Bioacoustics of Holocnemus hispanicus

Redescription Male ( 10 km N of Málaga, CRB) MEASUREMENTS. Total length 3.9, carapace width 1.4. Distance PME–PME 105 µm; diameter PME 100 × 130 µm; distance PME–ALE 30 µm; diameter AME 80 µm; distance AME–AME 40 µm. Leg 1: 31.2 (9.0 + 0.6 + 8.1 + 11.4 + 2.1), tibia 2: 5.6, tibia 3: 4.2, tibia 4: 5.0; tibia 1 L/d: 54; femora 1–4 diameters: 0.21, 0.19, 0.17, 0.18. COLOR (in ethanol). Carapace ochre-yellow; ocular area, carapace pit and posterior median area slightly darker, with brown V-mark behind ocular area; sternum brown, with dark brown radial marks; legs ochre-yellow, without darker rings, with black lines on femora and tibiae; abdomen ochre-gray, with some dark marks dorsally and laterally; ventrally with distinct black median band, partly disrupted, with three parallel longitudinal marks behind gonopore. BODY. Habitus similar to H. caudatus (cf. Fig. 7 ) but abdomen less elongated above spinnerets (rather as in Crossopriza tiwi sp. nov. ; cf. Fig. 394 ). Ocular area slightly raised. Deep thoracic pit and pair of shallow furrows diverging from pit toward posterior margin (cf. Fig. 148 ). Clypeus unmodified but rim more sclerotized than in female. Sternum wider than long (1.00/0.70), unmodified, without indentations as in H. caudatus and H. reini . Abdomen slightly elongated, dorso-posteriorly angular. Gonopore with six epiandrous spigots ( Fig. 161 ); ALS with one widened spigot and one pointed spigot ( Fig. 159 ). CHELICERAE. As in Figs 142–143 , with pair of frontal lateral apophyses, each with one large modified cone-shaped hair ( Fig. 150 ); distance between tips of modified hairs: 310 µm; without proximal frontal protrusion; lateral stridulatory ridges distinct ( Fig. 149 ); distances between ridges proximally ~14 µm, distally ~6 µm. PALPS. As is Figs 129–131 ; coxa with rounded retrolateral hump; trochanter barely modified; femur curved towards dorsal, distally widened, with rounded ventral protrusion, proximally with prolateral stridulatory pick, without retrolateral transversal line, without retrolateral proximal process; femur-patella joints slightly shifted toward prolateral side; tibia very large compared to femur, tibia-tarsus joints shifted toward retrolateral side; tarsus without macrotrichia; palpal tarsal organ capsulate ( Fig. 155 ); procursus ( Figs 136–138 ) straight, few dorsal hairs slightly curved upwards; proximally on prolateral side with strong hump free of hairs, with brush of hairs distal of hump, procursus tip with strong ventral sclerite slightly spiraling and proximally wide and partly semitransparent, on prolateral side with semitransparent pointed process (arrow in Fig. 137 ); genital bulb ( Figs 139–141 ) with simple basal sclerite connected to distal (main) sclerite; distal sclerite large and mostly flat, with distinctive prolateral rounded process; sperm duct opening prolaterally (arrow in Fig. 154 ; not visible in dissecting microscope). LEGS. Femur 1 with single row of ~26 ventral spines; without curved hairs; few vertical hairs; retrolateral trichobothrium of tibia 1 at 3.5%; prolateral trichobothrium absent on tibia 1, present on other leg tibiae; tarsal pseudosegments indistinct except 2–3 distally. Male (variation) Tibia 1 in 134 males : 6.1–11.8 (mean 8.7). Most specimens with pair of brown marks behind carapace pit, close to median line. Abdomen often higher posteriorly than anteriorly; posterior elongation of abdomen variably long; abdomen usually with many whitish marks. Difference in diameter between femur 1 and other femora stronger in larger males (e.g., large male from Ronda with tibia 1 length of 10.2: femur 1 diameter 0.38; femora 2–4 diameters 0.29–0.31). Rarely with spines on femur 2 (only when leg 1 on corresponding side is missing). Distance between tips of modified hairs on cheliceral apophyses: ~285–375 µm. Female In general similar to male but without spines on legs, with stridulatory apparatus between carapace and abdomen consisting of pale processes posteriorly on carapace (distance ~0.66) and barely visible plates anteriorly on abdomen; with cheliceral stridulatory ridges similar to male but in much smaller file ( Fig. 151 ; distances between ridges ~12 µm). Tibia 1 in 212 females : 4.3–10.4 (mean 7.5). Epigynum as in Figs 132–134 , main epigynal plate bean-shaped, weakly protruding, with distinctive pair of furrows converging anteriorly (distance of closest/widest sections of furrows: ~240/440 µm), internal arc and pair of dark round structures usually visible in uncleared specimens; posterior epigynal plate large but simple, anterior median part usually lighter; pair of low but distinct elevations in front of epigynum. Internal genitalia ( Figs 144–145 ) with elongate pore plates converging anteriorly, dorsal arc relatively simple [ Wiehle’s (1933) “Receptaculum seminis” is just an elongated sclerotized fold along the dorsal arc], ventral arc medially widened and heavily sclerotized, with distinctive indentation posteriorly; apparently without median ventral pouch but with pair of small ventral processes. Natural history This species is common in wall niches, rock crevices, and under rocks, generally less exposed than H. pluchei ( Wiehle 1933 ; Benhadi-Marín et al. 2013 ). The webs have a diameter of approximately 35– 40 cm and a relatively regularly-woven inner dome. They are sometimes provided with small silk puffs, closer together than in webs of H. caudatus ( Wiehle 1933 ) . Males undergo six or seven molts before adulthood, females one more ( Wiehle 1933 ). In southern Spain (Granada), adult males do not seem to overwinter (only females and juveniles were present in May; Wiehle 1933 ). Wiehle (1933) gave a brief description of copulation, and Senglet (2001) observed a case where a male almost completely destroyed the female web after mating. Egg-sacs contained approximately 20– 25 eggs ; mean egg diameter was 682 µm ( Wiehle 1933 ). In two cases, Wiehle (1933) counted nine days from copulation to egg-laying, and 37 days from egg-laying to eclosion; females produced two egg-sacs per season; Senglet (1972) observed that H. hispanicus and Spermophorides petraea ( Senglet, 1972 ) seem to compete for the same microhabitat; in Barco de Ávila, he suspected that S. petraea had largely replaced H. hispanicus ; in Jerte, S. petraea seemed to prefer piles of rocks, while H. hispanicus occupied holes in rock walls.