Alopecosa koponeni Blagoev & Dondale, 2014, sp. nov.

Alopecosa koponeni sp. nov.

Figs 2–7.

Type material. Holotype ♀ (07CHU-AR-0201, GU683697) Miss Piggy, 5 km East from Churchill, Manitoba, Canada, 58.76°N, - 94.086°W, 23 m a.s.l., 10 August 2007, J. Lankshear, J. McGowan. Deposited in the Canadian National Collection of Insects & Arachnids, Ottawa, Ontario (CNC).

Paratypes. 1♀ 4 ♂♂ same locality as holotype, 20 June 2007, J. Lankshear, J. McGowan, labelled as follows: ♀ (07CHU-AR-0206, GU683699), ♂(07CHU-AR-0202, GU683696), ♂ (07CHU-AR-0203, GU683695), ♂ (07CHU-AR-0204, GU683701), and ♂ (07CHU-AR-0205, GU683700), all deposited in CNC. Moreover, DNA barcodes have revealed four additional juvenile specimens (07PROBE-06502, KF367830; 07PROBE-02739, KF367832; 07PROBE-02883, KF367831; 07PROBE-02770, KF367833), which are deposited in the Biodiversity Institute of Guelph.

Diagnosis. Alopecosa koponeni sp. n. closely resembles A. pictilis (Emerton, 1885) in having a similar male palpal structure (Figs 2, 3), but differs in colour pattern and by the shape of the epigynum. Males of A. koponeni sp. n. (carapace length 3.72 ± 0.29) are smaller than those of A. pictilis (carapace length 4.42 ± 0.41 (Dondale & Render, 1990)). In structure, the lateral sides of the carapace in A. koponeni sp. n. enclose large orange or yellowish spots unlike the nearly uniform lateral areas in A. pictilis. The pale median area of the carapace in A. koponeni sp. n. expands to a large circular region posterior to the posterior lateral eyes, then expands again at the dorsal groove and narrows to the posterior margin of the carapace (Figs 4, 5); by contrast, this area in A. pictilis expands gradually posterior to the posterior lateral eyes and then narrows to the posterior margin of the carapace. The legs of A. koponeni sp. n. possess 2 or 3 dark rings on the femora and tibiae in contrast with the weak or absent rings on individuals of A. pictilis. The epigynum of A. koponeni sp. n. somewhat resembles that of A. pictilis females externally, but the copulatory ducts angle abruptly where they meet the spermathecae in contrast with the curved tubes in females of A. pictilis, and the free ends of the spermathecae in A. koponeni sp. n. are directed posteromesally rather than anteromesally (Figs 6, 7). The shape of the epigynum in A. koponeni sp. n. is also reminiscent of the illustration of A. ermolaevi Savelyeva, 1972, described from Kazakhstan (Savelyeva 1972). Unfortunately, the latter species is only known from the original description (Logunov 2013), and was described from a single female. Furthermore, in the original description of the species there is no drawing of the spermathecae. Both species differ in the colour pattern and in the overall shape of the epigynum; the median septum of A. koponeni sp. n. also is broader anteriorly.