1,721,221 research outputs found
Linyphia bilobata Roy & al., 2015, is a junior synonym of Chrysso scintillans (Thorell, 1895) (Araneae: Linyphiidae, Theridiidae)
No full textBreitling, Rainer (2015): Linyphia bilobata ROY & al., 2015, is a junior synonym of Chrysso scintillans (THORELL, 1895) (Araneae: Linyphiidae, Theridiidae). Contributions to Natural History 30: 1-7, DOI: 10.5169/seals-78707
Alopecosa trabalis
No full textAlopecosa trabalis (Clerck, 1757) Araneus trabalis Clerck, 1757: 97, pl. 4, tab. 9. Aranea obscura Olivier, 1789: 218. Aranea vorax Walckenaer, 1802: 238. Aranea agilis Walckenaer, 1802: 238. Lycosa accentuata Latreille, 1817: 294 (n. syn.).Published as part of Breitling, Rainer & Bauer, Tobias, 2022, What, if anything, is Lycosa accentuata Latreille, 1817? - Review of a nomenclatural conundrum (Araneae: Lycosidae), pp. 197-207 in Zoosystema 44 (8) on page 201, DOI: 10.5252/zoosystema2022v44a8, http://zenodo.org/record/646768
FIG. 1 in What, if anything, is Lycosa accentuata Latreille, 1817? - Review of a nomenclatural conundrum (Araneae: Lycosidae)
No full textFIG. 1. — Schematic timeline of the different interpretations of Latreille's Lycosa accentuata Latreille, 1817. The names on the right are the most closely matching currently valid taxa, and the years refer to the major taxonomic publications detailed and discussed in Table 1. It is clear that the recent inversion of preceding usage, as proposed by Canard & Cruveillier (2019), contradicts all previous interpretations of the name. This figure should be read in conjunction with the detailed information in Table 1.Published as part of Breitling, Rainer & Bauer, Tobias, 2022, What, if anything, is Lycosa accentuata Latreille, 1817? - Review of a nomenclatural conundrum (Araneae: Lycosidae), pp. 197-207 in Zoosystema 44 (8) on page 199, DOI: 10.5252/zoosystema2022v44a8, http://zenodo.org/record/646768
Closing the gap: Identification of human 3-ketosteroid reductase, the last unknown enzyme of mammalian cholesterol biosynthesis
No full textThe protein encoded by the HSD17B7 gene was originally described as a prolactin receptor-associated protein and as 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (HSD) type 7. Its ability to synthesize 17β-estradiol in vitro has been reported previously. However, we demonstrate that HSD17B7 is the ortholog of the yeast 3-ketosteroid reductase Erg27p and converts zymosterone to zymosterol in vitro, using reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate as cofactor. Expression of human and murine HSD17B7 in an Erg27p-deficient yeast strain complements the 3-ketosteroid reductase deficiency of the cells and restores growth on sterol-deficient medium. A fusion of HSD17B7 with green fluorescent protein is located in the endoplasmic reticulum, the site of postsqualene cholesterogenesis. Further critical evidence for a role of HSD17B7 in cholesterol metabolism is provided by the observation that its murine ortholog is a member of the same highly distinct embryonic synexpression group as hydroxymethyl-glutaryl-coenzyme A reductase, the rate-limiting enzyme of sterol biogenesis, and is specifically expressed in tissues that are involved in the pathogenesis of congenital cholesterol-deficiency disorders. We conclude that HSD17B7 participates in postsqualene cholesterol biosynthesis, thus completing the molecular cloning of all genes of this central metabolic pathway. In its function as the 3-ketosteroid reductase of cholesterol biosynthesis, HSD17B7 is a novel candidate for inborn errors of cholesterol metabolism
Linyphia bilobata ROY, SEN, SAHA & RAYCHAUDHURI 2015
