Trochosa C.L. Koch, 1847

Marusik, Yuri M. & Nadolny, Anton A., 2020, On the identity of Trochosa hispanica (Araneae, Lycosidae), with notes on the synonymy of West Palaearctic “ Trochosa ” species, Zootaxa 4859 (1), pp. 56-80 : 58

Trochosa C.L. Koch, 1847

Trochosa C.L. Koch, 1847: 95 ; Engelhardt 1964: 224; Fuhn & Niculescu-Burlacu 1971: 221; Dondale & Redner 1990: 22; Zyuzin 1990: 422; Almquist 2005: 246; Tanaka 1988: 94.

Type species: Aranea lupus ruricola De Geer, 1778 .

Diagnosis. Trochosa resembles Pirata Sundevall, 1833 and the related genera Piratula Roewer, 1960 and Trebacosa Dondale & Redner, 1981 by the carapace pattern: a pair of longitudinal stripes in the anterior part of a light median band. However, the genus can be easily separated from the others due to its large size, and the parallel longitudinal stripes in Trochosa ( Fig. 1 ) which are converging posteriorly in Pirata and related genera (see Omelko et al. 2011). Trochosa can be differentiated from the genera mentioned before by the copulatory organs, which are similar to those of Hogna Simon, 1885 . Members of Trochosa and Hogna differ from other genera by having a triangular tegular apophysis (ventral view), an elliptically curved embolus with a basal transparent membrane, a pointed synembolus, and the epigyne has an anchor-shaped septum and a pair of deep anterior hoods. Trochosa can be differentiated from Hogna by: 1) the lack of strong macrosetae on the cymbial apex (vs. present); 2) the epigyne having a small fovea, and the septal stem covering more than half of the fovea (in Hogna , the fovea is larger, equal to three times the width of the septal stem); 3) the width of the septal base is equal to the length of the septum (in the West Palaearctic, Hogna ’s septum length is 1.2–1.4 times longer than the width of the septal base); 4) the septal stem widens anteriorly (in Hogna , the septum edges are parallel).

Comments. A search for published figures and types of species described by Roewer (1955a) reveals that some arachnologists are not aware of the key characters of the genus. For example, Roewer (1955a) described T. hispanica under three different names in three different genera but none of them in Trochosa . Simultaneously, he placed a species, Hippasa loeffleri ( Roewer, 1955a) , belonging to a different subfamily, as well as Arctosa tbilisiensis Mcheidze, 1946 (= Trochosa impercussa Roewer, 1955a ) in Trochosa . In the revision of Australian Trochosa, McKay (1979) treated 12 species, although 11 of them are now transferred to other genera. The remaining Trochosa glarea McKay, 1979 , known only from the female, has an epigyne that differs from those of the generotype.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Males (A–B) and females (C–D) of Trochosa hispanica from the Crimea.A, C–D living and B preserved in ethanol. Scale bar 2 mm