Sinothela sinensis (Crosby & Bishop, 1932 )

Xu, Xin, Yu, Li, Liu, Fengxiang & Li, Daiqin, 2022, Delimitation of the segmented trapdoor spider genus Luthela gen. nov., with comments on the genus Sinothela from northern China (Araneae, Mesothelae, Liphistiidae), Zootaxa 5091 (1), pp. 131-154 : 152-153

Sinothela sinensis (Crosby & Bishop, 1932) , nomen dubium

Sinothela sinensis: Haupt, 2003: 71 .

Heptathela sinensis Bishop & Crosby 1932: 5 (holotype female, from Shandong Christian University, Jinan City, Shandong Province, collected by A. Jacot in May 1930, deposited at the American Museum of Natural History, New York, not examined due to unable to loan or image the holotype from museum under the situation of COVID pandemic); Bristowe, 1933: 1055; Wen & Zhu, 1980: 39 (male description without the detail information on collection site and where it was deposited; presumed to be lost); Haupt 1983: 285; Hu, 1984: 26; Song & Haupt 1984: 445 (drawings of the male palp based on the specimen collected from Xingyang, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, deposited in IZCAS, examined; Zhu & Shi, 1985: 48; Zhang, 1987: 44; Zhao, 1993: 53; Song, Zhu & Chen, 1999: 33; Song, Zhu & Chen, 2001: 46.

Abcathela sinensis: Ono, 2000: 150 .

Sinothela sinensis: Haupt, 2003: 71 ; Xu et al., 2015a: 139.

Songthela sinensis: Zhu & Zhang, 2011: 30 .

For the detailed description of holotype, see Bishop & Crosby 1932; for the illustration of holotype female and secondarily associated non-type male genital anatomy, see Haupt 1983 and S ong & Haupt 1984.

Remarks. We were unable to redescribe the species, Sinothela sinensis , from the holotype female for a few reasons. We were unable examine the holotype female (lodged at the American Museum of National History). The type locality (Shandong Christian University) of the species no longer exists. While our collecting efforts in the type vicinity (Jinan, Shandong Province) did produce a single female specimen, the exact identity of the female specimen is doubtful without examining the holotype and due to highly intraspecific variation in female genital morphology. For the males collected from Huolu, Hebei Province ( Wen & Zhu 1980) and from Xingyang, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province ( Song & Haupt 1984), we doubt that they were corrected diagnosed as the species. Thus, Sinothela sinensis is here considered a nomen dubium.