When Muma (1962) first described
Eremochelis andreasana (Muma 1962) and
Eremochelis larreae (Muma
1962), he placed these two small species into their own species group,
which he called the andreasana group,
characterized as follows:.
Small species.
Males with mesial groove of fixed finger a distinct to indistinct
shallow trough along ventral margin of finger. Apical plumose
bristle and apical striate bristle of flagellum complex somewhat
flattened and elongated. Basal or ventral tubular bristles situated in a
group below and behind fondal notch. Fondal notch obscure. Females
with posterior portions of genital opercula extended ectally into a
boot-like form. Ectal row of teeth graded in size II, III, I, IV;
mesial row, I, III, II, IV. Metatarsi of palpi provided with usual
clothing.
Muma (ibid.) suggested that the andreasana group has affinities with the
branchi group, noting the distinct
mesial groove and modified flagellar bristles. He further noted,
however, that both original members of the andreasana group have the movable
finger modified in a manner similar to that of the
imperialis group and the
fondal tooth formula somewhat like that of the genus
Chanbria Muma 1951.
Rowland (1974) commented that he could not satisfy himself that a
fundamental difference exists between Eremochelis imperialis (Muma 1951)
and
Eremochelis andreasana in regard to the relative development of
the apical bristle, and raised his concerns over utilizing the development
of the apical plumose bristles of the flagellum complex in grouping species
naturally within the genus. Rowland suggested that interpreting the
relative development of the bristles in question is not clear cut.
Muma (1986) added
Eremochelis sonorae Muma 1986
without altering his diagnosis of the andreasana group, and later (Muma
1989)transferred Eremochelis larreae
(Muma 1962) to the imperialis group, transferred
Eremochelis rothi (Muma
1962) from the imperialis group to the
andreasana group, and refined his
diagnosis of the andreasana group by describing its males as having the
fixed cheliceral finger undulate or notched venrally, and the flagellum
complex with only striate setae apically (the flagellum complex of the
imperialis group was characterized as having both striate and plumose setae
apically). Females were characterized as having the lateral pits of
the opercula indistinct, often hidden behind the lateral wings (the pits
were described as distinct, often invading the lateral wings in the
imperialis group).
Muma (1989) observed that males
of most species seemingly related to Eremochelis imperialis
have the apex of the movable cheliceral finger modified into a more or less
distinct cup, whereas those apparently related to
Eremochelis andreasana (Muma 1962) have the apex of the movable
cheliceral finger flanged at most. He further noted that
imperialis group species have the
apical setae of the flagellum complex serrate, but not especially enlarged.
Brookhart and Brookhart
(2006) retain Eremochelis rothi
(Muma 1962) in the imperialis group without explanation.
Muma's (1989) concept of
the andreasana group is retained here, and the following species are treated
as members:
Eremochelis andreasana
(Muma 1962)
Eremochelis
rothi (Muma 1962)
Eremochelis sonorae Muma 1986
