunting by P_. otiosus is of a slightly different form, since it occurs in a horizontal rather than vertical plane. Individuals of P. otiosus were observed, especially at Newnan's Lake, to wait at the ends of branches at the periphery of a tree canopy, presumably waiting for insects to land on the outer edge of the canopy. Often an individual

PAGE 232

225 would be on the underside of an upper leaf in a clump of leaves at the end of a branch, where it could survey the leaves below it without being seen itself. In this respect, P. otiosus was like the other Phidippus species, which also observed strata below their own position. Search hunting . The basic search behavior has been well described by Hill (1978) for Dendryphantes marginatus (a close relative of the genus Phidippus ) , and is applicable both to individuals hunting for prey, and to males searching for females. To summarize, a spider moves out side branches and explores both upper and lower surfaces of leaves, frequently stopping to visually scan the surrounding area, and orienting toward any nearby movement. The front legs are often waved around as if testing the air; laboratory observations by Forster (1977a) indicate that jumping spiders may be able to pick up nearby airborne vibrations caused by vibrating insect wings. Agonistic encounters . I observed two equal-sized males of P. audax engage in a wrestling match on a Sacciolepis leaf at Newnan's Lake. The males locked chelicerae and pushed and pulled on each other with their legs for 10 min. Finally, they fell off the leaf and were separated by the force of the fall, after which fighting was not resumed and they separated. Why males should fight under such conditions is not clear, unless in localized populations, peck orders are set up among males, as was shown experimentally by Richman (1977) for the salticid Corythalia canosa . Smaller males usually flee from or only briefly challenge larger males when encounters occur while searching for females, but equalsized males apparently reach more advanced stages of encounter before determining which is dominant. When a male locates a female, fighting with another male for possession of mating rights to the female is more

PAGE 233

226 readily understood. I observed a 40 min. fight between two equal-sized males of Dendryphantes marginatus ; one of the males had been cohabiting with an immature female which appeared to be too young to be in the penultimate stage; this male eventually drove the other male away in a seesaw battle in which one and then the other appeared to be winning. Snetsinger (1955) observed a small male of P_. clarus cohabiting with a female to successfully drive away a larger male which approached the nest . Courtship and cohabitation . On several occasions at Newnan's Lake I observed _P. audax males courting hunting females; however, only one of these males was observed to be successful. On the other hand, I observed two instances of cohabitation for J?, audax , six instances for _P. regius (one was with an obviously gravid female, not a penultimate female; on another occasion, two males were cohabiting with the same female, one in the usual adjacent cell made over the females nest, and another which had made a new nest 2 cm away) , and two instances for _P. otiosus . Hill (1978) reports four instances of cohabitation in P. otiosus observed by John A. Anderson, and Snetsinger (1955) reported cohabitation for both P_. clarus and P. audax . Jackson (1977a) reported cohabitation for P_. johnsoni . As already noted in Chapter 4, John Anderson observed a mating between a _P. otiosus male and a P_. regius female. I observed a P. clarus male courting a JP. audax female at Burnt Pond from a distance of 40-50 cm. Initially, each spider was on a separate herb, but the male, upon spotting the female, went down the stem of the plant it was on, across a grass blade, up the stem of the plant the female was on, and out on a side stem of that plant where the female was perched (total distance traversed was about 86 cm) . The female watched the entire approach of

PAGE 234

227 the male. The male began courting when about 12 cm from the female, but the female backed away on the stem; the male moved forward to about 12 cm distance and again displayed, then advanced forward to where he could almost touch the female; the female backed away again; the male followed, but the female turned and jumped off the plant, ending the encounter. The male looked around in several directions, but not finding the female, turned and went back down the plant. Gardner (1965) reported males of other Phidippus species courting females of different species, but Snetsinger (1955) reported that individuals of P. audax and P_. clarus gave each other scarcely more than passing notice when encounters occurred in the field. The above encounter occurred in mid-August, when females of _P. audax would normally be nesting, but, as noted earlier (see Phenology) , adults of P_. audax occur throughout most of the year in peninsular Florida, creating additional opportunities for non-specific encounters. Nesting . Almost all eggsacs of P_. otiosus and P_. regius were taken under either pine or oak bark. One P_. regius female made a nest on the outside of the trunk of a young pine sapling, and another was found with an eggsac inside a hollow pole. Sometimes several _P. otiosus females would make nests under the bark of a lightning-struck pine. A few _P. otiosus were found nesting under frond petiole remnants on trunks of cabbage palms. One P_. otiosus female made an eggsac on the top of a cabbage palm frond, as did a P_. audax female. Other _P. audax females were found nesting in rolled Rub us leaves, and one female had a nest in the top of a cattail seed head. This latter case was extraordinary, as the P_. audax female's eggsac (which contained first instars nearly ready to emerge when observed) was right next to a _P. clarus female's nest (which had eggs; probably this female's second eggsac). The two eggsacs

PAGE 235

228 were nearly touching, and I cannot believe that these females were not aware of each other's presence; neither can I explain why the close proximity of the other's eggsac was tolerated. Other females of P_. clarus usually made their eggsacs in the tops of Eupatorium , Solidago and Boehmeria . Few records of eggsacs of other species were noted in the field. A P. apacheanus female was found with an eggsac under oak bark. Two eggsacs of P. putnami containing postembryos and first instars were found on rosemary and in the curled tip of a saw palmetto frond, respectively, but the female had already left the eggsac in each case. A P. xerus female was found with an eggsac deep in the folds of a newly emerging saw palmetto frond. Two females of _P. cardinalis were collected under hickory bark by D. B. Richman and J. Reiskind; one female later produced an eggsac in the laboratory. Jon Reiskind also collected a female _P. pulcherrimus with an eggsac in a rolled sweet gum leaf. Kaston (1948) reported a P. whitmani female nesting in a rolled leaf on the ground. Based on field records of eggsacs and first appearance of 1st instars, species of Phidippus appear to lay eggs in the following range of months: P_. apacheanus (December to May), P_. audax (primarily May to August; probably year round in peninsular Florida), P_. cardinalis (February to May) , _P. clarus (August to November) , ?_. insignarius (August to September) , P. mystaceus (October to May) , _P. otiosus (January to June) , P_. pius (August) , P_. princeps (May to July) , I?, pulcherrimus (April to July) , P. putnami (August to October) , J?, regius (mostly October to June in north Florida, probably March to September in south Florida), P_. whitmani (May to August), and J?, xerus (August to September)

PAGE 236

229 Shelter . Individuals of P. audax , P. clarus , P_. otiosus , P. pulcherrimus , P_. regius , and P. xerus were observed to have built thinwalled silken retreats in which to spend the night. Spiders could be easily seen through the silk of these nests, which were built in rolled leaves or the tops of grasses and herbs, frequently in seed heads or flower umbels. I occasionally observed adults of P_. audax , P. otiosus , and P. regius spend the night in shelters without spinning silken retreats, e.g., in hollow spaces under bark. I also observed the very thickly-woven molting nests of immatures of the above species, and observed individuals of P_. audax and P_. pulcherrimus on Tradescantia to make short hunting sorties of a few cm from their molting nests after molting, and then returning to the nest with prey. Tessler (personal communication) found _P. audax to repeatedly use the same nests on wild carrot, and Jackson (1979) reported marked individuals of P. johnsoni in the field to make excursions as far as 1.2 m and return to the nest. Territoriality . I marked 13 females of P_. regius on 11 cabbage palms in a study of territoriality near Burnt Pond. Palms ranged from 1.6-3.1 m in height, and were either isolated (#3, 6, 7, 9, 10), associated with other palms (#2, 8), associated with shrubs (#4, 5), or associated with other types of trees (#1, 11). The palms approximately ringed the experimental area, beginning with palm #1 on the west side and moving counterclockwise to palm #10 on the northwest corner. Palm #11 was in the southeast corner. Female P_. regius were usually found in nests on the youngest fully-developed fronds, in the center of the palm. On Oct. 13, 1976, I marked females (F) 1-5 and correspondingly marked the palms they were on. On Oct. 20, I rechecked these five palms: F-l had been replaced by another female, which I marked and designated as F-l ; F-2 was missing; both F-3 and F-5 were on palm #3; and F-4 was

PAGE 237

230 was missing. On this same date I marked females 6-10 and their corresponding palms, and I noted a cohabiting pair (male and penultimate female) in a palm near palm #1. On Oct. 27, F-l 1 was still on palm #1, F-5 was on palm #4, and F-10 was on palm #8; all other females were missing and all other palms were unoccupied. On Nov. 3, F-l' was on palm #1, and all other palms were unoccupied; I did find a new female on a palm which 1 had observed to have four unoccupied retreats on an earlier date. I marked both female and palm as #11. On Nov. 10, F-l' was still on palm #1, but all other palms were unoccupied; the same was observed on Jan. 14, 1977. On Jan. 28, F-l' was missing also. The following conclusions can be made: 1) most females were transient, staying on a palm less than a week, 2) a few females stayed in the vicinity of one or a few palms for over a week; F-3 was on palm #3 for two consecutive weeks, F-10 was on palm #10 and the nearby palm #8 on consecutive weeks, and F-5 was on the closely spaced palms #3, 5, and 4 on three consecutive weeks, 3) a female may remain on a palm for a prolonged period of time; in this study, F-l' was on the same palm on all but the first and last observation days, and was on the palm a minimum of 56 days. Palm #1 was about 2.1 m in height and was clumped with a pine tree about 4.3 m high; the combination of the two plants may have provided a sufficient combination of shelter and foraging area for the spider to remain. A female with this combination of resources may actively exclude other individuals, and in effect establish a territory, using the palm as home base for excursions into the surrounding vegetation. The cohabiting pair remained together through Nov. 10, a minimum of 21 days, but on Dec. 9, only the female was present (designated female

PAGE 238

231 and palm #12) , presumably the same female which had finally matured and mated (I made this assumption because the penultimate female of the cohabiting pair was smaller than normal, and the adult female on the same palm on Dec. 9 was also small and of similar color. This female still was present on the same palm on Jan. 14; total time on the same palm, including the penultimate stage, was at least 92 days, and in the adult stage at least 36 days. A second smaller palm was clumped with palm #12. Abiotic Factors Temperature and humidity . I took measurements of temperature and relative humidity every two hours on days of observations in primary study habitats. Daily trends were a rise in temperature in the afternoon accompanied by a decrease in relative humidity. Only three observations seemed noteworthy in respect to these factors. First, of the two types of hunting strategies employed by species of Phidippus , the ambush strategy was used most often during the middle of the day by species in exposed habitats. This reduced activity pattern corresponds with peaks of daily temperature. Anderson (1970) reported peak oxygen consumption rates for P. regius in a laboratory experiment to be during mid-morning and late afternoon, which corresponds with field activity patterns of search hunting during warm (20-30° C) but not hot temperature periods. Second, at Burnt Pond I noted increased search hunting during early and mid-afternoon on overcast days; temperatures remained moderate and relative humidity was higher on these days. Third, I did not observe hunting for any species at temperatures less than 18 C, except for P. pulcherrimus in pine flatwoods (a habitat relatively protected from

PAGE 239

232 weather effects, e.g., wind chill), where I observed individuals hunting in temperatures as low as 15° C, and I obtained one prey record (an ichneumon wasp) for this species at this temperature. An interesting comparison can be made between individuals of Dendryphantes ( Eris ) marginatus at Burnt Pond, which had essentially the same type of activity patterns as P. audax in the same habitat, and D. marginatus in Oregon (Hill, 1978) which was most active during the mid-day heat (20°C) in that locality. The D. marginatus at Burnt Pond were most active during the moderate temperature range periods (mid-morning and late afternoon) ; the Oregon population was most active during the same temperature range, but this temperature occurred in mid-afternoon in Oregon. Mid-afternoon in Florida is too hot during the summer months, and activity is reduced. Wind . Spiders were very difficult to observe or collect by sweeping on days when the wind was blowing consistently at approximately 15 mph or higher. Spiders mostly remain in shelters or cling tightly to the plant substrate under such conditions. Activity by both insects and spiders is probably reduced due to the precarious footing on plants moving back and forth; the constant plant movement probably also reduces the spider's ability to visually evaluate the surrounding area. Light intensity . Individuals of P. audax , P_. clarus , and _P. regius were all observed to begin making resting nests about an hour before sunset. Although I did not measure light intensity, it seems likely that this is an important factor, since Phidippus cannot see in the dark (Jackson, 1977a).

