Spider diversity in the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore

Abstract

This paper discusses the preliminary results of the first comprehensive survey of the spiders of the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve (BTNR) in Singapore. Two plots were established in each of the three zones of vegetation, viz., primary forest, old secondary forest, and maturing secondary forest. They were repeatedly sampled over an 18-month period. Sorting of the collection so far suggests that the three vegetation zones harbour rather different spider assemblages. Only ~9% of the total spider fauna recovered was shared by all three zones. The results have also yielded a preliminary picture of dominance, abundance and rarity. Although first intended to obtain a baseline for future quantitative analyses, the survey became a testing ground to modify and refine methodology so as to conduct future quantitative surveys with greater scientific rigour. Taxonomic work on the samples so far shows that the spiders in the BTNR span over 43 families, of which six families are listed for the first time in Singapore. The tally is summarised in an interim checklist of BTNR spiders. The checklist, with a total of 317 entries, shows that there are 158 described species of spiders in BTNR, of which 25 species are new records for Singapore. Another 159 morphospecies are provisionally recognised as distinct species, some of which may be new to science. Our observations during the survey have allowed us to provide a narrative of BTNR spider diversity against a backdrop of their microhabitat specialisation.

Full text

209
Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 71(Suppl. 1):209-243. 2019
doi: 10.26492/gbs71(suppl.1).2019-08
Spider diversity in the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve,
Singapore
J.K.H. Koh1 & D.J. Court2
BTNR Spider Survey Group
c/o National Biodiversity Centre,
National Parks Board,
1 Cluny Road, 259569 Singapore
1 josephkhkoh@gmail.com
2borboropactus@gmail.com
ABSTRACT. This paper discusses the preliminary results of the rst comprehensive survey
of the spiders of the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve (BTNR) in Singapore. Two plots were
established in each of the three zones of vegetation, viz., primary forest, old secondary forest,
and maturing secondary forest. They were repeatedly sampled over an 18-month period.
Sorting of the collection so far suggests that the three vegetation zones harbour rather different
spider assemblages. Only ~9% of the total spider fauna recovered was shared by all three
zones. The results have also yielded a preliminary picture of dominance, abundance and rarity.
Although rst intended to obtain a baseline for future quantitative analyses, the survey became
a testing ground to modify and rene methodology so as to conduct future quantitative surveys
with greater scientic rigour. Taxonomic work on the samples so far shows that the spiders in
the BTNR span over 43 families, of which six families are listed for the rst time in Singapore.
The tally is summarised in an interim checklist of BTNR spiders. The checklist, with a total of
317 entries, shows that there are 158 described species of spiders in BTNR, of which 25 species
are new records for Singapore. Another 159 morphospecies are provisionally recognised as
distinct species, some of which may be new to science. Our observations during the survey
have allowed us to provide a narrative of BTNR spider diversity against a backdrop of their
microhabitat specialisation.
Keywords. Arachnida, Araneae, biodiversity, conservation.
Introduction
Previous studies on the spiders of 163 ha Bukit Timah Nature Reserve (BTNR) have
been sporadic, focussing mostly on taxonomy, and usually embedded in research
involving just a few taxa (Zhang et al., 2003; Raven, 2008; Huber, 2011; Dankittipakul
et al., 2012; Baehr et al., 2012; Eichenberger et al., 2012; Kranz-Baltensperger, 2014;
Thoma et al., 2014; Huber et al., 2016a, 2016b; Tong et al., 2016a, 2016b; Huber,
2017; Lin et al., 2017; Yamasaki et al., 2017). Other records of BTNR spiders have
appeared either as parts of a Singapore checklist (Song et al., 2002) or mentioned
in passing in books covering a range of Southeast Asian spiders (e.g., Davison et
al., 2008; Murphy & Murphy, 2000). So far, the ecology and behaviour of spiders in
BTNR have only been studied by Murphy (1993), as part of a broader study on the

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
210
fauna in the BTNR forest system. Information on these topics from nearby areas is also
limited (e.g., Robinson, 1982).
As none of these studies has been quantitative, they do not provide an overview
of species richness and diversity of the spiders in BTNR. This project to survey
the spiders of BTNR was thus initiated as a component of a more comprehensive
biodiversity survey of the BTNR (Chan & Davison, 2019). As far as the spider survey
was concerned, there were three fundamental objectives:
• Spider inventory: To build an inventory of the spiders in BTNR that will serve
as a baseline for long-term monitoring of BTNR diversity, and a template for
future replicable and quantiable surveys.
• Management inputs: To provide NParks management with inputs on the
biological, physical and other requirements crucial to the conservation of
spiders and their habitats in the BTNR. We hoped to develop and rene the
methodology to build up baseline datasets for future temporal-scale and
spatial-scale comparisons, e.g., for the comparison of species richness and
diversity within BTNR after any rehabilitation programme or the comparison
of species richness and diversity in BNTR with those in the Central Catchment
Nature Reserve (CCNR), including the effects of eco-links.
• Capacity building: To train NParks staff and volunteers in spider collection
and identication techniques and to talent-spot and groom a cadre of potential
Singapore arachnologists.
Methods
Survey Sampling Sites
Systematic sampling of spiders was carried out by a team of 20 personnel in the three
zones dened by NParks based on vegetation type (Fig. 1). These were designated
Zone I (primary forest), Zone II (old secondary forest) and Zone III (maturing
secondary forest).
Two spatially-separated 16 × 16 m plots were established in each zone. At the
outset, these plots were placed in areas that best represented their respective zone.
Criteria included safety (e.g., no steep slopes), ease of access, and the presence of at
least leaf litter, tree trunks and vegetation. Their locations are shown in Fig. 1, with
details as follows:
• Zone I: Plots with primary forest vegetation
Both plots were chosen in an area north of Catchment Path. Plot I-1 was to the
east of the junction between Cave Path and Catchment Path. One of the corners
of I-1 was pinpointed by hand-held GPS as at 01º21′14.9″N 103º46′32.8″E.
Plot I-2 was to the west of Catchment Hut, between the Cave Path and Rock

211
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Fig. 1. Map of sampling sites for the Spider survey in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve. (Source:
NParks)

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
212
Path junctions, near the CTFS Primary Forest Plot. One of the corners was at
01º21′15.5″N 103º46′30.6″E. The plot included a fallen log.
• Zone II: Plots with old secondary forest vegetation: The rst plot,
designated II-1 within the old secondary forest zone, was at the
Taban Valley. One of the corners was near 1°20’54.7”N 103°46’45.3” E.
The second plot, designated II-2, was located to the east of Cave Path, about
20 steps from the Bat Cave. One of the corners was at 01°21’05.8”N 103°46’
28.0”E.
• Zone III: Plots with young secondary forest vegetation: These were to the north
of Senapang Link (biking trail), outside the hoarding gate that was erected
during the BTNR closure in 2015. Part of the Senapang Stream meandered
through Plot III-1, with a corner at 01º20′53.3″N 103º46′20.1″E. A fallen log
straddled Plot III-2 B. It was to the north of Plot III-1, in the direction away from
the gate, with a corner at 01º20′53.6″N 103º46′21.7″E
Each plot was divided into 16 quadrats measuring 4 × 4 m. During each sampling
cycle, two squares in each plot were randomly selected and sampled.
Survey Methods
The surveyors adopted a sampling protocol modied slightly from the widely-
accepted design proposed by Coddington et al. (1991) to estimate biodiversity in tropical
ecological systems. Spiders were only sampled on the ground and lower vegetation,
including tree trunks at reachable heights. There was no use of fogging, no Tullgren
funnels, collection by sweep nets, or bark traps.
In each quadrat, participants worked in pairs, adopting a consistent and
standardised, and therefore repeatable, collection strategy involving the following
methods within or adjacent to the chosen quadrats:
• Visual search (Day). Both participants visually combed all microhabitats
within the entire 4 × 4 m quadrat – foliage, branches, bark, crevices at tree
bases, ground, under stones, under fallen logs and mud banks. Duration
(including catching time) was standardised at 20 minutes.
• Vegetation shaking over inverted umbrella (Day). One of the two
participants carried out 20 “shakes” at randomly selected sites within the
quadrat. The other participant captured the specimens in separate vials.
• Leaf litter collection (Day). Two heaps of leaf litter and topsoil were gathered
from two randomly chosen 50 × 50 cm frames within each quadrat: they were
either sifted on site or were taken home for closer examination.

