Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Calendar
Upcoming Events

BugGuide is a National Moth Week Partner. How to add your National Moth Week 2021 photos. July 17-25.

Photos of insects and people from the Spring 2021 gathering in Louisiana, April 28-May 2

National Moth Week 2020 photos of insects and people.

Photos of insects and people from the 2019 BugGuide Gathering in Louisiana, July 25-27

Discussion, insects and people from the 2018 gathering in Virginia, July 27-29

Photos of insects and people from the 2015 gathering in Wisconsin, July 10-12

Photos of insects and people from the 2014 gathering in Virginia, June 4-7.

Photos of insects and people from the 2013 gathering in Arizona, July 25-28

Previous events


TaxonomyBrowseInfoImagesLinksBooksData
Photo#93499
Spider BG454 - Cheiracanthium inclusum - female

Spider BG454 - Cheiracanthium inclusum - Female
Gloster, Gloster Arboretum, Amite County, Mississippi, USA
September 1, 2006
Size: body length 5.8 mm.
We believe this to be a Clubionoid, maybe in the genus Cheiracanthium. It is a good match for C. inclusum as shown here (1).
Confirmation/correction would be appreciated.
Gayle

Images of this individual: tag all
Spider BG454 - Cheiracanthium inclusum - female Spider BG454 - Cheiracanthium inclusum - female Spider BG454 - Cheiracanthium inclusum - female Spider BG454 - Cheiracanthium inclusum - female Spider BG454 - Cheiracanthium inclusum - female Spider BG454 - Cheiracanthium inclusum - female

Moved
Moved from Strotarchus. The epigynum is just too C. inclusum to be in Strotarchus I think. The epigynes of the two look really different, so I don't think there'd be any mistaking them. I think we were thrown off by the eyes (self included).

 
Nice catch!
Nice catch!

 
Thanks!
.

I think it really is C. inclusum
I was just looking at our Strotarchus and noticed this one with the close-up of the epigynum. It's definitely Cheiracanthium inclusum (the Strotarchus epigynes look a lot different). I was confused for a second because the AME really do look like they're the largest, but then I zoomed in and I think the area surrounding them is just black, making them "look" larger than they really are. I think the AME are probably about the same size as the others. The epigynum is pretty telling, though, despite the eyes. Looks exactly like C. inclusum.

Moved
Moved from Cheiracanthium inclusum. Moved based on comments on the following image:

Moved

It does look like Cheiracanthium
but we have that under Miturgidae in the guide.

 
Thanks folks,
I realized(and then forgot), that BugGuide places Cheiracanthium in Miturgidae, as does (1).
Gayle

 
If
you ever have confusion with placement, reference here.
The genus is correct. Fig 39.17 pg. 174 (SNA) is C. mildei, so that should help you narrow it down to one of the two species.

 
Fig 39.17 not C. mildei
Just thought I would mention (for future visitors of this page, etc) that figure 39.17, pg. 174, in SONA(1) is actually the epigyne of C. inclusum. I know the tiny caption in the key makes it sound like it's C. mildei, but looking into Edwards 1958 and Dondale & Redner 1982 will show that the diagram is actually C. inclusum.

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.