PAGE 240

233 Resource Analysis The niche has been defined in a variety of ways, but most modern ecologists accept Hutchinson's (1957) definition of the niche as an n-dimensional hypervolume (Price, 1975). I analyzed six dimensions: habitats, microhabitats associated with hunting behavior, microhabitats associated with eggsac construction, prey (type and size), time of year in relation to size of individuals, and time of year in regard to mating season. Ten of the thirteen species of Phidippus known to occur in Florida (P. mystaceus , _P. pius , and J?, purpuratus were omitted due to insufficient data) were analyzed; a total of 45 pair-wise comparisons of species were possible. Where data for a particular niche dimension were lacking (i.e., prey or eggsac construction site), only remaining niche dimensions were compared for that species pair. All age groups are included in comparisons. Species-specific diversity (3) of resource used was measured using Levins' (1968) niche breadth formula: log g = E p ± log p ± where P. is the proportion of a species which occupies or uses the discrete state i of a particular resource dimension. Species overlap in resource utilization («.,) was calculated for each niche dimension using the method proposed by Pianka (1974) : E P. . P., jk £ PT. E P., ^J i 1J i lk

PAGE 241

234 where P and P , represent the proportions of resource i used by species ij ik j and k. Estimating overall niche overlap is difficult since, although resources may be discrete, animals integrate resource use over space and time (Pianka, 1974; May, 1976). Cody (1974) measured overall multidimensional utilization in two ways, product alpha and summation alpha. Product alpha (product of overlap values of each niche dimension) is the best estimator when niche dimensions are completely independent; it is calculated n « = n («.,R) Jk jk where <*., R is the total niche overlap of species j on species k for n niche dimensions. Where niche dimensions are entirely dependent the best estimator of overall overlap is summation alpha (arithmetic mean of the overlaps for all component dimensions) , which is calculated * " E ( -jk*> where <* , R and n are as above. The true measure of overall niche overJk lap should fall somewhere between the values calculated by product alpha and summation alpha. In most cases, summation alpha appears to be a better estimator of overall niche overlap for species of Phidippus , since the niche dimensions analyzed are dependent to some extent. Habitat will determine the number of available microhabitats for hunting and egg laying, and

PAGE 242

235 mating season and prey size are dependent on body size to some extent. Product alpha will be a good estimator when it is zero because of no overlap in habitat. Non-zero product alpha may be useful in comparing resource utilization for species which do not overlap in habitat. Habitat In the past, resource analysis comparisons have been made in single microhabitats (e.g., litter; Uetz, 1975), single communities (e.g., field; Turner and Polis, 1979), or between similar communities (e.g., deserts; Pianka, 1974); however, organisms with similar ecological requirements may or may not exploit similar types of resources in different habitats. Based on an earlier discussion (see Results and Discussion) , I consider the habitat (s) occupied by a species as a measure of its range of abiotic tolerance. Although one could argue that habitat limitations are really an expression of the realized niche based on competition for particular resources within a habitat, I have found no supporting evidence to substantiate this argument. On the contrary, where one might expect habitat overlap to occur in the absence of competitors in a particular microhabitat (e.g., P. whitmani on litter), overlap does not occur. To analyze species diversity by habitat, I employed H' , the ShannonWeaver Index (Shannon, 1948). As a measure of species evenness within a habitat, I used J' (Lloyd et al. , 1968). Only the primary and secondary study habitats were considered for analysis, except for the data for P_. whitmani from San Felasco Hammock, which is included for comparative purposes.

PAGE 243

236 Species diversity (H') and species evenness (J 1 ) were both greatest in xerophytic habitats (Table 10-7); each habitat supported six species, the species composition differing with the amount of canopy. No species was particularly numerous, but J?, apacheanus and P. xerus were restricted to these habitats and appeared to be the dominant species in the timbered scrub field. Species diversity may be high due to the poor nutrient content of the soil in scrub habitats (Laessle, 1942). Low nutrient supply has been hypothesized as a factor in increased species packing due to greater niche segregation in plants (Woodwell, 1974); presumably this situation would be favorable to increased species packing at higher trophic levels. Where a particular resource is excessively available, dominance by one or a few species best able to exploit that resource is expected (Patrick and Strawbridge, 1963). In the two habitats where food was unlimited (Burnt Pond and Newnan's Lake), P_. audax was clearly dominant, and species evenness was low, although species diversity was moderately high in the non-canopy-affected habitat (Burnt Pond) . In the absence of direct data, indirect data can be used: P_. regius was clearly dominant in the transition habitat dominated by palms, whereas _P. clarus was dominant in the old field community. Odum (1969) has shown that net community production is high in the early stages of a plant community; low species diversity would be expected in such a community (e.g., old field). On the other hand, Odum (1969) has shown that in mature plant communities, the net community production is low and available energy is primarily associated with detritus. Although only one species of Phidippus (P_. whitmani) occurs in mature forests, it occurs on the litter as predicted. The lack of intrageneric diversity of Phidippus species

PAGE 244

237 in this habitat may be due to the fact that the genus as a whole seems to be more xeric-adapted, or it could be because _P. whitmani is near the top of the food web in its trophic level, since it is one of the largest of a diverse assemblage of litter spiders (Drew, 1967; Berry, 1970), possibly precluding the presence of a similar competitor. The pine flatwoods habitat was clearly dominated by _P. pulcherrimus ; as with P_. regius , the primary indicator was association with a particular microhabitat , in this case the shrub understory. Microhabitat Distribution of species of Phidippus by microhabitat has been discussed earlier (see Results and Discussion and Table 10-3). For purposes of analysis, I lumped all age groups (Table 10-8) within a microhabitat; the dominance of _P. whitmani on litter, P_. audax and P_. clarus on grasses and herbs, P_. pulcherrimus on shrubs, P_. regius on palms, and P_. otiosus on other trees was further emphasized. Site of Eggsac Construction Data on what microhabitats were utilized for eggsac construction were limited for most species (Table 10-9). Woody perennials were primarily used by P. clarus , which made a conspicuous white eggsac in the tops of the plants by tying together several of the top leaves. Both _P. otiosus and _P. regius utilized spaces under dead tree bark as their primary eggsac construction site. Prey In order to analyze types of prey captured, I lumped prey categories into orders (Table 10-10). As a rule, the greater the sample size

PAGE 245

238 of numbers of prey taken by a particular species of Fhidippus, the greater the number of prey categories were represented. All nine orders of observed prey were taken by P_. audax , which had the highest sample size for captured prey. As noted earlier, _P. audax showed a decided preference for chironomids and other spiders, in that order; these were the two most numerous categories of available prey in the lake edge habitats frequented by J?, audax , indicating that this species will feed proportionately on more numerous prey types. Also, it was clear from the size of the spider populations that high prey density attracted a large number of predators. This agrees with the observations of Turnbull (1964) on a web spider, in that spiders will move toward a higher prey density. Since P. audax is by far the most frequently observed species of Phidippus in agro-ecosystems (e.g., Whitcomb et al. , 1963; LeSar and Unzicker, 1978), its ability to respond in a functional manner to high prey densities by both locating and feeding proportionally on them can make it a valuable controlling factor on pest populations. Other spiders are probably capable of similar responses. Adult size When only Florida records were considered, adult females of P_. regius and P. otiosus were significantly larger than adult females of the other species studied (Table 10-11). Adult males were smaller than females. Males were more diverse in their size differences among species, but for the purposes of this study, these differences were not considered important. Since in most cases the species of Phidippus are similar in size (based on female size) , this factor need not be analyzed with respect to resource utilization. In cases of high overall niche overlap

PAGE 246

239 between compared pairs of species, size differences can be used to explain coexistence of two species if one of the compared species is either P_. otiosus or P_. regius . Female Phenology The distribution in time of adult females is an indicator of when and for how long they reproduce (Table 10-12). The longer the active reproductive period, the greater the number of eggsacs produced, resulting in a greater distribution of age and size classes for a particular species at a particular time. This can be important if species normally subdivide resources on an allochronic basis, which would maintain a size differential between the species involved. If one species maintains a wide distribution of age and size classes throughout the year, other species utilizing the same resources will be directly competing with at least a portion of the population of the more widely agedistributed species. Both P_. regius and especially P_. audax maintain a wide diversity of age classes at any one time period. In the case of P. audax , this diversity may in part explain the dominance of this species in the lake edge habitats. Male Phenology The distribution in time of adult males is closely associated with the mating season for each species (Table 10-13) . Since males will court non-conspecif ic females, and are sometimes successful in mating with them, the time when males are present in relation to females of other species could be an important factor in the development of allochronic isolation of syntopic species. Males of all species except P_. audax and P_. regius exhibited single distinct seasonal peaks of maturation and subsequent mating.

PAGE 247

240 Niche Breadth Niche breadth values for the six niche dimensions are listed in Table 10-14. Several species showed low values for habitat, indicating they were habitat restricted. Both P_. apacheanus and P_. whitmani were restricted to a single habitat in this study, and P_. xerus , P. pulcher rimus , and P_. audax also demonstrated low niche breadth values. Higher values were found for P. regius and P_. putnami , indicating they were more generalists for habitat; the other species had intermediate values. Low microhabitat values were found for most of the species, indicating that specialization for microhabitat may be one of the most important factors isolating syntopic species. Only _P. regius appeared to be a generalist for microhabitat; the high flexibility of this species probably accounts for its frequency of occurrence on man-made structures. Extreme specialization was found for P_. whitmani on litter and _P. putnami on shrubs. Prey niche breadth values were moderate to high; generally the higher the sample size, the higher the value. Prey type is not considered to be an important factor in resource utilization, since all the species appear to be generalists. However, prey size is significantly correlated with spider size in most cases (see Results and Discussion) ; therefore seasonal size of spider is important since spiders of the same size will capture similar-sized prey. All species are fairly specific as to microhabitats in which they make their eggsacs. Niche breadth values for distribution of females and hence size range of immatures was moderate for most, very high for P_. audax and P_. regius (indicating a wide range of age and size classes present at any

PAGE 248

241 one time) , and low for P. putnami and P_. pulcherrimus (which are frequently syntopic but allochronic, and in the same microhabitat) . All species except .P. audax and P_. regius had low to moderately low niche breadth values for mating season, with considerable allochrony between syntopic species. In accord with their high seasonal niche breadth of adult females and immature, values for mating season of P. audax and P_. regius were also high. Niche Overlap Confidence in data comparison . I arbitrarily set a minimum of overlap of two categories between species for any single niche dimension as an indicator of the amount of confidence I had in the resultant comparison between any two species for that particular niche dimension. I based this minimum on two factors: 1) the amount of data available for a species for a particular niche dimension usually affected the number of categories represented in that niche dimension, and 2) a minimum of two category comparisons was necessary in order to obtain a statistically useful number. In those cases where one or both of a compared species pair was represented by only one category, overlap was represented by (1.0), and non-overlap was represented by 0. Where two or more categories could be compared between species, complete overlap is represented by 1.000, complete non-overlap by 0.000. The only major exception was habitat overlap of any other species with P. whitmani , which was indicated by a since only one habitat containing P. whitmani was included in the comparisons, but in this case is probably a true measure of nonoverlap. Data sets giving values of 1.0 and would probably be reduced or increased, respectively, with large sample sizes for that niche

PAGE 249

242 dimension, affecting overall niche overlap values to some extent (although probably not a significant amount in most instances) . Summation alpha . For the 45 pair-wise comparisons of 10 species of Phidippus (Table 10-15) , summation alpha gave mostly moderate to high values of overall niche overlap. Mean summation alpha was 0.611 and only 5 comparisons had a value less than 0.4. Considering the close similarities and relationship of the species under study, and the interdependence of the niche dimensions examined, this result was not unexpected. The mean niche overlap for species of Phidippus using six niche dimensions was 33% higher than found by Turner and Polis (1979) for a guild of ambushing spiders, which included non-related species, using only four niche dimensions. Non-zero product alpha . This measure of niche overlap is probably of limited usefulness in this study. It may serve as a measure of similarity of resource utilization for those niche dimensions which overlap between two species when there is no overlap of one or more niche dimensions. For example, two species could have identical requirements in all other niche dimensions as long as they had no habitat overlap. Product alpha . Overall niche overlap of one species on another may in some cases be accurately assessed by product alpha. This is especially true when the confidence is high that niche overlap of at least one niche dimension is zero, and most important if a zero value is due to non-overlap of habitat. Where all six niche dimensions are represented by non-zero values, and the overall niche overlap of a more specialized species by a more generalized species is high, product alpha may be a reasonable measure of the reciprocal relationship between the two species, i.e., the amount of overlap of the more generalized species by the more

PAGE 250

243 specialized species. Where high overall niche overlap values existed between two species, they had low overlap values with high confidence for at least one niche dimension, either habitat, microhabitat , or mating season. Syntopic species often showed very high overlap of one dimension and no overlap of another dimension, thus demonstrating a subdivision of resources (Schoener, 1974). Intraspecific Competition One unusual statistic pointed out the probability that intraspecific competition among species of Phidippus has a greater limiting affect than interspecific competition on a particular species. This statistic consists of a comparison of all observations of intra-salticid predation reported by Jackson (1977b) and here (Table 10-5, Appendix F) . Of 21 such observations, 4 were of intergeneric predation, and 17 were of intraspecific predation; there was not a single case of intrageneric predation. This implies that interference competition is highest within a species, which is exemplified by the predation on conspecifics by P_. audax I observed during a period of low food availability, and the observations of conspecific predation by the same species made by Tessler (personal communication) during apparent competition for nesting sites. Interspecific interaction is probably low due to subdivision of one or more niche dimensions. Species Summaries P. apacheanus This apparent mutillid mimic appears to be a specialist in all niche dimensions except microhabitat; it matures in the fall. It is limited to the lower strata since it occurs in xeric habitats lacking a

PAGE 251

244 canopy, where it appears to be one of the numerically dominant species. Overall niche overlap values with co-dominants P. cardinalis and P_. xerus are high, but microhabitat utilization by immatures of jP. cardinalis is different (and accentuated by their differences in color) , and there is no overlap of mating season with P. xerus (temporal isolation). P . audax This species is a time generalist (with adults found all year) but a habitat and microhabitat specialist, found primarily on grass and herbs in habitats near bodies of water, whether the water is lake, stream, or ocean. It maintained by far the largest populations of any single species of Phidippus ; this appeared to be in part due to unlimited food supply over a long growing season, and in part due to generalization in respect to age and size classes through time. P. cardinalis The adult males of this species are also apparent mutillid mimics, and adults mature in the fall. Categories of resource states utilized were very similar to P. apacheanus , from which it differed in microhabitat of immature stages, and to P. xerus , which it only slightly overlapped in mating season. P. clarus This species was moderately specialized for most niche dimensions, and found most often in the grass and herb zone of old fields, where it matured in late summer and was the dominant species. It was highly specialized in site of construction of eggsacs, mostly utilizing the tops of tall annuals and perennials within the fields.

