Orcevia eucola Thorell, 1890 (丽DZĸ尔¤)

Figs 83–88, 279, 284, 292

Orcevia eucola Thorell, 1890: 167; Reimoser, 1925: 91; Prószyński & Deeleman-Reinhold, 2012: 50, figs 120–121; Prószyński, 2017: 75.

Laufeia eucola (Thorell, 1890): Simon, 1903: 824; Prószyński, 1984: 73–74; Zhang & Maddison, 2015: 30.

Type material. Holotype: ♀ (MSNG), Indonesia: Sumatra, Ajer Mancior, VIII-1878, leg. O. Beccari (Maria Tavano examined and shared the photos of holotype).

Diagnosis. Resembles O. meinei sp. nov. in the body form and size, but the male can be distinguished by the lobe on tip of RTA is invisible in the retrolateral view (Prószyński & Deeleman-Reinhold 2012: fig. 121; Fig. 284; vs. clearly visible in O. meinei sp. nov., Fig. 285); the female can be distinguished by the melanic area present only on distal half of female femur IV (Fig. 292), whereas the female femur IV is almost all dark in O. meinei sp. nov. (Fig. 293).

Description. See Thorell, 1890: 167.

Distribution. Known only from type locality.

Remarks. “Ajer Mancior” (also written as “Ajer Mantcior”, “Ajer Mantjoer” or “Ayer Mantjoer”), where the holotype female of O. eucola was collected, is currently known as Lembah Anai Waterfalls, located in Singalang Village (where O. Beccari stayed for a long time during his travel to Sumatra in 1878), Sepuluh Koto Sub-District, West Sumatra. Photographs and drawing of the holotype specimen are provided herein. Reimoser (1925: 91) listed this species in his catalog of Sumatran spiders based on the “paired” specimens collected from Fort de Kock, Bukittinggi, where is very close to the type locality. Prószyński (1984: 73–74) re-illustrated the Reimoser’s specimens (deposited in the Natural History Museum, Vienna). However, the Reimoser’s female has relatively large atria that are close to each other (Prószyński 1984: 74) indicating that it is presumably not O. eucola but likely O. zabkai sp. nov.; the Reimoser’s male shares similar palpal structure as O. meinei sp. nov. (Prószyński 1984: 73). Since we couldn’t examine Reimoser’s specimens to confirm certain detailed genitalic structures for species determination, whether the records of O. eucola in Reimoser (1925) and Prószyński (1984) represent misidentification needs further investigation.