No full textThe identity of Linyphia bilobata The description of Linyphia bilobata by Roy & al., based on 8 female specimens, is very detailed and accompanied by excellent illustrations, including habitus drawings, details of the chelicerae, maxillae, labium and sternum, the epigyne and internal genitalia, as well as a colour photograph of the holotype female. Together, this information allows a clear identification of L. bilobata as being identical to Chrysso scintillans (THORELL, 1895) (syn. nov.). C. scintillans is a theridiid species that is widespread and common throughout Southeast Asia, with published records from Japan, China, Korea, and the Philippines (Amalin & Barrion 1990, Namkung 2002, Song & al. 1999, Yoshida 2009), in addition to the type locality in Tharawaddy, Myanmar, about 1,200 km southeast of the type locality of L. bilobata. Chrysso scintillans has been described repeatedly under various names (Physcoa scintillans THORELL, 1895; Argyria venusta YAGINUMA, 1957; and Chrysso bidens XING, GAO & ZHU, 1994). Its rather isolated position amongst Chrysso species led to its repeated assignment as the type species of a new genus (Physcoa THORELL, 1895 and Argyria YAGINUMA, 1957 = Argyroaster YAGINUMA, 1960). Numerous detailed descriptions and illustrations are available to support the identification of L. bilobata with this species (e.g., Levi 1962, Levi & Levi 1962, Namkung 2002, Shinkai 2006, Song & al. 1999, Xing & al. 1994, Yaginuma 1957, 1960, Yoshida 2001, 2003, 2009, Zhu 1998). A few selected details should suffice to illustrate the excellent agreement between the species described by Thorell (1895) and Roy & al. (2015). They also highlight the lasting quality of Thorell's eloquent descriptions. The ocular quadrangle is described by Roy & al. as "nearly square", corresponding to Thorell's slightly more detailed "Area oculorum mediorum paullulo (parum) latior antice quam postice, et aeque longa ac lata antice" ("area of the middle eyes very slightly (hardly) broader in the front than in the back, and as long as broad in the front"). This description matches the figure in Roy & al. exactly. The anterior eye row is described as "strongly recurved… as viewed dorsally", which could be considered a literal translation of Thorell's "series oculorum antica desuper visa fortiter recurva est." The maxillae of L. bilobata are "nearly twice as long as wide", which Thorell describes as "saltem dimidio sed non duplo longiores quam latiores" ("at least by half, but not twice longer than wide"); the labium is "wider than long" (Thorell: "paullo latius quam longius", "a bit broader than long"). The cephalothorax is "yellow brown" (Thorell: "luteo-testacea"). The legs are of the same colour, but are "banded". Thorell's detailed description of this banding matches the photograph of the holotype in all details. The picture shows dark reddish-brown bands at the end of the femora, and black rings at the ends of the tibiae, metatarsi of legs I, II, and IV, as well as red brown rings in middle of femora I, II, IV, and tibia I. Thorell describes this as "in reliquis pedibus (3ii exceptis) femora, tibiae et metatarsis apice sat late nigra sunt" ("in the other legs, except the third, the femora, tibiae and metatarsi are broadly black at their tips") and "femora praetera (ut tibiae 1i paris) annulo nigro versus basin cincta" ("moreover, the femora, as well as the tibiae I, are banded with a black ring towards the base"). The legs are further described as "clothed with pale brown moderate hairs", while Thorell more precisely refers to "pili pallide testacei, excepto in annulo nigro apicali tibiarum saltem 4i paris, ubi nigra sunt" ("pale brown hairs, except in the black apical bands of the tibiae, especially of leg IV, where they are black"); a detail that is clearly visible in the photo of the holotype of L. bilobata. Table 1 shows the detailed agreement in the relative length of the legs in the female type material of Physcoa scintillans, Linyphia bilobata, Chrysso bidens and Argyria venusta. The same consistency is also found in the relative lengths of the individual leg segments (not shown, as they are not reported in the original description by Thorell). In all cases, the observed differences are well within the range of measurement uncertainty and inter-individual variation. The shape of the opisthosoma is "sub pentagonal" in L. bilobata, while "desuper visum breviter pentagono-ovatum fere est abdomen" ("viewed from above the abdomen is quite shortly pentagonal-oval") in C. scintillans. The colour pattern of the "off white" abdomen "widest at the middle, each end marked by a black hump, tip black, blunt and round" is again described in some more detail by Thorell (1895), who refers to "macula magna humerali nigra vel maculis ejusmodi binis utrinque" ("a large black shoulder