392 



1848. Euophrys FLORICOLA C. Koch, Die Araclin., XIV, p. 39, Tab. 



CCCCLXXIII, fig. 1301. 



1850. Phcebe floricola id., Uebers. d. Arachn.-Syst. , 5, p. 63. 



1851. Attus saxicola Westr., Forteckn. etc., p. 55. 



1867. Euophrys pratincola Our.., Aran. d. Prov. Preuss., p. 160. 



1868. Attus FLORICOLA Sim., Monogr. d. Attides, p. 39 (29) (excl "Var. 



As regards Ar. pubescens Fabr., referred hither by Westring and 

 Sundevall, see above p. 381. Ar. V notatus Clerck, which is also 

 here taken up by Sundevall , does not belong to this species , but to 

 A. v-insignitus : vid. sup., p. 378. — Ohlert has himself sent me spe- 

 cimens of A. floricola under the name of E. pratincola Ohl. , which 

 species is therefore erroneusly referred by Simon to A. pratincola 

 (C. Koch), Sim. — Euophr. saxicola C. Koch which Westring loc. 

 cit. supposed to be the same as the species here in question, is not 

 with certainty known to me: it is said by Simon "widely to differ 

 from the type floricola" (Re'vis. d. Attidse, p. 149 (25)). — Salticus 

 floricola Blackw. 2 ), under which E. floricola C. Koch is taken up, is 

 an entirely different species, and = A, saltator Sim. (Monogr. d. Att., 

 p. 611 (145)); see farther on under Salt, floricola Blackw. 



In A. floricola* (C. Koch) the vulva is formed of a rounded, 

 somewhat transversal fovea, situated close to the rim a genitalis, and 

 bounded by two costse curved towards each other, which are united 

 behind, but appear to leave a small interval between their anterior 

 somewhat knobbed or slightly retracted extremities. In the male the 

 femoral joint of the palpi at its apex, as well as the patellar and 

 tibial joints above , is for the greatest part covered with white hair, 

 the lamina on the contrary is dark. — Euophrys rupicola C. Koch 

 1848 3 ) is certainly a different species from A. floricola. Simon, who 

 at first (loc. cit. in Syn.) considered it as a "constant variety" of A. 



1) Die Arachn., XIV, p. 17, Tab. CCCCLXXI, figg. 1284, 1285. 



2) Spid. of Gr. Brit., I, p. 55, PI. HI, fig. 30. 



3) Die Arachn., XIV, p. 19, Tab. CCCCLXXI, fig. 1286. - Hkntz has 

 in 1846 described another species under the name of A. rupicola (Descr. and 

 fig. of the Aran, of the U. S., in Bost. Journ. of Nat. Hist., V, p. 357, PI. XXI, 

 fig. 14). There is however as yet no reason to give A. rupicola (C. Koch) a new 

 name, for if Hentz' A. rupicola, as is probable, do not belong to the genus 

 Attus sens, strict., both species ought to retain the specific name rupicola. To reject 

 a specific name, as Simon sometimes does, merely because it has been previously 

 given to another species of the same family, is quite contrary to the received 

 custom in Zoology and Botany, which only prohibits two species within the same 

 genus having the same specific name. 



