Eutrecha longirostris Maury, 1982

Botero-Trujillo, Ricardo, Martinez, Leonel, Iuri, Hernan Augusto, Ojanguren-Affilastro, Andres Alejandro & Carvalho, Leonardo Sousa, 2023, Revision of the genera Eutrecha and Xenotrecha (Solifugae: Ammotrechidae), taxonomic notes on Ammotrechinae, and description of a remarkable new Eutrecha from Colombia, Arthropod Systematics & amp; Phylogeny 81, pp. 317-344 : 317

3.1.5. Eutrecha longirostris Maury, 1982

Figs 1 , 2A

Eutrecha longirostris Maury, 1982: 125, 126, 129, 137-139, figs 29-34; Harvey 2003: 210; Hernández and Colmenares 2008: 447, 448, figs 1, 2; Villareal-Blanco et al. 2017: 139, 140, 142, 143, fig. 15.

Type material.

Holotype. VENEZUELA • ♂; La Guaira [formerly Vargas], Districto Federal, Punta de Tarma; 10°33′52.48″N 67°09′13.00″W; 06 Dec 1978; M. von Dagel leg.; MAGS 167. Examined by photographs.

Distribution.

Eutrecha longirostris is known only from two localities in the states of Lara and Vargas, Venezuela (Fig. 1 ).

Remarks.

Eutrecha longirostris was described from a single male specimen from Punta de Tarma, in the state of Vargas, Venezuela ( Maury 1982). That was the only record of this species for many years, until Hernández and Colmenares (2008) recorded a second male from Barquisimeto, in the nearby state of Lara (Fig. 1 ). No other records of E. longirostris exist to date and the female of this species remains unknown.

The holotype of E. longirostris is supposed to be currently deposited at the MIZA, where the MAGS collection is being taken care of. Unfortunately, we were unable to examine this specimen or the other known male. Based on the original description and photos of the holotype made available to us by a collaborator (P.A. Colmenares), it is certain that E. longirostris is closely related to E. florezi , species from which a solid morphological distinction is not possible at this moment.

Villareal-Blanco et al. (2017) presented a diagnosis to separate E. florezi from E. longirostris . Nevertheless, the diagnostic characters listed by these authors are rather discretionary and it is possible that some could be intra-specifically variable. For what is of interest to the scope of this manuscript, E. longirostris and E. florezi very much resemble one another, and future research will be necessary to elucidate whether both are indeed separate species.

Thanks to the photos shared with us, we can confirm that Maury’s (1982) description and illustrations are a very accurate reflection of the actual morphology of the type specimen. Therefore, Maury’s (1982) description of E. longirostris continues to be the clearest and most complete reference so far available for this species.

Figures

Figure 1. Known records of Eutrecha Maury, 1982 (squares, circles and pentagons) and Xenotrecha Maury, 1982 (crosses). Records with question mark correspond to unconfirmed record from Suriname and the unprecise type locality of X. huebneri in the headwaters of the Orinoco River, in Venezuela. See text for details.

Figure 2. Eutrecha Maury, 1982, schematic representation of cheliceral morphology, retrolateral aspect. A Eutrecha longirostris Maury, 1982, holotype ♂ (MAGS 167). B Eutrecha florezi Villareal-Blanco, Armas and Martinez, 2017, ♂ (IAvH I 472), Santuario de Flora y Fauna Los Colorados, Bolivar Department, Colombia. C Eutrecha belenensis sp. nov., holotype ♂ (ICN Aso 008). Abbreviations: FD, fixed finger, distal tooth; FM, fixed finger, medial tooth; FMAD, fixed finger, median apical diastema; FP, fixed finger, proximal tooth; FSM, fixed finger, submedial tooth; FT, fixed finger, terminal tooth; MM, movable finger, medial tooth; MN, movable finger, medial notch; MP, movable finger, proximal tooth; MRLC, movable finger, retrolateral carina; MRVC, movable finger, retroventral longitudinal carina; MSM, movable finger, submedial tooth; MT, movable finger, terminal tooth; RFA, retrofondal apical tooth; RFM, retrofondal medial tooth; RFP, retrofondal proximal tooth; RFSP, retrofondal subproximal tooth. Arrowheads in B indicate extremely reduced FSM, FM, and FD teeth.