213
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
• Visual search (Night). As for visual search by day, but both participants searched
with the aid of head-lamps, some with additional torch lights. Duration of search
(including catching time) was standardised at 30 minutes.
Sessions and sampling frequency
It was important to ensure that each zone was sampled as frequently as the others and
that the two plots within each zone were also sampled with similar frequency. A team
coordinator prepared the sampling programme ahead of each session. Once she had
conrmed the availability of sufcient numbers of volunteers, she emailed the relevant
details to each participant before each sampling day. The slight unevenness in
sampling was due to delays caused by wet weather and manpower constraints.
Specimens and Field Records
All spiders, including juveniles, were collected, identied and counted. Specimens
were preserved in 70% ethanol and labelled individually with a unique specimen
serial number, incorporating date of collection and the zone and plot codes. These
data, along with tentative identication, are being archived and tracked in a master
database in Microsoft Excel®.
Identication
Specimens were identied by J.K.H. Koh and D.J. Court with the help of some of the
participants as part of their capacity-building. The names used in this report follow
those listed in the online World Spider Catalog (2019).
Despite recent advances in Southeast Asian spider systematics, and even with
assistance from foreign specialists on selected taxa, it was still difcult to identify a
high proportion of the specimens to species level. For undetermined adult specimens,
the following nomenclature procedures were adopted in the master database:
• Where a morphologically distinct adult specimen could not be positively
identied down to the species level, but where its generic afliation was clear,
it was counted as a morphospecies of that particular genus, e.g., “Clubiona sp.
BT” where BT is a double-letter code of its nickname, e.g., “Bukit Timah”.
• Where even the generic afliation could not be determined, then it was counted
as a morphospecies of a particular family, e.g., “Gnaphosidae sp. MG for an
unidentied gnaphosid spider nicknamed “Mousey Grey”.
• While identication of juveniles in many cases was difcult, juveniles in the
samples were still counted to obtain a better sense of abundance and species
diversity. This was important as juveniles often made up a large component of
many of the samples. In addition, some juveniles could be determined down to
species level, and to leave them out would have distorted abundance gures.
We are currently exploring the possibility of matching juveniles with identied
adults using molecular analysis techniques.

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
214
Custody of Specimens
All collected specimens are being consolidated by the principal investigator, J.K.H.
Koh who, as and when necessary, in consultation with NParks, may be arranging loans
of selected taxa to foreign specialists who might help in their identication.
After processing, all specimens will be deposited at the Lee Kong Chian Natural
History Museum (LKCNHM), National University of Singapore.
Results
Overall family diversity and species richness
More than 3000 specimens were collected during the survey. A total of 317 species,
including 158 named species and a further 159 distinct morphospecies were
distinguished among slightly more than 1000 of the specimens that had been studied
up to 31 Jan 2019. These are shown in the checklist in Appendix 1. The number far
exceeds the combined total of 57 species previously documented from BTNR in the
publications cited in the Introduction.
These spiders are spread across 44 families, against the combined record
of 23 families in the previously published records we have been able to examine.
The 21 spider families found to be represented for the rst time in BTNR were the
Clubionidae, Corinnidae, Dipluridae, Gnaphosidae, Liocranidae, Mimetidae,
Miturgidae, Mysmenidae, Nemesiidae, Nephilidae, Nesticidae, Ochyroceratidae,
Philodromidae, Pisauridae, Psilodercidae, Segestriidae, Stenochilidae, Telemidae,
Theraphosidae, Theridiosomatidae and Trachelidae.
Most of these families have previously been recorded from elsewhere in
Singapore in the literature cited in the Introduction. Nevertheless, this survey has
surfaced the rst country record of seven families, viz., Dipluridae, Gnaphosidae,
Mimetidae, Mysmenidae, Psilodercidae, Segestriidae, and Trachelidae. Taxonomic
changes affect this analysis, e.g., specimens that were collected in the past and
previously recorded under the families Clubionidae or Eutichuridae are now
considered to belong to the Cheiracanthiidae. In addition, the previously recorded
family Cryptothelidae is now considered to belong to the Zodariidae. Some other
taxonomic changes have occurred.
Notable nds and absentees
Among the specimens identied so far, nine described species are endemic to
Singapore, with some known only from BTNR. These are highlighted in the
Checklist (Appendix 1). Another 25 species have been described and recorded
elsewhere in Southeast Asia, but are recorded for the rst time in Singapore. They
are highlighted in the last column in Appendix 1. These “New records” are derived
from the fact that their presence in Singapore had not been previously documented in
any of the papers cited in the Introduction, as well as in other published records on
Southeast Asian spiders (Deeleman-Reinhold, 1993, 2001; Koh & Leong, 2014; Koh
& Bay 2019). Some of the spiders recorded for the rst time in Singapore are pictured
in Fig. 2.

215
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Of the 57 species previously recorded in published records of BTNR spiders,
seven species were not recovered. These absentees are indicated as “Not collected” in
the Checklist (Appendix 1).
Many of the remaining species cannot be identied to species level at this stage
of investigation. They cannot be placed under any of the species already described
from Singapore, but we have not been able to compare them with any species
described outside Singapore, hence the term “Not applicable” under the column for
“Singapore records” in Appendix 1. Included in this group are some morphospecies
that have unique patterns and genitalia that appear to be distinct from any of the
Fig. 2. Some new Singapore records from spiders collected at BTNR spiders survey. A. ♀
Ogdenia mutilla (Peckham & Peckham, 1907) (9 mm). B. ♂ Mintonia silvicola Wanless, 1987
(5.5 mm). C. ♀ Utivarachna phyllicola Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001 (4.5 mm). D. ♀ Apochinomma
nitidum (Thorell, 1895) (4.5 mm). E. ♂ Ctenus argentipes Hasselt, 1893 (12 mm). F. ♀ Hersilia
lelabah Rheims & Brescovit, 2004 (7 mm). (Photos: J.K.H. Koh)

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
216
described spiders. They may well be new to science and will be investigated further.
Some of them are pictured in Fig. 3.
Abundance & common species
At this stage of sorting, it is premature to provide a picture of relative abundance in
each of the three zones. Nevertheless, a picture has emerged for the more common
species. These are noted in the Checklist in Appendix 1. They are often
associated with specic niches within BTNR and are discussed in the next section.
Singletons and rare species
Certain impressions of the “rare” species in BTNR have emerged during the survey.
“Rare” species are dened as those described species and undescribed morphospecies
represented by a single specimen in the collection sorted so far and the species or
morphospecies have not previously been collected in Singapore. These are shown in
the Checklist in Appendix 1.
Some of these rare species are prospective new species as discussed in earlier
paragraphs and pictured in Fig. 3.
Zonal similarities and differences
In regard to overall species richness (absolute number of species), the three zones did
not differ greatly from one another. The absolute and relative number of species in
each zone are illustrated in Fig. 4. Altogether 150 species have been recorded so far
from Zone I (primary forest), 149 species from Zone II (old secondary forest) and 130
species from Zone III (maturing secondary forest).
Fig. 4 also shows the number of species shared between the different zones
based on the specimens sorted so far. Although there was considerable overlap of
spiders between the three zones, each zone contained many unique species. Zone I
(primary forest, on or near a higher ridge) yielded the highest number of undescribed
species, often from poorly-known taxa. Some of them appear to be forest dwellers
surviving only in more pristine environments. Zones II and III have both been rather
disturbed and their spider constituents tended to overlap more with each other than
with that of Zone I.
Zoogeography
Among the identied species from the BTNR collection, there appear to be several
zoogeographical components.
• Singapore endemics: We have so far identied 15 species, including four
species of Oonopidae, endemic to Singapore. The ve species Mintonia
protuberans (Salticidae), Monodontium bukittimah (Barychelidae),
Paculla bukittimahensis (Pacullidae), Sulaimania brevis and Singaporemma
lenachanae (both Tetrablemmidae), each described from BTNR, have not been
seen elsewhere in Singapore.

