Talk:Jumping spider/Archive 1

Old content -- should have been archived long ago
in the Scientific American many years ago on the Portia (spider), a jumping and webspinning spider which preys on other spiders. The spider has two remarkable behaviors - one is cryptic movement, in which it moves while waving its legs randomly as if it was a fluttering leaf. The other is the way that it intentionally vibrates spider webs in order to lure the spiders. I hope someone who knows about spiders will write an article for Wiki on Portia. -Willmcw 23:42, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * FYI, a group of editors, starting with user:OldakQuill, have created a nice little article. -Willmcw 10:12, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Picture
is it legal to have such a cute spider picture on the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.216.189 (talk) 15:10, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The picture is too 'cutesy'. While I am all for fuzzy-wuzzy stuff, could we have a better, more representative picture pleawse? Let the little monster remain though. 218.248.64.136 (talk) 06:42, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Can the spider help it if it's born cute? "Fuzzy-wuzzy" is subjective. Being it itself representative, let the pic stand Manytexts (talk) 11:18, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It's ridiculously cute, and that's a *good* thing!--75.83.69.196 (talk) 01:02, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Sounds produced by the male during courtship dance
I added a link to the "External Links" section to a video posted on Liveleak of a courtship dance where a contact microphone and membrane was used to pick up the sounds produced by the male during the dance.

The Reproduction section of the Wiki article has "citation needed" for the statement, "In recent years it has been discovered that many jumping spiders may have auditory signals as well, with amplified sounds produced by the males sounding like buzzes or drum rolls." While the video posted to Liveleak clearly demonstrates this, I'm unsure how to cite it because I don't know the source of the video. I did try searching, but it was fruitless. -Artificial Silence 01:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The jumping spider on Mt. Everest
There has been reported a species even on Mt. Everest, which feeds on insects blown there by the wind. Why is its name NEVER mentioned, and why isn't there any information about this spider?


 * I've made the link to the spider more obvious in this article. It seems to actually be adapted to living at very high altitudes, but probably not at or near the peak. P0M (talk) 02:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The "tan jumping spider" on this page is actually a lynx spider. Family Oxyopidae, not Salticidae. You can tell by the eye arrangement-- Salticidae has two very large median eyes. Oxyopidae does not.
 * This picture has been removed. P0M (talk) 02:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Jumping mechanism?
How exactly do these spiders jump? Do they have muscles that are very strong or do they employ a different mechanism?


 * They are using their blood: "Spiders extend their limbs by forcing blood into them, much as you pump hydraulic fluid into a backhoe's digging arm to extend the claw. This system is remarkably efficient, the mechanics of a jumping spider's legs enables it to leap 25 times its own length. If a spider loses too much blood, however, it no longer has enough internal pressure to fully push its legs out. A human in that predicament . . . well, there's always Viagra. A spider is fated to curl up and die."  If they had used muscles instead, their legs would have to be incredible thick. They are most of all using their most posterior pair of legs for jumping.
 * Very interesting. Thanks for the answer

gliding spider
I checked the gliding spider 'Maratus volans', and cannot find any references on it that it actually glides (although the species name volans implies this). As far as I found out (and wrote in the species article), they use these flaps for display. I could not contact the anonymous author that made the change at 23:51, 27 February 2006. if anybody has a source for this, that would be nice. --Sarefo 12:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes I just removed that part simply because nothing is baked about this supposed flap gliding anywhere. --uniquinous

