Euprosthenops

Cruz da Silva, Estevam L. & Sierwald, Petra, 2014, Description of the males of Euprosthenops australis Simon, 1898 and Euprosthenopsis pulchella (Pocock, 1902) (Araneae: Pisauridae), Zootaxa 3857, pp. 137-150 : 138

Euprosthenops Pocock, 1897

Figs 1, 3-22

Euprosthenomma Roewer 1955a: 148, synonymised by Blandin, 1974: 946.

Euprosthenops ; Platnick 2014.

Type species. Euprosthenops schenkeli Roewer , 1955, designated by Blandin, 1974: 946.

Diagnosis. The representatives of Euprosthenops Pocock, 1897 resemble those of Euprosthenopsis Blandin, 1974 in the following characters: foraging in webs (Fig. 1), anterior eye row extremely procurved (all eyes forming almost three rows) (Figs 5, 6) and anterior lateral eyes on strongly projected tubercles (Figs 5, 6). The two genera can be differentiated by the spider's position in the web; Euprosthenops moves under the web (Fig. 1) and Euprosthenopsis moves on the surface of the sheet web (Fig. 2). The male palpus of Euprosthenops possesses a large and wide distal tegular apophysis ( DTA) (Figs 9-15) and a finger-like retrolateral tibial apophysis ( RTA) (Figs 10, 12, 13, 17), males of Euprosthenopsis have a short and rounded distal tegular apophysis ( DTA, Figs 27, 32) and a wide and concave retrolateral tibial apophysis ( RTA, Figs 28, 34). Females of Euprosthenops resemble those of Euprosthenopsis by the presence of conspicuous lateral lobes ( LL) and by the scape-like projection of the middle field ( MF) (Blandin 1974: 938, figs 4 A, B). They can be distinguished from Euprosthenopsis by the short spermathecae and by the very large and flattened copulatory ducts ( CD) (Blandin 1974: 939, fig. 5 A).

Distribution. Africa (Fig. 22).