217
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Fig. 3. Examples of some suspected new species from the BTNR spider survey. A. “♂
Simaetha sp. (Salticidae) (2.3 mm). B. ♀ Phintella sp. (Salticidae) (3.5 mm). C. ♀ Phoroncidia
sp. (Theridiidae) (2.5 mm). D. ♂ Suspected Hitobia sp. (Gnaphosidae) (3 mm). E. ♀ Dictis or
Scytodes sp. (Scytodidae) (2 mm). F. ♂ Theridiidae (Subfamily Spinthariinae) (3 mm).
(Photos: A, J.K.H. Koh; B–F, D.J. Court)
• Spiders conned to the Sunda or “Malay Archipelago” region: Examples
include Ctenus argentipes, Hersilia deelemanae, Heteropoda boiei and
Nusatidia camouata.
• More widespread, eurytopic species: These include species whose range
includes parts of Wallacea, or even the Sahul shelf, or the southern parts of
China, Japan, and parts of South India. The more common ones include
Araneus miticus, Acusilas coccineus, Argyrodes avescens,

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
218
Bavia sexpunctata, Cyrtophora cylindroides, Eriovixia excelsa, Nephila pilipes,
Nephilengys malabarensis, Nihonhimea mundula, Oedignatha scrobiculata,
Parawixia dehaani, Poltys illepidus, Scytodes pallida and Tylorida ventralis.
• Pantropical synanthropic species: These were not frequently found, and
appeared more conned to the more disturbed zone III. They include Hasarius
adansoni, Platnickina mneon, Scytodes fusca, and Theotima minutissima.
An overview of the species in each of these categories is given in the Checklist
(Appendix 1). The overview does not cover morphospecies that we have not been able
to identify to species level, as it would be obviously premature to determine their range
before they are described and established as valid species.
Ecological observations
In the course of the survey, we were able to make additional observations to
supplement those made by Murphy (1993) on the distribution of spiders in terms of
the diurnal cycle and in terms of vertical and horizontal stratication within the BTNR
ecosystem.
Fig. 4. Species richness compared between vegetation zones, showing the absolute number of
species and the respective percentage of the total species count (317 species, of which ten were
not re-collected during the present survey).

219
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Amongst lower vegetation
During the day-time, the lower vegetation was very much the realm of the roaming
jumping spiders, among which several species of the genera Epeus and Parabathippus
were the most prominent.
Among the most common web-building species found in the lower vegetation
during daylight in all three zones were Theridion t-notatum (Theridiidae) and Tylorida
ventralis (Tetragnathidae). They were frequently found in their three-dimensional
tangle webs and horizontal orbwebs respectively in drier and more exposed niches,
along with the relatively common orbweb builder Cyclosa insulana (Araneidae).
Another araneid, Cyrtophora cylindroides, which wove a characteristic inverted
bowl-shaped orbweb with an irregular superstructure, appeared to prefer a similar
environment but was conned to areas with plenty of vertical and horizontal
branchlets in the young secondary forest in Zone III.
Yet another common horizontal orbweb builder, Leucauge argentina
(Tetragnathidae), appeared to prefer more shady and moist niches nearer the forest
oor. Several other species of diurnal web builders were also found barely a metre
above the ground. They included Cyclosa bida and Gea spinipes (both Araneidae).
Both appeared to be capable of trapping ies hovering close to the litter surface and
intercepting small jumping crickets.
Several species of daddy-long-legs spiders (Pholcidae) showed a distinct
preference for building their three-dimensional tangle webs under broad leaves in
shady parts of the forest beneath a dense canopy. These included an unidentied
Belisana sp. and an unidentied Calapnita sp., both found only in the primary forest
in Zone I. Other leaf-dwelling daddy-long-legs included Cantikus halabala, Cantikus
ubin, and Pribumia atrigularis which also appeared in other zones. The underside of
leaves also appeared to be the preferred habitat of a minute goblin spider Orchestina
codalmasi that could leap like a ea.
After sunset, some araneid spiders emerged from their retreats and started
building their orbwebs. The most commonly seen ones included Araneus miticus,
Cyphalonotus sp., Neoscona vigilans, Parawixia dehaani, and a Poltys sp.
The heavy huntsman spiders of the genus Thelcticopis were among the most
conspicuous free-ranging nocturnal hunters on the foliage. They were often seen
sitting on leaves and petioles, capturing prey by a sudden grabbing action. A
Thelcticopis was seen feeding on quite large foliage-dwelling cockroaches and
crickets. The spitting spiders Scytodes pallida were often seen away from their
under-leaf silk-laced retreats, roaming over the leaf surfaces apparently in search
of prey. Other leaf-dwellers that became active at night included the sac spiders
Nusatidia borneensis and N. camouata (Clubionidae), as well as the long-legged sac
spider Cheiracanthium sp. (Cheiracanthiidae).
Tree trunks and buttress roots
It took a trained eye to spot the spiders living on tree trunks and buttress roots, as
they were often well camouaged or well concealed, presumably as an adaptation to
mitigate against the risk of living in such highly exposed microhabitats. However,

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
220
with a careful visual search, it was still possible to discern the presence of the well-
camouaged long-tailed spiders (Hersiliidae), viz., the more common Hersilia
deelemanae and the less common H. lelabah. They habitually positioned
themselves on the slightly more shaded bark surfaces, extending their very thin legs in
all directions, and ready to rotate at high speed around passing insects, binding the
insect with a swathe of ne silk from their extremely long posterior spinnerets.
The ornamental coin spider Herennia multipuncta and the Malabar hermit
spider Nephilengys malabarensis (both Nephilidae) built orbwebs that differed from
the more typical aerial webs built by the related Nephila pilipes among trees and
branches. Herennia multipuncta trapped insects landing on its tree-hugging “ladder
web” with stiles and rungs around a sunken cup on which the spider sat. Nephilengys
malabarensis built a modied orbweb supported between the tree trunk and a branch
but hid itself in a funnel retreat made of an irregular tangle of silky threads.
Where the buttresses protected deep and sheltered crevices, the pholcid Uthina
luzonica constructed a tangled-looking web in and out of which moved small spiders
of other species, and in and out of which ew a variety of small moths and midges.
Less sheltered cavities and other areas near trunks were sometimes occupied by the
web complexes established by the bright orange subsocial orbweaver Philoponella.
Some of these web complexes were also inhabited by Leucauge argentina and other
spiders such as the spider-predators Mimetus sp. and Rhomphaea sp. Where the
cleavage between two buttresses up against the trunk was particularly incised and
sheltered, a microhabitat existed for a suspected new species of Dolichognatha.
This orb-weaver wove small horizontal webs of extremely ne silk which could
intercept very small leaping or ying prey. When disturbed or pulled
sideways, these webs appeared like a regular silken sheet. These webs intercepted very
small leaping or ying prey.
At night, the litter crab spider Borboropactus cinerascens emerged from the
litter and took up a hunting station on the trunks and buttresses, facing
downward. With its front pairs of legs extended it was ready to seize small crickets and
similar prey moving from litter to foliage. The highly camouaged lichen
sparassid Pandercetes sp., sometimes seen midway up shaded trunk surfaces during
the day, became active. Sometimes the large corinnid Medmassa sp. could be seen
searching for Camponotus ants, away from the day-time tubular retreat woven
between bark furrows.
The forest oor
In the litter layer, several species of Oonopidae, two species of wolf spiders, viz.,
Venonia coruscans and Ovia macritchie, and the banded-legged zodariid Mallinella
annulipes were frequently encountered. Nannenus syrphus could be regarded
as the most dominant species among the jumping spider inhabitants of the litter
layer, although they occasionally ranged upwards into the lower vegetation. A m
other long-bellied jumper Bavia sexpunctata was found once with its egg sac within
a curled leaf. There were also many juveniles of unidentied jumping spiders in the
litter layer. While it is tempting to suggest that the litter layer could be a “nursery”

