Nomisia excerpta, : Levy, 1995

Chatzaki, M., 2010, A revision of the genus Nomisia in Greece and neighboring regions with the description of two new species, Zootaxa 2501 (1), pp. 1-22 : 6-9

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.2501.1.1
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/A94A0419-FFAD-FFAC-FF7A-68B6FBE7FE36
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Nomisia excerpta
status

Treatment

Nomisia excerpta View in CoL (O. P.- Cambridge, 1872)

Figs 9–23 View FIGURES 9–17 View FIGURES 18–23 , 51

Gnaphosa excerpta O. P.- Cambridge, 1872: p. 266, pl. 15, Fig. 4 View FIGURES 1–4 (holotype from Israel - not examined).

Nomisia excerpta: Levy, 1995: p. 933 View in CoL , Figs 31–35 View FIGURES 30–33 View FIGURES 34–37 ; Chatzaki, Thaler & Mylonas, 2002 a: p. 583, Figs 49–50 View FIGURES 47–50 , 53–54 View FIGURE 53 .

Diagnosis: Notwithstanding the intraspecific variation of the species, N. excerpta can still be distinguished by the upright cylindrical embolus and the shape of the tibial apophysis, and the more or less heart-shaped epigynal margins closing at posterior end in combination to the globular spermathecae.

Citations in Greece: CRETE and satellite islands (for detailed records see Chatzaki et al. 2002).

New records: GREECE: Ipeiros: Preveza: 1 ♀ (15. VI.38, leg. H. Hadjissarantos, ZMUA6614.22 View Materials ); Sterea Ellada: Aitoloakarnania, Amfilochia : 1 ♂ 12 ♀ (04. VI.38, leg. H. Hadjissarantos, ZMUA6614.23 View Materials ); Peloponnisos: Taygetos Mt , Abies wood, 1600 m alt: 1 ♂ (ptf, 15. III.97 to 06. VII.97, leg. I. Anastasiou, ZMUAG580.2 (1)); 1 ♀ (ptf, 15. III.97 to 06. VII.97, leg. I. Anastasiou, ZMUAG580.15 (1)); 2 ♀ (ptf, 09. V.97 to 05. VII.97, leg. I. Anastasiou, ZMUAG584.5 (1)) ; CYPRUS (no further details): 1 ♂ ( SMF 38619, sub N. recepta , det. Grimm) .

Comparative material examined: ISRAEL: Mt Meron : 1 ♀ (29. IV.75, leg. M. Warburg, ZMHUJ); Poriyya, east slope: 1 ♂ (01. IV.68, leg. Amitai, MNHUJ-14881) .

Comments. N. excerpta and N. recepta ( Pavesi, 1880) have been the subject of taxonomic puzzle several times ( Levy 1995, p. 933, Figs 31–35 View FIGURES 30–33 View FIGURES 34–37 ; Chatzaki et al. 2002, p. 583, Figs 49–50 View FIGURES 47–50 , 53–54 View FIGURE 53 ). Levy (1995) and Chatzaki et al. (2002) reported on the resemblance of the two species, which, according to the former is superficial among males and not existent among females. The close examination of the type of N. recepta and a couple of topotypic specimens of N. excerpta (the type of N. excerpta was unavailable to the author and is probably lost) leaves no doubt about the clear separation of the two species, mainly based on the shape of the embolus and tibial apophysis of the male pedipalp, and the shape of both the lateral margins of the epigyne and the spermathecae (see also detailed comments in N. recepta section). However, the examination of specimens from several localities from Greece (Peloponnisos, Ipeiros, Sterea Ellada and Crete) and Cyprus leads to a clear intraspecific variation. Differences among the four morphogroups may be observed on the following elements:

♂: the embolus of specimens from Peloponnisos ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 9–17 ), Sterea Ellada and Cyprus ( Fig. 9 View FIGURES 9–17 ) are smoother at the surface and more slender compared to that from Crete ( Fig. 15 View FIGURES 9–17 ); the spermophore of specimens from Peloponnisos ( Figs 13–14 View FIGURES 9–17 ) is wider and the tegulum more slender ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 9–17 ) compared with the other two, which are more similar in the general shape of the tegulum, creating angles at prolateral sides ( Figs 9 and 15 View FIGURES 9–17 ); membranous endings at the apical part of tegulum form different shapes at all three specimens; the tibial apophysis of the specimens from both Peloponnisos and Crete are more bulging when viewed retrolaterally and dorsally than that from Cyprus, notwithstanding their similarity in shape; finally the whole bulb of the specimen from Cyprus is smaller compared to the specimens from Peloponnisos and Crete, and is more similar to that of the male from Sterea Ellada.

♀: the shape of the lateral margins of the epigyne is clearly different in all three morphogroups ( Figs 18, 20, 22 View FIGURES 18–23 ), although the interior genital organs (spermathecae, introductory ducts) seem almost inseparable ( Figs 19, 21, 23 View FIGURES 18–23 ). The specimen from Ipeiros was identical to that found from Sterea Ellada. In the female specimen from Israel the lateral margins are fully heart-shaped giving an intermediate impression of the specimen from Peloponnisos ( Fig. 18 View FIGURES 18–23 ) and from Sterea Ellada (20). The introductory ducts are longer and the spermathecae more globular than all Greek specimens.

The afore-mentioned differences among Greek populations could also be considered as sufficient for species separation. In this case, only the specimen from Cyprus would correspond to the “true” N. excerpta , as it is the only one which is identical to the topotypic specimens examined. The specimens from Crete, Peloponnisos and mainland Greece would correspond to three new species respectively. However, until more material is collected throughout the country and the range of the species is fully understood (as well as the degree of morphological distinction among geographical units), the author remains reluctant to the creation of new species.

It is noteworthy that the only recording of N. excerpta by Levy (1995) from Tunisia is here considered as a misidentification, thus returning the species to its original identification, i.e. N. recepta . This is based on the direct comparison of the voucher that Levy examined (1 ♂ from Tunisia det. as N. recepta by Dalmas, MNHN Ar. 3183) and the type of N. recepta . Taking into consideration the difficulty in separating the two species, and the distribution range of N. recepta at the central part of the Mediterranean ( Algeria, Tunisia, Sicily, Malta), it could be argued that the record of the species from the Canary Islands, based on the synonymization of N. verneaui (Simon, 1889) to N. excerpta by Levy (1995) is also doubtful. Although specimens of N. verneaui were unavailable to the author, Dalmas’ illustration (1921, p. 282, Fig. 64) would better match N. recepta epigyne than N. excerpta . N. excerpta ’s distribution seems to be more safely restricted to the East Meditteranean area.