For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/innovation.php#8

Spider Species of Family Thomisidae; Camaricus formosus and Mastira menoka is described in this paper.A total of 210 species belonging to 44 genera of Thomisidae was recorded in all states and the union territories of India except for Nagaland and Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, out of which 143 species (68.4%) were strictly endemic. However, among them, 6 species seem to be the case of erroneous report or misidentification.21 species from Uttar Pradesh. Several species of Thomisidae reported from India are recorded only from one state or from the type locality. Hence, intensive and extensive faunistic surveys for these spiders are required throughout the country.

Spider Species of Family Thomisidae; Camaricus formosus and Mastira menoka is described in this paper. Morphology of Family Thomisidae is described in this paper so that it can be identified and preserve in its natural habitat.This work is to focus on redescription and illustration of spiders collected from target area and to provide their identification keys.

The usual habitats of thomisids are leaves, flower or bark. They are mainly active during day time and spin no web. From the target area following two species of Thomisidae were recorded: Camaricus formosus Thorell, 1887; and Misumena menoka Tikader, 1963. We thank Dr. Theo Blick, Hummeltal, Denmark, and an editorial member of World Spider Catalog, for many suggestions regarding the distribution of crab spiders in India. Sharma, A., & Singh, R. (2018a). Biodiversity and guild structure of spiders in northeastern Uttar Pradesh. . Sharma, A., & Singh, R. (2018b). Species diversity and guild structure of spiders from Siddharthnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India. Sharma, A., Singh, R., & Singh, G. (2020a). Faunal diversity of Liocranidae, Mimetidae, Miturgidae, Nesticidae and Oecobiidae (Arachnida, Araneae) of India.  Sharma, A., Singh, G., & Singh, R. (2020b). Faunal diversity of Linyphiidae (Araneomorphae, Araneae, Arachnida) in India. . Sharma, A., Singh, G., & Singh, R. (2021). Faunal diversity of spider families Dictynidae, Dysderidae, Eresidae and Filistatidae (Araneomorphae, Araneae, Arachnida) in India. 

Most morphological features used for identifications can be seen under an ordinary dissecting microscope. The features of the male pedipalp are best viewed by removing the left pedipalp at the junction between the trochanter and the femur and viewed ventrally and were expanded to reveal obscured sclerites. Internal genitalia were prepared for examination by placing the dissected genitalia in 10% KOH solution for one hour at 50°C to dissolve soft tissue. They were immersed in 10% KOH for 30 minutes at 50°C, then placed in water until they had fully expanded.

All measurements are in millimetres (mm). The order of leg lengths is given in a four-digit sequence, longest to shortest (e.g., 4123). The size range given for each species represent the smallest and largest individual of each sex found in all specimens examined.

Identification 

The adult spiders were identified using available literatures (Pocock, 1900; Levi & Levi, 1968; Kaston, 1978; Proszynski and Zechowska, 1981; Tikader, 1980, 1982a, b, 1987; Tikader and Malhotra, 1980; Tikader and Biswas, 1981; Barrion and Litsinger, 1995; Cushing, 2001; Proszynski, 2003; Keswani et al, 2012). Details of body parts, such as pattern of eye arrangement, were examined using a dissection microscope or a binocular microscope, and identification features noted and sketched for each taxon following Barrion & Litsinger (1995) and Sebastian and Peter (2009).

Abbreviations used in systematics

AE - anterior eyes

AER-L -  length of the anterior eyes

ALE - anterior lateral eyes

AME - anterior median eyes

RTA - Retrolateral tibia apophysis

PTA –Posterior tibial apophysis

LE – lateral eyes

ME -  median eyes

MOQ - median ocular quadrangle (area encircled by the AME and PME) 