Found a possible source, don't know how relyable it is. - Bakuhatsusama 23:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * See also: [] The two sites are by the same person, and he is reliable. P0M (talk) 03:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Bad Geographics?
What is up with the map showing that these things are everywhere - is that a mistake?? Jgreenberg 02:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I think it's true. There are over 4,000 species of jumping spider identified so far, and they're everywhere.  RobertAustin 13:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Walking on glass
Walking on glass depends on finding minute imperfections in the surface? Does not current theory invoke something like Van der Waals forces instead? Myron 09:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It is true that scopula composed of many fibers and attracting by Van der Waal's force are present ventral to the two claws. It would be impossible to prove that the Salticidae never use their claws while climbing glass. Probably they use whatever works in a given situation. But the Lycosidae, which also have claws, cannot climb glass. They do not have the scopulae, so it would seem likely that the smoother the glass the more the scopulae become essential to climbing. P0M (talk) 03:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

National Geographic Special
A must watch for fans of these spiders:. There's information in the special not included in the article. Like the mosquitoes they hunt are filled with human blood or the extent of the hunting strategies. Alatari 15:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Wording
"Further approach may result in the spider jumping backwards while still eyeing the hand." Don't they generally have eight eyes? i.e. they could probably be described as "eyeing the hand" even with their back against the hand. I think the sentence meant "facing the hand", and it should be changed to avoid confusion. Aran|heru|nar 09:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Inquisitive?
Just a quick question, 'cause lord knows I'm no spider expert. How do we know that jumping spiders are "inquisitive" and "interested" rather than simply possessing an instinct to face whatever stimulus approaches? My gut reaction to these words is that they are needlessly anthropomorphizing the spiders - ascribing to them a personality they are too simple to possess. Does a spider get acclimated to stimuli? For instance, if you keep approaching a jumping spider with your hand, does it ever get "bored" of that game? Applejuicefool (talk) 11:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Of course nobody knows what any other being is thinking. On the other hand, when a female elephant tries repeatedly to rescue a baby rhino despite mother rhino's trying to keep the elephant away, it is kind of hard to imagine that the elephant is not acting out of some awareness that the baby rhino is in trouble and some kind of nurturing impulse is guiding its behavior.


 * In the case of jumping spiders, it would probably be harder to ascribe motivations. On the other hand, the behavior of jumping spiders is stereotypical. If one approaches the nest of paper wasps they always act the same way. But jumping spiders show great variety between genera, species, and even individuals.


 * First, it makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint that a visual hunter would spot prey from a distance and orient toward it. It also makes sense that any spider with good vision would notice conspecifics from afar and try to see whether mating was a prospect. But unlike bees, ants, cricketss, or any insect that I can think of, jumping spiders are not limited to ignoring you, attacking you, or trying to eat you.


 * Second, across genera and species there are significant differences in responses to human intruders. Some species are very shy and make for the other side of the tree trunk, jump from the twig, or take other evasive action. They seem to look at the approaching human only long enough to make sure it is not getting too close too fast. But another species such as Phidippus audax may well not take flight. As long as they are not approached too rapidly, or the surface they are clinging to is not shaken severely, they will generally hang around. Sometimes jumping spiders will jump onto a human hand. Some of them sense that it is part of another animal (or maybe they just don't like the "taste") and will immediately bail out. Others will happily climb around, jump from finger to finger. Again, there would seem to be a good evolutionary explanation. Their main plan of action appears to be to explore their environment. If a camera lens comes close to them they may jump onto it even though another kind of spider would flee. So the spiders that will jump onto the camera are likely to be adapted to exploring more risky situations. P. audax is not shy about biting if it feel threatened or gets squeezed. P. johnsoni is even more fearless than P. audax. If you push one of them around with your finger and then let the finger come to rest, rather than taking the opportunity to flee the pushy stranger they are probably going to climb onto the finger and climb all over the hand, up the arm, etc.


 * Curiosity and interest do not always have abstract motivations, even in the case of humans. If something makes a rattling noise in a supposedly empty box, humans instinctively try to check it out. If a new kind of animal is noticed in the woods we will try to discover whether it is a threat and whether it may be particularly good for something. Jumping spiders seem to be doing the same kinds of things.


