Arctosa khudiensis (Sinha, 1951)

Figs 7–8

Lycosa khudiensis Sinha, 1951: 22, fig. 1d.

Arctosa khudiensis— Tikader & Malhotra 1980: 375, figs 252–254 (Transfer from Lycosa). Yin et al. 1993: 10, figs 7–13. Yin et al. 1997: 86, fig. 38a–g. Song et al. 1999: 319, fig. 189B, I. Majumder 2005: 26.

Type material. Female holotype with cocoon from INDIA: Jharkhand: Dhanbad: on the bank of Khudi River, 11/ 2 miles of Nirsa market (formerly in Manbhum in Bihar); T. B. Sinha leg.; 10 November 1948; repository NZC-ZSI (2273/18), examined. Female paratype with same data as holotype (NCZ-ZSI 2274/18), examined .

Diagnosis. Females of A. khudiensis seem closely related to the females of Arctosa laminata Yu & Song, 1988 as both share oval spermathecae with short, stout stalks. It can be distinguished from the latter by a median septum with nearly triangular posterior part, while it is widely oval in A. laminata (compare Fig. 8 A–C to Yin et al. 2012: fig. 400b–c).

Supplementary description. Female (holotype, Fig. 7A). Fovea vertical, dark. Sternum with dark marginal streaks. Cheliceral promargin with two teeth, retromargin with three. Body length 5.73. Prosoma length 3.09, width 2.29. Opisthosoma length 2.64, width 1.40. Eye diameters: ALE 0.08. AME 0.12. PLE 0.18. PME 0.21. Eye interdistances: ALE–AME 0.03. AME–AME 0.06. PLE–PLE 0.48. PME–PLE 0.23. PME–PME 0.17. Chelicerae length 1.10. Clypeus height at ALEs 0.07, at AMEs 0.05. Measurements of palp and legs. Palp 2.96 [1.07, 0.63, 0.53, 0.73], I 7.39 [2.18, 1.08, 1.72, 1.53, 0.88], II (right) 6.38 [1.80, 0.93, 1.19, 1.51, 0.95], III (right) 6.28 [1.92, 0.98, 1.08, 1.61, 0.69], IV ----- [2.72, 1.24, 2.45, 1.18, ----]. Epigynum as in Fig. 8A.

Measurements of paratype female (Fig. 7B). Body length 8.87. Prosoma length 2.84, width 2.22. Opisthosoma length 2.23, width 1.57. Genitalia as in Fig. 8 B–C.

Male. Unknown.

Remarks. The NZC-ZSI collection has four glass tubes for this species. A first tube, labelled ‘holotype’ (2273/18), contains only an egg sac. A second tube, labelled ‘paratypes’ (2274/18), contains one female specimen in fairly good condition, with broken legs. A third tube, also labelled as ‘paratype’ (no register number), contains one female specimen in fairly good condition. The same tube has a small glass vial that contains the dissected genitalia. A fourth tube, also labelled as ‘holotype’ (no register number), contains one female specimen in fairly good condition, with broken legs and intact genitalia. We presume this specimen is the holotype of A. khudiensis, which may have been misplaced from first tube into the fourth one.