221
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
for jumping spiders living higher in the vegetation, more studies would be
required to support such a theory.
Shortly after sunset, the litter layer became the hunting ground of several
species of wandering spiders (Ctenidae) and huntsman spiders (Sparassidae). Some of
these are large and conspicuous, such as Ctenus argentipes and Heteropoda tetrica,
each with the body length of 20 mm or more.
We also found an amazing variety of minute species in the litter layer, including
Telema fabata, some ochyroceratids, oonopids and pholcids, as well as an undescribed
scytodid and a diplurid Masteria sp. Of these, the tiny ochyroceratids and many
oonopids proved highly sensitive to any decrease in humidity. Collected specimens
in tubes died within two or three hours of collection unless they were provided with
moistened tissue or leaf litter. Their extreme sensitivity to drying strongly suggested
to us that the activity of these two groups, if not the others, is strictly conned to deep
litter during the day and limited to roaming further beyond the deep litter solely during
night-time hours in non-drought periods of the year.
A number of the litter spiders were found with an armoured carapace, sternum
and abdomen. These included the newly-described pacullid Paculla bukittimahensis,
the tetrablemmid Singaporemma lenachanae and the goblin spiders (Oonopidae) of
the genera Aposphragisma, Gamasomorpha and Xiphinus. Such armour, particularly
that of the tetrablemmid, is likely related to radical respiratory system modications
associated with the reduction of water loss (Kropf, 2016).
The lace web weavers, Psechrus singaporensis, often established themselves
over mud banks or ground hollows created by fallen trees, spinning a large sheet web
connected to a funnel-like retreat. The sheet web was supported by guy lines attached
to surrounding vegetation and dead sticks. During the day, the spiders were just visible
in the funnel but moved out below the surface of the sheet web at night.
Rotting logs were found to be a microhabitat for several taxa of spiders. The
segestriid Ariadna sp. were often collected inside abandoned insect burrows. Soft
rotten wood was often associated with open tubular retreats excavated by certain
juvenile selenocosmiine tarantula species. Trapdoor spiders Rhianodes atratus were
seldom seen in their trapdoor retreats, but they were frequently collected among the
leaf litter, even during the daytime. With our limited observations in the eld,
it would be premature to speculate that they were diurnal.
Discussion
Assessment of BTNR spider diversity
Our latest checklist of 317 species should be regarded as nothing more than an interim
and provisional enumeration of the spider fauna in BTNR. There are several sources
of uncertainty:

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
222
• Our sorting and identication of the specimens is still ongoing.
• Nocturnal spiders are under-represented as we were unable to carry out as many
night surveys as we had hoped.
• We avoided the use of fogging and therefore were unable to sample the
spiders living in the higher canopy. From the results of work done in Borneo
and elsewhere, reported by Deeleman-Reinhold (2001, 2009a, 2009b) and
other workers, it is expected that there is also a rich canopy fauna of spiders
in Singapore.
• We may also have included some ‘double-counts’, especially in cases where
sexual dimorphism has not been recognised, and where we assigned nicknames
to spiders that we could not recognise due to poor published descriptions.
• Unpublished past records of BTNR spiders were excluded in building the
checklist.
With further sorting and taxonomic work, we hope to obtain a much more complete
and accurate dataset so that we can apply rigorous statistical tools such as Shannon and
Chao 1 to better estimate BTNR’s species richness, diversity, abundance and evenness,
and make more meaningful comparisons of such data for Zones I, II and III. We are
particularly interested in verifying our hypothesis that the primary forest in Zone I is
a hotspot of the rarer species associated with more pristine forests, i.e., not found in
secondary forests within BTNR or other localities outside BTNR but within
Singapore.
Our species abundance numbers remain incomplete as many juveniles could not
be identied to species level. More reliable estimates for abundance could be possible
if molecular analysis using COI is used to match unidentied juveniles and adults. A
similar application of molecular analysis could minimise double counting of sexually
dimorphic species. Some of the collected specimens are being analysed in this way but
the results are still pending.
We are not too concerned about the absence of some of the more common
species from the samples that we have identied so far. They may eventually be
represented as more specimens are identied. In any case, there should be no
conservation issues so long as these spiders continue to be seen outside BTNR. We
believe that some of the apparent absentees were not found because their previous
records were, we suspect, based on misidentication, confusing the species found in
BTNR with similar species found only in the Palearctic parts of China.
We are encouraged that we may have found some species that may be new
to science. Nevertheless, we are concerned that we were unable to recover from
the sorted samples some of the rarer species and more ‘iconic’ species whose type
locality is BTNR. These include the goblin spider Aposphragisma stannum, the
recently described armoured spider Paculla globosa, and the squat jumping spider
Simaetha deelemanae.

223
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Conclusions
The BTNR spider checklist, as it stands today based on the specimens sorted so
far plus those in published records, adds up to 317 species, comprising 158 named
species and a further 159 morphospecies. The gure includes seven species previously
recorded from BTNR that were not collected during our survey. We expect to reach
a higher number of species once the sorting and identication is completed. Even if
we give some allowance to previous misidentication and possible double-counting,
the net total is still a staggering one for such a small patch of nature reserve. It is
however premature to conclude that the BTNR is more speciose in spiders than the
nearby CCNR and other protected areas. For this we will require more than checklists.
To make such a comparison, standardised sampling programmes with comparable
man-hours of effort will be required.
The total species tally for BTNR would have been much higher had we not
intentionally avoided some of the more pristine areas (e.g., Fern Valley, Jungle Fall
Path) for fear of causing excessive trampling through frequent sampling there. The
number was also suppressed as we had eschewed collection strategies that may be
deemed more damaging to the habitat (e.g., fogging to collect spiders in the canopy).
With rigorous statistical tools, we should be able to provide rmer indications
of spider species richness, diversity and evenness in BTNR. However, we will need
to study more carefully if the nal statistical ndings from the current survey should
form the baseline of future quantiable surveys. To begin with, the templates of future
surveys may need to be radically revised, with equal weight given to night collection.
Both eld and laboratory equipment need to be in place before the survey begins. We
should also nd alternative plots in Zone I. The two current plots are tick-infested
(Ambylomma sp.) and are relatively disturbed and exposed, compared to other more
pristine parts within Zone I. Our plot size of 16 × 16 m is also unrealistically small
for intensive surveys; 25 × 25 m would have been better. Another key lesson learnt
was that for the survey to be sustainable, there must be enough manpower to satisfy a
roster for not only eld duties, but also laboratory work (to sift leaf litter and identify
specimens). This may require some reduction in frequency of eld trips.
The survey highlights not only the need to look at BTNR spider diversity from
a holistic and quantiable perspective, but also the need to zero in on some of the
spiders requiring attention for conservation reasons. These should include species that
are endemic, rare, iconic (e.g., described from BTNR or Singapore), and vulnerable
(e.g., poor dispersal ability, conned to certain microhabitats). Examples include the
trapdoor spider Monodontium bukittimah and others that are recorded from BTNR and
nowhere else.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We are very grateful to every member of the BTNR Spider Survey
Team for their participation. This team included Alan Tan, Azlin Sani, Chris S P Ang, Christina
Choy, Derek Liew, Fiona Loh, James W B Koh, Joanna M.L. Yeo (Team Coordinator), Joyce
Koh, Justin Tan, Lee Yueying, Liew Qi, Mark Wong, Mendis Tan, Peifen Koh, Rachel Lim and

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
224
William Ng. Each collector searched earnestly through all the little nooks and crannies in the
selected quadrats. Some of them also volunteered to help in the tedious litter sifting work. We
were most encouraged by their interest in the task, where, despite the danger of tick attacks and
discomfort that one had to endure whilst working in the hot and humid tropical rainforest,
they cheerfully completed their assigned duties. We wish to thank survey coordinator
Joanna M. L. Yeo, and the plot setters Chris S. P. Ang, Derek Liew, William Ng and Mohd
Azlin Sani. Together they provided much of the practical foundation for the survey. This
included the sampling timetable and the permanent reference points for each of the 108
Quadrats, both essential survey tasks. Funding for equipment was provided and collecting
permits were issued by the National Parks Board (NParks). At all times NParks staff, viz.,
Lena Chan, Zhou Boyi, Samantha Lai and Joanna M. L. Yeo, championed our endeavour. They
have been of the greatest encouragement. Much ground support has been offered by very able
BTNR staff ØC Sharon Tan, Cheryl Chia, Sunia Teo and Chew Ping Ting. A/Prof Peter Ng and
his staff of the Lee Kong Chian Natural History Museum, National University of Singapore,
gave us a very helpful critique on an earlier version of the manuscript and supported us with
our laboratory requirements respectively. Dr Ingi Agnarsson assisted us in the identication
of some of the specimens in the Family Theridiidae. Dr Peter Schwendinger provided advice
regarding Masteria. Paul Ng assisted us with painstaking data entry and specimen sorting. To
all the above people we are most thankful!
References
Baehr, B.C., Harvey, M.S., Burger, M. & Thoma, M. (2012). The new Australasian goblin
spider genus Prethopalpus (Araneae, Oonopidae). Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 369: 1–113.
Chan, L. & Davison, G.W.H. (2019). Introduction to the Comprehensive Biodiversity Survey
of Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore, 2014–2018. Gard. Bull. Singapore 71
(Suppl. 1): 3–17.
Coddington J.A., Griswold, C.E., Silva Davila, D., Penaranda, E. & Larcher, St. F. (1991).
Designing and testing sampling protocols to estimate biodiversity in tropical
ecosystems. In: The unity of evolutionary biology: Proceedings of the Fourth
International Congress of Systematic and Evolutionary Biology 1990, pp. 44–60.
Portland, Or, USA: Dioscorides Press.
Dankittipakul, P., Jocqué, R. & Singtripop, T. (2012). Systematics and biogeography of the
spider genus Mallinella Strand, 1906, with descriptions of new species and new genera
from Southeast Asia (Araneae, Zodariidae). Zootaxa 3369: 1–327, 3395: 46.
Davison, G.W.H., Ng, P.K.L. & Ho, H.C. (2008). The Singapore Red Data Book: Threatened
Plants and Animals of Singapore, 2nd ed. Singapore: Nature Society (Singapore).
Deeleman-Reinhold, C. (1993). An inventory of the spiders in two primary tropical forests in
Sabah, North Borneo. Mem. Queensland Mus. 32(2): 491–495.
Deeleman-Reinhold, C.L. (2001). Forest spiders of South East Asia: with a revision of the sac
and ground spiders (Araneae: Clubionidae, Corinnidae, Liocranidae, Gnaphosidae,
Prodidomidae and Trochanterriidae [sic]). Leiden: Brill.
Deeleman-Reinhold, C.L. (2009a). Description of the lynx spiders of a canopy fogging project
in northern Borneo (Araneae: Oxyopidae), with description of a new genus and six new
species of Hamataliwa. Zool. Meded. 83: 673–700.