 * As for the reactions of jumping spiders to repeated exposure to humans, my impression is that humans are more easily bored than are the jumping spiders. A human might get bored of a rabbit in his or her yard, but it is unlikely that anybody would soon get bored by an elephant in the yard. People who keep tarantulas have observed that they can learn to accept being handled without freaking out.


 * Instinctive behavior probably is pretty stereotypical. Bees always make three kinds of wax cells. Moreover, any number of bees can contribute to making a single cell. There does not seem to be any personal factor involved on which cell a given bee will be working on at any one time. Any bee from a single colony sitting on an undisturbed comb will behave in the same way to an approaching human finger. And there is almost no middle ground between a bee's being totally oblivious to the human and the bee going into threat mode and then into all-out attack mode. The things that determine the "temperament" differences of the bees in one colony are generally things like abundance of nectar (which means that the bees will be relatively tolerant of humans inspecting their combs for bee disease, etc.) or scarcity of nectar (in which case they will all be on hair triggers because under those circumstances other bees are likely to see to rob their honey). So to the extent that bee behavior varies from time to time it is generally because of changed environmental factors and all members of the hive will be affected similarly.


 * Bees are interested primarily in nectar and pollen. Horses are interested primarily in grass, grain, and anything that looks like it might be a predator. Horses behave more like bees in regard to grass and grain, i.e., their behavior is methodical and fairly stereotypical. Horses behave more like jumping spiders in regard to potential predators. They will notice something from afar, be ready to flee, but also be interested in scoping things out if the intruders are not too threatening but are different. (A rolling beach ball will produce a very noticeable change in the behavior of more spirited horses.)


 * There must be hard-wired parts of the spider's behavior. But for a successful highly mobile predator that is also highly subject to predation I think the hard-wired routines must be pretty general: watch out for new things in the environment; try to identify as prey, predator, potential mate, or unknown; watch for changes in its movement; evaluate again; etc. The "out" points of this cycle will be (1) it's prey and within attack distance, (2) it's a definite predator that's too big to tackle and eat, (3) it's a potential mate, so go to mating behavior now, it just keeps waving its arms so it is a "windmill" (i.e., the spider identifies the intruder but gradually desensitizes to it because there is no change in its behavior).  The other part of dealing with a "boring" intruder is that the jumping spider is primarily interested in finding something to eat so it will keep moving if hunting does not look good. So I think that "curious" applies to jumping spiders and so does "interested."


 * Their behavior contrasts to the behavior of the Lycosidae. Those spiders freeze at relatively far distances and run like crazy if the human gets too close. Their vision is fairly good, but they seem to be much more willing to cede territory to intruders rather than take any risks. The Lycosidae that have burrows and therefore would have something to lose by running away probably just run for their burrows. The Sparassidae also see pretty well and also run at the slightest alarm. I once saw a small mammal standing up on its hind legs and supported by an ivy plant growing near a building on the UC Riverside campus. It seemed totally oblivious to my presence. I reached down to pet it and it did not run away. Whatever it was, it was probably a newly weaned individual that had not learned to fear other kinds of mammals. The so-called "robber jays" that live in the mountains of Colorado will also seek contact with humans, but their interests seem to be in the food they can get from humans. Those are the only other kinds of small animals that will exhibit an interest in investigating humans at close quarters. (I don't class the behavior of mosquitoes, deer flies, ticks, etc. in the same category.) P0M (talk) 03:22, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Jumping spiders will orient toward your face just as they will orient toward another jumping spider. I think they are orienting toward the eyes. This may seem "inquisitive" or "interested" but they are really engaging in self-defense (Salticidae prey on each other) or finding a mate. It is rather startling to see a spider wheel around and look you steadily in the eyes. But they don't act the same way when approached by a random object; it's the eyes, I think. Wastrel Way (talk) Eric

Carththrayx
The following sentence was added by 98.203.143.29:
 * Jumping spiders have full, 360 degree vision, owing to the 4 eyes spread around the carththrayx.

