Peckhamia glabra ( Franganillo, 1930 ) Cala-Riquelme & Bustamante & Crews & Cutler, 2020

Cala-Riquelme, Franklyn, Bustamante, Abel A., Crews, Sarah C. & Cutler, Bruce, 2020, New species of Peckhamia Simon, 1900 (Salticidae: Dendryphantini: Synagelina) from the Greater Antilles, Zootaxa 4899 (1), pp. 141-160 : 155

Peckhamia glabra ( Franganillo, 1930) comb. nov. and nomen dubium

Sarinda glabra Franganillo, 1930: 37 ; Galiano, 1965: 280 (Holotype lost, Cuba, Sierra Maestra).

Notes. Franganillo (1930) described Sarinda glabra based on the morphology of both males and females from Sierra Maestra, Cuba. However, we believe that this species actually corresponds to Peckhamia . According to Galiano (1965), Peckhamia can be distinguished from Sarinda by the tibial spination, which has the regular 2-2-2 ventral macrosetae in the former and is 2-2-2- 2 in Sarinda ; the chelicerae with two promarginal teeth and a bicuspid retromarginal tooth in Peckhamia (four promarginal teeth and three retromarginal teeth, the retromarginal teeth almost equal in size in females ( Galiano 1965: fig. 10)); the male chelicerae are developed, projected anteriorly and divergent; in Peckhamia , leg I is swollen but the tarsi are not dilated (in Sarinda the tarsi are dilated, and the tibia are very elongated, more than 2 times the length of the patella (maybe to imitate antennae), and the sternum in Peckhamia is oval (subtriangular in Sarinda ), the embolus is distal and articulated by hematodochae in Peckhamia (fixed to tegulum and coiled more than two times around the tegulum in Sarinda ); and the female has the CD less developed (CD well-developed, coiled and with CD receptacle in Sarinda ).

Considering the original description ( Franganillo 1930: 37–38), we conclude that Sarinda glabra is erroneously placed in the genus Sarinda . Galiano (1965: 282) commented that S. glabra Franganillo, 1930 does not belong to Sarinda according to the original description, but because of the poor description and because the type specimens are lost, she did not establish any nomenclatorial change. Unfortunately, the type material of Franganillo (1930) is lost, and the original description is poor.

However, there are traits to support the transfer considering the revision of Galiano (1965): 1) males and females of Peckhamia have two teeth on the retromargin of the chelicerae, the proximal one larger than the distal one (as in P. espositoae sp. nov., P. areito sp. nov. and P. surcaribensis sp. nov.), while in Sarinda this trait varies from one to three retromarginal teeth; 2) In leg I, the tarsus is not dilated (= “fusiforme”) as in Sarinda ; and 3) tibia I is a bit larger than the patella and the sternum is oval (in Sarinda tibia I is much longer than the patella and the sternum is sub-pentagonal).

Even with expeditions and extensive collecting in the type locality of Sarinda glabra , we did not find the species. It is possible that the species described as S. glabra by Franganillo (1930) corresponds to one of the species described in our work. However, this cannot be proven based on the description alone. Based on the aforementioned evidence, we propose Peckhamia glabra ( Franganillo, 1930) comb. nov. as a nomen dubium.