PAGE 252

245 P. otiosus Another fall-maturing species, P_. otiosus was neither especiallyspecialized or generalized for any niche dimension except eggsac construction site, which was usually under bark, and microhabitat , which was primarily canopy. Adult females were present for several months of the year, giving the species a tendency toward being a time generalist. This species differed from P. audax and P_. regius in low habitat overlap, from P. putnami and P_. cardinalis by low microhabitat overlap, and from P. pulcherrimus in size. P. pulcherrimus This species is a specialist for most niche dimensions. It is found primarily in pine flatwoods (where it was dominant) on shrubs and it matures in the early spring. It has a high overall niche overlap with P. putnami , except there is no overlap in mating season between the two species. P. putnami This species has a resource utilization pattern very similar to that of P. pulcherrimus , except that P_. putnami is less specialized for habitat, more specialized for microhabitat (shrubs), and matures in midsummer, so there is no mating season overlap with P_. pulcherrimus . Highest populations of P_. putnami were found in mature sand pine scrub, which was not included in this study. Microhabitat overlap with P. xerus is fairly low, but other niche dimensions are utilized in a similar manner .

PAGE 253

246 P. regius This species was both a time generalist and a space generalist, occurring in the widest variety of both habitats and microhabitats. It matures in the fall in north Florida. Adults and subadults show a preference for various palms, but smaller immatures live in the herb shrub zone. It only specializes in eggsac construction site, which is under bark. This is the largest species, and appears to be adaptable to a wide variety of environmental conditions. P. whitmani This species is an extreme specialist for habitat and microhabitat , occurring in mature forest on the litter unlike any other species studied. It matures in late spring. P. xerus This species is a specialist for xeric habitats and for mating season, maturing in mid-summer. It differs from the syntopic P_. apacheanus and P_. cardinalis in mating season, and from P_. putnami in microhabitat in the younger immatures; P. xerus does not move onto shrubs until the subadult stage.

PAGE 254

247 Table 10-1. Habitats in which species of Phidippus were collected. Double X (XX) indicates that the species was numerically dominant in that particular habitat. Underlined X's (X) indicate that adults were collected in that habitat. X's in parentheses (X) indicate the species was reported from this habitat in another study, but was not taken from that habitat during the course of this study. Habitat designations are taken mostly from Laessle (1942). Phidippus sp.

PAGE 255

248 Table 10-1 continued. Phidippus sp.

PAGE 256

249 Table 10-1 continued. Phidippus sp.

PAGE 257

250

PAGE 258

251 <\ rHrHrHCrHCOrHOvOrH CM CN CM pen pL, pn pL, H rH O H !N 00 H H H S B S S X "K K W saw w a a s s a w EC EC co ES "W -pa tc «m «ec ec ec es ww w w Cfl -H

PAGE 259

252 fa fa pl, s S * H vf CM ^^ PL, ^ 2 pL, pL C_^ pL lH CM C*> CM LO KffiffiffipLiw »w s s re rn a tc £ B

PAGE 260

to I pi* pL, P& r> tv (^ H vO 253 H| oo h JC S3 cfl -H 3 • J3 a 4-1 en (3 & B aj aj

PAGE 261

254 co| M| CM mr^ H 00 SJrH xZ C*> rH 00 r— CM iH 1/1C 1 Ot"Cl pCPCPCPCPCPCPCPCCCffiDCPCPCPCPCPCc/jpCpCPCpCPC c/> SB .US -PC «K w PC w

PAGE 262

03 j 255 s a CN O^ r-^ P~> rH H H M
PAGE 263

256 & X r-i ^n

PAGE 264

257 to | H CO m N S £ -H

PAGE 265

co co 1) £, u m HI no O.CN 03 X 258 -i co ,c co d ii -u < u CD CO ^ to co c 0) 3 X J3 ID ti OJ e ^ 3 • C O 3 4-> o | 4J to co co a) 3 J-i JJ "3 • 4-1 cd -H en 01 o > C ,r> -h -h o 3 *d TO tH CO C C 4-1 C/0 CN CN CO CO CN 4-1 0) p. < iH LTi CO O CU U-l • CU t-J -H CO •H CO O TO CU S CU o

PAGE 266

259 H -H !-l 1-4 CJ CU CO ,£) > >n B ,0 3 >n 3 Xi c O 0) TO -H J= 01 4-1 4-1 CO CO 3 CJ TO 00 •H 3 60 co ch cfl qj e -h 11 ^ 4-1 CO W f! CO O QJ U C TJ O .3 >n -H O ft

PAGE 267

260 •H 00

PAGE 268

261 o

PAGE 269

262 ON

PAGE 270

263

PAGE 271

E

PAGE 272

265 « * cfl >, > rO U Cfl XI rH 0> II & rJ CN|

PAGE 273

266 o-\ o S-i r-» 3 cfl X> e >* o <

PAGE 274

267 o o

PAGE 275

268 CO

PAGE 276

269 S < a

PAGE 277

270 rH rH
PAGE 278

271 cfl en i-H CN T3 iH * * * W * c

PAGE 279

272 u

PAGE 280

273 C m ^o • I oo a-. H +1

PAGE 281

274 Table 10-7. Total number of individuals of each species of Phidippus observed throughout the research periods for primary and secondary study habitats. Totals for P. whitmani were taken on two days at San Felasco Hammock. The Shannon-Weaver Index (H') is used as a measure of species diversity within a habitat. Values in parentheses to the right are row proportions, values in parentheses below are column proportions, in this and following tables. Phidippus sp. P.

PAGE 282

275 Table 10-7 extended. Newnan's Transition Pine Deciduous Lake Field Flatwoods Woods Totals 33 154 (.446) 345 (.851) 1 (.037) 27 (.006) 13 (.171) 76 (.071) 27 (.509) 2 (.038) 53 (.149) (.050) 2 (.011) 166 (.869) 191 (.050) (.907) 3 (.214) 14 (.016) 36 (.423) 91 (.900) 36 (1.0) 36 (1.0) 26 36 895 181

PAGE 283

276 a) CO

PAGE 284

42 277

PAGE 285

278 Table 10-10. Total number of prey of each species of Phidippus , lumped by order (see Table 10-5) . Phidippus sp. Odonata Orthoptera Hemiptera Homoptera Coleoptera 1 (.011) 1 (.011) 2 (.021) 2 (.021) 9 (.096) (.500) (.167) (.200) (.400) (.643) 1 (.250) 1 (.250) (.167) (.200) 1 (.167) 1 (.167) (.500) (.100) 2 (.250) 1 (.125) (.400) (.071) 4 (.129) 5 (.161) 3 (.097) (.666) (.500) (.215) 2 (.667) 1 (.333) (.200) (.071) Totals 2 6 10 5 14 P.

PAGE 286

279 Table 10-10 extended. Lepidoptera Diptera Hymenoptera Araneae Totals 1 (.500) 1 (.500) 2 (.067) (.050) 2 56 (.596) 4 (.042) 17 (.181) 94 (.133) (.800) (.571) (.850) 2 (.500) 4 (.029) 2 (.333) 1 (.167) 1 (.167) 6 (.133) (.014) (.143) 1 (.125) 1 (.125) 2 (.250) 1 (.125) 8 (.067) (.014) (.286) (.050) 1 (1.0) 1 (.014) 9 (.290) 9 (.290) 1 (.033) 31 (.600) (.129) (.050) 15 70 7 20 149

PAGE 287

280 Table 10-11. Sizes of Phidippus species based on length (Florida records only). Species are listed in descending order by mean length of females. Species followed by the same letter are not significantly different within that sex (Duncan's Multiple Range Test). Number of specimens measured are given (n) . Phidippus sp.

PAGE 288

281 Table 10-12. Distribution by month of numbers of females of species of Phidippus (Florida records only) ; used to compare seasonal differences in size and age distribution. Phidippus sp. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. P. apacheanus 1 (-100) 1 (.100) (.024) (.024) P. audax 1 (.008) 8 (.061) 16 (.122) 11 (.084) 20 (.057) 14 (.107) (.077) (.667) (.327) (.262) (.488) (-560) P. cardinalis J?, clarus P. o tiosus 8 (.163) 1 (.021) 12 (.245) 5 (.102) ~ — " (.615) (.083) (.245) (.119) P. pulch errimus 8 (.533) 5 (.333) 1 (.067) _ (.163) (.119) (.040) P. putnami P regius 4 (0.47) 2 (.024) 11 (.129) 12 (.141) 11 (.129) 5 (.059) (.308) (.067) (.224) (.286) (.268) (.200) P. whitman! 2 (.080) 8 (.320) 9 (.360) 4 (.160) _ ( Q41) ( pl90 ) (.220) (.160) P. xerus 1 (.063) 1 (-063) (.083) (.040) Totals 13 12 49 42 41 25

PAGE 289

282 Table 10-12 extended. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Totals 4 (.400) 3 (.300) 1 (.100) 10 (.103) (.115) (.025) 13 (.099) 17 (.130) 4 (.030) 3 (.023) 15 (.115) 9 (.069) 131 (.325) (.321) (.103) (.115) (.375) (.429) 2 (1.0) 2 (.095) 5 (.094) 22 (.415) 16 (.302) 6 (.113) 4 (.076) 53 (.125) (.415) (.410) (.231) (.100) 1 (.021) 3 (.061) 13 (.265) 6 (.122) 49 (.019) (.115) (.325) (.256) 1 (.067) 15 (.025) 3 (.200) 3 (.200) 9 (.600) 15 (.075) (.056) (.230) 13 (.153) 2 (.024) 3 (.035) 11 (.129) 7 (.083) 4 (.047) 85 (.325) (.037) (.077) (.423) (.175) (.190) 1 (.040) 1 (.40) 25 (.025) (.019) 4 (.250) 7 (.437) 3 (.187) 16 (.100) (.132) (.077) 40 53 39 26 40 21 401

PAGE 290

283 Table 10-13. Distribution by month of numbers of males of species of Phidippus (Florida records only); used to compare mating seasons. Phidippus sp. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. 1 (.007) 5 (.037) 9 (.066) 10 (.074) 26 (.191) 17 (,1J (.500) (.714) (.429) (.500) (.765) (.607) 1 (.01 (.036) 1 (.091) 7 (.636) 2 (.182) (.143) (.333) (.100) 1 (.050) 2 (.1( (.029) (.071) 1 (.019) 1 (.019) 5 (.096) 1 (.019) 1 (.0: (.500) (.143) (.238) (.029) (.036) 8 (.471) 6 (.353) 3 (.11 (.400) (.177) (.107) 4 (.3( (.143) Totals 2 7 21 20 34 28 P.

PAGE 291

284 Table 10-13 extended. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Totals 4 (.800) 1 (.200) 5 (.085) (.030) 15 (.110) 11 (.081) 10 (.074) 8 (.059) 19 (.139) 5 (.037) 136 (.246) (.239) (.213) (.276) (.576) (.714) 1 (.067) 8 (.533) 6 (.400) 15 (.022) (.170) (.207) 21 (.412) 24 (.470) 5 (.098) 51 (.344) (.521) (.106) 1 (.059) 7 (.412) 5 (.294) 3 (.176) 1 (.059) 17 (.022) (.149) (.172) (.091) (.143) 1 (.091) 11 (.030) 11 (.550) 4 (.200) 2 (.100) 20 (.180) (.087) (.043) 8 (.154) 4 (.077) 11 (.212) 10 (.193) 9 (.173) 1 (.019) 52 (.131) (.087) (.234) (.345) (.273) (.143) 6 (.545) 1 (.091) 11 (.099) (.022) 61 46 47 29 33 7 335

PAGE 292

285 r-v

PAGE 293

Cfl C O QJ co o u rH 4J O iH 286 QJ > QJ X O QJ HH (X c o en •h o cu 3 p u S >, CO X rH rH « •H 4-J 3 U O cn o o a) o 3 > O O T3 4h O • 4J O O I o n 3 m a. a, o -a 3 CO C 3 OTIH ct) <4H (3 M U CO 0) O O c > o o a o a.o I cfl . T3 3 C rH rH QJ O O U en -h 3 QJ >> 6 O T3 6 • i-l o e x p -h a) g -a CD T) O 3 £ QJ CJ> >H 4-1 4J (1) CO CO H 01

PAGE 294

o QJ CD a u >*, Ph H 60 -H 00 CO w 287 60

PAGE 295

288 Ml

PAGE 296


PAGE 297

Figure 10-1. Adult phenology of eastern U. S. species of Phidippus , Numbers given are actual numbers of specimens examined. Florida records should be subtracted from total to find number of nonFlorida records. Note different scales for each histogram. Key to symbols is as follows: Males Females Non-Florida Florida

PAGE 298

291 :^L£ P. audax '«ff^^ J" m P. otiosus 1m _-at 30 20 10 hdv.fllv.ral P. reeius Iftl ..J' * g ;•• P. xerus JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

PAGE 299

Figure 10-1 (continued),

PAGE 300

293 4U

PAGE 301

Figure 10-1 (continued)

PAGE 302

295 P. apacheanus «... 15 10 P. insi.qnarius JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

PAGE 303

Figure 10-1 (continued).

