Bathyphantes concolor

Platnick writes "Ivie's (1969) placement of Diplostyla Emerton, 1882 and Kaestneria Wiehle, 1956 as subgenera of Bathyphantes has not been followed by subsequent workers."

(Although Paquin & Dupérré (2003) certainly did.)

This, I think (but we should ask Lynette), is one of those areas where we follow "Platnick as modified by Crawford".

… Kevin Pfeiffer, 1 February, 2012 - 12:20pm

One Species

Gen. Diplostyla Emerton, 1882 [urn:lsid:amnh.org:spidergen:00933]

N.B.: considered the earliest name available to replace Stylophora Menge, 1866, preoccupied (Merrett, 1963b: 465); placed by Ivie, 1969: 60 as a subgenus of Bathyphantes Menge, 1866 but regarded as a separate genus by most authors.

I would say since there is only one species in the genus, and it appears to be in question by some authors, it would be simpler to just keep it with Bathyphantes. Also, I doubt we can tell a Diplostyla from a Bathyphantes using just a photo, so it's probably easier for us to lump them together.

… Lynette Elliott, 2 February, 2012 - 2:36pm

> Also, I doubt we can tell

> Also, I doubt we can tell a Diplostyla from a Bathyphantes using just a photo

Here you lost me. As you write in the subject line there is only the one species ("concolor"), with the question being whether Diplostyla is a subgenus of Bathyphantes or its own (monotypic) genus.

Either way, the female epigynum, with its long thin scape, is very distinctive and easily recognizable in good ventral photos.

… Kevin Pfeiffer, 3 February, 2012 - 12:46am

Sorry I meant

that if we have a spider dorsal photo we can't ID to species... how do we decide (for example) if it's a Diplostyla concolor or Bathyphantes pallidus?

If we can't separate them it's much cleaner to leave the spider at the genus level instead of out in the subfamily level. But you're probably right... it's likely a moot point because I'm not even sure I can separate those two species for other genera in that group.

I guess overall I just figure it's easier to not have another genus to think about for just one species, but if anyone feel strongly the other way it's fine with me to create that Diplostyla concolor page.

… Lynette Elliott, 3 February, 2012 - 9:13am

It's a relatively easy-to-identify species -- if you've got a good ventral view of a female. The male is not so difficult either -- if you've got a really good photo of the palp.

But which location makes no difference to me; if it's good enough for Paquin & Dupérré, it's good enough for me, at least for now.

… Kevin Pfeiffer, 3 February, 2012 - 9:21am