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OUT OF DATE CLASSIFICATORY SYSTEMS -Simon's classification - Petrunkevich synthesis-1928 - Bonnet's list of subfamilies - Prószynski's revision of subfamilies 1976.
Monograph of the Salticidae (Araneae) of the World 1995-2014
Introduction to classification of Salticidae
 an appendix

Manuscript 1 - On synonymy of the genus Omoedus Thorell, 1885
by Jerzy Prószyński
Version November 30th, 2014
This is correction of nomenclature of three genera of Salticidae. Illustrations used in this note are displayed
in other parts of the monograph, together with particulars of their sources and permissions

Introduction

The genera Omoedus and Pystira from New Guinea, Indonesia and Pacific Islands were described during XIX century on the basis of a few specimens, revised only once [Prószynski, 1971 – Omoedus] and [1984 – Pystira] – all diagnostic drawings, existing in the world literature, are reproduced below. Genus Zenodorus has more species and broader distribution, none the less is still very insufficiently known, the drawings of type species are also shown below. The diversity within these genera is not documented. Taxonomic operations on such poorly known genera require their preliminary revision or, at least, comparison with documentation of the type species, the mere quotations of names is meaningless. Mistake in description of a new genus, or a species, is relatively of lesser harm because will be easily discovered and corrected by next students, merging of genera, however, has grave consequences because remove them from further attention, derailing process of studying species diversity.
Zhang & Maddison [2012b] have broken taxonomic procedures by shifting species of Pystira and Zenodorus to Omoedus without comparison with previously known species, especially type species, without paying attention to earlier literature (it is even not obvious if they consulted the older descriptions). It is not understandable how could they overlook importance of striking differences in habitus of the three genera (Photos 1-3) and differences in epigyne, spermathecae and copulatory ducts between true Omoedus species (Figs 6, 8, 13-7) and their newly described 7 “Omoedus” species (being in fact misidentified Zenodorus) (Figs 18-23, 26-31). They have also misjudged taxonomic importance of palps (Figs 34-46), which are rather uniform within the subfamily and whose intra-generic variation of structures partially overlaps inter-generic diversity. Their main literature authority for the wholesale shifting of 34 species was apparently Catalogue by Platnick [2013] whose list of species they accepted as trustworthy document of classification (personal correspondence), but Catalogues are in fact assemblages of uncritical literature quotations. In a result of dismissing preliminary morphological revision, they lumped together unrelated genera, misleading future students of these genera. Zhang & Maddison [2012a, b, c, d.] described 107 new species of Euophryinae, as the taxonomic background to their main research interest – synthesis of molecular research on subfamily Euophryinae, which they have summarised in their main publication of 2013. That is, of course, highly commendable attitude. However, they did not pay sufficient attention to trivial morphological documentation. They argue in descriptions that “unpublished molecular results” support their taxonomic proposals. Published or not, application of new molecular methods seems to require preliminary calibration of these methods to problems of taxonomy: intra-specific and inter-specific variation, inter-generic diversity, also checking of correlations with other characters, including morphological ones. Selection of useful morphological diagnostic methods lasted in taxonomy of spiders some 300 years, many characters considered important appeared finally to lead nowhere. If we are to accept some molecular methods in taxonomy of Salticidae, they should be tested the same way as were morphological characters. The corrected descriptions of the three genera, together with diagnostic drawing documentation, are given below.

Genus Omoedus Thorell, 1881 was recently synonymized with genera Pystira Simon, 1885 and Zenodorus Peckham & Peckham, 1886 by Zhang & Maddison [2012d: 21-22]. The authors did not indicate specimens on whose examination that conclusion was drawn (actually on newly collected specimens, identified by them - personal communication from Maddison), nor produce supporting drawings of morphological characters. While their definition of the newly synonymized genus is rather vague and devoid diagnostic drawings, the only precise character: “…long and convoluted copulatory duct and the small and tubular spermatheca of the vulva…” in epigyne of females fit only one of the synonymized genera - Zenodorus, but excludes type species of Omoedus itself, that structure is unknown yet in the type species of the third genus - Pystira. Of the other hand, the male palps characters of these species fit many genera of Euophryinae, and are not restricted to the three above mentioned. There is some diversity of species in these genera (shown in Salticidae database by Prószyński 2013), but that is irrelevant to the problem of synonymy, which is based exclusively on type species. Main diagnostic characters of true type species of the three genera are shown on the diagram below (all drawings after Prószyński 2013a, Zenodorus durvillei originally from Davies Todd, Zabka 1989, by permission of the Queensland Museum):

Comparison of Omoedus sp. from Ceram (1); Pystira sp. from Singapore (2); Zenodorus durvillei from Australia (3). @Photo: 1 - D. Knowles; 2 - D. Court; 3 - R. Whyte. All by courtesy.