PAGE 304

297 40 30 20 10 J?, princeps 3' N P. pulcherrimus 12 _P. putnami 12 P. mys taceus JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

PAGE 305

3

PAGE 306

299 &•£*' '.'&% "" !: ' ^ *•/ • .%-;•'•--,; j

PAGE 307

300 M PK| (tnui) n^Suaj Xaad m iH rH r^ (N O
PAGE 308

301 M M (suibj3) ^q§T3M Aaad *| (suifjS) 3q§T9M iCaad

PAGE 309

302 eggs 200 160 120 80 40' y = 18.28x 95.05 r = .815 p < .005 3 6 9 12 mean female length (mm) 15 Figure 10-5. Correlation of mean female length to clutch size for first eggsac of eastern species of Phidippus (Florida P. clarus not included). Florida P_. clarus indicated by an x.

PAGE 310

303 s o en >> 3 X X +J <

PAGE 311

CHAPTER 11 SYNTHESIS Two subgenera, Phidippus (the nominate form) and Anipalpus (new subgenus) are represented in eastern North America. Courtship behavior of members of the subgenus Phidippus is similar among species, but the two species placed in Anipalpus (P_. putnami and P_. mystaceus ) have distinctly different courtships, both from the other species and from each other. The peculiar rotary courtship of P_. putnami and the stridulatory courtship of _P. mystaceus are so different that this subgenus as presently defined may actually consist of two phylogenetic lines. The stridulatory courtship of P_. mystaceus is the first known for the family. Phidippus whitman i is the first known salticid to use vibration during its visual (Type I) courtship; other species of Phidippus use vibration during tactile (Type II) courtship (Edwards, 1975; Jackson, 1977). In a little over a decade, understanding of the visual system and associated visually-oriented behaviors of salticids has improved from a position of relative obscurity to a point where research on the complex visual system of these spiders is revealing some amazing capabilities. Papers by Land (1969a, b, 1971, 1972), Forster (1977a, 1979), and Hill (1979) have demonstrated that salticids can see in color to infinity, can scan and focus with their main eyes, and can accurately turn the body so as to orient the main eyes to evaluate stimuli detected by the secondary eyes; then they can accurately guage the distance of the stimulus object with their binocular vision. The possibility that prey may be detected through reception of aerial vibrations (Forster, 1979) deserves further study. 304

PAGE 312

305 Hill (1979) has shown that Phidlppus can orient on distant targets, whether those targets are plant configurations or other animals, and the spiders can attain a target location by a circuitous route without having to constantly view the target, indicating a short-term memory for locations. Jackson (1979) found that Phidippus could forage a considerable distance and then return to the nest, indicating a memory capability for locations of a somewhat longer-lasting type than demonstrated by Hill; evidence presented for P_. regius herein indicates that under certain conditions, females may become territorial and forage repeatedly from a single nest for several weeks. Individual Phidippus frequently assume perches near the tops of tall plants, where they can survey the surrounding area for prey. Not only can Phidippus approach prospective prey in a circuitous manner, but I have shown (Chapter 7) that once within striking range, the spider will use an attack strategy that minimizes the prey's escape and defense capabilities, depending on the size and motility of the prey. The spider probably evaluates both morphological and behavioral attributes of the prey when choosing an attack strategy. More motile prey are approached in a more stealthy manner and attacked from farther away than slow-moving prey; this behavior appears to be instinctive, as the same attack behaviors were demonstrated by naive spiderlings. On the other hand, naive spiderlings will attack any prey, but quickly learn to avoid ants, further demonstrating their memory capabilities. Phidippus species fed on a wide variety of prey under natural conditions, and P. audax demonstrated a capability of exploiting a high density monospecific prey source. The hypothesis that Phidippus (and other vagrant females) guard their eggsacs from egg predators and parasites is untenable (or at least the females

PAGE 313

306 are unsuccessful) , considering the high infestation rate of exposed eggsacs (e.g., of P_. clarus ) . A more likely explanation is that due to physiological constraints, perhaps due to energetically expensive specializations (e.g., vision in salticids) , females lack sufficient resources to construct adequately-protective eggsacs, so must care for the eggs to ensure that they hatch. The most important enemies of free-living instars of Phidippus both in the literature and in this study were found to be Hymenoptera, especially Sphecidae. However, a strong vertebrate predation pressure is indicated by some species (in open, especially xerophytic, habitats) which have apparently evolved mutillid mimicry in both color pattern and behavior. Species of Phidippus living in the herb-shrub zone frequently traverse from plant to plant via the ground and virtually never use bridge lines (Hill, 1978; Tessler, personal communication; personal observation); mutillids are mostly terrestrial. Fitch (1963) reported numerous instances of lizards preying on P_. audax in a prairie habitat. Similar habitats are frequented by P_. apacheanus and P_. cardinalis , males of which are strikingly marked with red and black like many mutillids; other stages of J?, apacheanus are also red or yellow and black. Since males of most species lacking a red dorsal pattern are black with white markings, one could speculate that these species might mimic pompilids. Females and immatures of most species are cryptic in coloration. Of the three species of eastern Phidippus not occurring in Florida, only P. borealis does not have a southern counterpart and is poorly known. The allopatric species pairs P_. insignarius P. xerus and P_. princeps P_. pulcherrimus , especially the latter pair which are allopatric sister species, appear to be ecological replacements based on a comparison of literature records of habitat, museum records of adult phenology, and this study. I have collected P. princeps on several occasions from Maryland to Missouri,

PAGE 314

307 always from fields and transitional areas (see also Hill, 1977c). Lowrie's studies (1942, 1948) indicate P_. insignarius to be an inhabitant of fields and open xeric woodland understory. The habitats of both of these species correspond well with those of _P. pulcherrimus and P_. xerus , respectively, which replace them in Florida. The maturation seasons of P_. insignarius and _P. xerus are identical, while P_. pulcherrimus matures a little earlier than P_. princeps , but their reproductive periods are similar. Sympatric species of Phidippus showed clear patterns of competition avoidance, subdividing available resources by habitat, microhabitat , or season; in only 1 of 45 species pair comparisons with 10 species was it necessary to invoke size differences as a partial explanation of resource subdivision; only two closely related species (P. otiosus and P regius ) , which were shown to hybridize in the wild as well as under laboratory conditions, were significantly larger than the other species studied. Most species occured in the herb-shrub zones throughout part or all of their life cycle. However, P. whitmani was specialized for mesophytic leaf litter, and _P. otiosus was primarily a canopy species. Where palms were available in old field or transitional habitats, they were occupied by subadults and adults of P_. regius . Intraspecific interference competition (especially cannibalism) appeared to be more important than interspecific interactions in population regulation.

PAGE 315

APPENDIX A GLOSSARY ALE Anterior lateral eyes, the outer pair of eyes in the first eye row; these eyes detect motion and are important in depth perception. AME Anterior median eyes, the inner pair of eyes in the first eye row; these eyes are used to focus on target objects; they have the following capabilities: focus to infinity, scanning, and color vision. Apophysis An integumental projection; in spiders, usually referring to a projection of the palpus, most often on the retrolateral (or ectal) surface of the palpal tibia; it engages in a median notch of the epigynum to properly orient the embolus for mating. BL Body length, measured from the front of the anterior median eyes (AME) to the end of the opisthosoma (abdomen) , not including the spinnerets; measurement taken from life-like position of spider, with slight overlap of prosoma and opisthosoma. Brush A multiple fringe, covering three or all four sides of a leg segment (see fringe) . CL Carapace length, including anterior median eyes. CW Carapace width, across widest point just behind posterior lateral eyes (PLE) . Clypeus That part of the carapace between the anterior eye row and the chelicerae. Cymbium The palpal tarsus of the male, when formed into a bowl shape to contain the reproductive organ. Embolus The intromittent organ; usually spine-like or spatulate in shape. Endite A modified palpal coxa; the pair of endites are used as accessory mouthparts and assist in manipulating food items. Epigynum A sclerite associated with the female gonopore, containing openings through which sperm is passed to the spermathecae during copulation. 308

PAGE 316

309 Fan A row of setae oriented perpendicular to the long axis of the leg segment; also perpendicular to the integument, and since the segment is rounded, the setae are arranged in the shape of a fan; a transverse fringe. File A series of integument al ridges which is moved against an inner branch (plectrum) of the palpal tibial apophysis in P_. mystaceus , producing a trill during courtship. Fringe A row or rows of usually very long setae oriented along one surface of the long axis of a leg or palpal segment; often in alternating color patterns on alternate leg segments (see brush). Also used to refer to rows of setae on other body parts, e.g., on clypeus, above eyes. Guide An expanded part of the anterior lateral rim of the epigynum, forming an inner groove which alines the embolus with the spermathecal duct opening. LOQ Length of ocular quadrangle, measured from anterior edge of anterior median eyes (AME) to posterior edge of posterior lateral eyes (PLE) . Macroseta An enlarged seta, with a basal diameter at least twice that of a vestitural seta, and usually much less attenuate and proportionally shorter than a vestitural seta. Ocular Quadrangle A rectangular area on top of the cephalic area of the carapace which is bounded by the anterior and posterior lateral eyes (ALE and PLE). PLE Posterior lateral eyes, the pair of eyes forming the third eye row; these eyes detect motion over a wide field of view to each side of the spider. PME Posterior median eyes, a pair of very small eyes which form the second eye row; their function is unknown. Plectrum An integumental projection moved against a file during stridulation; in this case, an inner branch of the palpal tibial apophysis of male P_. mystaceus which contacts a file on the cymbium, producing an audible trill. Protegulum The distal-most part of the tegulum, separated from the tegulum by a suture; generally present in dendryphantine salticids, and often highly rugose, especially in Phidippus species. The embolus arises from the protegulum. Septum An anterior longitudinal keel or ridge midway between the two copulatory openings of the epigynum. Tegulum A sclerotized bulbous structure, fitting into the "bowl" of the cymbium, which contains the sperm storage duct of the male.

PAGE 317

310 Tuft A minimum of three elongate vestitural setae, noticeably longer than surrounding setae, which are more closely spaced (concentrated into a small area of the integument) than surrounding setae; especially prominent in and near the ocular quadrangle; sometimes present on femur I of males.

PAGE 318

APPENDIX B PLACE NAMES Explanations are provided below for abbreviations of institutions used in the text. AMNH American Museum of Natural History New York, New York Curator of Arachnida and Myriapoda: Dr. N. I. Platnick BMNH British Museum (Natural History) London, Great Britain Curator of Arachnida: Mr. F. R. Wanless MCZ Museum of Comparative Zoology Cambridge, Massachusetts Curator of Arachnida and Myriapoda: Dr. H. W. Levi SIU Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Illinois Curator of Arachnidae: Dr. J. A. Beatty USNM United States National Museum Washington, D. C. Curator of Arachnida and Myriapoda: Dr. R. A. Crabill OSU Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio Curator: Dr. C. A. Triplehorn 311

PAGE 319

APPENDIX C LAKE EDGE HABITATS I compared spider populations along the shores of Burnt Pond (YMCA Camp McConnell) and Newnan's Lake (1976 and 1977, respectively). Both populations of spiders were greatly influenced by populations of chironomids, especially Glyptodentipes paripes (Edwards), which occur literally by the millions during the warmer months of the year and provide food for many different predators. Species are listed by descending order of abundance, and population estimates are given for the more abundant species per 0.004 hectare. Population estimates were made from a combination of visual sighting, hand collecting, and sweeping. Only arboreal species are represented. All but the last species in each list are either orb weavers or jumping spiders, the latter marked with asterisks (*) . Burnt Pond * Dendryphantes marginatus (Walckenaer) > 200 *Phidippus audax (Hentz) > 100 Tetragnatha spp. > 50 Acanthepeira sp. > 20 *Thiodina peurpera (Hentz) > 20 *Phidippus regius C. L. Koch > 20 *P. pulcherrimus Keyserling *P, clarus Keyserling *P_. otiosus (Hentz) Argiope aurantia (Lucas) *Dendryphantes galathea (Walckenaer) *Zygoballus ruf ipes Peckhams Sosippus f loridanus Simon Newnan ' s Lake Tetragnatha guatemalensis O.P.-C. > 1000 T. elongata Walckenaer > 1000 T. nitens (Audouin) > 100 *Phidippus audax (Hentz) > 100 Nuctenea cornuta (Clerck) > 20 * Phidippus otiosus > 20 312

PAGE 320

313 Newnan's Lake (cont.) Argiope aurantia (Lucas) Nephila clavipes (L.) *Marpissa bina (Hentz) Neoscona domiclliorum (Bryant) JSL hentzi (Keyserling) *Zygoballus nervosus (Peckhams) Araneus bicentenarius (McCook) Tidarren sisyphoides (Walckenaer) Lake Edge Habitat without Canopy This habitat was located on the north edge of Burnt Pond, east of the pier; approximately 0.01 hectare. Vegetation stratified away from lake edge, in order of further distance from lake: Typha acalypha (cattail); Echinochloa Walteri (a broad-leaved grass); Lactuca sp. (composite); mixed grasses and herbs; Rubus sp. (blackberry), Andropogon virginicus (broomsedge) , and perennials such as Eupatorium and Boehmeria . The north edge was bounded by Paspalum not a turn (bahia grass) and Liquidambar styraciflua L. (sweet gum), while the northeast corner was bordered by several Sabal palmetto (cabbage palm) (Figures C-l, C-2). Lake Edge Habitat with Canopy This area was on the west edge of Newnan's Lake, just south of unmarked public boat landing; approximately 0.004 hectare. Primarily it consisted of a mixture of Sacciolepis striata (a broad-leaved grass) and Bidens pilosa (shepherd's needle), with some Lactuca f loridana along the west edge. It was bordered on north and south edges by Taxodium distichum (bald cypress) , Fraxinum caroliniana (pop ash) , and Liquidambar styraciflua ; on west edge by bahia grass and road.