MOQ-AW - anterior width in the MOQ

MOQ-AW < MOQ-PW - MOQ is narrower in front than behind

MOQ-AW > MOQ-PW - MOQ is wider in front than behind

MOQ-L - length in the MOQ

MOQ-PW - posterior width in the MOQ

PE - posterior eyes

PER-L - length of the posterior eyes

PLE - posterior lateral eyes

PME - posterior median eyes

Gu - Promarginal guide tooth

Family Thomisidae Sundevall, 1833

Thomisidae, commonly known as the crab-spiders, is a large family and are not active hunters and make more use of the camouflage techniques than other spiders. The colour of the spider is adapted to the hunting terrain they use and is mostly extravagant. They remain unmoved until the prey arrives and catches it. Crab spiders can be found on flowers or leaves of plants. Often these spiders remain for days, even weeks at the same spot. The front two legs, that are often larger and stronger than the other six, are held sideways, ready to catch the prey immediately. They have laterigrade legs, no scopulae or true claw tufts but often strong paired spines on the ventral tibiae; normally two big front eyes usually encircled by a ring of white pigment. Lateral eyes are elevated on tubercles which may be joined. The labium is free and chelicerae have a boss.

The usual habitats of thomisids are leaves, flower or bark. They are mainly active during day time and spin no web. From the target area following two species of Thomisidae were recorded: Camaricus formosus Thorell, 1887; and Misumena menoka Tikader, 1963. 

Genus : Camaricus Thorell, 1887

Camaricus Thorell, 1887. Ann. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nat. Gen. 5(2): 261.

Type species: Camaricus formosus Thorell, 1887. Ann. Mus. Civ. Star. Nat. Gen. 5(2) 261.

Diagnostic characters: A small genus of crab-like spiders with barely 15 described species scattered in tropical Africa, India, and Malaysia. Camaricus Thorell has a moderately high, square-like to parallel-sided Prosoma. wider in front; eyes III two recurved rows, ME wide apart and closer to LE than to each other; eye diameter ALE > PLE > AME > PME, MOQ wider behind than III front, clypeus height distinctly large; sternum longer than wide; labium slightly longer than broad; legs moderately short with less developed spines; abdomen oblong to subglobular with dorsal markings.

 Camaricus formosus Thorell, 1887

Type species: Camaricus formosus Thorell, 1887. Ann. Mus. Civ. Star. Nat. Gen. 5(2): 261.

Common name : Halloween crab spider.

Synonymy:

=  Camaricus fornicatus Thorell, 1890: Annali del Museo Civico di Storia

Materials examined: 2 female, U.P.: Maharajganj: Rampur, 14.vii.2015, coll. A. Sharma; 1 female, U.P.: Gorakhpur: University Campus, 6.vi.2016, coll. R. Singh; 2 female, U.P.: Siddharthnagar: Lehra, 11.vii.2016, coll. A. Sharma; 3 female, U.P.: Kushinagar: Ahiroli, 11.iii.2017, coll. A. Sharma; 1 female, U.P.: Maharajganj: Parsa raja, 24.vi.2017, coll. A. Sharma; 2 female, U.P.: Maharajganj: Balrampur, 4.vii.2017, coll. A. Sharma

Description: Female : Total length 9.17 mm. Prosoma 3.98 mm long, 3.14 mm wide, 2.61 mm high. Abdomen 5.02 mm long, 4.80 mm wide, 4.27 mm high. Prosoma squarish, orange-red except black eye area and lateral margins and black patch in the thoracic groove area and high. Eyes in two recurved rows, PE slightly longer than AE row, middle eyes very adjacent to lateral eyes. Eye diameter: ALE: > PLE > AME > PME. Eye separation: AME-AME more than twice AME-ALE separation, PME-PME approximately three times PME-PLE separation. Median ocular quadrangle wider than long, slightly wider behind than in front. Sternum heart-shaped, pointed behind, truncate anteriorly, and clothed with fine hairs. Labium longer than wide. Maxillae moderately concave midlaterally on the outer side, apices slightly converging. Chelicerae light or dark brown. Legs robust, pale yellow in colour with hairs and spines, patellae, metatarsi and tarsi with longitudinal stripes (very distinct in legs I and II). Metatarsi I and II with six (2-2-2) pairs of ventral spines. Leg formula 2134. Pedipalp yellow, as long as femur III. Length of leg and pedipalp segments (mm).

