Ariamnes, THORELL, 1869

Agnarsson, Ingi, 2004, Morphological phylogeny of cobweb spiders and their relatives (Araneae, Araneoidea, Theridiidae), Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 141 (4), pp. 447-626 : 478

ARIAMNES THORELL, 1869

Ariamnes Thorell, 1869 , type species by monotypy Ariadne flagellum Doleschall, 1857 [= Ariamnes flagellum ] (see Levi & Levi, 1962: 17), not examined.

Synonymy: Ariadne Doleschall, 1857 – type species by monotypy A. flagellum Doleschall, 1857 , preoccupied by Ariadne Latreille, 1829 (junior synonym of Ariadna Audouin, 1826 (Segestriidae) . Ariamnes is a replacement name for Ariadne .

Removed from the synonymy of Argyrodes by Yoshida (2001a: 183–184), contra Levi & Levi (1962: 17). See also Arnedo et al. (2004). All species attributed to the ‘ Ariamnes ’ group of Exline & Levi (1962) and Zhu (1998), or originally described as Ariamnes are explicitly transferred to Ariamnes : A. attenuata O. P.-Cambridge, 1881, A. birgitae Strand, 1917 , A. campestratus Simon, 1903 , A. colubrinus Keyserling, 1890 , A. corniger Simon, 1900 , A. cylindrogaster Simon, 1889 , A. flagellum (Doleschall, 1857) , A. flagellum nigritus Simon, 1901, A. haitensis ( Exline & Levi, 1962) comb. nov., A. helminthoides Simon, 1907 , A. jeanneli Berland, 1920 , A. longicaudata O. P.- Cambridge, 1872, A. longissimus Keyserling, 1891 , A. mexicanus ( Exline & Levi, 1962) comb. nov., A. patersoniensis Hickman, 1927 , A. pavesii Leardi, 1902 , A. rufopictus Thorell, 1895 , A. russulus Simon, 1903 , A. schlingeri ( Exline & Levi, 1962) comb. nov., A. setipes Hasselt, 1882 , A. simulans O. P.-Cambridge, 1892, A. triangulatus Urquhart, 1887 , A. triangulus Thorell, 1887 .

Diagnosis: Ariamnes differs from other argyrodines by the following putative synapomorphies (based on A. attenuata ) elongate spermathecae (11), embolus terminal apophysis (96, Fig. 34D, E ), carapace pars stridens irregular (138), epiandrous gland spigots not in sockets (169, Fig. 34G ), elongated egg sac (231, Fig. 98E ), abdomen extremely elongated ( Fig. 95A ), unusual arrangement of proprioreceptors ( Fig. 35C ), sturdy setae on male metatarsus and tarsus I ( Fig. 35D ), as well as details of head modification ( Fig. 34F ), palpus ( Fig. 34A–D ), and prey-catching strategy (e.g. Eberhard, 1979). At least elongate spermathecae, elongated abdomen, and head modifications appear uniform in the genus (see e.g. Exline & Levi, 1962; Zhu, 1998). Irregular carapace pars stridens, arrangement of proprioreceptors and sturdy setae on male metatarsus and tarsus I were confirmed in the two other Ariamnes examined in detail, Ariamnes sp. and A. longissimus . I have observed the elongated egg sac in several undescribed species, but at least some species presumably build shorter egg sacs similar to other argyrodines (e.g. Chikuni, 1989: 35).

Figures

Figure 34. Ariamnes nr. attenuatus. A–E, male palp. A, ventral. B–E, bulb removed from cymbium. B, ventral. C, ectal. D, ventral close-up; note hooded tip of the MA (78-1) with a broken-off cymbial hook (arrow, 33-0), showing the locking system is active in the unexpanded palp (31-1). E, close-up of embolus; note embolic apophysis (EA, 96-1) and ridges on embolus base (90-1). F, modified prosoma (130-1), clypeal glands and setae (132-1, 133-1). G, epiandrous gland spigots. H, female pedicel area; note broadened slit sensilla (Ss, 141-1), stridulatory nubbins (SN, 149-1) and setal proprioreceptors (arrows). Scale bars: A, B, F, 100 mm; C–E, H, 50 mm; G, 20 mm

Figure 35. Ariamnes nr. attenuatus. A, B, female spinnerets. A, PLS and PMS, apparently a FL and a single AG are present (or possibly two highly dimorphic AGs). B, ALS. C, setal proprioreceptors (arrows point to a few). D, male first leg; note sturdy setae on the metatarsus. E, female fourth tarsal comb. F, serrated bristles of the tarsal comb. G, tip of fourth tarsus; note position of the comb relative to the tarsal claws. H, cheliceral promarginal teeth. Scale bars: A, B, F, G, 50 mm; C–E, 100 mm; H, 10 mm

Figure 95. A, typical ‘chicken-wire’ web (225-2) of Synotaxus monoceros, characteristic of this genus (Bartika, Guyana). B, S. waiwai, female guarding egg sac in a simple ‘egg sac web’. (Gunn’s landing, Guyana) C, S. monoceros, female guarding egg sac in an identical web (Bartika, Guyana). D, male of S. monoceros (Bartika, Guyana). E, Selkirkiella luisi (Puyehue, Chile) in an egg-guarding web typical of the genus, superficially similar to Synotaxus. Note that the dense silk mat in Selkirkiella covers the loosely woven egg sac entirely. Enoplognatha ovata is similar (e.g. Nielsen, 1932: 41)

Figure 98. Argyrodinae. A, Argyrodes sp. and Faiditus sp. stealing food caught by its Nephila host (Cabo Blanco, Costa Rica). B, Argyrodes sp. pilfering tiny prey, ignored by the Nephila host (Cabo Blanco, Costa Rica). C, Faiditus female in a nonsnare web at edge of host web, attaching egg sac. D, Faiditus sp. egg sac; note distinct stalk (230-1), a synapomorphy of Argyrodinae (Cabo Blanco, Costa Rica). E, Ariamnes female with egg sac (231-3), both extremely elongated (Gunn’s Landing, Guyana). F, Rhomphaea draca (Chamberlin & Ivie) female in a very simple, nonsticky web (Gunn’s Landing, Guyana).