The only word that bears any resemblance and makes any sense there is "cephalothorax". As that is too different from "carththrayx" and that was this IP's only edit, I have removed the sentence entirely. phma (talk) 03:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Jumping ability
"The jumping spider can jump 20 to 60 or even 75 to 80 times the length of its body." Should this sentence read, "The jumping spider can jump 20 to 80 times the length of its body." —Preceding unsigned comment added by WesUGAdawg (talk • contribs) 23:46, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Normally, I'd concur and change it, but the two measurements may be to distinguish the the jumping capabilities of different species. I think I'll tag it. 79.71.106.253 (talk) 18:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Without citations it would be difficult to say what the correct figures are. Some heavy-bodies jumping spiders, e.g. Phidippus johnsoni, can barely jump at all as adults. Some light-bodies and low-mass jumping spiders can jump much farther. How much farther? Jumping from what height to what height? There would have to be a long series of measures made to have a reliable measurement of how far individuals do jump. P0M (talk) 21:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The "75 to 80 times" figure is ridiculous and not backed up by any published sources. I've seen one book that claims 30 times, but even this is dubious, as no formal studies have been conducted. I've paired down the sentence to say 20-30 times, as this is at least more reasonable. Kaldari (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Fossil record
Previously this article stated that jumping spider fossils dated back to the Cretaceous period. This was cited to a 2002 paper by David Grimaldi. The Grimaldi paper only mentions salticid fossils in passing, noting that "The oldest true salticid, and only Cretaceous, is in New Jersey amber (AMNH NJ835; D. Penney, personally comm.)". This statement conflicts with every other source I've seen, including recent papers by David Penney (who is probably the world's foremost expert on spider fossils). All other sources, as of 2010, say that the oldest salticid fossils are from Baltic amber dating to the Eocene epoch. To clear up this discrepancy I emailed Dr. Grimaldi and Dr. Penney. Dr. Grimaldi replied: "I'm in no position to weigh in on spider IDs, but there was misunderstanding (not disagreement) about the ID of the salticid-like fossils in Turonian-aged NJ amber. Indeed, all salticids are Tertiary..." Dr. Penney replied: "I cannot remember exactly what the misunderstanding was, although I think somebody else had identified the specimen as a salticid. When I examined the specimen I confirmed that it was not." Based on these statements, it seems that the claim in the Grimaldi paper is probably false. Unless more information comes to light, I'm going to revise the article to reflect the more recent papers. Kaldari (talk) 21:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Lifespan
If someone ever writes a Life cycle section, the following paper may be of interest: Bartos, Maciej (2005). "The Life History of Yllenus arenarius (Araneae, Salticidae)—Evidence for Sympatric Populations Isolated by the Year of Maturation". Among other things, it shows typical lifespans for Yllenus arenarius females in excess of 2 years (which is the longest documented under natural conditions). Most jumping spiders live for a year or less. Kaldari (talk) 01:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Number of eyes
On web the number appears to vary. How many eyes does the jumping spider have? Manytexts (talk) 11:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Jumping spiders always have 8 eyes (unlike some other spider families). Kaldari (talk) 17:00, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

I also found this confusing - it says 4 pairs of eyes, but there is no image where this is visible and in the illustration the Anterior Lateral and the Posterior Medial Eye seem to be the same - upon closer looking the PME is smallish brown, but no field of vision is indicated for it, which makes distinguishing it from the ALE all that harder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.59.246.34 (talk) 08:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I've put in a small schematic that shows all eight eyes.P0M (talk) 18:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

What species of jumping spider is this?
I've been playing with and studying Jumping Spiders since I was a kid, so I know all of the characteristics that set them apart from other spiders, and have never even heard of anything like this.