225
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Deeleman-Reinhold, C.L. (2009b). Spiny theridiids in the Asian tropics. Systematics, notes on
behaviour and species richness (Araneae: Theridiidae: Chrysso, Meotipa). Contrib. Nat.
Hist. 12: 403–436.
Eichenberger, B., Kranz-Baltensperger, Y., Ott, R., Graber, W. & Kropf, C. (2012).
Morphology of new Indian/Indonesian Gamasomorpha and Xestaspis species
(Araneae: Oonopidae). Zootaxa 3160: 1–68.
Huber, B.A. (2011). Revision and cladistics analysis of Pholcus and closely related taxa
(Araneae, Pholcidae). Bonn. Zool. Monogr. 58: 1–509.
Huber, B.A., (2017). Revision and cladistic analysis of the Southeast Asian leaf-dwelling
spider genus Calapnita Simon (Araneae, Pholcidae). Zootaxa 4219(1): 1–63.
Huber, B.A., Koh, J.K.H., Ghazali, A.R.M, Braima, K.A., Nuñeza, O.M., Leh Moi Ung, C. &
Petcharad, B. (2016a). New leaf- and litter-dwelling species of the genus Pholcus from
Southeast Asia (Araneae, Pholcidae). Eur. J. Taxon. 200: 1–45.
Huber, B. A., Petcharad, B., Leh, M.U., Koh, J.K.H. & Ghazali, A.R.M. (2016b). The
Southeast Asian Pholcus halabala species group (Araneae, Pholcidae): new data from
eld observations and ultrastructure. Eur. J. Taxon. 190: 1–55.
Koh, J.K.H. & Bay, N. (2019). Borneo Spiders: A photographic eld guide. Sandakan: Sabah
Forestry Department.
Koh, J.K.H. & Leong, T.M. (2014). Spiders of Borneo: With special reference to Brunei. Kota
Kinabalu: Opus Publications.
Kranz-Baltensperger, Y. (2014). The goblin spider genus Xiphinus (Araneae; Oonopidae).
Zootaxa 3870(1): 1–79.
Kropf, C. (2016). The haemolymph pressure pump of armoured spiders. Oral presentation at
the 20th International Congress of Arachnology, Golden, Colorado, 2–9 July 2016.
Lin, Y.C., Koh, J.K.H., Koponen, S. & Li, S.Q. (2017). Taxonomic notes on the armoured
spiders of the families Pacullidae and Tetrablemmidae (Arachnida, Araneae) from
Singapore. ZooKeys 661: 15–60.
Murphy, D.H. (1993). Animals in the Forest Ecosystem. In: Chuang, S.H. (ed.) Animal Life and
Nature in Singapore, pp. 53–73. Singapore: Singapore University Press.
Murphy, F. & Murphy, J. (2000). An introduction to the spiders of South East Asia with notes
on all the genera. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Nature Society.
Raven, R.J. (2008). A revision of the mygalomorph spider genus Monodontium Kulczyński
(Barychelidae: Araneae). Rafes Bull. Zool. 56: 29–44.
Robinson, M.H. (1982). The ecology and biogeography of spiders in Papua New Guinea. In:
Gressitt, J.L. (ed.) Monographiae Biologicae, vol. 42, pp. 557–581. The Hague: Dr W.
Junk Publishers.
Song, D.X., Zhang, J.X. & Li, D. (2002). A checklist of spiders from Singapore (Arachnida:
Araneae). Rafes Bull. Zool. 50(2): 359–388.
Thoma, M., Kranz–Baltensperger, Y., Kropf, C., Graber, W., Nentwig, W. & Frick, H. (2014).
The new Southeast Asian goblin spider genus Aposphragisma (Araneae, Oonopidae):
diversity and phylogeny. Zootaxa 3798(1): 1–86. Doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3798.1.1
Tong, X.J., Wang, R. & Tong, Y.F. (2016a). First discoveries of the females of two oonopid
spider species from Singapore (Arachnida, Araneae). Acta Arachnol. Sin. 25(1): 26–32.
Tong, Y.F., Koh, J.K.H., Tong, X.J. & Li, S.Q. (2016b). Five new species of the genus
Ischnothyreus Simon, 1893 from Singapore. ZooKeys 618: 39–66.

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
226
World Spider Catalog (2019). World Spider Catalog, version 20.0. Natural History Museum
Bern. https://wsc.nmbe.ch. Accessed 31 Jan. 2019.
Yamasaki, T., Koh, J.K.H. & Court, D.J. (2017). The rst record of the female of Idastrandia
orientalis (Szombathy 1915) from Singapore, with redescription of the holotype
(Araneae: Salticidae). Acta Arachnol. 66: 81–85.
Zhang, J.X., Song, D.X. & Li, D.Q. (2003). Six new and one newly recorded species of
Salticidae (Arachnida: Araneae) from Singapore and Malaysia. Rafes Bull. Zool. 51:
187–195.

227
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Provisional checklist of spiders recorded from Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore. Names in CAPITAL ITALICS are those for
which BTNR is the type locality. Names in Bold italics are the species (additional to those with BTNR as type locality) whose presence in BTNR
has previously been documented. Species listed as ZZ are those not yet identified to family or genus level.
Under Status, Common refers to species of which more than ten specimens were collected during the 2014–2018 survey, and Rare refers to (a) any
singleton collected during the year and (b) such a specimen has not been found elsewhere in Singapore.
** Previous record in Singapore may have been based on misidentification; @ Cosmopolitan synanthropic species.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Araneidae Acusilas coccineus Simon, 1895 Y Y – No
Araneidae Anepsion depressum (Thorell, 1877) Y – No
Araneidae Araneus mitificus (Simon, 1886) Y – No
Araneidae Argiope dang Jäger & Praxaysombath, 2009 Y – No
Araneidae Argiope jinghongensis Yin, Peng & Wang, 1994 Y – New record
Araneidae Argiope versicolor (Doleschall, 1859) Y Y Y – No
Araneidae Chorizopesoides wulingensis Yin, Wang & Xie, 1994 Y Y – No
Araneidae Cyclosa bifida (Doleschall, 1859) Y – No
Araneidae Cyclosa bulla Tanakawa & Petcharad, 2018 Y – No
Araneidae Cyclosa insulana (Costa, 1834) Y Y Y – No
Araneidae Cyphalonotus z sp. BT Y Y Y – Not applicable
Araneidae Cyrtophora cylindroides (Walckenaer, 1841) Y Y – No
Araneidae Eriovixia excelsa (Simon, 1889) Y Y – New record
Araneidae Eriovixia laglaizei (Simon, 1877) Y Y Y – No
Araneidae Eriovixia sp. WW Y – Not applicable

