On the identity of species of the huntsman spider genus Thelcticopis Karsch, 1884 (Araneae: Sparassidae: Sparianthinae) from India, Myanmar, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka Author Sankaran, Pradeep M. Division of Arachnology, Department of Zoology, Sacred Heart College, Thevara, Cochin, Kerala 682 013, India. Author Sherwood, Danniella Arachnology Research Association, 124 City Road, London, ECIV 2 NX, United Kingdom. & Fundación Ariguanabo, 4111, Calle 58, e / ave. 41 y ave. 43, San Antonio de los Baños, Provincia Artemisa c. p. 18100, Cuba. Author Jäger, Peter Arachnology, Senckenberg Research Institut, Mertonstrasse 17 - 21, 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. text Zootaxa 2024 2024-06-06 5463 3 301 338 http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5463.3.1 journal article 298429 10.11646/zootaxa.5463.3.1 5390ab23-704a-4644-8307-4bfc73751bcf 1175-5326 11611277 6E261F38-7196-4C87-AE81-E09996D055F4 Thelcticopis nalandica ( Karsch, 1892 ) comb. rest. Figs 13–14 , 27 Stasina nalandica Karsch, 1892: 293 , pl. 11, fig. 15 ( ♂ , imm.). Roewer 1955: 685 . Stasina nigropicta Pocock, 1899: 753 ( ♂ ). Thelcticopis nalandica (Karsch) : Pocock 1900: 270 (transfer from Stasina , synonymy of Stasina nigropicta , description of adult ♀ ). Type material. Syntypes of T. nalandica 1♂ , 1 immature ♀ , SRI LANKA : Central Province : between Matale [ca. 7°27’58.71”N , 80°37’20.49”E ; 364 m a.s.l] and Nalanda [ 7°39’59.33”N , 80°38’23.42”E ; 300 m a.s.l. ], P. & F. Sarasin leg., ST. XI, F. 15, 6 ( ZMB 31203–31204 ; examined). Holotype of Stasina nigropicta ♂ , SRI LANKA : Central Province : Pundaloya [ca. 7°0’42.95”N , 80°39’49.77”E ; 1072 m a.s.l. ], E.G. Green leg., ( NHMUK 9010.22 ; examined). FIGURES 12A–D. Thelcticopis moolampilliensis Sunil Jose & Sebastian, 2007 , genitalia of non-type male (A–B) and female (C–D) (ZSI/WGRC/I.R.INV.26579). A–B Left palp (A ventral, B retrolateral); C Epigyne, ventral; D Vulva, dorsal. Abbreviations: C—conductor; CD—copulatory duct; CO—copulatory opening; CS—cymbial scopula; E—embolus; FD— fertilisation duct; GA—glandular appendage; LL—lateral lobe of epigyne; RTA—retrolateral tibial apophysis; S—spermatheca; Sp—spermophor; T—tegulum; TA—tegular apophysis; UA—unpaired appendage; VDL—ventro-distal lobe of palpal tibia. Scale bars: A–B, 1 mm; C–D, 0.5 mm. Drawings by Pradeep Sankaran. Diagnosis. Males of T. nalandica comb. rest. are very similar to those of T. paripes comb. rest. in having a heavily enlarged embolus and conductor, the latter situated in the retrolateral half of tegulum, as well as the elongated dRTA with acuminate distad tip, but are distinguished by (1) RTA simple, i.e., without ventro-medial branch (vs. with such branch in T. paripes comb. rest. ), (2) dRTA with ventral outgrowth (vs. dRTA without such outgrowth in T. paripes comb. rest. ), (3) conductor tip long, i.e., extending distinctly into prolateral half of tegulum (vs. short, not extending in prolateral half of tegulum in T. paripes comb. rest. ) ( Figs 13A–B , 14A–B vs. Figs 15A–B ). Females of T. nalandica comb. rest. are similar to those of T. flavipes in having median septum with posterior part distinctly narrower than anterior part and being twice as long as wide, but distinguished by (1) lateral lobes medially distinctly concave (vs. not in T. flavipes ), and (2) internal duct system simple, i.e., running in a semicircle from anterior to posteriorly situated spermathecae (vs. with anteriad first winding and additional windings laterally before reaching spermathecae postero-laterally in T. flavipes ) ( Figs 14F–H vs. Pocock 1897 : pl. 26, fig. 26). Description. Male ( holotype ; Figs 13A–D ) [after Karsch 1892 ( T. nalandica ): body length 12.5; Pocock 1899 ( T. nigropicta ): body length 9.5, carapace 4–5; Pocock 1900 : leg I length 18.0]. Male ( Figs 13C–D , 14C– E ): opisthosoma dorsally and ventrally vividly spotted ( Fig. 14E ). Chelicerae with three promarginal and five retromarginal teeth, two distal of the latter separated by a small gap from others of the retromargin ( Figs 13D , 14D ). Anterior eye row straight, posterior eye row slightly procurved; AME largest, others of similar, smaller size ( Figs 13C , 14C ). Spination of legs: femur I–II 323, III 322, IV 321; patella I–IV 000; tibia I 222(15), II 222(14), III–IV 2226 . Palp ( Figs 13A–B , 14A–B ): cymbium with straight proximo-retrolateral margin. Tibia short, i.e., less than half the length of cymbium. RTA with one broad branch, slightly acuminate tip and ventrad outgrowth subdistally. Tegular apophysis situated medio-retrolaterally. Conductor complex, with acuminate, proximo-prolaterad tip. Embolus with narrow apical part visible centrally, with widened tip. Female ( Figs 14I–L [after Pocock 1900 : body length 13.5, carapace length 6.0, leg I length 18.5]. Opisthosoma dorsally and ventrally vividly spotted ( Fig. 14L ). Chelicerae with 3 promarginal and 5–6 retromarginal teeth, the latter with gap between the three proximal teeth and the rest ( Figs 14J–K ). Spination of legs: femur I–II 323, III 322, IV 321; patella I–IV 000; tibia I 000(16), II 000(14), III–IV 0006. Genitalia ( Figs 14F–H ): epigynal field slightly wider than long, without anterior bands ( Fig. 14F ). Lateral lobes kidney-shaped, without posterior projections ( Fig. 14F ). Median septum with anterior median ridge ( Fig. 14F ). Internal duct system with narrow copulatory ducts widening posteriorly, fertilisation ducts narrow, long and laterad ( Fig. 14G ). Distribution. Sri Lanka ( Fig. 27 ). Remarks. Internal tooth on RTA not observed in holotype male of S . nigropicta . The syntype female of T. nalandica comb. rest. is immature (in contrast to what was indicated by the World Spider Catalog 2024 ). Thus, Pocock (1900) provided the first description of the female for that species. The suggested record for Pakistan ( Punjab , Lahore, Dane Park; Dyal 1935: 213 ) is considered doubtful here. First of all, the two female specimens listed are immature. The other two Thelcticopis species described in the same paper are doubted to be even Sparassidae (see remarks under T. ancorum and T. telonotata ), thus it is assumed that Dyal (1935) did not use the concept of Thelcticopis as described by L. Koch (1875) . Moreover, the large gap of 2000 km between the nearest records for the genus in southern and eastern India and the rather dry environments in Lahore suggest that the otherwise tropically distributed subfamily Sparianthinae ( Jäger 2001 ) does not occur in Pakistan .