So can anyone tell me if there is a recorded species that had the body color and distinct pattern of a Black Widow spider? If not, I call dibs on naming it, lol. I was at church 1 year ago, and saw a black body with orange/red hourglass cross the ground in front of me. Naturally I moved to squish, but stopped myself after I realized the body shape was not that of a web building spider. Upon closer inspection I found it was a jumping spider, with the typical large front eye set, twitchy movements, sideways hinged fangs; all the typical physiology of a jumping spider; except for the coloration and hourglass.

So... do these guys have camo capabilities that aren't mentioned here, or is this a new species, or just one I've never heard of? If its something we've never heard of before, it could mean a change in our understanding of Spider intelligence, since not only has this jumper copied the color and patterns of a Black Widow, but has altered it to better suit its own needs. The hourglass was placed atop the spider, rather than below as is with the actual Black Widow, meaning its the first thing any creature eying it from above sees. No doubt this is a defensive measure to scare off birds and larger insects. And how did something just smaller than my fingernail know of the danger posed by the Black Widow to other creatures?

So, has anyone heard of anything like this or should I start planning a name for this'n, lol? Maybe I'm getting too excited over this, but hey, how often does one get to find and name a new member of their favorite arachnid family? It'd be awesome by me if I could :). --99.112.26.226 (talk) 18:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Without a picture, it is very difficult to say what you have. Imitation of one species by another is not a matter of intelligence. It is something that happens over very many generations as some little change that give a tiny advantage gives rise to a slightly more successful generation. Some of the members of the second generation may have slightly better characteristics and a better survival rate, and so on.


 * With all our intelligence, we could not decide that a camo coloration for the city or the forest would give us an advantage and just will the production of these characteristics in our children.


 * Phidippus audax come in several morphs. One of them has a red on black pattern that is not quite an hourglass, but not all widow spiders have a stereotypical hourglass pattern either. See Revision of the Jumping Spiders of the Genus Phidippus (Araneae: Salticidae) by G.B. Edwards, inside rear cover, #34.P0M (talk) 19:29, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

