Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Spider: Enoplognatha ?
|
|
| Iolaire |
Posted on 24-06-2008 11:29
|
 Member Location: Posts: 192 Joined: 17.08.07 |
Hello, These 2 are what you might say common in my garden. I asume they are female and male Enoplognatha sp.. Can anyone give them a full ID? Thank you.  
Best regards, Iolaire |
|
|
|
| Smoggycb |
Posted on 24-06-2008 17:38
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 350 Joined: 19.05.07 |
Certainly looks like Enoplognatha, and in northern Europe I would say probably E. ovata, but there is at least one very similar species which needs examination of the palps or epigyne for id. |
|
|
|
| Dima DD |
Posted on 24-06-2008 17:55
|
 Member Location: Posts: 75 Joined: 28.11.05 |
I cannot find dramatic differences between these spiders and Enoplognatha ovata (Clerck, 1757): http://www.spider...alerie.htm. However, there are 23 European species in this genus: http://www.jorgen...iidae.aspx |
 |
|
| Dima DD |
Posted on 24-06-2008 19:37
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 75 Joined: 28.11.05 |
E. ovata is the most popular European species of this genus in the Internet!  I've tried to find phrase "Enoplognatha ..." for all 23 species by the Google search ("text mode", not pictures) and obtained this nice logarithmic diagram. An interesting question: do this curve reflect natural abundances of species, at least roughly? |
|
|
|
| Iolaire |
Posted on 24-06-2008 23:14
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 192 Joined: 17.08.07 |
Thank you all for your reactions and suggestions. I figured it could only be E. ovata or E. latimana, which indeed are very similar to eachother. I only hoped someone could tell me that the ones on my pictures are E. latimana instead of the much more common E. ovata... I suppose I have to kill one to be sure...
Edited by Iolaire on 24-06-2008 23:15 Best regards, Iolaire |
|
|
|
| Juergen Peters |
Posted on 24-06-2008 23:42
|
 Member Location: Posts: 13502 Joined: 11.09.04 |
Hello! Iolaire wrote: only be E. ovata or E. latimana, which indeed are very similar to eachother. I only hoped someone could tell me that the ones on my pictures are E. latimana instead of the much more common E. ovata... E. latimana is also rather common (and cannot be separated from ovata by a photo). I think, there are so many pics titled "Enoplognatha ovata" on the net only because most people don't know, that there is a similar species (like it is the case with Araniella cucurbitina; you will find an overwhelming number of pics called A. cucurbitina, but A. opistographa is about as abundant as cucurbitina (and there are some other, rarer species)). Best regards, Jürgen -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Juergen Peters Borgholzhausen, Germany WWW: http://insektenfo... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= |
|
|
|
| Iolaire |
Posted on 25-06-2008 20:17
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 192 Joined: 17.08.07 |
Thanx J?rgen! I rest my case. Enoplognatha sp it'll be.
Best regards, Iolaire |
|
|
|
| Dima DD |
Posted on 26-06-2008 03:04
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 75 Joined: 28.11.05 |
Enoplognatha sp is OK... Moreover, it seems that we should write Genus sp. for the most of images... However, in the case of pure text report (e.g. list without images) Enoplognatha sp refers to any of 23 species, while it can be only 2(-3) of them. This is a common problem: how to give a narrower list of possible species? A better solution is to write Enoplognatha cf. ovata
Edited by Dima DD on 26-06-2008 03:06 |
|
|
|
| Iolaire |
Posted on 29-06-2008 00:00
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 192 Joined: 17.08.07 |
I agree Dima, Enoplognatha cf. ovata is the better option. But then again, so is Enoplognatha cf. latimana.
Best regards, Iolaire |
|
|
|
| Jump to Forum: |
