RETURN TO DATABASE - ALTERNATIVE CLASSIFICATION
SALTICIDAE OF THE WORLD - Abstract - INDEX of Genera - FOREWORD & KEY to groups of genera! - AEURILLINES - Comparison HISTORICAL classification of Aelurilleae - AMYCINES- AMYCOIDA VARIA - ASTIAINES - BELIPPINES - CHRYSILLINES - COCALODINES - COLONINES [=Thiodinines] - DENDRYPHANTINES - DIOLENINES - EUOPHRYINES-PART 1 Introduction-Donoessus- EUOPHRYINES-PART 2 Echeclus-Pystira - EUOPHRYINES- PART 3 Rhyphelia-Zenodorus - EUPOAINES - EVARCHINES - FOSSILS - HABRONATTINES - HARMOCHIRINES - HELIOPHANINES - HISPONINES - HYLLINES - ICIINES - LAPSIINES - LIGONIPEINES - LYSSOMANINES - MENEMERINES - MYRMARACHNINES - NOTICIINES - PELLENINES - PSEUDICIINES - SIMAETHINES - SITTICINES - SPARTAEINES - THIRATOSCIRTINAE - YAGINUMAELLINES - YLLENINES - UNCLASSIFIED TEMPORARY - Maddison's views on Salticidae phylogeny 2014 - Omoedus synonymy
OUT OF DATE CLASSIFICATORY SYSTEMS -Simon's classification - Petrunkevich synthesis-1928 - Bonnet's list of subfamilies - Prˇszynski's revision of subfamilies 1976.

Monograph of the Salticidae (Araneae) of the World 1995-2015. Introduction to alternative classification of Salticidae
Classification of the Salticidae genera of the World
group of genera
SITTICINES
by Jerzy Prószyński

Version December 31st, 2015
Note on illustrations. This introduction to classification of Salticidae includes only species defined by diagnostic illustrations in the taxonomic literature, arranged by similarities of embolus and spermophor. Images are displayed as thumbnails to save space and allow for rapid scanning of theoretically closely-related species. Thumbnails are small versions of illustrations in other parts of the monograph, whera are displayed together with particulars of their sources and permissions.

Gen. Sitticus Simon, 1901 ( 71 species)

Type species Sitticus terebratus.
DIAGNOSIS. Conform to definition of SITTICINES: "Palaearctic branch of the New World of supergroup AMYCOIDA. It is the only group in Palaearctics having multi cusp [saw-like] tooth on anterolateral edge of chelicerae, while retrolateral [posterior] edge is not developed and devoid of teeth. The central "S" shaped loop of spermophor is very prominent and regular, next follows the margin of bulbus, before narrowing and entering embolus. Embolus originate postero-laterally from bulbus, tapering next and continuing hair thin, parallel to bulbus or encircling it entirely, that character is somewhat different in Sittipub. Copulatory ducts short, but in Sitticus floricola group long, twisted into loop. Spermathecae strongly sclerotized, originally elongate and "C" shaped, in some genera modified. Epigyne is different in Sittipub (see below), resembling some AMYCOIDA VARIA". Diagnostic drawings below are integral part of the definition.

Group of species Sitticus (floricola group) (13 species)

Representative species Sitticus floricola [= Euophrys floricola Koch C.L., 1837].
DIAGNOSIS. Conform to description of SITTICINES. Differs by modification of the original "C" shape of spermatheca, which has posterior ramus much bigger and elongated posterior wards, which deep changes of appearance. Copulatory ducts much elongated and form striking loop. External depression in epigyne occupies largest part of the plate. Coloration with prominent pair of white spots, round or irregular, there are some white lines on carapace. Owing to coloration, but also to less hidden behavior, belong to the best noticeable Sitticus species. Diagnostic drawings below are integral part of the definition.