conflict
We seem to have an edit conflict. Bigdee removed my photo and edit before I had finished. The existing photo does not show the two eyes that are farthest back. I added the digitally enhanced photo at the request of a reader who complained about the lack of information on the eye pattern.P0M (talk) 20:59, 24 February 2012 (UTC) If there is a sufficient problem with the resolution of the photo, a schematic could be substituted.I originally used a schematic by Pilcha, but somebody did not like that one because it included the abdomen and was deemed confusing on that account.P0M (talk) 00:48, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know whether you folks have a problem sufficiently frustrating to leave you wanting a new photo, possibly annotated, but if so, let me know. We have Salticidae here and I have been taking a fair number of shots. Adding labels and pointers and uploading to WM Commons is no big deal. I have this page on my watchlist, so though I don't wish to interfere if you already have something on the boil, I'll get to hear of it soon enough if you reply affirmatively. Cheers JonRichfield (talk) 12:21, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Such photos are always appreciated at Commons. When you upload a photo to Commons, every Wikipedia can share. (Sometimes when I have wanted a photo, e.g., Lycosa tarantula without a covering of spiderlings, I have searched all the related spider articles until I have found one, say in an Italian article, that has the right characteristics. Then I have to "trans" it to Commons. Doing so is bothersome and time consuming.) The photo of the jumping spider that I augmented was in response to a reader's request. I looked at the photos available that happened to show all the eyes, at least on one side, and that was the first one I found. I had to change the beta of the original a little to bring out the eyes, but that still wasn't enough,so I had to add artificial "light reflections" in the eyes or at least modify what was already there. The next time one of us finds a nice big jumping spider who doesn't mind posing calmly in the sun, let's make a nice macro that shows the newcomer as clearly as possible both the "squared-off" nature of the cephalothorax and the four eyes one one side.
 * It helps if photos sent to Commons have correct identifications. It can be a bit of a problem to find the best photo if it happens to be labeled something like "Miss Muppet's eight-legged visitor," so even "jumping spider on Shodoshima" would be better. Thanks for your offer of help.P0M (talk) 17:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Only a pleasure. I'll start tomorrow (it is my bedtime at the moment!) Of course, from tomorrow morning on, local Salticids will share a psychic message, so I probably won't see another specimen for six months, and our species in this area tend to be fairly pedestrian in appearance, if not in gait, compared to your pretty moustached lady, but you never know your luck, and anyway, our plain vanilla varieties might show off the typical morphology better.
 * I usually label my technical photos with a keyword description plus the allocated date, so it should not be hard to trace whatever I upload. That part should be OK.
 * Cheers till then. JonRichfield (talk) 20:00, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Where is local for you? Here in USA, North Carolina, there are spiders about (warm winter) but I've only noticed the occasional single line of silk and one or two tiny sheet webs. I think your keyword idea is good. I have started giving geographical coordinates showing where my photos were taken. I think it is useful to include data such as the body length of the spiders photographed, and also any info on coloring. (I have an electronic microscope that seems highly sensitive at high frequencies, so you can actually see ultraviolet patterns on some spiders as "brighter white" and one spider that looks almost dead black in normal light turned out to be a beautiful midnight blue when photographed using the microscope. It seems important to me to note that the photos do not see what the naked eye would see in normal sunlight.) Thanks for your help.
 * Any interesting wolf spiders where you live? P0M (talk) 05:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi again Patrick. I am in the South Western corner of South Africa, nearish to Cape Town.
 * Seasonality in spiders is a difficult thing to predict in warm temperate climates such as ours. I never was very observant about spiders till recently (retired entomologist) but recently got a couple of digital cameras that opened my eyes. One thing that has surprised me is that winter (our region is a winter rainfall area) seems to be our main breeding/feeding season for some species such as a few genera of Thomisidae. I had become interested in them because of encountering various species of jackal flies, mainly Milichiidae on their prey, and had looked forward to lots of summer pics, but hardly had one so far; roll on wintertime!
 * Your electronic mike has my mouth watering, but I had better stick to my current combination of a macro lens on an SLR and a plain vanilla point-and-shoot. Both money and time make more ambitious options unrealistic. I do agree with your assessment of the importance of recording more than naked eye stuff though.
 * Wolf spiders? yes. Interesting? Depends on what interests one. And how alert one is. Have a look at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hogna_species_female_Lycosidae_parasitised_by_fly_probably_in_Tachinidae_EOS_016s.jpg I only noticed the egg after the photo was on my PC and the spider had gone! But as a family the Lycosidae are not especially rare round here. I am no Arachnologist, but my favourites are probably Salticidae, Tetragnathidae, Thomisidae, Sparassidae, Scytodidae, Zodariidae, and a job lot of others. It depends on how I encounter them. Many that don't at first look interesting become interesting when you look more closely. For a naturalist that is the story of one's life, right?
 * Meanwhile, I have gone out with my camera and got more shots of Salticids than I expected, but all have our local grey-and-black colour jobs. They are nice enough, but it is very hard to see the rear four eyes hidden in the black. I have been checking my files and found older pics of a more helpfully coloured species, but the best pic also will take a bit of enhancement, which I'll have a go at tonight. Wish me luck.
 * Go well,
 * Jon JonRichfield (talk) 17:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks.P0M (talk) 06:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Video
Hi, suggesting to add a video to this page since i just saw another upload matching it on commons and more video on wikipedia would be great. Wanna take a look at commons:Category:Videos of Salticidae (i linked back to this article from there) and maybe insert one or even more in the article? Mutante23 (talk) 05:09, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Meaning of quietly?
In the intro it currently says "Though they normally move quietly and fairly slowly...". What is moving "quietly" intended to mean? It seems to imply they don't make much noise when they move, but how would a human know without a very sensitive microphone? Is the word "quietly" intended to imply that they don't usually make sudden or fast moves, except for the jumping? It would be good to make the meaning clear either way. Thanks. Invertzoo (talk) 23:40, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Good comment, and some species do not move slowly, either, but move very quickly from one place to another and then remain still for a while. I see that "quietly" has been changed to "unobtrusively" in the intro, and this is not really much better. Many species do not bother to hide from people. This is an anthropocentric point of view. Wastrel Way (talk) Eric

