A REVISION OF THE PISAURIDAE OF THE UNITED STATES 35 
Dolomedes albineus, Banks, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1904, 
56 :136 
Monomer dhe smalipiitivertiis  tHanicsy Huli72 Wil ou Natem Misi COLON =).53 
Dolomedes albineus, Petrunkevitch, Bul. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 
IQII, 29:542. Considered by Petrunkevitch as a synonym of Dolomedes 
rufus De Geer 
Dolomedes albineus, Comstock, The Spider Book, New York, 1912, 
p. 609 
Remarks. Dolomedes albineus Hentz is regarded by 
Banks* and Petrunkevitch* as a synonym of Dolomedes 
rufus De Geer. Simon? in his discussion of D. rufus, listed 
D. tenebrosus Hentz as a synonym but figured, apparently 
following Emerton *, the tibial apophysis of D. vittatus Walck- 
enaer®. But there is nothing in De Geer’s* description or figure 
on Dolomedes  rutiws (4ranea rufa) to enable | this 
species to be specifically identified with any of the American forms 
now recognized. De Geer’s specimen came from Pennsylvania, a 
locality much too far north for this distinctly southern species. 
Walckenaer *, following De Geer, described two specimens from 
Georgia, compared them with Abbot’s plates of the “ Tree Spider,” 
and indicated their identity with De Geer’s D. rufus. Abbott’s 
figures ® were thought by Walckenaer to represent variations of a 
single species and this is possibly true, although it is impossible to 
determine which one. Two of the four drawings bear no resemblance 
to any known American species; the others may be said to approach 
D. scriptus Hentz and D. albineus Hentz. Neither is well 
enough defined to be placed with any degree of certainty. 
C. Koch? described and figured specimens from Pennsylvania 
and Georgia, using the name Ocyale rufa and listing De Geer’s 
and Walckenaer’s names as synonyms. While there is a slight re- 
semblance between the Koch figure and one of Abbot’s, neither shows 
the distinctive pattern of Dolomedes .albineus; in fact, 
I@EINS MSS IS factored yorendhy Wie ID SCienwwews Or IDG wes 
1 Banks, Ent. News, 1898, 9:142. 
2 Petrunkevitch, Bul. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 1911, 29:541-542. 
3 Simon, Hist. Nat. des Araignées, 2d ed., 1808, 2:302, fig. 300. 
#Emerton, Tran. Conn. Acad., 1885, 6:501, pl. 40, fig. gb. 
* Emerton in his early account of Dolomedes tenebrosus figured 
the palpal organ and tibial apophysis of D. vittatus (D. lanceolatus 
Hentz). In a later paper, Tran. Conn. Acad., 1900, 14:211, under the dis- 
cussion of D. urinator, he points out that his male “appears to be 
Uninatorn on lanieceo latus, Hentz, Ds uraianator is\now. known 
ro be 4 distinct species, not the male of D. vittatus '(D. lanceo- 
RUS) 
® De Geer, Mem. L’Hist. des Insectes, 1778, 7:319-320, pl. 30, figs. 6-7. 
7 Walckenaer, Ins. Apt., 1837, 1:351. 
8 Abbot, Georgia Spiders, pl. 1, fig. 1; pl. 2, fig. 6; pl. 4, fig. 16; pl. 57, fig. 281. 
9C. Koch, Die Arachniden, 1848, 14:112, pl. 483, fig. 1349 female). 