PAGE 322

315 >.-.

PAGE 323

B

PAGE 324

317 re . ^ «K 'aric."*!^ £. *1 ^/.'u^ :J

PAGE 325

APPENDIX D OTHER STUDY HABITATS Primary Habitats Mixed xeric ecotone . This habitat was located four miles east of Interstate 75 on hwy 24, Alachua Co. , FL. A xeric hammock with mixed ecotonal areas, consisting of open woodland or xeric old field with scattered trees. Dominant ground cover plants were Andropogon virginicus (broomsedge) , Rub us sp. (blackberry), Eupatorium capillifolium (dogfennel) , Boehmeria sp., Vaccinium arboreum , and numerous mixed grasses and small herbs. Trees were a mixture of Quercus spp., including Q. virgini ana (live oak), Q. laevis (turkey oak), and Q. falcata (southern red oak) , and Carya tomentosa (pignut hickory) . Aristida stricta (wire grass) is the predominant ground cover in areas of extensive turkey oak. The primary study area was approximately 0.5 hectare which was divided into old field and open woods habitats (Figure D-l). Pine flatwoods . This habitat was located four miles north of Cross Creek on hwy 325, Alachua Co. , FL. A mixed pine-oak flatwoods, with varying amount of understory. Serenoa repens (saw palmetto) and Lyonia ferruginea each formed dense thickets in some areas, whereas more open areas were dominated by Vaccinium myrsinites and Quercus spp. saplings, as well as numerous small herbs and grasses. Primary canopy species were Pinus elliottii (slash pine) and Quercus nigra (water oak) . Boundaries were the south edge of a Lyonia thicket, a path on the east, and the north and west sides of a small clearing extended. Primary study area was approximately 0.1 hectare (Figure D-2) . 318

PAGE 327

320

PAGE 329

322

PAGE 330

323 Secondary Habitats Xerophytic field . This area was half a mile west of the Central Tower on the north side of hwy 40, Ocala National Forest, Marion Co., FL. In an area cleared for a powerline, this very xeric field featured a sparse ground cover of some of the hardier old field plants (e.g., Eupatorium ) , scattered small herbs and grasses (including Cenchrus sp. sandspurs), Opuntia sp. (prickly pear cactus), Serenoa repens , Cera tiola ericoides (rosemary) , and 4 species I classified and lumped together as woody herbs: Vaccinium myrsinites , Garberia heterophylla , Baptisia lecontei , and Calamintha ashei . The east and west boundaries were typical sand pine scrub, a mixture of Pinus clausa (sand pine), Quercus virginiana var. maritima (scrub live oak) , Quercus myrtifolia (myrtle oak), Quercus chapmanii (Chapman's oak), Quercus laevis , Ceratiola ericoides , Sabal etonia (blue palmetto) , Serenoa repens , and Lyonia spp. The north boundary was an almost bare gound area, and the road was the south boundary. Primary study area was approximately 0.2 hectare (Figure P3) including the edges of the woods on both sides; especially important were edge areas where scrub oaks had grown back but no pines were present. Mesophytic field-forest transition . This area was at the top of a hill about 100 m north of Burnt Pond; approximate area was 0.2 hectare. The study area was essentially a rectangle of Sabal palmetto (cabbage palm) surrounding low herbaceous growth, with a clump of Liquidambar styracif lua (sweet gum) occupying much of the middle along the longitudinal axis of the rectangle (east-west) . Eleven palms were numbered and female P_. regius occupying each of these numbered palms were correspondingly marked on the legs (in a unique manner for each specimen) with yellow acrylic paint.

PAGE 331

o u

PAGE 332

325

PAGE 333

APPENDIX E PREY OF MUD DAUBERS Below is a list of the spiders (Araneae) taken from nests of the mud dauber, Trypargilum clavatum (Say). The collection was made July 18, 1974, near Tall Timbers Research Station, Leon County, Florida. Approximately 20 cells belonging to 12 mud nests are represented. Taxon Araneus prunus Levi Mimetidae Pisauridae Total % Araneidae (^' ^.5 1 1 Araneus spp. 2 2 Eustala anastera (Walckenaer) 1 1 (1) 0.6 Mimetus notius Chamberlin 1 1 Philodromidae C5) 3.1 Philodromus placidus Banks 14 5 (1) 0.6 Dolomedes sp. 1 •*Salticidae ( 126 ) 78 3 Dendryphantes marginatus (Walckenaer) 13 12 23 48 _D. pineus (Kaston) 2 1 3 Hentzia mitrata (Hentz) 5 4 4 13 H. palmarum (Hentz) 6 6 3 15 "Lyssomanes viridis (Walckenaer) 1 1 Metacyrba undata (De Geer) 2 2 Phidippus otiosus (Hentz) 26 26 P. audax (Hentz) 2 2 Thiodina sylvana (Hentz) 2 11 13 Tutelina n. sp. 1 1 Zygoballus nervosus (Peckhams) 2 2 Thomisidae (23) 14.3 Coriarachne versicolor (Keyserling) 1 1 Misumenop s oblongus (Keyserling) 2 Tmarus f loridensis Keyserling 4 6 4 14 Tmarus r ubromaculatu s Keyserling 2 3 1 6 ~' 161 326

PAGE 334

x w H P£ 00 ps to O Q U M W CJ Pi M ^i

PAGE 335

328

PAGE 336

329 U ft

PAGE 337


PAGE 338

APPENDIX G Attus otiosus HENTZ, 1846, (ARANEAE: SALTICIDAE) : PROPOSED PRESERVATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS The jumping spider known as Phidippus otiosus (Hentz) is common to the southeastern portion of the United States of America and a wellknown spider of the region. The species was described as Attus otiosus Hentz, 1846; the name has become well-established and has only once been challenged until recently. Walckenaer (1837) described many species of American spiders; in most cases these descriptions were based on the drawings of John Abbot (1792). American araneologists considered Walckenaer 's descriptions invalid, as there were no specimens on which the descriptions were based, and the drawings of Abbot were presumed lost. However, McCook (1888) discovered Abbot's manuscript in the British Museum (Natural History), but it was not until Chamberlin & Ivie (1944) studied Abbot's drawings that any en masse changing of names in favor of Walckenaer occurred. By this time, the names of Hentz had been in continual usage for nearly 100 years. Walckenaer described 3 of Abbot's drawings as Attus pulcher , Attus pulcher pallida , and Attus peregrinus . Chamberlin & Ivie decided, correctly, that all 3 illustrations represented the same species; they therefore synonymized A. pulcher pallida and A. peregrinus with A. pul cher , which had page and figure number priority. They also synonymized Attus otiosus Hentz with A. pulcher . In so doing, they synonymized an established name in favor of a name which had not even been properly 331

PAGE 339

332 placed to genus before 1944 (Bonnet, 1955, in a review of all araneological works through 1939, lists the species as Attus pulcher ) . Even though Chamberlin and Ivie resurrected the name as Phidippus pulcher (Walckenaer) , _P, otiosus (Hentz) continued to be the name used by American authors, even by Kaston (1978) and Muma (1975) who otherwise have followed Chamberlin and Ivie's resurrections of older names. Recently, the name P. otiosus has been used in the fields of physiology (Anderson, 1966), morphology (Hill, 1979), and ethology (Edwards et al. , 1974; Edwards, 1977; Richman, 1977). The first revisors of Phidippus , the Peckhams' (1901, 1909) on both occasions used the name P. otiosus (Hentz) for the species in question. The name otiosus has been used more than 20 times in the literature, mostly as Phidippus otiosus , rarely as Dendryphantes otiosus or Attus otiosus : since 1930, it has been used at least 13 times by 11 different authors; it is Phidippus otiosus in the popular books by Kaston (1972, 1978, How to Know the Spiders , 2nd and 3rd editions), Gertsch (1979, American Spiders , 2nd edition), and in all printings of Levi and Levi (1968-1978, Spiders and Their Kin ) . The name Phidippus pulcher , first used in 1944, has been used since then only 3 times. Richman (1978), while attempting to determine the status of Walckenaer 's names as they applied to various salticid species, agreed with Chamberlin & Ivie that P. otiosus was a synonym of P. pulcher , and used the name in a salticid checklist (Richman and Cutler, 1978). However, Richman (personal communication, 1978) has agreed that _P. otiosus is the name that is used most often and, based on this reason, has no objection to its continued usage. To preserve usage as it has been for 132 out of 134 years of existence of the name otiosus, the Commission is requested:

PAGE 340

333 (1) to use its plenary powers: (a) to suppress the specific name pulcher Walckenaer, 1837, as published in the binomen Attus pulcher , for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; (b) to suppress the specific names pulcher pallida Walckenaer, 1837, and peregrinus Walckenaer, 1837, as published in the trinomen Attus pulcher pallida and the binomen Attus peregrinus , both junior subjective synonyms of Attus pulcher Walckenaer, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy; (2) to place the specific name otiosus Hentz, 1846, as published in the binomen Attus otiosus , on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology; (3) to place the specific and subspecific names pulcher Walckenaer, 1837, pulcher pallida Walckenaer, 1837, and peregrinus Walckenaer, 1847, as published in the combinations Attus pulcher , Attus pulcher pallida , and Attus peregrinus (as suppressed under the plenary powers in (1) (a) and (1) (b) above) on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology.

PAGE 341

REFERENCES CITED Abbot, J. 1792. A manuscript of 592 annotated illustrations of the spiders of Georgia. Kept at the British Museum (Natural History) Anderson, J. F. 1966. The excreta of spiders. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 17: 973-982. 1970. Metabolic rates of spiders. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. "33: 51-72. 1978. Energy content of spider eggs. Oecologia 37: 41-57. Bailey, C. L. 1968. Life history of the spider Phidippus audax Hentz in relation to biological control of grain sorghum insects. Ph.D. Thesis, Oklahoma State University, 59 p. Bailey, C. L. and H. L. Chada. 1968. Spider populations in grain sorghums. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 61: 567-572. Banks, N. 1892. A classification of North American spiders. Canadian Ent. 24: 38-97. . 1893. Notes on spiders. J. New York Ent. Soc. 1: 123-134. . 1895. Some new Attidae. Canadian Ent. 27: 96-102. 1896. New North American spiders and mites. Trans. American "Ent. Soc. 23: 57-77. 1901. Notes on some spiders of Walckenaer, Koch, and others, "j. New York Ent. Soc. 9: 182-189. 1904. The arachnida of Florida. Proc. Acad. Natur. Sci. "Philadelphia 56: 120-147. 1910. Catalogue of nearctic spiders. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus. "72: 1-80. 1913. Notes on the types of some American spiders in European collections. Proc. Acad. Natur. Sci. Philadelphia 65: 177-188. 1941. Apartition of our Cryptochilus , with some new Psammocharidae (Hymenoptera) . Canadian Ent. 73: 119-122. 334

PAGE 342

335 Barnes, R. D. 1953. The ecological distribution of spiders in nonforest maritime communities at Beaufort, North Carolina. Ecol. Monogr. 23: 315-337. Barnes, R. D. and B. M. Barnes. 1955. The spider population of the abstract broomsedge community of the southeastern Piedmont. Ecology 36: 658-666. Barrows, W. M. 1919. New spiders from Ohio. Ohio J. Sci. 19: 355-360. Berry, J. W. 1970. Spiders of the North Carolina piedmont old-field communities. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 86: 97-105. Bilsing, S. W. 1920. Quantitative studies in the food of spiders. Ohio J. Sci. 20: 215-260. Bonnet, P. 1933. Cycle vital de Philaeus c hrysops Poda (Araneide, Salticide) . Arch. zool. exper. 75: 129-144. . 1958. Bibliographia Araneorum, Tome II (4). Toulouse. pp. 3027-4230. Brady, A. R. 1972. The spider genus Sosippus in North America, Mexico, and Central America. Psyche 69: 129-164. Brian, A. D. 1957. Differences in the flowers visited by four species of bumble-bees and their causes. J. Anim. Ecol. 26: 71-98. Bristowe, W. S. 1958. The World of Spiders . Collins, London, 305 p. Bristowe, W. S. and G. H. Locket. 1926. The courtship of British lycosid spiders, and its probable significance. Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1926: 317-345. Brown, J. H. 1971. Mammals on mountaintops : nonequilibrium insular biogeography. American Natur. 105: 467-478. . 1975. Geographical ecology of desert rodents, in, M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds.). Ecology and Evolution of Communities . Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 315-341. Bryant, E. B. 1942. Descriptions of certain North American Phidippus (Araneae) . American Midi. Natur. 28: 693-707. . 1943. The salticid spiders of Hispaniola. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard 92: 445-522. Burch, T. L. 1979. The importance of communal experience to survival for spiderlings of Araneus diadematus (Araneae: Araneidae) . J. Arachnol. 7: 1-18.