Sexual Dimorphiam C. Umbratica
Overall, I thought that the information cited was relevant and important with regards to dimorphism in C. umbratica. One suggestion I have is maybe subdividing each of the study topics into different subdivisions and expanding each. There could be a subsection about UV light effects (which could include the information at the beginning of the paragraph and at the end of the paragraph, body size and one for maladaptive ornamentation research. Also, the Wikipedia page for C. umbratica suggests that the UV light reflection done by males has to do with sexual signaling as well and they include this link: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1095-8312.2006.00704.x. While this does not directly link to your topic of dimorphism you could maybe mention it in the UV light subsection as to why males have a maladaptive trait. But as a whole I think that the content helps give a lot of good information as for the possible explanations for the dimorphism observed.Cbiology (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:09, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I think the sexual dimorphism article was very interesting and well written, however, there are a few changes you could make. The first change was mentioned in the comment above regarding possible dividing the information from the studies into their own sections where you could expand a little further with greater detail. Another suggestion would be to just separate the information itself into smaller sections that contain similar details. The article is a bit mushed together and very dense, breaking it up would make it a little more manageable with the information presented. ThatEvolGuy (talk) 23:28, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

ThatEvolGuy & Cbiology:

Thanks for the peer review! I took the advice to subdivide my contributions to the reproduction section of the jumping spider's page. After subdividing, I took out much of the information referring to specific studies. Instead, I summarized the points I was trying to make in regard to the visual and size dimorphisms. I think that the information in this format seems concise and easier to follow. If you feel that one subdivision is now too broad, too general, or needs improvement, please reflect any advice/opinions again! Thanks for your contributions and peer edit again! Namaste314 (talk) 08:22, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Revision #2
Overall this article was very well written. Within the article, I made a couple of revisions in order to make the article more concise. Your first paragraph was very thorough and explained courtship within the jumping spider very well. In the second paragraph, you do a good job explaining the different mechanisms by which females will choose males for mating. However, I believe that you could be a little clearer in regards to the UV reflectance and the auditory signals that you mentioned. Does sexual selection favor these traits? If so, what kinds of reflectance and sounds are favored by sexual selection? In the third paragraph, you mentioned UV ornamentation and size dimorphism in regards to how they can also attract predators. Do you think the auditory signals mentioned in the second paragraph could also produce a similar result? Is there any evidence that supports sounds increasing predation? Again, great work! Weightedswim94 (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review 11/15/15
I really enjoyed your article! I changed some sentence and word structures at the beginning of your article and added some punctuation but not many changes were necessary. The content you displayed was understandable and concise enough to explain the complex mating behaviors. I also liked the last paragraph and how you talked about the implications of the intricate courtship rituals. That said, I think you could add a little bit about how the utilization of the courtship practices continues to remain prominent even though it is costly to the individual (the ultimate or proximate cause to the behavior). Other then that, great job! Anon 2214 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:35, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Project Final Overview
The final changes I contributed to the section I have written are as follows:

1. Correcting any grammatical mistakes, such as commas and word spelling. I have had peer reviewers outside of class on my section, which I have edited myself. (thanks for all the help wiki peers!)

2. I made some of my sentences less complex and more concise. An example is when I state that "One form of communication between some Salticids is" to "Many species have patches of." I think that this makes the topic simple, which allows for a viewer of any background to follow the section more clearly.

3. I added links to size dimorphism and sexual selection. I chose these phrases/words so that a wiki reader could click on the link and see the definition of these words, as well to see more examples of these concepts. Then the reader could compare these principles not only to jumping spiders, but other species.