+
Sitticus (floricola group) floricola : Proszynski J. 1980 Annales zoologici, 36: 10-13, f 3-4, 10-14, 20-21+ + Proszynski
1983. Verh. naturwiss. Verein Hamburg, (NF) 26; 161-179. © Photo J. Lissner. By courtesy.
+
Sitticus (floricola group) floricola palustris: Proszynski J. 1980 Annales zoologici, 36: 12-14, f 15-19, 22-43
+ Kaston B. J. 1948. 70: 458-458, t. 89, f 1660-1662. © Photo J. Lissner. By courtesy
[Uncertain status with S. floricola: conspecific? subspecific? separate species?].
+
Sitticus (floricola group) rupicola : Proszynski 1980 Ann. zool., 36: 14-18; f 5-6, 9, 44-57, 58-59 [local variation in epigyne?
different species?] + Logunov, Kronestedt 1997. Bull. British Arachn. Soc., 10 (7): 226, f 29. © Photo J. Lissner. By courtesy.
+ sp?+
Sitticus (floricola group) inexpectus : Logunov, Kronestedt 1997. Bull. Brit. Arachn. Soc. 10 (7): 226-232, f 1-49 + © Photo J. Lissner + A. Senglet. By courtesy
+
Sitticus (floricola group) caricis : Proszynski J. 1980 Annales zoologici, 36: 18-20, f 1-2, 7, 60-63. © Photo J. Lissner. By courtesy.
.
Sitticus (floricola group) caricis : Proszynski J. 1980 Annales zoologici, 36: 18-20, f 1-2, 7, 60-63. By courtesy.
+
Sitticus (flor. gr.) zimmermanni : Proszynski J. 1980 Ann. zool., 36: 10-13, f 3-4, 10-14, 20-21 + © Photo J. Lissner. By courtesy
+
+
Sitticus (floricola group) atricapillus, Proszynski J. 1980 Ann. zool., 36: 10-13, f 3-4, 10-14, 20-21 (synonyms) + Kronestedt, Logunov. 2003. Rev. suisse Zool. 110 (4): 855-837, f 1-22 (comparison). By courtesy[Differs by white ornaments, hair-splitting differences in palps and epigyne - rather subspecies of S. zimmermanni ?].
++
Sitticus (floricola group) cutleri : Proszynski J. 1980 Ann. zool., 36: 130, 32, f 94-95, 96-98 + Internet + Proszynski
1983. Verh. naturwiss. Verein Hamburg, (NF) 26; 161-179. By courtesy.
+
Sitticus(floricola group) dudkoi + monstrabilis : Logunov, 1998d. Zoosyst. Rossica, 7(1): 77-78, f 5-6. + Logunov 1992a. Arthr. Sel., 1 (1): 64, f 9a-e + Logunov, Kronestedt 1997. Bull. Brit. Arachn. Soc. 10 (7): 232, f 50-51 .
+
Sitticus (floricola group) magnus: Proszynski J. 1980 Ann. zool., 36: 21-23, f. 64-68 + Proszynski 1983. Verh. naturwiss. Verein Hamburg, (NF) 26; 161-179. By courtesy.
Sitticus(floricola group) pulchellus: Logunov 1992a. Arthr. Sel., 1 (1): 64, f 6a-b + Logunov, 1995a. Zoosyst. Rossica, 7(1): 3, 2: 244, f 22-24 (female sp-?). By courtesy.
a)
+b)
c)
Sitticus a) striatus +b)syn. rivalis+c) comment on syn. rivalis : a)Proszynski J. 1980 Ann. zool., , 36: 10-13, f 3-4, 10-14, 20-21
+ b) Logunov 2004a. Bull. British Arachn. Soc., 13 (2): 33-34, f 17-21 +c) comment on separating of S. striatus and rivalis - By courtesy. Comment. After studying Logunov's description and documentation again, I am unable to find convincing characters warranting separation of S. striatus and rivalis. J. Proszyński, 2015. Complaints of Logunov on too transparent part of epigyne mounted in Canada Balsam slide: as in other old slides mounted in the Canada Balsam, this slide require dissolution in Xylol or Toluol, rinsing of epigyne itself, perhaps restaining, and examionation as temporary slide. J.P.