Comparison of main diagnostic characters of type species of the three genera.

The authors pass lightly over differences in body shape, proportions and color pattern in the three genera, however, these are important diagnostic characters on the background of the general diversity of New Guinean Salticidae. Zhang & Maddison transfer arbitrarily 28 species of Pystira and Zenodorus to the Omoedus, following their list in Platnick [2012], without paying attention to their taxonomic properties, presumably unknown to them, 16 of transferred species are unrecognizable, because have no drawings available. The authors claims that unpublished molecular research support synonymy of the three genera, however, interpretation of molecular data depends on correct identity of specimens used, and their specimens of Omoedus (that is congeneric with lectotype of Omoedus niger ) were apparently misidentified, because disagree with their own definition of the genus. Therefore synonymy of the three genera is considered void, and delimitation of species into genera is returned to the status quo ante.

Comparison of internal structures of epigyne in ALL known species of Omoedus and in representative series of species of Zenodorus (described by Zhang and Maddison 2012b as Omoedus) are shown below
>

The reference particulars of species of Omoedus areas follows.

Omoedus cordatus Berry, Beatty & Prószynski, 1996
O. c. Berry, Beatty & Prószynski, 1996: 242, f. 103-105.
Omoedus kulczynskii Prószynski, 1971
O. k. Prószynski, 1971b: 177, f. 43-44 .
Omoedus niger Thorell, 1881 Type species
O. n. Thorell, 1881: 669 (female). O. n. Prószynski, 1971b: 172, f. 28-33.
Omoedus piceus Simon, 1901
O. p. Simon, 1901a: 644, f. 762-764 (male). O. p. Simon, 1902d: 35 . O. p. Prószynski, 1971b: 173, f. 34-42.
Unnamed species: Omoedus sp. Davies & Zabka, 1989: 230, pl. 34.
Omoedus sp. Prószynski, 1971b: 173, f. 38-42.
Omoedus sp. Photo Knowles in Proszynski 2012.

Genus Pystira Simon, 1901 reinstated

Type species Hadrosoma ephippigera Simon, 1885.
“Type” specimen of the type species in the Simon collection (Simon did not designated type specimens), assumed lectotype and paralectotype, drawn by Prószynski, 1984: 117, f. unnumbered (male, female). Small, poorly known genus, consisting of four nominal species, three of which unrecognizable without revision. Type species has short, high carapace, tightly pressed to high and short abdomen, with anterior half bright yellow, posterior half black , that pattern is particularly well visible in the photograph reproduced in Prószynski [2012]. Internal structure of epigyne unknown.
Pystira ephippigera (Simon, 1885) (placement reinstated)
Hadrosoma ephippigerum Simon, 1885a: 36 (female). P. e.: Simon, 1901-1903: 656, f. 772. P. e.: Prószynski, 1984: 117, f. unnumbered (female). Omoedus ephippigerus: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Species irrecognizable, pending revision of type specimens.
Pystira cyanothorax (Thorell, 1881) (placement reinstated)
Attus c. Thorell, 1881: 509 (female). P. c.: Simon, 1901-1903: 653. Omoedus c.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Pystira karschi (Thorell, 1881) (placement reinstated)
Plexippus karschii Thorell, 1881: 637 (male, female). P. karschi: Simon, 1901-1903: 653. Omoedus k.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Pystira nigripalpis (Thorell, 1877) (placement reinstated)
Attus n. Thorell, 1877b: 620 (male, female). Pystira n.: Simon, 1901-1903: 653. Omoedus n.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Species dubius: Pystira versicolor Dyal, 1935: 226 (female)
Roewer 1954. 1107. Prószynski J. 1995-2013 [all versions]- on line. Platnick 2000-2013 [all versions] - online. Omoedus v.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).

Genus Zenodorus Peckham & Peckham, 1886

Type species Zenodorus durvillei Peckham & Peckham, 1886, Figs 150-154 (interpretation based on Davies & Zabka, 1989: 230, pl. 35).
Relatively better known genus from Australia, New Guinea and Pacific Islands. Consist of 18 species having diagnostic drawings, including seven recently described as Omoedus by Zhang & Maddison [2012: 24-27, f 112-124]. There are additional 11 species unrecognizable without revision. They have generalized salticid body shape, with dark abdomen, usually with some white bars. Internal structures of epigyne include characteristic mass of coils of long copulatory ducts, passing into small, oval spermatheca. Male palps of generalized Euophryinae shape, not permitting to recognize species.

