Ammotrechinae Roewer, 1934, 1900

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

publication ID	https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/asp.81.e95181
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:BE57FF40-7147-40AC-8BEA-1706A95DA4ED
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C64CBDB2-DCFC-5C54-82CB-F69EE2AB26EE
treatment provided by	Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny by Pensoft
scientific name	Ammotrechinae Roewer, 1934
status

Treatment

3.1.1. Subfamily Ammotrechinae Roewer, 1934 View in CoL

Figs 1 View Figure 1 , 2 View Figure 2 , 3 View Figure 3 , 4 View Figure 4 , 5 View Figure 5 , 6 View Figure 6 , 7 View Figure 7 , 8 View Figure 8 , 9 View Figure 9 , 10 View Figure 10 , 11 View Figure 11 , 12 View Figure 12 , 13 View Figure 13 , 14 View Figure 14 , 15 View Figure 15 , 16 View Figure 16 , 17 View Figure 17 , 18 View Figure 18 , 19 View Figure 19

Ammotrechinae Roewer, 1934: 590-591; Mello-Leitão 1938: 22; Muma 1951: 123; Muma 1970: 44; Muma 1971: 11-12; Muma 1976: 24-25; Harvey 2003: 200; Brookhart and Brookhart 2006: 323.

Revised diagnosis.

Ammotrechinae s.str. genera feature the one characteristic that typically defines Ammotrechidae : having the flagellum of the chelicera of males shaped as an open bowl, with the opening placed prolaterally (i.e., facing the opposite chelicera) (e.g., Figs 6A View Figure 6 , 8D View Figure 8 , 16A View Figure 16 ) ( Roewer 1934; Maury 1984; Bird et al. 2015). Ammotrechinae s.str., as defined in these lines, is presumed to be a monophyletic group of solifuges (see generic composition below) that exhibit the following combination of features (applicable to males and females unless otherwise specified). i) Cheliceral movable finger with retroventral longitudinal carina (MRVC) (Figs 2 View Figure 2 , 3 View Figure 3 ). ii) Movable finger prolateral (MPL) tooth present (Fig. 6B View Figure 6 ). iii) Cheliceral fixed finger without subdistal (FSD) tooth/teeth (Figs 2 View Figure 2 , 3 View Figure 3 ). iv) Fixed finger of female with pronounced angular dorsal crest at level of FP-RFA tooth (Figs 3A View Figure 3 , 9A, B View Figure 9 , 14A, B View Figure 14 ). v) Pedipalp femur retroventral surface with a suture-like cleavage plane that allows autotomy (Figs 17 View Figure 17 , 18 View Figure 18 ). vi) Legs II and III without retroventral spiniform setae on distal segment of telotarsus.

Revised generic composition.

Ammotrechinae s.str.: Ammotrecha Banks, 1900, Eutrecha Maury, 1982, Xenotrecha Maury, 1982. Other genera in Ammotrechinae s.l.: Ammotrechella Roewer, 1934, Ammotrechesta Roewer, 1934, Ammotrechinus Roewer, 1934, Ammotrechula Roewer, 1934, Antillotrecha Armas, 1994, Campostrecha Mello-Leitão, 1937, Chileotrecha Maury, 1987, Mummuciona Roewer, 1934, Neocleobis Roewer, 1934, and Sedna Muma, 1971.

Remarks.

Two monotypic genera, Mummuciona Roewer, 1934 and Sedna Muma, 1971, were listed, incorrectly, as members of Mummuciidae in Harvey’s (2003) catalogue. Maury (1982) transferred Mummuciona to Ammotrechidae - which that author already considered as a family separate from Mummuciidae despite not having yet formally elevated Mummuciinae to the family rank, which he did shortly thereafter ( Maury 1984) - whereas the same author transferred Sedna to the same family a few years later (Maury 1987). Although both genera have since remained unassigned into Ammotrechidae , Iuri et al. (2021) recovered Sedna as belonging to an unresolved clade containing Ammotrechinae and Saronominae genera and proposed that Mummuciona could potentially belong to the same clade. In the absence of conclusive phylogenetic data on the systematic position of Mummuciona and Sedna , both genera are here included, conservatively, into Ammotrechinae s.l. The same decision is made for Chileotrecha , which Iuri et al. (2021) recovered in the same clade as Sedna .