PAGE 343

336 Burks, B. D. 1963. Ten new reared species of Tetrastichus (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) . Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 76: 48 Cannon, S. S. 1965. A comparison of the spider fauna of four different plant communities found in Neotoma, a small valley in south central Ohio. Ohio J. Sci. 65: 97-110. Carpenter, R. M. 1972. The jumping spiders (Salticidae) of Wichita County, Texas. Southwest. Natur. 17: 161-168. Carr, A. F. , Jr. 1940. A contribution to the Herpetology of Florida. Univ. Florida Publ. , Biol. Sci. Ser. 3: 1-118. Caswell, H. 1978. Predator mediated coexistence: a nonequilibrium model. American Natur. 102: 107-147. Chamberlin, R. V. and W. J. Gertsch. 1929. New spiders from Utah and California. J. Ent. Soc. Claremont 21: 101-112. Chamberlin, R. V. and W. Ivie. 1935. Miscellaneous new American spiders. Bull. Univ. Utah 26: 1-79. . 1944. Spiders of the Georgia region of North America. Bull. Univ. Utah 35: 1-267. Chickering, A. M. 1944. The Salticidae (jumping spiders) of Michigan. Pap. Michigan Acad. Sci. 1943: 139-222. Clark, E. W. and P. A. Glick. 1961. Some predators and scavengers feeding upon pink bollworm moths. J. Econ. Ent. 54: 815-816. Clarke, C. A. and P. M. Sheppard. 1953. Further observations on hybrid swallowtails. Ent. Rec. , J. Variation 65 (Supple.): 1-12. Clench, H. K. 1967. Temporal dissociation and population regulation in certain hesperiine butterflies. Ecology 48: 1000-1006. Cody, M. L. 1968. On the methods of resource division in grassland bird communities. American Natur. 100: 371-376. . 1974. Competition and Structure of Bird Communities . Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Colwell, R. K. and D. J. Futuyma. 1971. On the measurement of niche breadth and overlap. Ecology 52: 567-576. Comstock, J. H. 1912. The Spider Book. Garden-City, New York, 721 p.

PAGE 344

337 1940. The Spider Book . Revised and edited by W. J. Gertsch. Doubleday, Doran and Co., New York, 729 p. Connell, J. H. 1970. A predator-prey system in the marine intertidal region. I. Balanus glandula and several predatory species of Thais . Ecol. Monogr. 40: 49-78. 1975. Some mechanisms producing structure in natural communities: a model and evidence from field experiments, in, M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds.). Ecology and Evolution of Communi ties . Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 460-490. Coquillet, D. W. 1892. Insect Life. 5: 24. Crane, J. 1949. Comparative biology of salticid spiders at Rancho Grande, Venezuela. Part IV. An analysis of display. Zoologica 34: 159-214. Cresson, E. T. 1867. Notes on the Pompilidae of North America. Trans. American Ent. Soc. 1: 85-150. Crosby, C. R. and S. C. Bishop. 1936. Aeronautic spiders with a description of a new species. J. New York Ent. Soc. 44: 43-49. Cutler, B. 1965. The jumping spiders of New York City. J. New York Ent. Soc. 73: 138-143. . 1977. A preliminary list of the Salticidae of Minnesota. Peckhamia 1: 40. 1979. Musings of a jack pine savage II. Peckhamia 1: 126. Davis, J. 1973. Habitat preferences and competition of wintering juncos and golden-crowned sparrows. Ecology 54: 174-180. Dayton, P. K. 1971. Competition, disturbance, and community organization: the provision and subsequent utilization of space in a rocky intertidal community. Ecol. Monogr. 41: 351-389. DeLong, K. T. 1966. Population ecology of feral house mice: interference by Microtus . Ecology 47: 481-484. Diamond, J. M. 1975. Assembly of species communities, in, M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds.). Ecology and Evolution of Communities . Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 342-444.

PAGE 345

338 Dondale, C. D. 1956. Annotated list of spiders (Araneae) from apple trees in Nova Scotia. Canadian Ent. 88: 697-700. • 1964. Sexual behavior and its application to a species problem in the spider genus Philodromus (Araneae: Thomisidae) . Canadian J. Zool. 42: 817-827. . 1967. Sexual behavior and classification of the Philodromus rufus complex in North America (Araneida: Thomisidae). Canadian J. Zool. 45:453-459. . 1971. Spiders of Heasman's Field, a mown meadow near Belleville, Ontario. Proc. Ent. Soc. Ontario 101: 62-69. • 1975. Ecology of Arachnida. Proc. 6th Int. Arachnol. Congr. 1974: 67-70. Dorris, P. R. 1969. Spiders collected from mud-dauber nests in Clark County, Arkansas. Proc. Arkansas Acad. Sci. 23: 88-90. Dow, R. 1932. Biological notes on Cuban wasps and their parasites. Psyche 39: 8-19. Dowdy, W. W. 1951. Further ecological studies on stratification of the Arthropoda. Ecology 32: 37-52. Drees, 0. 1952. Untersuchungen uber die angeborenen Verhaltensweisen bei Springspinnen (Salticidae) . Z. Tierpsychol. 9: 167-173. Dreisbach, R. R. 1953. Additional new species in the genera Anopom pilinus , Anoplius , and Pycnopompilus (Hymenoptera: Psammocharidae) and corrections to previous papers. American Midi. Natur. 48: 145-160. Drew, L. C. 1967. Spiders of Beaver Island, Michigan. Publ. Mus. Michigan State Univ., Biol. Ser. 3: 153-208. Eason, R. R. 1964. Maternal care as exhibited by wolf spiders (Lycosids). Proc. Arkansas Acad. Sci. 18: 13-19. . 1969. Life history and behavior of Pardosa lapidicina Emerton (Araneae: Lycosidae) . J. Kansas Ent. Soc. 42: 339-360. Eason, R. R. , W. B. Peck, and W. H. Whitcomb. 1967. Notes on spider parasites, including a reference list. J. Kansas Ent. Soc. 40: 422434. Eberhard, W. G. 1975. The 'inverted ladder' orb web of Scoloderus sp. and the intermediate orb of Eustala (?) sp. (Araneae: Araneidae) . J. Natur. Hist. 9: 93-106. Edgar, W. D. 1969. Prey and predators of the wolf spider, Lycosa lugubris. J. Zool. 159: 405-411.

PAGE 346

339 Edwards, G. B. 1975. Biological studies on the jumping spider, Phi dippus regius C. L. Koch. M. S. Thesis, University of Florida, 64 p. . 1977. Comments on some genus and species problems in the Salticidae, including Walckenaerian names. Peckhamia 1: 21-23. . 1978. Two new southern Phidippus . Florida Ent. 61: 77-82. . 1979. Rebuttal of objections to designation of Attus audax Hentz, 1845, as type species of Phidippus Koch, 1846 (Araneae) . Z. N. (S.) 1904. Bull. Zool. Nomencl. 36: 4. . 1980. Experimental demonstration of the importance of wings to prey evaluation by a salticid spider. Peckhamia 1(7), in press. Edwards, G. B. , J. F. Carroll, and W. H. Whitcomb. 1974. Stoidis aurata (Araneae: Salticidae) , a spider predator of ants. Florida Ent. 57: 337-346. Edwards, G. B. and D. E. Hill. 1978. Representatives of the North American salticid fauna. Peckhamia 1: 110-117. Elliott, F. R. 1930. An ecological study of the spiders of the beechmaple forest. Ohio J. Sci. 30: 1-22. Emerton, J. H. 1875. Notes and descriptions, in, The Spiders of the United States, a collection of the arachnological writings of Nicholas Marcellus Hentz. Occ. Pap. Boston Soc. Natur. Hist. 2: 1-171. . 1877. A comparison of the spiders of Europe and North America. Proc. Boston Soc. Natur. Hist. 19: 68-72. 1891. New England spiders of the family Attidae. Trans. Connecticut Acad. Arts Sci. 8: 220-252. Enders, F. 1974. Vertical stratification in orb-web spiders (Araneidae, Araneae) and a consideration of other methods of coexistence. Ecology 55: 317-328. . 1975. The influence of hunting manner on prey size, particularly in spiders with long attack distances (Araneidae, Linyphiidae, and Salticidae). American Natur. 109: 737-763. . 1976. Size, food-finding, and Dyar's constant. Environ. Ent. 5: 1-10. Evans, H. E. 1951. A taxonomic study of the Nearctic spider wasps belonging to the tribe Pompilini (Hymenoptera: Pompilidae) . Part II: Genus Anoplius Dufour. Trans. American Ent. Soc. 76: 207-361.

PAGE 347

340 1959. Prey records for some midwestern and southwestern spider wasps (Hymenoptera: Pompilidae) . J. Kansas Ent . Soc. 32: 75-76. Evans, H. E. and C. M. Yoshimoto. 1955. An annotated list of pompilid wasps taken at Blackjack Creek, Pottawatomie Co., Kansas (Hymenoptera). J. Kansas Ent. Soc. 28: 16-19. Everly, R. T. 1938. Spiders and insects found associated with sweet corn with notes on the food and habits of some species. I. Arachnida and Coleoptera. Ohio J. Sci. 38: 136-148. Fitch, H. S. 1963. Spiders of the University of Kansas Natural History Reservation and Rockefeller Experimental Tract. Misc. Publ. Univ. Kansas Mus. Natur. Hist. 33: 1-202. Fogarty, M. J. and H. K. Wallace. 1973. Spiders in the summer diet of cattle egrets. Florida Scientist 36: 189-192. Forster, L. M. 1977a. A qualitative analysis of hunting behaviour in jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) . New Zealand J. Zool. 4: 51-62. . 1977b. Some factors affecting feeding behaviour in young Trite auricoma spiderlings (Araneae: Salticidae). New Zealand J. Zool. 4: 435-443. . 1979. Visual mechanisms of hunting behaviour in Trite planiceps , a jumping spider (Araneae: Salticidae). New Zealand J. Zool. 6: 79-93. Franganillo Balboa, P. 1930. Arcnidos de Cuba. Mas aracnidos nuevos de la isle de Cuba. Inst. nac. invest, cien. 1: 47-99. Galiano, M. E. 1967. Ciclo biologico y desarrollo de Loxosceles laeta (Nicolet, 1849) (Araneae, Scytodidae) . Acta Zool. Lilloana 23: 431-464. Gardner, B. T. 1964. Hunger and sequential responses in the hunting behavior of salticid spiders. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 58: 167-173. . 1965. Observations on three species of Phidippus jumping spiders (Araneae, Salticidae). Psyche 72: 133-147. Gerhardt, U. 1928. Biologische Studien en griechischen, corsischen und deutschen Spinnen. Zeits. Morph. Okol. Tiere 10: 576-675. Gertsch, W. J. 1934. Further notes on American spiders. American Mus. Novit. 726: 1-26.