4. I added internal links to other pages that direct to the jumping spider page. The two pages I chose to link jumping spiders were secondary sex characteristics and courtship display. I chose secondary sex characteristics because ornamentation fits the category well, and I thought that anyone reading this page could easily understand the ornamentation example from the jumping spiders page. I chose courtship display because I thought that the "dances" given by specific jumping spider species is an excellent example of courtship displays, especially for the male section. I added a small section of this behavior from jumping spiders to this page, and left a link for anyone that would want to investigate more into the display and its importance to the organism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Namaste314 (talk • contribs) 09:30, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Jumping spider. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160202035211/http://www.gsd-salt.miiz.waw.pl/ to http://www.gsd-salt.miiz.waw.pl/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at Sourcecheck).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Ant mimicry
This article should mention ant mimicry, which is common in jumping spiders. Kaldari (talk) 18:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Behavioral Ecology Comment
The Wikipedia entry for this spider was extremely thorough, including information on their habitats, vision, behavior, diet, reproduction, taxonomy, and mimicry. Some of the sections, such as the one on vision had very detailed responses and diagrams like visual fields of a jumping spider. I found the discussion on the courtship and mating behavior to be very interesting, as these spiders have very complex and visual displays. Three general categories that are missing are population structure, speciation, and phylogeny, home range and territoriality, and webs. The first one would give more information on close relatives or subspecies that would give a better picture of the spider family. The home range and territoriality section would give important information on migration patterns and territorial defense strategy, which is an important behavioral adaptation of species. Finally, information on webs would also provide detail on behaviors like prey capture techniques. The article is part of the WikiProject Spiders and has been rated as B-class on the project’s quality scale and as high-importance on the importance scale. Like with the brown recluse article, I would consider this article to be mid-level importance since is covers a specific spider species rather than a general area of knowledge. Delanieludmir (talk) 03:44, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Behavior section intro paragraph
I would like to eliminate the introductory paragraph to the behavior section and replace it with a sub-section entitled "Jumping". None of the other major sections have introductory paragraphs, and this paragraph, while mostly about jumping, has other sentences about unrelated topics: hunting behavior of Portia, pheromones on silk, learning. These three topics can be incorporated elsewhere, into the appropriate sub-sections. Fresnelwiki (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Comment on UV sexual dimorphism
The current paraphgraph on courtship and mating behavior says "Many species have patches of UV reflectance, which are exhibited in mature males," and references two papers on the subject, both about a particular species from Singapore. As far as I know, from internet searches, this is the only species for which UV markings on males has been verified. Therefore, I propose changing the sentence to "The ability to sense UV light (see Vision section) is used by at least one species, Cosmophasis umbratica, in courtship behavior [33],[34], though it is reasonable to assume that many other species exhibit this characteristic." Fresnelwiki (talk) 15:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Purpose of dragline during jumping
This sentence is in the introductory paraph to the Behavior section: "When a jumping spider moves from place to place, and especially just before it jumps, it tethers a filament of silk (or 'dragline') to whatever it is standing on to protect itself if the jump should fail," and references the highly quoted book by Foelix. Has this claim been backed up by research? Due to their small size, falling poses little or no physical danger to a Jumping spider, except perhaps to a very gravid female. I have many times seen a Jumping spider fall short of its jump target and climb back up the dragline to the spider's original perch, but I don't think this is done for safety.Some species that I have observed do not seem to do this; they simply land below their target and continue on their merry way. So, I propose removing the statement that draglines during jumps are made for protection. Fresnelwiki (talk) 15:58, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Reference to BBC Video Link Not Working
The link to the world's biggest jumping spider video is not working. It takes you to the main page of BBC Earth. I found the same video on YouTube, so I'm going to change the URL for the reference. Fresnelwiki (talk) 02:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Linguistics in the Digital Age
— Assignment last updated by Etaylor345 (talk) 20:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC)