Heterocaucaseuma mauriesi (Golovatch & Makarov, 2011) comb. nov.

Fig. 66

Anamastigona mauriesi Golovatch & Makarov, 2011: 16 –20, figs 31–45. Anamastigona mauriesi— Vagalinski & Golovatch, 2016: 12.

Diagnosis. Differs from the other Heterocaucaseuma gen. nov. species by the presence of lateral horns which are higher than the medial part, but significantly shorter than in H. longicorne gen. et sp. nov., by the presence of a squarish medial part, in anterior view, of the anterior gonopods, and by the presence of a somewhat subtriangular coxal process on male leg-pair 7.

Type locality. ABKHAZIA: Duripsh, Cave Tarkiladze (= Cave Tarkila).

Material studied (total: 1 male, 3 juveniles) . Topotypes (total: 1 male, 3 juveniles) . All from ABKHAZIA, Cave Tarkiladze: 1 male, 3 juveniles, 19 Nov. 1943, Y.A. Birstein leg. (ZMUM ρ3309).

Distribution. Abkhazia (known only from Cave Tarkiladze) (Fig. 167, orange circle).

Note. This, ca 30 mm long species is characterized as by the presence of some troglomorphic features, such as reduced body pigmentation and somewhat elongated walking legs and antennae. Golovatch & Makarov (2011: 18, figs 33 and 34) mistakenly show the same drawings for leg-pairs 4 and 5. In this species, leg-pair 5 is characterized by the presence of a well-developed, oral, basal protrusion on the prefemur. As in the previous two species of this genus, the gonopods of this species are also characterized by the presence of an anterior, hairy, sternal sac, and by the presence of a medial syncoxal part and two lateral parts. The syncoxal medial part is squarish, with an anterior projection and with coxal vesicles posteriorly. The lateral parts are significantly shorter than those in H. longicorne sp. nov., but higher than in H. feminaepectorum sp. nov. The posterior gonopods consist of the same parts as in the other species of Heterocaucaseuma and Caucaseuma: coxites divided, each with a pair of flagelliform processes; posterolaterally with telopodital remnants; coxal vesicles present anteriorly.

Vagalinski & Golovatch (2016), in a recent review of Anamastigona, took a more conservative approach and still treated H. mauriesi as a species of Anamastigona .