Sericopelma commue F.O.P.-Cambridge, 1897

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 : 82-83

Taxon classification Animalia Araneae Theraphosidae

Sericopelma commue F.O.P.-Cambridge, 1897

Sericopelma communis F.O.P-Cambridge: 15 (D male).

Sericopelma commune Smith, 1991b: 18 (f), here considered misplaced in this species.

Type.

Male (3 male syntypes, BMNH 1898-12-24-19-21, male syntype OUMNH O.P.-Cambridge Coll. Jar 106):

Remarks.

Smith (1991b) refers to three of four male syntypes from Chiriquí as Sericopelma commune , specifically BMNH 1898-12-24-19-21 (i.e. accessioned 24th-Dec-1898, coded ‘19-21’), then described a female, saying "Female BMNH 98-12-24-22. Assigned to the species by Valerio". The only female BMNH specimen with this accession has the oldest label "Museo Nacional de Costa Rica, Pozo Azul de Pirrís, José C. Zeldón”, naming a collector from the 1890s. A later label " Sericopelma immensa n. sp. Det. C. E. Valerio, Jan 10, 1979" matches his paper ( Valerio 1980) referring to a BMNH specimen from this same locality as Sericopelma immensum . However, the species on the Valerio label has been physically scored out, but likely reads immensa . Another pen-written label says " Sericopelma commune F.O Pick–Cambr.” (in handwriting of curator Doug Clark, died 1972), apparently present when both Valerio and Smith examined the specimen. We suspect this label misled Smith (1991b) to reconsider the specimen as the un-described female Sericopelma commune , even though collected at a Costa Rican locality (Parrita Cantón, Puntarenas), approx. 250 km from the Chiriquí type site. However Smith only records the distribution (indicating both sexes) from Chiriquí, Panama. Further confusion occurs with another mature male in BMNH with an old pencil-written label “Panama”, then two pen labels in Clark’s handwriting, " Sericopelma commune PDA Costa Rica BMNH 1898-12-24-22" and " Sericopelma commune det. Clark 1960". We suspect these latter labels were an attempt by Clark to wrongly allocate this “Panama” male to both the Pozo Azul de Pirrís accession, and as a ‘missing’ fourth male syntype of Sericopelma commune . Clark perhaps did not realise that fourth male is in the Pickard-Cambridge collection at OUMNH, where a male labelled ‘syntype’ had the unequivocal label " Sericopelma communis Fopc Chiriqui - Champion". In a BMNH accessions book, 1898-12-24-22 corresponds to " Sericopelma sp? Pozo Azul de Pirrís (Costa Rica). Pres. by F.D. Godman, Esq., Costa Rica Mus, F.O.P.-Cambridge". However, although F.O. Pickard-Cambridge apparently recognised it as a possible female Sericopelma sp, the lack of accounts before Valerio (1980) indicate it was ignored, perhaps due to uncertainty about matching it with known males. We consider this female to be the same listed by both Valerio (1980) and Smith (1991b) and suggest its unsecure designation as the first described female of Sericopelma commune be suspended, instead to favour topotypic specimens from Chiriquí, such as the region of Volcán where G. Champion likely collected the four male syntypes.

Distribution.

Only known from type locality, Chiriquí = Chiriquí, Provincia de Chiriquí, República de Panamá.