spot or two such spots on each side") with "apice coni apicalis nigro" ("black tip of the apical cone"). The illustrations by Roy & al. again match Thorell's description in all details. In L. bilobata, the "epigynal plate [is] marked by 2 transverse nearly parallel lines"; these lines are clearly visible, e.g., in the illustration in Levi (1962), while Thorell states that "vulva ex sulco transverso lato et forti constat, … et ita foveas duas transversas plus minus discretas format": "the epigyne consists of a strong and broad transverse groove, and in this way forms two more or less distinct transverse lines". Thorell did not examine the internal genitalia of Chrysso scintillans, but the bilobed spermathecae after which L. bilobata has been named are also a distinct feature of the former. Illustrations are provided, e.g., in Xing & al. (1994) and Yoshida (2001) and also show the short fertilization duct mentioned by Roy & al. Other Indian species of Linyphia The misidentification of Linyphia bilobata can most likely be traced back to the work of Tikader, who described three species of Linyphia from India in 1970 and 1977. One of these, Linyphia urbasae TIKADER, 1970, was first reported from Sikkim, India, but is widespread and rather common in Southeast Asia, as evidenced by numerous photos of this distinctively coloured species from India, Malaysia, Singapore and Taiwan, which can be found on the internet. The species is certainly a theridiid, as can be seen from the schematic illustration of the epigyne in the original description, but most importantly from its habitus, which indeed closely resembles that of Chrysso scintillans. As documented repeatedly on the internet, the species also shows the maternal care behaviour reported for other species of theridiids, including members of Chrysso (Miller & Agnarsson 2005, Shinkai 2006). While the exact generic affiliation within Theridiidae remains doubtful without studying authentic material of L. urbasae, the available evidence supports a provisional transfer to the genus Chrysso, as Chrysso urbasae (TIKADER, 1970), comb. nov. The genus Chrysso, as currently used, is certainly a heterogeneous polyphyletic assemblage (Deeleman-Reinhold 2009), and a confident placement of C. urbasae will require a careful revision of the entire group. In the same publication, which is well-known for its dubious generic assignments (Brignoli 1976), Tikader described a second species of Linyphia, L. sikkimensis TIKADER, 1970, which he considers to be highly similar to C. urbasae. This species also seems to be rather common (the type series included 13 female and 3 male specimens). The illustrations of the male and female genitalia certainly exclude any affinity with Linyphia, but the correct placement is difficult to determine. Considering the close similarity to C. urbasae mentioned in the original description, it would seem reasonable to very tentatively transfer the species to Chrysso, as Chrysso sikkimensis (TIKADER, 1970), comb. nov., with the strong caveat that even the family affiliation is not quite clear in this case. The heterogeneity of Tikader's concept of Linyphia is illustrated by his third Indian species placed in this genus, Linyphia nicobarensis TIKADER, 1977. In this case, the description and illustrations leave no doubt that this species is very closely allied and probably even identical to the common Tylorida striata (THORELL, 1877), a member of Tetragnathidae. This species was also described by Tikader as being similar to L. urbasae, but size, shape, colour and markings all exactly match T. striata, which was already reported from the Nicobar Islands by Thorell (1891), from a location no more than 30 km from the type locality of L. nicobarensis. The illustration of the epigyne is, however, difficult to match to the epigyne of T. striata. While this may be due to the highly schematic nature of the drawing, it justifies provisional treatment of L. nicobarensis as a distinct species, Tylorida nicobarensis (TIKADER, 1977), comb. nov. Two further species of Linyphia were described from British India by O. Pickard-Cambridge (1885). Linyphia perampla from the Sind Valley, India, was described as "very nearly allied to Linyphia