PAGE 348

341 . 1979. American Spiders . Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, 274 p. Gertsch, W. J. and W. L. Jellison. 1939. Notes on a collection of spiders from Montana. American Mus. Novit. 1032: 1-13. Gertsch, W. J. and S. E. Riechert. 1976. The spatial and temporal partitioning of a desert spider community, with descriptions of new species. American Mus. Novit. 2604: 1-25. Gertsch, W. J. and L. A. Woodbury. 1930. Spiders found in the stomachs of Sceloporus graciosus graciosus (B. & G.) (Araneina) . Ent. News 41: 318. Gisbon, W. W. 1947. An ecological study of the spiders of a riverterrace forest in western Tennessee. Ohio J. Sci. 47: 38-44. Glick, P. A. 1939. The distribution of insects, spiders, and mites in the air. USDA Tech. Bull. 673, U. S. Dept. Agric. , Washington, D. C. , 150 p. 1960. Collecting insects by airplane with special reference — to dispersal of the potato leafhopper. U. S. Dept. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1222: 1-16. Hartman, C. 1905. Observations on the habits of some solitary wasps of Texas. Bull. Univ. Texas. Sci. Ser. 6: 1-72. Hentz, N. M. 1835. VII. Araneids Latr. The Spiders, in, A catalogue of the animals and plants of Massachusetts. Report on the Geol. Mineral. Bot. and Zool. of Massachusetts. Amherst, 1835: 550-552. . 1845. Descriptions and figures of the Araneides of the United States. Boston J. Natur. Hist. 5: 189-202. . 1846. Descriptions and figures of the Araneides of the United States. Boston J. Natur. Hist. 5: 352-370. . 1850. Descriptions and figures of the Araneides of the United States. Boston J. Natur. Hist. 6: 18-35. Hermann, H. R. 1969. The hymenopterous poison apparatus: Evolutionary trends in three closely related subfamilies of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) . J. Georgia Ent. Soc. 4: 123-141. Highton, R. 1956. Systematics and variation of the endemic Florida snake genus Stilosoma . Bull. Florida St. Mus. Biol. Serv. 1: 73-96. Hill, D. E. 1977a. The mating of Phidippus princeps . Peckhamia 1: 5-7. * """ "

PAGE 349

342 . 1977b. The pretarsus of salticid spiders. Zool. J. Linnean Soc. 60: 319-338. . 1977 c. Field observations on the behavior of immature Phidippus princeps in Minnesota. Peckhamia 1: 44-50. . 1978. The behavior of Eris marginata (Araneae: Salticidae) . Peckhamia 1: 63-70. . 1979. Orientation by jumping spiders of the genus Phidippus (Araneae: Salticidae) during the pursuit of prey. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 5: 301-322. Hoelldobler, B. 1969. Steatoda fulva (Theridiidae) , a spider that feeds on harvester ants. Psyche 77: 202-208. Hollis, J. H. and B. A. Branson. 1964. Laboratory observations on the behavior of the salticid spider Phidippus audax (Hentz) . Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 67: 131-148. Horner, N. V. 1974 (1975). Annual aerial dispersal of jumping spiders in Oklahoma (Araneae, Salticidae). J. Arachnol. 2: 101-105. Horner, N. V. and J. H. Klein, Jr. 1979. Spider prey of two mud dauber wasp species in Comanche County, Oklahoma (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae). Environ. Ent . 8: 30-31. Howard, L. 0. 1890. U.S.D.A. Insect Life 2: 270. 1892. Hymenopterous parasites of spiders. Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington 2: 290-303. Howell, J. 0. and R. L. Pienkowski. 1971. Spider populations in alfalfa, with notes on spider prey and effect of harvest. J. Econ. Ent. 64: 163-168. Hubbell, T. H. 1954. Relationships and distribution of Mycotrupes , in, A. L. Olsen. The burrowing beetles of the genus Mycotrupes . Misc. Publ. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. 84: 1-59 (39-51). 1956. Some aspects of geographic variation in insects. Ann. Rev. Ent. 1: 71-88. Hurlbert, S. H. 1978. The measurement of niche overlap and some relatives. Ecology 59: 67-77. Hutchinson, G. E. 1957. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 22: 415-427.

PAGE 350

343 . 1959. Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals? American Natur. 93: 145-159. Jackson, R. R. 1976. The evolution of courtship and mating tactics in a jumping spider, Phidippus johnsoni (Araneae, Salticidae) . Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 271 p. 1977a. Courtship versatility in the jumping spider, Phidippus johnsoni (Araneae: Salticidae). Anim. Behav. 25: 953-957. 1977b. Prey of the jumping spider Phidippus johnsoni (Araneae: Salticidae). J. Arachnol. 5: 145-149. . 1978a. An analysis of alternative mating tactics of the jumping spider Phidippus johnsoni (Araneae, Salticidae) . J. Arachnol. 5: 185-230. . 1978b. The life history of Phidippus johnsoni (Araneae: Salticidae). J. Arachnol. 6: 1-29. . 1979. Nests of Phidippus johnsoni (Araneae, Salticidae) : characteristics, pattern of occupation, and function. J. Arachnol. 7: 47-58. Judd, W. W. 1965. Studies of the Byron Bog in southwestern Ontario. Canadian Ent. 95: 327-333. Jung, A. K. S. and V. D. Roth. 1974. Spiders of the Chiricahua Mountain area, Cochise Co., Arizona. J. Arizona Acad. Sci. 9: 29-34. Kagan, M. 1943. The Araneida found on cotton in central Texas. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 36: 257-258. Kaston, B. J. 1936. The senses involved in the courtship of some vagabond spiders. Entomologica americana 16: 97-166. . 1938a. New spiders from New England with notes on other species. Bull. Brooklyn Ent. Soc. 33: 173-191. . 1938b. Checklist of the spiders of Connecticut. Bull. Connecticut Geol. Natur. Hist. Surv. 60: 175-201. . 1945. New spiders in the group Dionycha with notes on other species. American Mus. Novit. 1290: 1-25.

PAGE 351

344 1948. Spiders of Connecticut. Connecticut State Geol. & ~Natur. Hist. Bull. 70: 1-874. 1972. How to Know the Spiders . Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa, Second Edition, 289 p. . 1978. Ibid. Third Edition, 271 p. Keyserling, E. 1884. Neue Spinnen aus Amerika. VI. Verh. Zool.-bot. Ges. Wien 34: 489-534. Koch, C. L. 1837. Uebersicht des Arachnidensystems Nurnberg, 39 p. . 1846. Die Arachniden. Dreizehnter Band. Nurnberg, 234 p. . 1851. Uebersicht des Arachnidensystems. Heft 5. Nurnberg, 104 p. Kohn, A. 1971. Diversity, utilization of resources, and adaptive radiation in shallow water marine invertebrates of tropical oceanic islands. Limnol. Oceanography 16: 332-345. Krombein, K. V. 1955. Miscellaneous prey records of solitary wasps. I. (Hymenoptera: Aculeata) . Bull. Brooklyn Ent . Soc. 50: 13-17. . 1959. Biological notes on some ground-nesting wasps at Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina, 1958, and additions to the faunal list (Hymenoptera, Aculeata). Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington 61: 193199. . 1961. Miscellaneous prey records of solitary wasps. IV. (Hymenoptera: Aculeata). Bull. Brooklyn Ent. Soc. 56: 62-65. . 1967. Trap-nesting wasps and bees life histories, nests, and associates. Smithsonian Press, Washington, D. C. , 576 p. Kuenzler, E. J. 1958. Niche relations of three species of lycosid spiders. Ecology 39: 494-500. Kurczewski, F. E. and E. J. Kurczewski. 1968. Host records for some North American Pompilidae (Hymenoptera). First Supplement. J. Kansas Ent. Soc. 41: 367-382. Laessle, A. M. 1942. The plant communities of the Welaka area. Publ. Univ. Florida Biol. Sci. Ser. 4: 1-143.

PAGE 352

345 Lamore, D. H. 1958. The jumping spider, Phidippus audax Hentz, and the spider Conopistha trigona Hentz, as predators of the basilica spider, Allepeira lemniscata Walckenaer, in Maryland. Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington 60: 286. Land, M. F. 1969a. Structure of the retinae of the principal eyes of jumping spiders (Salticidae: Dendryphantinae) in relation to visual optics. J. Exp. Biol. 51: 443-470. . 1969b. Movements of the retinae of jumping spiders (Salticidae: Dendryphantinae) in response to visual stimuli. J. Exp. Biol. 51: 471-493. . 1971. Orientation by jumping spiders in the absence of visual feedback. J. Exp. Biol. 54: 119-139. . 1972. Stepping movements made by jumping spiders during turns mediated by the lateral eyes. J. Exp. Biol. 57: 15-40. LeSar, C. D. and J. D. Unzicker. 1978. Soybean spiders: species composition, population densities, and vertical distribution. Illinois Natur. Hist. Survey 107: 1-14. Levi, H. W. 1957. The spider genera Crustulina and Steatoda in North America, Central America, and the West Indies (Araneae: Theridiidae) . Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. 117: 367-424. Levi, H. W. and H. M. Field. 1954. The spiders of Wisconsin. American Midi. Natur. 51: 440-467. Levi, H. W. and L. R. Levi. 1951. Report on a collection of spiders and harvestmen from Wyoming and neighboring states. Zoologica 36: 219-237. Levi, H. W. and L. R. Levi. 1968. Spiders and Their Kin . Golden Press, New York, 160 p. Levi, L. R. and H. W. Levi. 1955. Spiders and harvestmen from Waterton and Glacier National Parks. Canadian Field-Naturalist 69: 32-40. Levi, H. W. and L. J. Pinter. 1970. Attus audax Hentz, 1845 (Araneae): Proposed preservation under the plenary powers and designation as type-species of Phidippus Koch, 1846. Bull. Zool. Nomencl. 27: 103. Levins, R. 1968. Evolution in Changing Environments: Some Theoretical Explanations. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 120 p. Lincoln, C. , J. R. Phillips, W. H. Whitcomb, G. C. Dowell, W. P. Boyer, K. 0. Bell, Jr., G. L. Dean, E. J. Matthews, J. B. Graves, L. D. Newsom, D. F. Clower, J. R. Bradley, Jr., and J. L. Bagent. 1967. The bollworm-tobacco budworm problem in Arkansas and Louisiana. Agr. Exp. Sta. Div. Agr. Univ. Ark. Bull. 720: 1-66.

PAGE 353

346 Lloyd, M. , J. H. Zar, and J. R. Karr. 1968. On the calculation of information theoretical measures of diversity. American Midi. Natur. 79:257-272. Locket, G. H. 1939. A case of crossing in spiders. Ann. Mag. Natur. Hist. 11: 629-631. Lowrie, D. C. 1942. The ecology of the spiders of the xeric dunelands in the Chicago area. Bull. Chicago Acad. Sci. 6: 161-189. . 1948. The ecological succession of spiders of the Chicago area dunes. Ecology 29: 334-351. Lucas, H. 1833. Memoire sur plusieurs Arachnides nouvelles appartenant au genre Atte de M. de Walckenaer. Ann. Soc. Ent. France 2: 476482. . 1857. Aragnides, in Ramon de la Sagra, Historia fisica, politica y natural de la Isla de Cuba. Secunda parte, tomo VII, Paris 1857: xxiv-xxx. Luczak, J. 1963. Differences in the structure of communities of web spiders in one type of environment (young pine forest). Ekol. Polska A. 11: 159-221. . 1966. The distribution of wandering spiders in different layers of the environment as a result of interspecies competition. Ekol. Polska A. 14: 233-244. Luczak, J. and T. Wierzbowska. 1959. Analysis of the likelihood of material in relation to the length of a series in the sweep method. Bull. Acad. Pol. Sci. CI. 2. 7: 313-318. MacArthur, R. H. 1958. Population ecology of some warblers of northeastern coniferous forests. Ecology 39: 599-619. MacArthur, R. H. and R. Levins. 1967. The limiting similarity, convergence, and divergence of coexisting species. American Natur. 101: 377-385. MacNeil, F. S. 1950. Pleistocene shorelines in Florida and Georgia. U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap. 221-F: 95-107. Malas, D. and J. B. Wallace, 1977. Strategies for coexistence in three species of net-spinning caddisflies (Trichoptera) in second-order southern Appalachian streams. Canadian J. Zool. 55: 1829-1840. Martin, J. L. 1966. The insect ecology of red pine plantations in central Ontario. IV. The crown fauna. Canadian Ent. 98: 10-27.

PAGE 354

347 Marx, G. 1890. Catalogue of the described Araneae of temperate North America. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. 12: 497-594. May, R. M. 1975. Patterns of species abundance and diversity, in M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds.). Ecology and Evolution of Communities . Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 81-120. . 1976. Models for two interacting populations, in R. M. May (ed.) Theoretical Ecology: Principles and Applications . W. B. Saunders and Co., Philadelphia, pp. 49-70. Mayr, E. 1954. Change of genetic environment and evolution, in J. S. Huxley (ed.). Evolution as a Process . Geo. Allen and Unwin Ltd., London, pp. 157-180. McCaffrey, J. P. and R. L. Horsburgh. 1980. The spider fauna of apple trees in central Virginia. Environ. Ent. 9: 247-252. McCrone, J. D. 1963. Taxonomic status and evolutionary history of the Geolycosa pikei complex in the southeastern United States (Araneae, Lycosidae). American Midi. Natur. 70: 47-73. Mittal, 0. P. 1964. Karyological studies on the Indian spiders VI. Res. Bull. Panjab Univ. Sci. (NS) 5: 67-80. Moulder, B. C. and D. E. Reichle. 1972. Significance of spider predation in the energy dynamics of forest floor arthropod communities. Ecol. Monogr. 42: 473-498. Muma, M. H. 1944. A report on Maryland spiders. American Mus. Novit. 1257: 1-14. . 1945. New and interesting spiders from Maryland. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 58: 91-102. . 1975. Spiders in Florida citrus groves. Florida Ent. 58: 83-90. Muma, M. H. and W. F. Jeffers. 1945. Studies of the spider prey of several mud-dauber wasps. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 38: 245-255. Muma, M. H. and K. E. Muma. 1949. Studies on a population of prairie spiders. Ecology 30: 485-503. Murrill, W. A. 1942. Spiders of Alachua County, Florida. Florida Ent. 25: 7-9.

PAGE 355

348 Odum, E. P. 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 262-270. Oehler, C. M. 1980. Jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) in the Cincinnati region of Ohio. Ohio Biol. Surv. Biol. Notes 13: 1-36. Oliver, A. D. 1964. Studies on the biological control of the fall webworm, Hyphantria cunea , in Louisiana. J. Econ. Ent. 57: 314-318. Painter, T. S. 1914. Spermatogenesis in spiders. I. Zool. Jahrb., Anat. 38: 509-576. Patrick, R. and D. Strawbridge. 1963. Variation in the structure of natural diatom communities. American Natur. 97:51-57. Patterson, J. T. and W. S. Stone. 1952. Evolution in the genus Droso phila. MacMillen, 610 p. Peck, W. B. 1966. The population composition of a spider community in west central Missouri. American Midi. Natur. 76: 151-168. Peck, W. B., L. 0. Warren, and I. L. Brown. 1971. Spider fauna of shortleaf and loblolly pines in Arkansas. J. Georgia Ent. Soc. 6: 87-94. Peckham, G. W. and E. G. Peckham. 1883. Descriptions of new or little known spiders of the family Attidae from various parts of the United States of North America. Milwaukee 1883: 1-35. 1888. Attidae of North America. Trans. Wisconsin Acad. Sci. Arts Let. 7: 1-104. . 1889. Observations on sexual selection in spiders of the family Attidae. Occ. Pap. Natur. Hist. Soc. Wisconsin 1: 1-60. . 1896. Spiders of the family Attidae from Central America and Mexico. Occ. Pap. Natur. Hist. Soc. Wisconsin 3: 1-101. . 1901. Spiders of the Phidippus group of the family Attidae. Trans. Wisconsin Acad. Sci. Arts Let. 13: 282-358. 1909. Revision of the Attidae of North America. Trans. Wisconsin Acad. Sci. Arts Let. 16: 355-646. Petrunkevitch, A. 1911. A synonymic index-catalogue of spiders of North, Central and South America with all adjacent islands, etc. Bull. American Mus. Natur. Hist. 29: 1-791. Pianka, E. R. 1974. Niche overlap and diffuse competition. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 71: 2141-2145. Platnick, N. I. and M. U. Shadab. 1975. A revision of the spider genus Gnaphosa (Araneae, Gnaphosidae) in America. Bull. American Mus. Natur. Hist. 155: 1-66.

PAGE 356

349 . 1975. Niche relations of desert lizards, in M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds.). Ecology and Evolution of Communities . Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 292-314. Pielou, E. C. 1966. Species-diversity and pattern-diversity in the study of ecological succession. J. Theoret. Biol. 10: 370-383. 1975. Population and Community Ecology. Principles and Methods . Gordon and Breach Science Publ. , New York, 424 p. Pinter, L. J. and D. M. Walters. 1971. Karyological studies I. A study of the chromosome numbers and sex-determining mechanism of three species of the genus Phidippus (Aranea: Salticidae, Dendryphantinae) . Cytologia 36: 183-189. Price, P. W. 1975. Insect Ecology . John Wiley & Sons, New York, 514 p. Randall, J. R. 1978. The use of femoral spination as a key to instar determination in the Green Lynx spider, Peucetia viridans (Hentz) (Araneida, Oxyopidae). J. Arachnol. 6: 147-153. Rathcke, B. J. 1976. Competition and coexistence within a guild of herbivorous insects. Ecology 57: 76-87. Rau, P. 1926. The ecology of a sheltered clay bank; a study in insect sociology. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis 25: 158-260. . 1928. The nesting habits of the wasp Chalybion caeruleum . Ann. Ent. Soc. America 21: 25-35. 1935. The spider prey of the mud wasp, Sceliphron caementarium (Araneae, Hymen.: Sphegidae). Ent. News 46: 267-270. Reiskind, J. 1969. The spider subfamily Castianeirinae of North and Central America (Araneae, Clubionidae) . Bull. Mus . Comp. Zool. 138: 163-325. . 1970. Multiple mimetic forms in an ant-mimicking clubionid spider. Science 169: 587-588. Reiskind, J. and H. W. Levi. 1967. Ana tea , an ant-mimicking theridiid spider from New Caledonia (Araneae: Theridiidae) . Psyche 74: 20-23. Richman, D. B. 1977. The relationship of epigamic display to the systematics of jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Florida, 162 p. . 1978. Some thoughts on Walckenaer's names for salticids after an examination of Abbot's drawings. Peckhamia 1: 57-61.

PAGE 357

350 Richman, D. B. and B. Cutler. 1978. A list of the jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) of the United States and Canada. Peckhamia 1: 82-110. Riley, C. V. 1887. Our shade trees and their insect defoliators. U.S. Dept. Agric. Div. Ent. Bull. 10: 1-69. Roewer, C. F. 1954. Katalog der Araneae. 2. Band, Abt. b. Brussels, pp. 927-1751. Ross, H. H. 1957. Principles of natural coexistence indicated by leaf hopper populations. Evolution 11: 113-129. Rovner, J. S. 1967. Acoustic communication in a lycosid spider ( Lycosa rabida Walckenaer) . Anim. Behav. 15: 273-281. . 1975. Sound production by Nearctic wolf spiders: A substratumcoupled stridulatory mechanism. Science 190: 1309-1310. . 1980. Vibration in Heteropoda venatoria (Sparassidae) : A third method of sound production in spiders. J. Arachnol. 8: 193-200. Sailer, R. I. 1954. Interspecific hybridization among insects with a report on crossbreeding experiments with stink bugs. J. Econ. Ent. 47: 377-383. Scheffer, T. H. 1904. A preliminary list of Kansas spiders. Industrialist 30: 371-386. . 1905. A preliminary list of Kansas spiders. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 19: 182-193. . 1906. Additions to the list of Kansas Arachnida. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 20: 121-130. Schlinger, E. I. 1960. A revision of the genus Ogcodes Latreille with particular reference to species of the western hemisphere. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. Ill: 227-336. Schoener, T. W. 1968. The Anolis lizards of Bimini: resource partitioning in a complex fauna. Ecology 49: 704-726. . 1969. Models of optimum size for solitary predators. American Natur. 103: 277-313. 1970. Non-synchronous overlap of lizards in patchy habitats. Ecology 51: 408-418. . 1974. Resource partitioning in ecological communities. Science 185: 27-39. . 1975. Competition and the niche, in D. W. Tinkle and W. W. Milstead for C. Gans (eds.). Biology of the Reptilia . Academic Press, New York.

PAGE 358

351 Shannon, C. E. 1948. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27: 379-424; 623-656. Simon, E. 1864. Histoire naturelle des Araignees (Araneides) . Paris 1864: 1-540. . 1901. Histoire naturelle des Araignees. Tome 2, fascicule 3. Paris 1901: 381-668. Snetsinger, R. 1955. Observations on two species of Phidippus . Ent. News 66:9-15. Specht, H. B. and C. D. Dondale. 1960. Spider populations in New Jersey apple orchards. J. Econ. Ent. 53: 810-814. Taylor, B. B. and W. B. Peck. 1975. A comparison of northern and southern forms of Phidippus audax (Hentz) (Araneida, Salticidae) . J. Arachnol. 2: 89-99. Thorell, T. 1891. Spindlar fran Nikobarerna och andra delar af Sodra Asien, etc. Kongl. Svenska Vet.-Akad. Handl. 24: 1-149. Tikader, B. K. 1974. Studies on some jumping spiders of the genus Phidipppus from India (Family-Salticidae) . Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. 79: 120-126. Tolbert, W. W. 1975. Predator avoidance behaviors and web defensive structures in the orb weavers Argiope aurantia and Argiope trifasciata (Araneae, Araneidae) . Psyche 82: 29-52. Townes, H. 1957. Nearctic wasps of the subfamilies Pepsinae and Ceropalinae. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus. 209: 220-237. Tullgren, A. 1901. On the spiders collected in Florida by Dr. Einar Lonnberg 1892-93. Bih. Svenska Vet.-Akad. Handl. 27: 1-29. Turnbull, A. L. 1964. The search for prey by a web-building spider, Acheaearanea tepidariorum (C. L. Koch) (Araneae: Theridiidae) . Canadian Ent. 96: 568-579. 1973. Ecology of the true spiders (Araneomorphae) . Ann. Rev. Ent. 18: 305-348. Turner, M. 1979. Diet and feeding phenology of the green lynx spider, Peucetia viridans (Araneae: Oxyopidae) . J. Arachnol. 7: 149-154. Turner, M. and G. A. Polis. 1979. Patterns of co-existence in a guild of raptorial spiders. J. Anim. Ecol. 48: 509-520. Uetz, G. W. 1975. Temporal and spatial variation in species diversity of wandering spiders (Araneae) in deciduous forest litter. Environ. Ent. 4: 719-724.

PAGE 359

352 . 1977. Coexistence in a guild of wandering spiders. J. Anim. Ecol. 46: 531-541. Vachon, M. 1957. Contribution a 1' etude du developpement postembryonaire des araignees. Premier Note. Generalities et nomenclature des stades. Bull. Soc. Zool. France 82: 337-354. Valerio, C. E. 1974. Feeding on eggs by spiderlings of Achaearanea tepidariorum (Araneae: Theridiidae) , and the significance of the quiescent instar in spiders. J. Arachnol. 2: 57-63. Vandermeer, J. H. 1972. Niche theory. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 3: 107-132. Van Hook, R. I., Jr. 1971. Energy and nutrient dynamics of spider and orthopteran populations in a grassland ecosystem. Ecol. Monogr. 41: 1-26. Walckenaer, C. A. 1805. Tableau des Araneides ou Caracteres essentials des tribus, genres, families et races que renferme le genre Aranea de Linne, avec la designation des especes comprises dans chacune de ces divisions. Paris 1805: 1-88. . 1837. Histoire naturelle des Insectes. Apteres. Tome I. Paris 1837: 1-549. _. 1947. Histoire naturelle des Insectes. Apteres. Tome IV. Paris 1847: 1-623. Wallace, H. K. 1942. A revision of the burrowing spiders of the genus Geolycosa (Araneae, Lycosidae) . American Midi. Natur. 27: 1-62. . 1950. On Tullgren's Florida spiders. Florida Ent. 33: 71-83. Warren, L. 0., W. B. Peck, and M. Tadic. 1967. Spiders associated with the fall webworms, Hyphantria cunea (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae) . J. Kansas Ent. Soc. 40: 382-395. Wheeler, A. G. , Jr. 1973. Studies on the arthropod fauna of alfalfa V. Spiders (Araneida) . Canadian Ent. 105: 425-432. Whitcomb, W. H. 1967. Field studies on predators of the second-instar bollworm, Heliothis zea (Boddie) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) . J. Georgia Ent. Soc. 2: 113-118. . 1973. Natural populations of entomophagous arthropods and their effect on the agroecosystem. Proc. Mississippi Symp. Biol. Contr. 1973: 150-169. whitcomb, W. H. , H. Exline, and R. C. Hunter. 1963. Spiders of the Arkansas cotton field. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 56: 653-660.

PAGE 360

353 Whitcomb, W. H. and M. Tadic. 1963. Araneida as predators of the fall webworm. J. Kansas Ent. Soc. 36: 186-190. Wickler, W. 1968. Mimicry in Plants and Animals . World Univ. Libr. , McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. Wiens, J. A. 1977. On competition and variable environments. American Scientist 65: 259-267. Williams, S. C. 1970. Coexistence of desert scorpions by differential habitat preference. Pan-Pacific Ent. 46: 254-267. Woodwell, G. M. 1974. Variation in the nutrient content of leaves of Quercus alba , Quercus coccinea , and Pinus rigida in the Brookhaven Forest from bud-break to abscission. American J. Bot. 61: 749-753. Yeargan, K. W. 1975. Prey and periodicity of Pardosa ramulosa (McCook) in alfalfa. Environ. Ent. 4: 137-141. Zug, G. R. and P. B. Zug. 1979. The marine toad, Bufo marinus : A natural history resume of native populations. Smithsonian Contr. Zool. 284.

PAGE 361

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH G. B. Edwards, Jr., was born November 24, 1948, at Aberdeen, Maryland, the oldest child of Glavis B., Sr., and Margaret P. Edwards. He graduated from Northwestern Senior High in 1967, having participated on the varsity baseball and basketball teams; the basketball team won the Maryland state highschool championship his senior year. He then enrolled at the University of Maryland, where he played on the freshman basketball team, graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree in 1971. He enrolled as a graduate student in the Entomology and Nematology Department of the University of Florida in 1972, and earned a Master of Science degree in 1975. Between undergraduate and graduate school, he married C. Sue Williams on the 3rd of April, 1972; they have no children. 354

PAGE 362

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. %/ljM/M, K Willard H.'Whitcomb, Chairman Professor of Entomology and Nematology I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Thomas J. WalkeA Professor of Enfedmology and Nematology I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. V tthan Reiskind Associate Professor of Zoology This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the College of Agriculture and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. December, 1980 r. £ Dean, College of Agricul-tjfore Dean, Graduate School

PAGE 363

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 08553 3841


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E5Y54WWU5_A0ICGN INGEST_TIME 2011-06-09T10:48:27Z PACKAGE UF00099377_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES