Pseudicius palaestinensis Strand , 1915

Dmitri V. Logunov, 2010, Taxonomic notes on a collection of jumping spiders from Iran (Araneae, Salticidae), Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society 15, pp. 85-90 : 88-89

Pseudicius palaestinensis Strand, 1915 ( Figs. 13–16)

Pseudicius picaceus palaestinensis Strand, 1915: 169 (Dd). Pseudicius palaestinensis: Prószyński, 2003: 152 , figs. 598, 601–602,

610–611 (D♀).

Comments: A poorly known species, recorded to date only from the Levant and Iran (Logunov et al., 2002; Prószyński, 2003); previously reported from Iran by Logunov et al. (2002).

This name was described by Strand (1915) as a subspecies of the south European–Mediterranean species Pseudicius picaceus (Simon, 1868) from Israel, and was recently elevated to the status of full species by Prószyński (2003: figs. 610, 611), who re-examined the d holotype. However, when diagnosing the male of P. palaestinensis, Prószyński (2003: 153) compared it with that of P. pseudocourtauldi Logunov, 1999 from Armenia (see Logunov, 1999), rather than with that of P. picaceus, the closest if not identical species of Pseudicius. Pseudicius pseudocourtauldi indeed belongs to the same species group, as does the more common P. courtauldi Bristowe, 1935 (see Logunov, 1993: figs. 4a– f), but it is easily distinguishable from P. palaestinensis by the much wider and stronger dorsal tibial apophysis and the much shorter ventral tibial apophysis (cf. Figs. 13–14 and Logunov, 1999: figs. 7–8); females of both species are very close and almost indistinguishable by the conformation of their copulatory organs.

A series of 2d and 2♀ of P. palaestinensis collected together from SW Iran allowed me to provide a di ff erential diagnosis of this species from P. picaceus, from which it di ff ers in having a slightly shorter ventral tibial apophysis, a notched dorsal tibial apophysis (arrowed in Fig. 14), a wider tegulum with a well-marked lateral bulge (arrowed in Fig. 13) and, particularly, the mutual arrangement of the insemination ducts and spermathecae (cf. Figs. 15–16 and Metzner, 1999: figs. 58d–e).

Thus, in my opinion, P. palaestinensis is distinct from the true P. picaceus. The distribution of both species, particularly in Asia Minor and the Near East, needs to be further clarified when more material becomes available. Pseudicius picaceus is quite common in Greece and Turkey (Metzner, 1999; Logunov, unpubl. data), whereas P. palaestinensis remains known only from a few localities in Israel and Iran (Logunov et al., 2002; Prószyński, 2003; present data). Incidentally, the male of P. courtauldi reported from the Greek islands and illustrated by Metzner (1999: figs. 56a–c) almost certainly belongs to P. palaestinensis. This matter requires further attention in the future.

Material: iran: 2d 2♀ ( BMNH), Khuzestan, Shush (Susa) (c. 32.20°N, 48.25°E), fallen tree on dry mound, 17 September 1958, coll.?