collina, L. KOCH " (= Megalepthyphantes collinus (L. KOCH, 1872)); Linyphia straminea from Murree, Pakistan, was considered as "in its form and general structure… very like Linyphia ericaea, BL. " (= Palliduphantes ericaeus (BLACKWALL, 1853)). In both cases, there is no indication of a close relationship with Linyphia in the modern sense. The two species are therefore provisionally transferred to the genus Lepthyphantes sensu lato, as Lepthyphantes stramineus (O. PICKARD-CAMBRIDGE, 1885), comb. nov., and Lepthyphantes peramplus (O. PICKARD-CAMBRIDGE, 1885), comb. nov. " Linyphia striata ", a species described by Sebastian & al. (2009) without valid assignment of a holotype, has recently been identified as probably being identical to Theridion zonulatum THORELL, 1890 (Ehrler & al. 2014). In conclusion, the genus Linyphia, as defined by van Helsdingen (1969), seems to be absent from the Indian subcontinent.Published as part of Breitling, Rainer, 2015, Linyphia bilobata ROY & al., 2015, is a junior synonym of Chrysso scintillans (THORELL, 1895) (Araneae: Linyphiidae, Theridiidae), pp. 1-7 in Contributions to Natural History 30 on pages 2-5, DOI: 10.5169/seals-787078, http://zenodo.org/record/628391
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Greased hedgehogs: new links between hedgehog signaling and cholesterol metabolism
No full textThe close link between signaling by the developmental regulators of the Hedgehog family and cholesterol biochemistry has been known for some time. The morphogen is covalently attached to cholesterol in a peculiar autocatalytic reaction and embryonal disruption of cholesterol synthesis leads to malformations that mimic Hh signaling defects. Recently, it was furthermore shown that secreted Hh could hitchhike on lipoprotein particles to establish its morphogenic gradient in the developing embryo. Additionally, there is new evidence that the Hh-receptor Patched transmits the Hh signal by modulating the secretion of an inhibitory sterol molecule from the receiving cells. Here we present some of the most recent discoveries on the Hh–sterol link and discuss their implications from a systems design perspective. We predict that a robust functioning of the Hh pathway will require the involvement of more sterol metabolites, and these should be the subject of future research.
Lycosa accentuata Latreille 1817
No full textNEOTYPE DESIGNATION FOR LYCOSA ACCENTUATA LATREILLE, 1817 TYPE MATERIAL LOST. — Locus typicus: “environs de Paris” NEOTYPE. — France • 1 ♀; Ermitage de Franchard, forêt de Fontainebleau, 48°24’28”N, 2°37’44”E; 27.V.2018; C. Jacquet leg.; MNHN-AR-AR16223. DESCRIPTION OF FEMALE NEOTYPE (Fig. 2) Prosoma brown, with a complete, wide and yellowish median stripe ending between the PME. Laterally with yellowish and slightly serrated stripes completely covering the margins of the prosoma. Chelicerae dark brown. Proximal part of maxillae brownish, distal part more yellowish brown. Labium brown, distal margin yellowish. Sternum light brown, with a longitudinal median stripe of yellow colour, broadened at the centre. Opisthosoma dorsal greyish brown, cardiac mark slightly darker and more greyish, with thin yellowish frame. Spinnerets dark brown, distinctly darker than ventral side. Coxae in ventral view light yellowish.Legs brownish. Prosoma length 5.4 mm, width 3.9 mm, Opisthosoma length 6.0 mm, anterior eye row 0.91 mm, median eye row 1.07 mm, posterior eye row 1.33 mm, diameter of AME 0.13 mm, PME 0.34 mm, ALE 0.12 mm, PLE 0.3 mm. Distance between PLE-PLE 0.99 mm, PME-PME 0.4 mm, ALE-ALE 0.64 mm, ALEAME 0.12 mm, AME-AME 0.18 mm, ALE-PME 0.22 mm. For measurements of legs, see Table 3. REMARK Geographical distribution, habitat, size, colouration and phenology of Alopecosa trabalis agree with the description of Lycosa accentuata provided by Latreille (1817). No other lycosid species is a similarly plausible match to the original description. The selected neotype thus meets the requirements of ICZN Article 75.3.5. The restricted locus typicus in the forêt de Fontainebleau is within the “environs de Paris”, as confirmed by contemporary travel guides (e.g. Dulaure 1827; Anonymous 1855). Thus, the requirements of ICZN Article 75.3.6 are met as well. The