Leg	Femur	Patella	Tibia	Metatarsus	Tarsus	Total
1	1.79	0.84	1.55	1.24	1.13	6.54
2	2.14	0.77	1.66	1.48	1.01	7.05
3	1.37	0.47	1.31	0.77	0.71	4.63
4	1.24	0.42	1.07	0.47	0.60	3.81
Pedipalp	0.53	0.36	0.29	0.00	0.24	1.42

Abdomen dark brown to black, longer than wide, broadest at midlength, medianly decorated by a chalk-white anchor-like band, and laterals each with a triangular transversely set band projected towards each other, venter light brown except median with a broad longitudinal brown patch running from epigastric furrow to the base of spinnerets. Epigynum simple with a transverse W-shaped transparent light band.  

Distribution : India (Andman & Nicobar, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Delhi, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, West Bengal), Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, Myanmar, Philippines, Sumatra.

Genus  : Mastira Thorell, 1891

Type: Mastira bipunctata Thorell, 1891: Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps-Akademiens Handlingar 24(2): 1-149.

Diagnosis. Males of all Mastira spp. have central modifications of the tegulum, varying from the presence of one or two tegulum, the pedipalp apophyses are variable in form but VTA is often the most complex. The structure of the embolus is always groove like, sometimes weakly screwed. The annulations of the male legs are usually wide. Tibia and metatarsi sometimes completely dark. The female epigyne has a posterior excavation, while the hood is quite wide, insignificant or even absent. The distinct pair of more or less conical projections in the epigynal area is characteristic feature of the most specimens. 

Mastira menoka (Tikader, 1963)

Type :   Misumena menoka Tikader, 1963: Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Science,   58(B): 249-262.

Male Mastira menoka (Tikader), A. Dorsal view; B. Pedipalp.

Materials examined: 2 male, U.P.: Maharajganj: Partawal, 14.ii.2015, coll. A. Sharma; 2 male, U.P.: Siddharthnagar: Birdpur, 21.vii.2016, coll. A. Sharma; 1 male, U.P.: Maharajganj: Rampur, 14.ii.2018, coll. A. Sharma.

Description: Male: Prosoma yellowish-brown, abdomen silvery-white, legs light green. Total length 3.36 mm. Carapace 1.44 mm long, 1.80 mm wide; abdomen 1.81 mm long, 1.82 mm wide.  convex, slightly wider than long, clothed with fine pubescence and a few spines; cephalic region slightly elevated with a U-shaped, broad, dark brown patch on the prosoma, the base of the U-lying in the ocular area and the limbs directed backward on the prosoma. Clypeus broad, the margin, provided with six spines directed forward. Eyes round, posterior row slightly recurved and almost equal and equidistant; antero row more recurved than the posterior; lateral eyes situated on elevated, confluent, white tubercles; antero-lateral eyes larger than the others; the median ocular area a little narrower in front than behind. Legs I and II much longer than III and IV, clothed with hairs and spines. Distal end of femora and tibiae I and II with a dark transverse band; femur I with two pairs of ventral spines. Length of leg and pedipalp segments (mm) are given below.

Leg	Femur	Patella	Tibia	Metatarsus	Tarsus	Total
1	1.22	0.52	0.93	0.70	0.53	3.89
2	1.15	0.53	0.69	0.90	0.51	3.77
3	0.60	0.30	0.46	0.29	0.33	1.98
4	0.67	0.31	0.47	0.33	0.34	2.12
Pedipalp	0.26	0.15	0.19	-	0.23	0.84

Abdomen round, broadest just behind the middle, dorsally on the posterior half with three incomplete, transverse, black patches and on the base of abdomen with a V-shaped mark. 

Distribution: India (Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Uttarakhand). Barrion and Litsinger (1995) reported this species from Philippines, but according to Lehtinen (2004) that species was misidentified by them and that belong to antoher undescribed spcies of Misumena Latreille, 1804. It is the first record from Uttar Pradesh.

