1869,by monotypy.Not examined.
Landana Simon1884:185;type species
1884,by monotypy.Not examined.
1895,by original designation.Examined.NEW SYNONYMY
1895,by monotypy.Not examined.
Nicholasia Bryant&Archer1940:60;type species
Epeira pentagona Hentz
1850by monotypy.Not examined.
1955by monotypy.Not examined.
Update on type repositories listed by Levi(1981).The type of
is not catalogued in BMNH(J.Beccaloni,pers.comm.),the repository given by Levi(1981).Instead this type is likely to be in OUM where six O.P.-Cambridge specimens are catalogued under this name(J.Hogan,pers.comm.).In addition to the syntype of
in NHRM(T.Kronestedt,pers.comm.)(stated to be the holotype in Levi1981)there is a vial of syntype material in BMNH.Syntypes and paratypes of
are in BMNH(information not given by Levi).Types of both
species are in MNHNP.
Diagnosis.All currently recognised
have large anterior median eyes,which are prominent on a slight tubercle(Brescovit&Cunha2001),a distinctively shaped carapace,with sides often subparallel in the caput region and evenly rounded posteriorly(Levi1981),and in males,long to very long chelicerae with enlarged cheliceral teeth distally(Levi1981,Brescovit&Cunha2001).The male palpal patella is without macrosetae.The male palp has a ‘metine’
embolic apophysis(sensu Hormiga et al.1995),a prominent paracymbium and procurved cymbial basal process(secondary process of Hormiga et al.1995;Kuntner&Alvarez-Padilla2006).The abdomen of
s.str.bears two pairs of posterodorsal humps,but the abdominal shape may be otherwise in some
s.l.,including those described herein.Reflective tapeta are absent from all the secondary eyes of
s.str.(Levi1981;Tanikawa1991),but again may be present in other
make orb webs,which are always horizontal or slope less than45degrees to horizontal(Levi1981,F.Alvarez-Padilla pers.comm.).Levi(1981)reports that all the species he observed made similar webs,which were often“messy”
,between buttress roots at the base of large trees in relatively moist,dark forests;the collection data of some further specimens listed in the Appendix agree with this description.Whilst all specimens in this present study were collected in tropical forests,many were taken from foliage and by canopy fogging,a departure from the web position just above the ground suggested by all previous records.In all the collection data for the species treated here there is only one mention of a web:a report of
specimens being found in a horizontal sheet web between leaves.Regarding such web structure,Simon(1894:743)reported that the web of the
he observed in Ceylon(Sri Lanka)was a horizontal sheet,a claim which was discounted by Levi(1981).David Court(pers.comm.)reports that the webs of a
sp.he has observed in Singapore may look like a sheet when damaged;this interpretation,at least for Simon’s
specimens,seems likely as the specimens collected by Simon in Sri Lanka are in MNHNP,and are
s.str.(from photographs supplied by F.Alvarez-Padilla).The report of a sheet web in
therefore requires confirmation.
may include a line of debris and egg sacs in the web,or hanging nearby.Simon(1894)reported(in translation):"The
that I have observed from Ceylon lays its egg cocoons in a cylindrical truncated sleeve of thick sticky silk suspended from two divergent lines near its web."These sources are the only published references to
biology I have seen.