neotype designation stabilises the interpretation of Lycosa accentuata, and in consequence the nomenclature of the sibling species pair Alopecosa barbipes / A. farinosa. PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES OF (MIS)APPLYING LYCOSA ACCENTUATA LATREILLE, 1817, TO THE ATLANTIC SIBLING SPECIES, INVERTING PREVIOUS ESTABLISHED USAGE While mere preferences based on the traditional use of names should not be used to justify violations of the code of nomenclature, which ultimately can only result in increased instability and confusion, it is important to take prevailing usage into account when making reasonable judgement calls in doubtful cases. In the present case, it is relevant to point out that Alopecosa farinosa and A. barbipes are frequently caught in pitfall traps and are an important part of epigeal spider communities inhabiting dry open habitats across their range; as a result they figure widely in ecological and faunistic studies. Following Dahlem et al. (1987) and Cordes & von Helversen (1990), and until the publication by Breitling et al. (2016), the names A. accentuata and A. barbipes were almost uniformly applied to the Eastern/Continental and Western/ Atlantic form of the sibling pair, respectively, throughout the ecological and faunistic literature (e.g. Entling et al. 2007; Schmitt 2008; Buchholz & Kreuels 2009; Buchar & Dolanský 2011; Cruveillier 2012). The same was the case for authoritative country checklists (e.g. Merrett & Millidge 1992; Alderweireldt & Maelfait 1993; van Helsdingen 1996; Le Peru 2007; Blick et al. 2016), all of which specifically refer to the recent splitting of the sibling species pair. Other checklists do also list both species (A. accentuata and A. barbipes), but the lack of a critical discussion leaves it open whether this is intentional, or a result of the historical ambiguity of usage (e.g. Blagoev 2002; Canard 2005; Cardoso & Morano 2010). Moreover, various scientific articles on cryptic species and behavioural isolation in wolf spiders also use the nomenclature of Dahlem et al. (1987), e.g. Töpfer-Hofmann et al. (2000), Vink & Mitchell (2002), Framenau & Hebets (2007). This follows the standard practice in the arachnological literature of applying the nomenclature adopted in the World Spider Catalog, first edited by Norman Platnick and now hosted by the University of Bern, Switzerland. The availability of these online catalogues as an internationally accepted point of reference has contributed immensely to stabilizing spider nomenclature. The catalogue adopted the nomenclature of Dahlem et al. from 2001 onwards (version 2.0, the first version covering the Lycosidae), and additional stability was achieved as the most important modern identification guide for European spiders did the same (Roberts 1995, 1998), followed in due course by the current major resource for the identification of European spiders, the Spiders of Europe website (Nentwig et al. 2010 et seq.). Using Google Scholar, we were able to identify dozens of ecological or faunistic publications from a wide range of journals, as well as the grey literature, in which the name A. barbipes (or rarely Tarentula barbipes) has been unequivocally applied to the Atlantic sibling species after 1990. This includes citation classics such as Buchholz (2010) and Entling et al. (2007). We also found dozens of publications in which the name A. accentuata was used specifically for the Continental sibling after 1990. Not in all cases was it clear whether this use was accidental, or whether the authors were simply unaware of the existence of two sibling species. However, we did not find a single example of a publication using A. accentuata exclusively for the Atlantic species only, in explicit contrast to its continental sibling. This consistent use at an international level and across a diverse range of publications contradicts the assessment by Canard & Cruveillier (2019), who seem to imply that the name A. accentuata had been used consistently for the Atlantic sibling species, at least by French authors. This is not the case, and this view is contradicted not only by the French standard checklist (Le Peru 2007), but even by their own publications (e.g. Cruveillier 