Earlier, Singh and Singh (2014) surveyed only riceland fields for four districts of northeaster utttar Pradesh, viz. Kushinagar, Deoria, Gorakhpur and Sant Kabirnagar. In the present survey, other habitats such as road side shrubs, forests, other agroecosystem, human dweillings, kitchen garden etc. were also observed and spiders were collected, whenever observed in that habitat. so, one more district at the border of Nepal was also surveyed excluding Sant Kabir nagar.. Despite spiders being the most diverse group of predators and crucial to the health of terrestrial ecosystems, none of the species recorded in India is listed in IUCN Red List. An extensive survey for these spiders is urgently required.

1. Pocock, R.I. (1900). The fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Arachnida. London, pp. 1-279.

2.  Levi, H.W. and L.R. Levi (1968). A guide to spiders and their kin. a golden nature guide, Golden Press, New York.

3. Kaston, B.J. (1978). How to know the spiders. The pictured key nature series. Win. C. Brown Co. Publishers. Dubuque, Iowa, USA, 1-272.

4. Prószyn'ski, J. and Zochowska, K. (1981). Redescriptions of the O. P.-Cambridge Salticidae (Araneae) types from Yarkand, China. Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne, 51: 13-35.

5. Tikader, B.K. (1980). Thomisidae (Crab-spiders). Fauna India (Araneae) 1: 1-247.

6. Tikader, B.K. (1982a). Family Araneidae (=Argiopidae), typical orbweavers. Fauna India (Araneae) 2: 1-293. 

7. Tikader, B.K. (1982b). Family Gnaphosidae. Fauna India (Araneae), 2: 295-536.

8. Tikader, B.K. (1987). Handbook of Indian spiders, Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, India.

9. Tikader, B.K. and Malhotra, B. (1980). Fauna of Indian spider (Araneae), Vol. I, Thomisidae. Zoological Survey of India, 1 - 258 pp.

10. Tikader, B.K. and Biswas, B. (1981). Spider fauna of Calcutta and vicinity: Part-I. Records of the Zoological Survey of India, Occasional Paper, 30: 1-149.

11. Barrion, A.T. and Litsinger, J.A. (1995). Riceland Spiders of South and Southeast Asia. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, xix + 700 pp.

12. Cushing, P.F. (2001). Colorado spider survey. Denver Museum of Nature and Science. Denver.

13. Prószyn'ski, J.  (2003). Salticidae (Araneae) of the Levant. Annales Zoologici Warszawa, 53: 1-180.

14. Keswani, S., Hadole, P., Rajoria, A. (2012). Checklist of Spiders (Arachnida: Araneae) from India-2012. Indian Journal of Arachnology, 1: 1-129.

15.   Sebastian, P.A. and Peter, K.V. (2009). Spiders of India. Universities Press (India) Pvt. Ltd. 614 pp.

16. Sharma, A., & Singh, R. (2018a). Biodiversity and guild structure of spiders in northeastern Uttar Pradesh. Journal of Life Sciences, Bioinformatics, Pharmaceuticals & Chemical Sciences, 4(4), 525-541.

17. Sharma, A., & Singh, R. (2018b). Species diversity and guild structure of spiders from Siddharthnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India. Journal of Life Sciences, Bioinformatics, Pharmaceuticals & Chemical Sciences, 4(4), 383-390.

18. Sharma, A., Singh, R., & Singh, G. (2020a). Faunal diversity of Liocranidae, Mimetidae, Miturgidae, Nesticidae and Oecobiidae (Arachnida, Araneae) of India. Serket, 17(3), 270-283.

19. Sharma, A., Singh, G., & Singh, R. (2020b). Faunal diversity of Linyphiidae (Araneomorphae, Araneae, Arachnida) in India. Asian Journal of Conservation Biology, 9(2), 304-314.

20. Sharma, A., Singh, G., & Singh, R. (2021). Faunal diversity of spider families Dictynidae, Dysderidae, Eresidae and Filistatidae (Araneomorphae, Araneae, Arachnida) in India. International Journal of Zoology and Applied Biosciences, 6(1), 1-9.