ovr.news
About

Scientists recover physical reference for historic spider species

Read on delo.si · 12 November 2026
Scientists recover physical reference for historic spider species
Photo: delo.si

Headline and summary by local AI

A team of scientists led by Jonathan Coddington from the Smithsonian Institution, in collaboration with Slovenian researchers Matjaž Kuntner and Matjaž Gregorič, identified new physical specimens to restore the scientific record for the orb-weaver spider Araneus angulatus.

This species holds a unique place in biology as the first animal species described using binomial nomenclature.

Although the Swedish arachnologist Carl Alexander Clerck first described the spider in 1757, the original type specimens used to define the species disappeared between 1858 and 1965. The researchers conducted an international study to find a "neotype," a new physical specimen that serves as the official reference for the species name. They chose a male spider from an island in the Baltic Sea near Sweden, close to where Clerck originally collected his samples.

By comparing these new specimens with Clerck's original illustrations and using DNA sequencing, the team confirmed the genetic identity of the species. The study also suggested that some populations currently labeled as Araneus angulatus in Southeast Europe and Asia might actually be different, cryptic species that look nearly identical but are genetically distinct. The team will store the new neotype in the Swedish Museum of Natural History to join the remaining pieces of Clerck's collection.

They will also place six other specimens in the Smithsonian Institution and store tissue samples in biorepositories in the United States and Slovenia. This work ensures that the historical name remains linked to a physical specimen, allowing future researchers to accurately identify and classify the species.

Selected and summarized by local AI How we work

More in Discovery

Browse all Discovery articles

Anything you want to add?

What made you doubt it?

What's wrong with this article?