Metaphidippus felix (Peckham & Peckham, 1901)

Prószyński, Jerzy, 2017, Pragmatic classification of the World's Salticidae (Araneae), Ecologica Montenegrina 12, pp. 1-133 : 92-94

Metaphidippus felix versus Messua felix

Identification of Messua cf. felix was proposed by the late J. A. Beatty (whose "taxonomist eye" and extensive knowledge I learned to trust) for 3 males and 2 females from Honolulu, Hawaii, kept in the American Museum of Natural History: “ … males with enormously elongated, diverting chelicerae with a single, long retrolateral tooth". These were documented by drawings of Prószyński (2001 [2002]: 239, f. 71- 74). The placement was commented skeptically in the WSC "… provided no justification for transfer [from Metaphidippus ]" without even bothering to look at publication (compare Fig. 42K with entirely different one of Metaphidippus - Fig. 42L). Therefore :

Metaphidippus felix (Peckham & Peckham, 1901) = Messua felix (Peckham & Peckham, 1901)

(return to previous placement, documented by Prószyński (2001 [2002]: 239, f. 71-74 - Fig. 42K).

10 Personal archive of Dr. W.P. Maddison contains very important diagnostic drawings of undescribed forms of DENDRYPHANTINES, and some other Salticidae , unpublished to date, 84 of which he has very kindly permitted me to copy in 1986, unfortunately I have no permission to display them in the present database of Salticidae .

SOURCES: A -C, E, G-H, L-O, Q-T, V, Y - Maddison 1996 Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 154: 215-368; A - (female) Prószyński 1979: 305, f. 36; D - Galiano 1963b Physis 23 (66): 305-306, t 10; f. 6; Galiano 1987c Journal of Arachnology 15: 290, f. 18; F - (male) Maddison 1986: Psyche 93, 1-2: 141-145,f. 2-7, 14; I - Crane 1945 Zoologica 30 (1, 3): 38, f. 4A-G; J - Scioscia 1993 Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society 9 (4): 123, f. 7, 15; K - Prószyński 2002 Arthr. Sel. 10 (3): 239,f. 71-74; f. 77-78; P - Scioscia 1997. Physis , C. 1995 (1997) 53(124- 125): 44-46, f. 24, 29; U - Prószyński 1984 c Atlas ... Salticidae . Zeszyty Naukowe WSRP, Siedlce 119-121; W - Paquin, Duperre 2003. Fabreries, Suppl. 11: 203, f. 2276-2278; X - Żabka 1985 Annales Zoologici 39, 11: 456-457, f. 633, 644. All ©Copyrights are retained by the original authors and copyright holders, used here by their courtesy.

…figure on page 93

Group of genera EUODENINES Prószyński, 2016 Figures 43 A-N1, 44A-H1 Database contains 16 recognizable genera,139 species

Type genus Macaroeris Wunderlich, 1992 , of which type species is Macaroeris nidicolens (Walckenaer, 1802) .

Documentation studied. Survey of diagnostic drawings in Prószyński (2016a) and in original literature. Etymology. Informal name combined of parts of names of related groups EUO-phryines-DEN-dryphant- INES].

Mutual diagnostic characters of genera included. Diverse genera departing from average of EUOPHRYINES and DENDRYPHANTINES, pending further research. Some males have enormous single coil of embolus, often shifted to the lateral surface of bulbus (like in Bagheera - Fig. 43D), or have atypical spermophor, straight or gently waving ( Fig. 43H), or have otherwise incompatible palps (like in Synagelides or Agorius - Figs 43A, N). Palp of Macaroeris has typical meandering spermophor, but its epigyne ( Fig. 43L) fit rather DENDRYPHANTINES. Ducts and spermatheca of Gambaquezonia are most unusual ( Figs 43 I-I 1, 44E).

Description. Enclosed illustrations are integral part of description. More diagnostic documentation - see file http://www.peckhamia.com/salticidae/Euodenines.html.

Remarks. Group created to trim inconveniently excessive number of species of EUOPHRYINES and DENDRYPHANTINES, housing forms intermediate to, or departing from each of the mentioned groups. Pending further revisionary studies.