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
228
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Araneidae Eriovixia sp. YU Y – Not applicable
Araneidae Gea spinipes (C.L. Koch, 1843) Y Y Common No
Araneidae Neoscona punctigera (Doleschall, 1857) Y Y – No
Araneidae Neoscona vigilans (Blackwall, 1865) Y – No
Araneidae Parawixia dehaani (Doleschall, 1859) Y Y – No
Araneidae Poltys illepidus C.L. Koch, 1843 Y – No
Araneidae Poltys stygius Thorell, 1898 Y Y – No
Araneidae Singa perpolita (Thorell, 1892) Y – No
Araneidae ZZ sp. MP Y Rare Not applicable
Barychelidae MONODONTIUM BUKITTIMAH Raven, 2008 Y Rare No
Barychelidae Rhianodes atratus (Thorell, 1890) Y Y Y – No
Cheiracanthidae Calamopus sp. VM Y Rare Not applicable
Cheiracanthidae Cheiracanthium sp. UD Y Rare Not applicable
Cheiracanthidae Cheiracanthium sp. SD Y Rare Not applicable
Clubionidae Clubiona sp. PJ Y – Not applicable
Clubionidae Clubiona sp. PA Y – Not applicable
Clubionidae Clubiona sp. SA Y – Not applicable
Clubionidae Nusatidia borneensis Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001 Y – New record
Clubionidae Nusatidia camouflata
Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001 Y Y Y Common New record
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Clubionidae Nusatidia sp. XB Y – Not applicable
Clubionidae Nusatidia sp. MW Y – Not applicable
Corinnidae Aetius sp. SC Y – Not applicable
Corinnidae Aetius sp. OB Y – Not applicable
Corinnidae Apochinomma nitidum (Thorell, 1895) Y – New record
Corinnidae Corinnomma rapax Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001 Y – New record
Corinnidae Corinnomma severum (Thorell, 1877) Y Y – No
Corinnidae Corinnomma javanum Simon, 1905 Y Y – No
Corinnidae Corinnomma sp. OT Y – Not applicable
Corinnidae Medmassa sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Ctenidae Acantheis longiventris Simon, 1897 Y Common No
Ctenidae Anahita z sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Ctenidae Ctenus argentipes Hasselt, 1893 Y Y Common New record
Ctenidae Ctenus sp. ET Y Y Y Common Not applicable
Dipluridae Masteria sp. SC Y Y – Not applicable
Gnaphosidae Hitobia sp. ON Y Rare Not applicable
Gnaphosidae ZZ sp. MG Y Y Rare Not applicable
Gnaphosidae ZZ sp. TR Not collected Not applicable
Gnaphosidae ZZ sp. PD Y Rare Not applicable

229
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Clubionidae Nusatidia sp. XB Y – Not applicable
Clubionidae Nusatidia sp. MW Y – Not applicable
Corinnidae Aetius sp. SC Y – Not applicable
Corinnidae Aetius sp. OB Y – Not applicable
Corinnidae Apochinomma nitidum (Thorell, 1895) Y – New record
Corinnidae Corinnomma rapax Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001 Y – New record
Corinnidae Corinnomma severum (Thorell, 1877) Y Y – No
Corinnidae Corinnomma javanum Simon, 1905 Y Y – No
Corinnidae Corinnomma sp. OT Y – Not applicable
Corinnidae Medmassa sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Ctenidae Acantheis longiventris Simon, 1897 Y Common No
Ctenidae Anahita z sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Ctenidae Ctenus argentipes Hasselt, 1893 Y Y Common New record
Ctenidae Ctenus sp. ET Y Y Y Common Not applicable
Dipluridae Masteria sp. SC Y Y – Not applicable
Gnaphosidae Hitobia sp. ON Y Rare Not applicable
Gnaphosidae ZZ sp. MG Y Y Rare Not applicable
Gnaphosidae ZZ sp. TR Not collected Not applicable
Gnaphosidae ZZ sp. PD Y Rare Not applicable

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
230
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Hahniidae Alistra stenura (Simon, 1898) Y – No
Hersiliidae Hersilia deelemanae Baehr & Baehr, 1993 Y Y – No
Hersiliidae Hersilia lelabah Rheims & Brescovit, 2004 Y Y – New record
Hersiliidae Hersilia sp. AG Y – Not applicable
Hersiliidae Hersilia yunnanensis Wang, Wong & Qiu, 1993
Not collected No**
Linyphiidae Erigone bifurca Locket, 1982 Y Rare No
Linyphiidae Knischatiria longispina Wunderlich, 1995 Y Y Rare New record
Linyphiidae Prosoponoides sinensis (Chen, 1991)
Not collected No**
Linyphiidae ZZ sp. OF Y – Not applicable
Liocranidae Oedignatha scrobiculata Threll, 1881 Y Y – No
Liocranidae Sphingius sp. XP Y – Not applicable
Liocranidae Teutamus sp. UD Y Y – Not applicable
Lycosidae Ovia macritchie Lu, Koh, Zhang & Li, 2018 Y Y Y – No
Lycosidae Venonia coruscans (Thorell, 1894) Y Y Y Common No
Mimetidae Mimetus sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Mimetidae Mimetus sp. WT Y – Not applicable
Miturgidae Systaria bifida Dankittipakul & Singtripop, 2011 Y – New record
Mysmenidae Simaoa sp. UD Y Rare Not applicable
Nemesiidae Damarchus workmani Thorell, 1891 Y – No
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Nephilidae Herennia multipuncta (Doleschall, 1859) Y – No
Nephilidae Nephila pilipes (Fabricius, 1893) Y Y Y – No
Nephilidae Nephilengys malabarensis (Walckenaer, 1841) Y Y – No
Nesticidae ZZ sp. SP Y Rare Not applicable
Ochyroceratidae Theotima minutissima (Petrunkevitch, 1929) Y Y – New record
Oonopidae APOSPHRAGISMA SALEWSKI Thoma, 2014 Y Y Y – No
Oonopidae APOSPHRAGISMA STANNUM Thoma, 2014 Not collected No
Oonopidae Gamasomorpha lalana Suman, 1965 Not collected No
Oonopidae Gamasomorpha camelina Simon, 1893 Y Rare No (endemic)
Oonopidae Gamasomorpha coniacris Eichemberger, 2011 Y Rare New record
Oonopidae Gamasomorpha insomnia Eichenberger, 2012 Y Y Y – No
Oonopidae Ischnothyreus an Tang & Li, 2016 Y – No
Oonopidae Ischnothyreus brunneus Ton & Li, 2016 Y – No
Oonopidae Ischnothyreus dactylinus Tang & Li, 2016 Y Y – No
Oonopidae ISCHNOTHYREUS POCULUM Tong & Li, 2016 Not collected No
Oonopidae Ischnothyreus tectorius Tong & Li, 2016 Y Y – No
Oonopidae Opopaea sp. 4S Y Y – Not applicable
Oonopidae Opopaea sp. BT Y Y Y – Not applicable
Oonopidae Opopaea sp. GH Y Rare Not applicable

231
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Nephilidae Herennia multipuncta (Doleschall, 1859) Y – No
Nephilidae Nephila pilipes (Fabricius, 1893) Y Y Y – No
Nephilidae Nephilengys malabarensis (Walckenaer, 1841) Y Y – No
Nesticidae ZZ sp. SP Y Rare Not applicable
Ochyroceratidae Theotima minutissima (Petrunkevitch, 1929) Y Y – New record
Oonopidae APOSPHRAGISMA SALEWSKI Thoma, 2014 Y Y Y – No
Oonopidae APOSPHRAGISMA STANNUM Thoma, 2014 Not collected No
Oonopidae Gamasomorpha lalana Suman, 1965 Not collected No
Oonopidae Gamasomorpha camelina Simon, 1893 Y Rare No (endemic)
Oonopidae Gamasomorpha coniacris Eichemberger, 2011 Y Rare New record
Oonopidae Gamasomorpha insomnia Eichenberger, 2012 Y Y Y – No
Oonopidae Ischnothyreus an Tang & Li, 2016 Y – No
Oonopidae Ischnothyreus brunneus Ton & Li, 2016 Y – No
Oonopidae Ischnothyreus dactylinus Tang & Li, 2016 Y Y – No
Oonopidae ISCHNOTHYREUS POCULUM Tong & Li, 2016 Not collected No
Oonopidae Ischnothyreus tectorius Tong & Li, 2016 Y Y – No
Oonopidae Opopaea sp. 4S Y Y – Not applicable
Oonopidae Opopaea sp. BT Y Y Y – Not applicable
Oonopidae Opopaea sp. GH Y Rare Not applicable

