Hitobia devendrai (Gajbe & Rane, 1985) comb. nov. Figs 20–23 Poecilochroa devendrai Gajbe & Rane, 1985: 117, figs 1–5 (♀). Type material. Holotype ♀, INDIA: West Bengal: Howrah (not in Serampore): Howrah city (22°35’N 88°15’E; 19 m a.s.l.), 15 July 1919, A. Drake leg., repository NZC-ZSI, Kolkata (no register number specified), examined. Diagnosis. Females of H. devendrai comb. nov. are most similar to the females of H. behni comb. nov. as both share epigyne with short median atrium, with sclerotised semi-circular lateral rims, and vulva composed of small, oval spermathecae, but can be separated from the latter species by epigyne with semicircular posterior epigynal margin without W-shaped median part (vs. with W-shaped median part in H. behni comb. nov.), and weakly converging widely spaced spermathecae (vs. strongly converging and in closer proximity in H. behni comb. nov.) (cf. Fig. 18 and Figs 21–22). Supplementary description. Female (holotype; Fig. 20): body length 4.63. Carapace 1.95 long, 1.34 wide. Opisthosoma 2.68 long, 1.52 wide. Genitalia (Figs 21–22): epigyne with semicircular posterior epigynal margin, with a small median, triangular atrium (Fig. 21). Copulatory openings widely separated, mediolaterally placed. Copulatory ducts indistinct (Fig. 22). Spermathecae oval, laterally placed, almost parallel (Fig. 22). Fertilization ducts narrow, diverging. Male. Unknown. Justification of the transfer. This species shares more characters with Hitobia rather than with Poecilochroa, such as: chelicerae with three pro-, and one retromarginal teeth (vs. chelicerae without teeth in Poecilochroa), epigynal plate as wide as long (vs. longer than wide in Poecilochroa), and vulvae only with primary spermathecae (vs. with primary and secondary spermathecae in Poecilochroa) (cf. Murphy 2007: figs 290–291, Kamura 1992: figs 12, 15–16, Yin et al. 1996: figs 4–5, Song et al. 2004: figs 86B–C, 91B–C and herein figs 21–22). Thus, we propose to transfer this species to Hitobia. Distribution. India: West Bengal (Gajbe & Rane 1985). Remarks. The NZC-ZSI collection has one glass tube with P. devendrai labeled as ‘holotype’ (no register number) containing a female specimen in poor condition (Figs 20–23). The same tube has a small glass vial containing the dissected genitalia. The similarities in the shape of the epigyne and shape and orientation of the vulva of both H. devendrai comb. nov. and H. behni comb. nov. suggest that the differences mentioned in the diagnosis may be attributed to intraspecific variation, and that the species H. devendrai comb. nov. may be a junior synonym of H. behni comb. nov.. However, confirmation requires the description of the male sex of both species, which are currently unknown. Until then, H. devendrai comb. nov. and H. behni comb. nov. are considered as distinct species.

Published as part of Sankaran, Pradeep M. & Caleb, John T. D., 2025, On the taxonomic validity of Indian ground spiders: VI. Genera Ladissa Simon, 1907, Melicymnis Simon, 1885, and Poecilochroa Westring, 1874 (Araneae: Gnaphosidae), pp. 132-142 in Zootaxa 5673 (1) on pages 139-141, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5673.1.9, http://zenodo.org/record/16983378