Comparison of palps in representative series of species of Zenodorus (described by Zhang and Maddison 2012b as Omoedus)are shown below

The reference particulars of species of Zenodorus are as follows.

Zenodorus albertisi (Thorell, 1881) (placement reinstated)
Attus albertisii Thorell, 1881: 517 (male, female). Margaromma a:. Simon, 1901-1903: 654. Margaromma a:. Prószyn'ski, 1984: 80, f. unnumbered (female). Z. a.: Zabka, 1991: 57. Omoedus a.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
 Zenodorus arcipluvii (Peckhams, 1901) (placement reinstated)
Jotus arci-pluvii Peckham & Peckham, 1901: 333, pl. 25, f. 16, pl. 26, f. 5 (male). Z. arcuspluvius: Zabka, 1991: 57. Omoedus a.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus bernsteini (Thorell, 1881) (placement reinstated)
Plexippus bernsteinii Thorell, 1881: 619. Sandalodes b.: Simon, 1903a: 700. Sandalodes b.: Chrysanthus, 1968, 111: 59, f. 46-50. Sandalodes b.: Prószynski, 1976, 152, f 167-168 Zenodorus b.: Prószynski, 2012: online. Omoedus b.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus brevis (Zhang & Maddison, 2012) comb. n.
Omoedus brevis Zhang & Maddison 2012: 22, Figs f 96–100 (male) .
Zenodorus danae (Hogg, 1915) (placement reinstated)
Z. d. Hogg, 1915b: 513, f. 6 (male, female). Z. d. Prószynski, 1984: 151, f. unnumbered. Omoedus d.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus darleyorum (Zhang & Maddison, 2012) comb. n.
Omoedus d. Zhang & Maddison 2012: 22-24, Figs f 101–111 (male, female) .
Zenodorus durvillei (Walckenaer, 1837) (type species, placement reinstated)
Attus d'urvillii Walckenaer, 1837: 459 (male). Ephippus d.: Keyserling, 1883: 1422, pl. 120, f. 4-5 (male, female). Z. d. : Peckham & Peckham, 1901a: 299, pl. 25, f. 1. Z. urvillei: Simon, 1901-1903: 656, f. 771 (male). Z. d.: Chrysanthus, 1968: 63, f. 66-69 (male, female). Z. urvillei: Prószynski, 1984: 151, f. unnumbered (male, female). Z. d.: Davies & Zabka, 1989: 230, pl. 35 (male, female). Omoedus d.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus lepidus (Guérin, 1834) (placement reinstated)
Salticus l. Guérin, 1834: 8, pl. 7 (female). Z. l. : Simon, 1901-1903: 649, f. 768-770 (male). Z. l. : Prószynski, 1984: 150, f. unnumbered (male, female). Omoedus l.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus metallescens (Koch L., 1879) (placement reinstated)
Philaeus m. L. Koch, 1879: 1080, pl. 94, f. 7-8 (male, female). Mollika m:. Simon, 1901-1903: 657, f. 775. Mollika m.: Roewer, 1938: 85, f. 63-64 (male, female). Mollika m.: Prószynski, 1984: 82-83, f. unnumbered (male, female). Z. m.: Davies & Zabka, 1989: 230, pl. 36 (male, female). Omoedus m.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus meyeri (Zhang & Maddison, 2012) comb. n.
.Omoedus m. Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 24-27, f. 112–124 (male, female).
Zenodorus microphthalmus (L. Koch, 1881) (placement reinstated)
Jotus m.: L. Koch, 1881: 1246, pl. 107, f. 2-3 (male, female). Z. m.: Berry, Beatty & Prószynski, 1996: 248, f. 123, 125, 128-129 (male, female). Omoedus m.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus obscurofemoratus (Keyserling, 1883) (placement reinstated)
Euophrys o. Keyserling, 1883: 1430, pl. 121, f. 2 (female). Pystira o.: Simon, 1901-1903: 653. Z. o.: Davies & Zabka, 1989: 230. Omoedus o.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus omundseni (Zhang & Maddison, 2012) comb. n.
Omoedus o. Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 28-30, Figs f 125–135 (male, female).
Zenodorus orbiculatus (Keyserling, 1881) (placement reinstated)
Hasarius o. Keyserling, 1881: 1285, pl. 110, f. 1-2 (male, female). Pystira o.: Simon, 1901-1903: 656. Pystira o.: Prószynski, 1984: 117, f. unnumbered (female). Z. o. Davies & Zabka, 1989: 230, pl. 37. Omoedus o.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus ponapensis Berry, Beatty & Prószynski, 1996 (placement reinstated)
Z. p. Berry, Beatty & Prószynski, 1996: 250, f. 121-122, 124, 126-127 (male, female). Omoedus p.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus papuanus (Zhang & Maddison, 2012) comb. n.
Omoedus p. Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 30-32, Figs f 136–146 (male, female) .
Zenodorus swiftorum (Zhang & Maddison, 2012) comb. n.
Omoedus s. Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 32-34, Figs 147–158 (male, female).
Zenodorus tortuosus (Zhang & Maddison, 2012) comb. n.
Omoedus t. Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 35-36, Figs 159–169 (male, female)

