Metabalta polyhastata (Hara, 2016) comb. nov.

Nanophareus polyhastatus Hara, 2016: 117; Pérez-Schultheiss et al., 2019: 10. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 364BA304-56DD- 4C73-9BF3-FA652B038A46

The results of the cladistic analysis (Fig. 1) demonstrated that Nanophareus polyhastatus Hara, 2016 forms a wellsupported clade with species of Metabalta . This relationship is underpinned α-taxonomically too, as evidenced by a close examination of the original description and illustrations of N. polyhastatus: the exomorphological and genital features of this species (Hara, 2016) best match the character states present in Metabalta, as defined in Table 8. For example, fig. 6A by Hara (2016) clearly displays pedipalp coxae with ‘normal’ appearance, i.e., not elongated as in Nanophareus . In addition, N. polyhastatus has a ‘normal’ development of basichelicerite and pedipap femur, and the retrolateral apical-subapical spines on tibia are placed in a bifid basal socket, not as large and furcate-tipped as in Nanophareus (Table 8, chars. b, d, h). Several genital characters support the transfer of N. polyhastatus into Metabalta, like the sigmoid curvature of stylus, its orientation and apical narrowing, and the apical end of VPS (Table 8, chars. o, p, r, s); drawings of Hara (2016) are not detailed enough to see if also char. t (subapical spines on VPS shaft) applies. Based on this evidence, I hereby formally propose the new combination Metabalta polyhastata (Hara, 2016) comb. nov. (the original spelling polyhastatus changed to polyhastata to ensure the agreement in grammatical gender with the genus name Metabalta).

Aside, Pérez-Schultheiss et al. (2019) suggested that N. polyhastatus and Metabalta albipes Mello-Leitão, 1931 might prove to be the same. Although the latter species has no original figure available for a comparison, that of Metabalta porteri Mello-Leitão, 1936 (currently under synonymy of M. albipes, after Ringuelet 1959) looks identical to M. polyhastata, as described and drawn by Hara (2016); key similarities refer to the general apophysis pattern on femur IV, and the shape (and thickness) of apophysis of coxa IV. Until the relevant types are studied I prefer not to formalize this presumed specific synonymy. It should be noted that M. polyhastata was included by Hara (2016) in his cladistic analysis of Nanophareus, but resulted in an internal position in the genus.

Additional material examined. Metabalta efformata: Chile: Sierra de Chillán, 2 ♂ syntypes (SMF RII 952) ; Metabalta geniculata: Chile: Valparaíso, 1 ♂, 1 ♀ syntypes (SMF RII 951) ; Nanophareus palpalis: ‘ Chile’, 1 ♂ lectotype, 1 ♂, 2 ♀ paralectotypes (designated by Hara et al. 2012; SMF 986 /1); Nanophareus bosqenublado: Chile: Los Molles, elev. 2 m, under succulent rock cover along coast, 9 Jan. 1985, N.I. Platnick & O.F. Francke (AMNH) .