Sericopelma angustum (Valerio, 1980) Valerio, 1980

Gabriel, Ray & Longhorn, Stuart J., 2015, Revised generic placement of Brachypelmaembrithes (Chamberlin & Ivie, 1936) and Brachypelmaangustum Valerio, 1980, with definition of the taxonomic features for identification of female Sericopelma Ausserer, 1875 (Araneae, Theraphosidae), ZooKeys 526, pp. 75-104 : 80-81

Taxon classification Animalia Araneae Theraphosidae

Sericopelma angustum (Valerio, 1980) comb. n.

Brachypelma angusta Valerio, 1980: 269, f. 19. (D female)

Euathlus angustus : Raven 1985: 150 (T f from Brachypelma ).

Brachypelma angustum : Schmidt 1992: 10, f. 8 (T f from Euathlus ).

Brachypelma angustum : Schmidt 1993: 82, f. 192. (misidentification*) [*Note: The figure 'Abb. 192' in Schmidt 1993 shows a spermathecae of an alleged Brachypelma angustum , but does not conform to either the Valerio’s (1980) drawing of the holotype spermathecae, nor our examination of the type. We suggest the material of Schmidt (1993) was likely misidentified pet trade Brachypelma sp. as with discussion and figures in Peters (2000, 2003), also misidentified pet trade Brachypelma sp.]

Description.

Female (Holotype UCR 433): Total length including chelicerae 58.9. Carapace, length 22.9, width 19.2.Caput, high. Ocular tubercle, length 2.6, width 3.1. Anterior row procurved, posterior row recurved. Eyes, ALE> PLE, PLE> AME, AME> PME. Clypeus, 0.5, clypeal fringe long. Fovea, deep transverse. Maxillae, with 80-100 cuspules, covering approximately 60% of proximal edge. Labium, length 2.9, width 3.7, with 21 labial cuspules (a bald area in the centre of the labium lacks sockets for cuspules and may indicate previous damage, this cannot be confirmed until further specimens are examined) most separated by less than 0.5-1 times the width of a single cuspule. Labio-sternal mounds separate. Sternum damaged, narrow, length 10.2 (approx), width 8.4 with three pairs of sigilla. Femur IV with a dense pad of plumose hair on retro-lateral surface, pro-lateral surfaces of trochanter/femur of anterior legs lacking stridulatory setae. Tarsi I–IV densely scopulate, tarsus IV with spines along central axis. Metatarsal scopulae, I 84%, II 78%, III 35%, of the length of the segment, IV lacking scopulae. Lengths of leg and palpal segments see Table 1. Spination: femurs I, II, IV d 0-0-1, III 0-0-4, palp 0-0-2 (no spines on LHS palp only on RHS palp), patella II, palp 0-1-0, III 1-1-0, tibia I d 0-2-0, v 4-3-3, II d 1-1-1, v 2-4-3, III d 2-2-2, v 3-5-3, tibia IV d 2-0-4, v 4-4-3, palpal tibia d 0-2-1, v 2-2-4 (apical), metatarsus I v 2-0-3, II d 0-1-1, v 2-1-3(apical), III d 3-3-2, v 3-5-10 (6 apical), IV d 6-5-4, v 8-11-16 (6 apical). Posterior lateral spinnerets with three segments, basal 3.9, medial 3.2, digitiform apical 5.1.Lateral median spinnerets with one segment. Spermathecae, single domed receptacle apically swollen with slight medial indentation. Urticating hairs, type I and type III present.

Colour. Alcohol faded brown, posterior legs III and IV with longer reddish setae.

Distribution.

Only known from type locality San Pedro de Arenal, Cantón San Carlos, Provincia de Alajuela, Costa Rica. [Likely DMS = 10°22'30"N, 84°34'47"W].

Remarks.

The holotype is now fragmented (Figs 6-11) and right legs II and III both appear to have been lost in life as coxal stumps are blackened indicating wound healing. Accession data from UCR and jar labels specify the holotype was collected on 01-Oct.-1974 by Edgar Vargas, but this information was not given by Valerio 1980. In the holotype jar of Sericopelma angustum a label "iqual a Sericopelma upala (?) CEV 13 julio 83" (Fig. 6) shows Valerio himself (= CEV) had doubts about placement in Brachypelma , also considering it conspecific to the male he described as Sericopelma upala . The type localities are close, less than 50 km apart in Alajuela with similar ecotypes of lowland tropical forest, now largely fragmented to sugarcane plantation and cattle pasture (S. Longhorn pers. obs). However, until further specimens of Sericopelma upala and/or Sericopelma angustum are examined, we are not prepared to place them into synonymy at this time. We suspect Valerio (1980) lacked sufficient access to Brachypelma material to make a more informed decision about the genus, failing to recognise defining characteristics (as outlined below).