Species irrecognizable, pending revision

Zenodorus formosus Rainbow, 1899 (placement reinstated)
Jotus f. Rainbow 1899: 319, illustrations t 25, f 9. Mollika formosa: Simon, 1901-1903: 654. Zenodorus f.: Platnick, 2012: online. Omoedus f.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012b: 3491: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus jucundus (Rainbow, 1912) (placement reinstated)
Mollika jucunda Rainbow 1912b: 207, Fig. 3. Zenodorus j.: Platnick 2012: online. Omoedus j.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus juliae Thorell, 1881 (placement reinstated)
Ephippus j. Thorell, 1881: 650, 710. Zenodorus f.: Platnick, 2012: online. Omoedus j.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus marginatus Simon, 1902 (placement reinstated)
Margaromma marginatum Simon, 1902d: 35 (male). Z. m. Zabka, 1991c: 58. Z. m.: Platnick 2012: online. Omoedus m.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus niger Karsch, 1878 (placement reinstated)
Attus n. Karsch, 1878: 23 (female). Z. m. Zabka, 1991c: 58. Omoedus n.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus pupulus (Thorell, 1881) (placement reinstated)
Plexippus p. Thorell, 1881: 622 (female). Z. p.: Zabka, 1991: 58. Omoedus p.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus pusillus Strand, 1913 (placement reinstated)
Mollika pusilla Strand, 1913d: 123 (female). Mollika pusilla Strand, 1915d: 263, pl. 14, f. 29, pl. 19, f. 103 (male, female). Mollicia pusilla Marples, 1964: 406, f. 6 (male). Zenodorus m.: Platnick 2012: online. Omoedus pusillus: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus rhodopae Hogg, 1915 (placement reinstated)
Z. r.: Hogg, 1915b: 517, f. 7 (male, female). Omoedus rhodopae: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus syrinx Hogg, 1915 (placement reinstated)
Z. s.: Hogg, 1915b: 519, f. 8 (male, female). Omoedus s.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus variatus Pocock, 1899 (placement reinstated)
Z. v. Pocock, 1899: 117 (male). Omoedus v.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus varicans Thorell, 1881 (placement reinstated)
Attus v. Thorell, 1881: 514 (male). Hasarius v.: Rainbow, 1911: 303. Z. v.: Zabka, 1991: 59. Omoedus v.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).
Zenodorus wangillus Strand, 1911 (placement reinstated)
Z. w. Strand, 1911: 184, pl. 4, f. 19 (female). Omoedus w.: Zhang & Maddison, 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).

New generic transfer

Ascyltus asper (Karsch, 1878) comb. n.
Attus a. Karsch, 1878: 24 (female). Euryattus senex Simon, 1885b: 90 (male). Euryattus senex Simon, 1901-1903: 812, f. 960-961 (male). Zenodorus a.: Zabka, 1988: 476, f. 151-157 (male) Omoedus a.: Zhang & Maddison 2012: 21-22 (erroneous generic placement).

