Pachomius argyrochrysos ( Mello-Leitão, 1946 ) Bayer & Höfer & Metzner, 2020

Bayer, Steffen, Höfer, Hubert & Metzner, Heiko, 2020, Revision of the genus Corythalia C. L. Koch, 1850, part 1: Diagnosis and new species from South America (Araneae: Salticidae: Salticinae: Euophryini), Zootaxa 4806 (1), pp. 1-144 : 122-125

Pachomius argyrochrysos ( Mello-Leitão, 1946) comb. nov.

Figs 56 A–I

Dinamius [ sic.!] argyrochrysos Mello-Leitão 1946: 89 (description of ♂) (the spelling of the genus name “ Dinamius ” was a lapsus, correct would be “ Dynamius ”, moreover, this genus name was misapplied at that point of time). Lectotype ♀ (specimen with chelicerae still present) and paralectotype ♀ (specimen with chelicerae dissected and lost) (here designated) from Par- aguay: Departamento Presidente Hayes: Puerto Pinasco, Mera G. von Bülow leg. Jan. 1943, MLPA 17020 ; types requested, but customs regulations of the state of Argentina do not allow to send scientific type material abroad. However , thanks to the kindness and efforts of Luis Alberto Pereira , the associate curator of the section “Arachnology and Myriapodology” and the permission by the main curator of the division “Zoología de Invertebrados” of the Museo de La Plata, María Cristina Damborenea, many photos of the two type specimens were made available for examination.

Corythalia argyrochrysos— Roewer 1954b: 1100 [listing of that species correctly under Corythalia according to: Simon 1901: 652, 655, 657 (Synonymy of Dynamius with Corythalia , hence, formal transfer of all species described or listed in that genus to Corythalia )].

Description. The description is only a short summary by mentioning a few characters of taxonomic interest. The reasons are: 1. This species is not a Corythalia . 2. A physical examination was not possible (see above).

Male: unknown.

Female: body length 6 mm. Basic colouration relatively dark red-brown, with light transversal band centrally on opisthosoma and additionally with short transversal band in front of spinnerets ( Figs 56A, 56G ). Carapace laterally and proximally without margin of light white to beige scale hairs (may or may not be rubbed off). General shape of carapace similar to the situation in Corythalia species but appears to be slightly longer ( Figs 56A, 56G ). Legs light brown to red brown, III & IV annulated (light brown & brown) ( Figs 56A, 56G ). Leg pair I (at least slightly) stronger and broader than others ( Figs 56 A–B). Palps similar like those in females of Corythalia species but distally (palpal tarsus) slightly broader ( Figs 56 C–D). Cheliceral claws longer than in Corythalia species ( Figs 56 B–D), distal endings (in resting position) crossing. Gnathocoxae shorter and labium slightly shorter than in Corythalia species ( Figs 56 C–D). Cheliceral furrow with two teeth at promargin (one clearly smaller and shorter than the other having normal size) and one at retromargin. The latter conspicuous and broad (larger than the large tooth on promargin) ( Fig. 56D ). Cheliceral base medio-distally at anterior surface without lobe. COPULATORY ORGAN: “Epigynal windows”, if regarded as such, very finely indicated and approximately round ( Figs 56E, 56H ). A crescent structure leading to the copulatory opening. Primary spermathecae visible through cuticle. Posterior margin of epigyne with conspicuous, deep invagination ( Figs 56E, 56H ). Epigynal field slightly longer than broad ( Fig. 56H ). Vulva: (primary) spermathecae clearly longer than broad, fertilisation ducts arising from medio-anteriorly. Copulatory duct quite broad ( Figs 56F, 56I ).

Remarks. Concluding the descriptive aspects above, this species definitely does not belong to the genus Corythalia . Although, colouration of dorsal opisthosoma and shape of the carapace (except the fact that it is slightly longer) would suggest assignment to the genus Corythalia , the length of the cheliceral claws, the teeth on both margins of the cheliceral furrow and the missing lobes medio-distally on anterior surface of cheliceral base are not common in Corythalia . Above all, the basic structures of the copulatory organ distinctly differ from Corythalia . The deep invagination at posterior part of epigyne, the missing secondary spermathecae and the relatively broad copulatory duct running simply from anterior to posterior resemble the conditions in some species of Phiale C.L. Koch, 1846 and definitely correspond to Pachomius . Consequently, this species is here transferred to the genus Pachomius .

Distribution. Presidente Hayes, Paraguay.

Figures

FIGURE 56. Pachomius argyrochrysos comb. nov., photographic images of specimens from Departamento Presidente Hayes, Paraguay (Luis Alberto Pereira).A–F Female lectotype (A dorsal view; B ventral view; C prosoma, ventral view; D labium, gnathocoxae and cheliceral bases and claws, ventral view; E epigyne, ventral view; F vulva, dorsal view). G–I Female paralectotype (G dorsal view; H epigyne, ventral view; I vulva, dorsal view).