2012; Lafage et al. 2015). The re-naming of A. accentuata as A. farinosa and the maintained usage of A. barbipes, as proposed by Breitling et al. (2016), have been widely accepted by the community (e.g. Just et al. 2018; Naumova et al. 2019). From the point of view of database curation and unambiguous information retrieval, this name change was much less problematic than would be the proposed transfer of the name A. accentuata from one sibling to the other. Especially checklists and faunistic databases are extremely susceptible to honest mistakes based on such a switch of names, and future confusion, e.g., by accidental attributions of historic records of A. farinosa listed under the name accentuata to the Atlantic species, would be inevitable and would create a major impediment in many areas for future scientific work on this fascinating pair of sibling species.Published as part of Breitling, Rainer & Bauer, Tobias, 2022, What, if anything, is Lycosa accentuata Latreille, 1817? - Review of a nomenclatural conundrum (Araneae: Lycosidae), pp. 197-207 in Zoosystema 44 (8) on pages 203-205, DOI: 10.5252/zoosystema2022v44a8, http://zenodo.org/record/646768
Lycosa accentuata Latreille 1817
No full textNEOTYPE DESIGNATION FOR LYCOSA ACCENTUATA LATREILLE, 1817 TYPE MATERIAL LOST. — Locus typicus: “environs de Paris” NEOTYPE. — France • 1 ♀; Ermitage de Franchard, forêt de Fontainebleau, 48°24’28”N, 2°37’44”E; 27.V.2018; C. Jacquet leg.; MNHN-AR-AR16223. DESCRIPTION OF FEMALE NEOTYPE (Fig. 2) Prosoma brown, with a complete, wide and yellowish median stripe ending between the PME. Laterally with yellowish and slightly serrated stripes completely covering the margins of the prosoma. Chelicerae dark brown. Proximal part of maxillae brownish, distal part more yellowish brown. Labium brown, distal margin yellowish. Sternum light brown, with a longitudinal median stripe of yellow colour, broadened at the centre. Opisthosoma dorsal greyish brown, cardiac mark slightly darker and more greyish, with thin yellowish frame. Spinnerets dark brown, distinctly darker than ventral side. Coxae in ventral view light yellowish.Legs brownish. Prosoma length 5.4 mm, width 3.9 mm, Opisthosoma length 6.0 mm, anterior eye row 0.91 mm, median eye row 1.07 mm, posterior eye row 1.33 mm, diameter of AME 0.13 mm, PME 0.34 mm, ALE 0.12 mm, PLE 0.3 mm. Distance between PLE-PLE 0.99 mm, PME-PME 0.4 mm, ALE-ALE 0.64 mm, ALEAME 0.12 mm, AME-AME 0.18 mm, ALE-PME 0.22 mm. For measurements of legs, see Table 3. REMARK Geographical distribution, habitat, size, colouration and phenology of Alopecosa trabalis agree with the description of Lycosa accentuata provided by Latreille (1817). No other lycosid species is a similarly plausible match to the original description. The selected neotype thus meets the requirements of ICZN Article 75.3.5. The restricted locus typicus in the forêt de Fontainebleau is within the “environs de Paris”, as confirmed by contemporary travel guides (e.g. Dulaure 1827; Anonymous 1855). Thus, the requirements of ICZN Article 75.3.6 are met as well. The neotype designation stabilises the interpretation of Lycosa accentuata, and in consequence the nomenclature of the sibling species pair Alopecosa barbipes / A. farinosa. PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES OF (MIS)APPLYING LYCOSA ACCENTUATA LATREILLE, 1817, TO THE ATLANTIC SIBLING SPECIES, INVERTING PREVIOUS ESTABLISHED USAGE While mere preferences based on the traditional use of names should not be used to justify violations of the code of nomenclature, which ultimately can only result in increased instability and confusion, it is important to take prevailing usage into account when making reasonable judgement calls in doubtful cases. In the present case, it is relevant to point out that Alopecosa farinosa and A. barbipes are frequently caught in pitfall traps and are an important part of epigeal spider communities inhabiting dry open habitats across their range; as a result they figure widely in ecological and faunistic studies. Following Dahlem et al. (1987) and Cordes & von Helversen (1990), and until the publication by Breitling et al. (2016), the names A. accentuata and A. barbipes were almost uniformly applied to the Eastern/Continental and Western/ Atlantic form of the sibling pair, respectively, throughout the ecological and faunistic literature (e.g. Entling et al. 2007; Schmitt 2008; Buchholz & Kreuels 2009; Buchar & Dolanský 2011; Cruveillier 2012). The same was the case for authoritative country checklists (e.g. Merrett & Millidge 1992; Alderweireldt & Maelfait 1993; van Helsdingen 1996; Le Peru 2007; Blick et al. 2016), all of which specifically refer to the recent splitting of the sibling species pair. Other checklists do also list both species (A. accentuata and A. barbipes), but the lack of a critical discussion leaves it open whether this is intentional, or a result of the historical ambiguity of usage (e.g. Blagoev 2002; Canard 2005; Cardoso & Morano 2010). Moreover, various scientific articles on cryptic species and behavioural isolation in wolf spiders also use the nomenclature of Dahlem et al. (1987), e.g. Töpfer-Hofmann et al. (2000), Vink & Mitchell (2002), Framenau & Hebets (2007). This follows the standard practice in the arachnological literature of applying the nomenclature adopted in the World Spider Catalog, first edited by Norman Platnick and now hosted by the University of Bern, Switzerland. The availability of these online catalogues as an internationally accepted point of reference has contributed immensely to stabilizing spider nomenclature. The catalogue adopted the nomenclature of Dahlem et al. from 2001 onwards (version 2.0, the first version covering the Lycosidae), and additional stability was achieved as the most important modern identification guide for European spiders did the same (Roberts 1995, 1998), followed in due course by the current major resource for the identification of European spiders, the Spiders of Europe website (Nentwig et al. 2010 et seq.). Using Google Scholar, we were able to identify dozens of ecological or faunistic publications from a wide range of journals, as well as the grey literature, in which the name A. barbipes (or rarely Tarentula barbipes) has been unequivocally applied to the Atlantic sibling species after 1990. This includes citation classics such as Buchholz (2010) and Entling et al. (2007). We also found dozens of publications in which the name A. accentuata was used specifically for the Continental sibling after 1990. Not in all cases was it clear whether this use was accidental, or whether the authors were simply unaware of the existence of two sibling species. However, we did not find a single example of a publication using A. accentuata exclusively for the Atlantic species only, in explicit contrast to its continental sibling. This consistent use at an international level and across a diverse range of publications contradicts the assessment by Canard & Cruveillier (2019), who seem to imply that the name A. accentuata had been used consistently for the Atlantic sibling species, at least by French authors. This is not the case, and this view is contradicted not only by the French standard checklist (Le Peru 2007), but even by their own publications (e.g. Cruveillier 2012; Lafage et al. 2015). The re-naming of A. accentuata as A. farinosa and the maintained usage of A. barbipes, as proposed by Breitling et al. (2016), have been widely accepted by the community (e.g. Just et al. 2018; Naumova et al. 2019). From the point of view of database curation and unambiguous information retrieval, this name change was much less problematic than would be the proposed transfer of the name A. accentuata from one sibling to the other. Especially checklists and faunistic databases are extremely susceptible to honest mistakes based on such a switch of names, and future confusion, e.g., by accidental attributions of historic records of A. farinosa listed under the name accentuata to the Atlantic species, would be inevitable and would create a major impediment in many areas for future scientific work on this fascinating pair of sibling species.Published as part of Breitling, Rainer & Bauer, Tobias, 2022, What, if anything, is Lycosa accentuata Latreille, 1817? - Review of a nomenclatural conundrum (Araneae: Lycosidae), pp. 197-207 in Zoosystema 44 (8) on pages 203-205, DOI: 10.5252/zoosystema2022v44a8, http://zenodo.org/record/646768
- …