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
232
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Oonopidae Orchestina codalmasi Wunderlich, 2011 Y Rare New record
Oonopidae Orchestina sp. UD Y Rare Not applicable
Oonopidae Prethopalpus schwendingeri Baehr, 2012 Y – No
Oonopidae Xiphinus hystrix Simon, 1893 Y – No
Oonopidae ZZ sp. 4S Y – Not applicable
Oonopidae ZZ sp. 6S Y – Not applicable
Oonopidae ZZ sp. CW Y – Not applicable
Oxyopidae Hamataliwa incompta (Thorell, 1895) Y Y – No
Oxyopidae Hamataliwa sp. 2T Y – Not applicable
Oxyopidae Oxyopes auratus Thorell, 1890 Y Y – No
Pacullidae PACULLA BUKITTIMAHENSIS Lin & Li, 2017 Y Y Common No
Palpimanidae Boagrius pumilus Simon, 1893 Y Y – No
Palpimanidae Sarascelis raffrayi Simon, 1893 Not collected No
Philodromidae Gephyrota sp. WA Y Rare Not applicable
Philodromidae ZZ sp. TD Y Rare Not applicable
Pholcidae Belisana sp. B Y – Not applicable
Pholcidae Belisana sp. FP Y Y – Not applicable
Pholcidae Belisana sp. LB Y – Not applicable
Pholcidae Belisana sp. XN Y – Not applicable
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Pholcidae Calapnita sp. SJ Y – Not applicable
Pholcidae Cantikus halabala (Huber, 2011) Y – No
Pholcidae Cantikus ubin (Huber, 2016) Y Y – No
Pholcidae Pholcus gracillimus Thorell, 1890 Y – No
Pholcidae Pribumia atrigularis (Simon, 1901) Y Y Y Common No
Pholcidae Pribumia sp. XA Y Rare Not applicable
Pholcidae Spermophora sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Pholcidae TISSAHAMIA BUKITTIMAH (Huber, 2016) Y – No
Pholcidae Uthina luzonica Simon, 1893 Y – No
Pisauridae Dolomedes sp. WS Y – Not applicable
Psechridae Psechrus singaporensis Thorell, 1894 Y Common No
Psilodercidae Althepus sp. SC Y – Not applicable
Psilodercidae Althepus sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Agorius constrictus Simon, 1901 Y – No
Salticidae Agorius z sp. BW Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Anarrhotus fossulatus Simon, 1902 Y Rare No
Salticidae Artabrus erythrocephalus (C.L. Koch, 1846) Y Rare No
Salticidae Bavia capistrata (C.L. Koch, 1848) Y Rare New record
Salticidae Bavia sexpunctata (Doleschall, 1859) Y Y Y – No

233
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Pholcidae Calapnita sp. SJ Y – Not applicable
Pholcidae Cantikus halabala (Huber, 2011) Y – No
Pholcidae Cantikus ubin (Huber, 2016) Y Y – No
Pholcidae Pholcus gracillimus Thorell, 1890 Y – No
Pholcidae Pribumia atrigularis (Simon, 1901) Y Y Y Common No
Pholcidae Pribumia sp. XA Y Rare Not applicable
Pholcidae Spermophora sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Pholcidae TISSAHAMIA BUKITTIMAH (Huber, 2016) Y – No
Pholcidae Uthina luzonica Simon, 1893 Y – No
Pisauridae Dolomedes sp. WS Y – Not applicable
Psechridae Psechrus singaporensis Thorell, 1894 Y Common No
Psilodercidae Althepus sp. SC Y – Not applicable
Psilodercidae Althepus sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Agorius constrictus Simon, 1901 Y – No
Salticidae Agorius z sp. BW Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Anarrhotus fossulatus Simon, 1902 Y Rare No
Salticidae Artabrus erythrocephalus (C.L. Koch, 1846) Y Rare No
Salticidae Bavia capistrata (C.L. Koch, 1848) Y Rare New record
Salticidae Bavia sexpunctata (Doleschall, 1859) Y Y Y – No

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
234
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Salticidae Bavia sp. XC Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Emathis sp. BF Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Epeus flavobilineatus (Doleschall, 1859) Y Y Y – No
Salticidae Epeus furcatus Zhang, Song & Li, 2003 Y Y Y – No
Salticidae Euryattus sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Harmochirus brachiatus (Thorell, 1877) Y – No
Salticidae Hasarius adansoni (Audouin, 1826) Y – No @
Salticidae Hyllus keratodes (Hasselt, 1882) Y – No
Salticidae Idastrandia orientalis (Szombathy, 1915) Y Y – No (endemic)
Salticidae Laufeia daiqini (Proszynski & Deeleman-Reinhold,
2012) Y – No
Salticidae Laufeia sp. EB Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Laufeia sp. TC Y – Not applicable
Salticidae MINTONIA PROTUBERANS Wanless, 1984 Y Rare No (endemic)
Salticidae Mintonia silvicola Wanless, 1987 Y Rare New record
Salticidae Myrmarachne comuta Badcock, 1917 Y – No
Salticidae Myrmarachne turriformis Badcock, 1918 Y Rare New record
Salticidae Myrmarachne sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Nannenus lyriger Simon, 1902 Y – No
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Salticidae Nannenus syrphus Simon, 1902 Y Y Y Common No
Salticidae Ogdenia mutilla (Peckham & Peckham, 1907) Y Y – New record
Salticidae Pancorius magnus Zabka, 1985 Y – No
Salticidae Pancorius thorelli (Simon, 1899) Y Y Y – No
Salticidae Pancorius sp. BT Y Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Pancorius sp. CP Y Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Pancorius sp. GO Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae PARABATHIPPUS DIGITALIS Zhang, Song & Li, 2003 Y Rare No (endemic)
Salticidae PARABATHIPPUS RECTUS (Zhang, Song & Li, 2003) Y Rare No (endemic)
Salticidae Parabathippus sp. NS Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Phintella debilis (Thorell, 1891) Y – No
Salticidae Phintella vittata (C.L. Koch, 1846) Y – No
Salticidae Phintella sp. LC Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae Phintella sp. TS Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae Portia fimbriata (Doleschall, 1859) Y Y – No
Salticidae Portia labiata (Thorell, 1887) Y Y – No
Salticidae Ptocasius weyersi Simon, 1885 Y Y Y Common No
Salticidae Pystira ephippigera (Simon, 1885) Y Y – No
Salticidae Rhene sp. WR Y Rare Not applicable

235
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Salticidae Nannenus syrphus Simon, 1902 Y Y Y Common No
Salticidae Ogdenia mutilla (Peckham & Peckham, 1907) Y Y – New record
Salticidae Pancorius magnus Zabka, 1985 Y – No
Salticidae Pancorius thorelli (Simon, 1899) Y Y Y – No
Salticidae Pancorius sp. BT Y Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Pancorius sp. CP Y Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Pancorius sp. GO Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae PARABATHIPPUS DIGITALIS Zhang, Song & Li, 2003 Y Rare No (endemic)
Salticidae PARABATHIPPUS RECTUS (Zhang, Song & Li, 2003) Y Rare No (endemic)
Salticidae Parabathippus sp. NS Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Phintella debilis (Thorell, 1891) Y – No
Salticidae Phintella vittata (C.L. Koch, 1846) Y – No
Salticidae Phintella sp. LC Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae Phintella sp. TS Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae Portia fimbriata (Doleschall, 1859) Y Y – No
Salticidae Portia labiata (Thorell, 1887) Y Y – No
Salticidae Ptocasius weyersi Simon, 1885 Y Y Y Common No
Salticidae Pystira ephippigera (Simon, 1885) Y Y – No
Salticidae Rhene sp. WR Y Rare Not applicable

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
236
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Salticidae Siler sp. UD Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae SIMAETHA DEELEMANAE Zhang, Song & Li, 2003 Not collected No (endemic)
Salticidae Simaetha sp. GB Y – Not applicable
Salticidae Telamonia dimidiata (Simon, 1899) Y Y – No
Salticidae Thorelliola ensifera (Thorell, 1877) Y – No
Salticidae Viciria praemandibularis (Hasselt, 1893) Y – No
Salticidae ZZ sp. AT Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. BC Y Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. BE Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. BM Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. BO Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. BS Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. BW Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. CB Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. DF Y Rare Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. FH Y Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. HH Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. LB Y Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. LF Y – Not applicable

237
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Salticidae ZZ sp. PE Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. RK Y – Not applicable
Salticidae ZZ sp. ST Y – Not applicable
Scytodidae Scytodes fusca Walckenaer, 1837 Y – No @
Scytodidae Scytodes pallida Doleschall, 1859 Y Y Y Common No
Scytodidae Scytodes venusta (Thorell, 1890) Y – No
Scytodidae Scytodes sp. LL Y – Not applicable
Segestriidae Ariadna sp. UA Y Y Y – Not applicable
Sparassidae Gnathopalystes kochi (Simon, 1899) Y – No
Sparassidae Gnathopalystes sp. BT Y Y – Not applicable
Sparassidae Heteropoda boiei (Doleschall, 1859) Y – No
Sparassidae Heteropoda laai Jaeger, 2008 Y – No
Sparassidae Heteropoda tetrica Thorell, 1897 Y Y – No
Sparassidae Heteropoda sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Sparassidae Olios sp. UD Y Rare Not applicable
Sparassidae Pandercetes sp. FF Y Rare Not applicable
Sparassidae Pandercetes sp. LS Y – Not applicable
Sparassidae Stasina planithorax Simon, 1897 Y Rare No (endemic)
Sparassidae Thelcticopis sp. AA Y Y – Not applicable

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
238
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Sparassidae Thelcticopis sp. BB Y – Not applicable
Sparassidae Thelcticopis sp. CC Y – Not applicable
Sparassidae ZZ sp. AB Y – Not applicable
Sparassidae ZZ sp. GS Y – Not applicable
Stenochilidae Colopea malayana Lehtinen, 1982 Y – New record
Telemidae Telema fabata Wang & Li, 2010 Y Y – No
Tetrablemmidae SINGAPOREMMA LENACHANAE Lin & Li, 2017 Y Y Common No (endemic)
Tetrablemmidae SULAIMANIA BREVIS Lin & Li, 2017 Y – No (endemic)
Tetragnathidae Dolichognatha sp. UD Y Rare Not applicable
Tetragnathidae Dolichognatha sp. DS Y Rare Not applicable
Tetragnathidae Guizygiella nadleri Heimer, 1984 Y – No
Tetragnathidae Leucauge argentina (Hallest, 1882) Y Y Y Common No
Tetragnathidae Mesida sp. GB Y Rare Not applicable
Tetragnathidae Mesida sp. SA Y Rare Not applicable
Tetragnathidae Opadometa fastigata (Simon, 1877) Y Y – No
Tetragnathidae Tylorida ventralis (Thorell, 1877) Y Y Y Common No
Tetragnathidae ZZ sp. SS Y Rare Not applicable
Theraphosidae Phlogiellus sp. UD Y Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Argyrodes fasciatus Thorell, 1892 Y – No
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Theridiidae Argyrodes fissifrons O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1880 Y – No
Theridiidae Argyrodes flavescens O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1880 Y – No
Theridiidae Argyrodes sp. PF Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Argyrodes sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Argyrodes sp. XK Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae Ariamnes flagellum (Doleschall, 1857) Y – No
Theridiidae Ariamnes sp BS Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Brunepisinus selirong Yoshida & Koh, 2011 Y Y Y – No
Theridiidae Brunepisinus sp. QD Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Chrysso sp. LE Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Chrysso sp. TD Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Chrysso sp. TT Y Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Episinus yoshidai Okuma, 1994 Y Y Y – New record
Theridiidae Episinus sp. EB Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Janula triangularis Yoshida & Koh, 2011 Y Y – No
Theridiidae Janula triocellata Yoshida & Koh, 2011 Y – No
Theridiidae Janula sp. RC Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae Janula sp. YF Y Y Common Not applicable
Theridiidae Meotipa sp. 4N Y – Not applicable

239
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Theridiidae Argyrodes fissifrons O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1880 Y – No
Theridiidae Argyrodes flavescens O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1880 Y – No
Theridiidae Argyrodes sp. PF Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Argyrodes sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Argyrodes sp. XK Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae Ariamnes flagellum (Doleschall, 1857) Y – No
Theridiidae Ariamnes sp BS Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Brunepisinus selirong Yoshida & Koh, 2011 Y Y Y – No
Theridiidae Brunepisinus sp. QD Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Chrysso sp. LE Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Chrysso sp. TD Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Chrysso sp. TT Y Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Episinus yoshidai Okuma, 1994 Y Y Y – New record
Theridiidae Episinus sp. EB Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Janula triangularis Yoshida & Koh, 2011 Y Y – No
Theridiidae Janula triocellata Yoshida & Koh, 2011 Y – No
Theridiidae Janula sp. RC Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae Janula sp. YF Y Y Common Not applicable
Theridiidae Meotipa sp. 4N Y – Not applicable

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
240
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Theridiidae Meotipa sp. SF Y Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Molione triacantha Thorell, 1892 Y – No
Theridiidae Moneta mirabilis O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1870
Not collected No**
Theridiidae Moneta sp. FA Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Moneta sp. BD Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Moneta sp. BL Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Nihonhimea mundula (L. Koch, 1872) Y – No
Theridiidae Parasteatoda kompirensis (Boesenberg & Strand, 1906) Y Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Parasteatoda sp. BF Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Parasteatoda sp. GE Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Parasteatoda sp. IC Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Parasteatoda sp. WW Y Y Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Phoroncidia sp. LU Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae Phoroncidia sp. UD Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae Phycosoma amamiense (Yoshida, 1985) Y – New record
Theridiidae Phycosoma hana (Zhu, 1998) Y – New record
Theridiidae Phycosoma sp. BB Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Phycosoma sp. BF Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Phycosoma sp. BH Y – Not applicable

241
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Theridiidae Phycosoma sp. GB Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Phycosoma sp. HB Y Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Phycosoma sp. HE Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Phycosoma sp. UD Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae Phycosoma sp. WR Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae Platnickina mneon (Boesenberg & Strand, 1906) Y Y – New record @
Theridiidae Rhomphaea labiata (Zhu & Song, 1991) Y Y – New record
Theridiidae Rhomphaea sinica (Zhu & Song, 1991) Y – New record
Theridiidae Rhomphaea sp. SP Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae Theridion t-notatum (Thorell, 1895) Y Y Y Common No
Theridiidae Theridion zonulatum Thorell, 1890 Y – No
Theridiidae ZZ sp. PA Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. 2P Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. 4B Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. FA Y Rare Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. FB Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. LF Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. MT Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. OS Y – Not applicable

Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (Suppl. 1) 2019
242
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Theridiidae ZZ sp. SC Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. SF Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. SH Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. SO Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. WF Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. WS Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. YP Y – Not applicable
Theridiidae ZZ sp. LA Y – Not applicable
Theridiosomatidae Theridiosoma fasciatum Workman, 1896 Y – Not applicable
Thomisidae Alcimochthes limbatus Simon, 1885 Y – No
Thomisidae Borboropactus cinerascens (Doleschall, 1859) Y Common No
Thomisidae Cebrenninus rugosa Simon, 1887 Y – No
Thomisidae Lycopus rubropictus Workman, 1896 Y – No
Thomisidae Oxytate virens (Thorell, 1891) Y – No
Thomisidae Pharta bimaculata Thorell, 1891 Y – No
Thomisidae Phrynarachne tuberosa (Blackwall, 1864) Y – No
Trachelidae Utivarachna fukusawana Kishida, 1940 Y – New record
Trachelidae Utivarachna phyllicola Deeleman-Reinhold, 2001 Y – New record
Trachelidae Utivarachna sp. ND Y – Not applicable

243
Spiders in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve
Appendix 1. Continuation.
Family Genus & Species Zone I Zone II Zone III Status New record for
Singapore
Uloboridae Miagrammopes oblongus Yoshida, 1982 Y Y – No
Uloboridae Miagrammopes singaporensis Kulzynski, 1908 Y – No
Uloboridae Miagrammopes sp. CB Y – Not applicable
Uloboridae Miagrammopes sp. GB Y – Not applicable
Uloboridae Philoponella raffrayi (Simon, 1891) Y – No
Uloboridae Philoponella sp. BB Y – Not applicable
Zodariidae Asceua sp. 5B Y – Not applicable
Zodariidae Asceua sp. AB Y – Not applicable
Zodariidae Asceua sp. CF Y Y Common Not applicable
Zodariidae Cryptothele sundaica Thorell, 1890 Y Y Y Common Not applicable
Zodariidae Mallinella allorostrata Dankittipakul, Jocque &
Singtripop, 2012 Y Y – No
Zodariidae Mallinella annulipes (Thorell, 1892) Y Y Y Common No
Zodariidae Mallinella sp. DM Y – Not applicable
Zodariidae Workmania botuliformis Dankittipakul, Jocque &
Singtripop, 2012 Y Y – No
Zodariidae Workmania juvenca (Workman, 1896) Y Y – No
ZZ ZZ sp. CE Y – Not applicable
ZZ ZZ sp. UE Y – Not applicable
ZZ ZZ sp. TW Y – Not applicable