References

Chrysanthus P. 1968. Spiders from South New Guinea. X.// Tijdschrift voor Entomologie. Vol. 111. P. 49-74.
Guérin-Meneville F.E. 1834. Description de Salticus lepidus// Magasin de zoologie, de Guérin-Méneville, Paris. Vol. 4, No. 8. Pl. 7.
Davies Todd V., Zabka M. 1989.Illustrated keys to the genera of jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) in Australia// Memoirs of the Queensland Museum. Vol. 27. No. 2. P. 189-266.
Dyal S. 1935. Fauna of Lahore. 4 : Spiders of Lahore// Bulletin of the Department of Zoology, Panjab University. Lahore. Vol. 1. P. 117-252.
Hogg H. R. 1915. On spiders of the family Salticidae collected by the British Ornitologists' Union Expedition and the Wollaston Expedition in Dutch New Guinea// Proceedings of the zoological Society of London, London. 1915. P. 501-528.
Karsch F. 1878. Diagnoses Attoidarum aliquat novarum Novae Hollandiae collectionis Musei Zoologici Berolinensi// Mitteilungen des münchener entomologischen Vereins. München. Vol. 2. P. 22-32.
Koch L. 1879. Die Arachniden Australiens // P. 1045-1271.
Koch L. 1881. Die Arachniden Australiens// P. 1045-1271.
Marples B.J. 1964. Spiders from some Pacific islands, part V // Pacific Science. Honolulu. Vol. 18. P. 399-410.
Peckham G.W., Peckham E.G. 1901. Spiders of the Phidippus Group of the Family Attidae// Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters. Madison. Vol. 13. P. 282-358.
Platnick N.I. 2013. The World Spider Catalog, ver. 1-13.5. Online. http://research.amnh.org/iz/spiders/catalog/SALTICIDAE.html.
Pocock R.I. 1899. Scorpions, Pedipalpi and spiders collected by Dr Willey in New Britain, the Solomon Islands, etc. In: In Willey (ed.), Zoological results based on material from New Britain, New Guinea, Loyalty Islands and elsewhere. Vol. 1. P. 95-120.
Prószynski J. 2013. Monograph of Salticidae (Araneae) of the World // Internet, version 2013. http://www.peckhamia.com/salticidae/, [version summing up previous versions since 1995].
Rainbow W. J. 1899. Contribution to a Knowledge of the Araneidan Fauna of Santa Cruz// Vol. 24. P. 304-321.
Rainbow W. J. 1911. A census of Australian Araneidae// Records of the Australian Museum. Sydney Vol. 9. P. 107-319.
Rainbow W. J. 1912. Some Araneidae from the Roper River, Northern Territory// Memoirs of the Queensland Museum. Vol. 1. P. 203-209.
Roewer C.F. 1938. Araneae// In: Resultats scientifiques du Voyage aux indes neerlandaises de la SS. AA. RR. le Prince et la Princesse Leopold de Belgique. Mémoires du Musée royal d'histoire naturelle de Belgique, (Hors Serie). Bruxelles. Vol. 3. No. 19. P. 1-94.
Simon E. 1885a. Arachnides recueillis par M. Weyers a Sumatra. Premier envoi// Annales de la Société entomologique de Belgique, Compte Rendus. Bruxelles. Vol. 29. P. 30-39.
Simon E. 1885b.Materiaux pour servir a la faune arachnologique de la Nouvelle Caledonie// Annales de la Société entomologique de Belgique, Compte Rendus. Bruxelles. Vol. 29. P. 87-92.
Strand E. 1911. Araneae von den Aru- und Kei-Inseln// Abhandlungen senckenbergischen naturforschenden Gesselschaft, Frankfurt/M. Vol. 34. P. 127-199.
Strand E. 1913. Neue indoaustralische und polynesische Spinnen des senckenbergischen Museums// Archiv für Naturgeschichte. Berlin. Vol. 79 A. No. 6. P. 113-123.
Strand E. 1915. Indoaustralische, papuanische und polynesische Spinnen des senckenbergischen Museums, gesammelt von Dr E. Wolf, Dr J. Elbert u. a.// In: Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Hanseatischen Sudsee-Expedition 1909. Abhandlungen senckenbergischen naturforschenden Gesselschaft. Frankfurt/M. Vol. 36. No. 2. P. 181-274.
Thorell T. 1877. Studi sui Ragni Malesi e Papuani. I. Ragni di Selebes raccolti nel 1874 dal Dott. O. Beccari// Annali del Museo civico di Storia naturale. Genova. Vol. 10. P. 341-634.
Zhang J., Maddison W.P. 2012. New euophryine jumping spiders from Papua New Guinea (Araneae: Salticidae: Euophryinae)// Zootaxa. No. 3581: P. 53-80.
Zabka M. 1991. Studium taksonomiczno-zoogeograficzne nad Salticidae (Arachnida: Araneae) Australii// Rozprawa Naukowa Wyzszej Szkoly Rolniczo Pedagogicznej, Siedlce. Vol. 32. P. 1-110.