Comments:  Roewer (1934) erected the genus Eremochelis Roewer 1934 to accommodate a single species, which he named Eremochelis insignitus and designated as the type species.   Roewer concisely characterized the genus as follows:

Eremobatinae, deren 2. und 3. Tarsus ventral mit jeweils 2.2.2.4.6 Dornen und deren 4. Tarsus ventral mit 2.2.2.2.2.2/2/1.2.6 Dornen bewehrt ist (Abb. 320 d, n).

         Muma (1951) later described the genus Therobates Muma 1951, which he characterized as:

Large- to small-sized Therobatinae. Fixed finger of male chelicera with a mesal or mesoventral groove. Flagellum complex composed of a dorsal row or group of simple tubular bristles, a mesal row or group of plumose bristles, and a ventral or basal row or group of simple tubular bristles. The plumose bristles partially or completely cover the mesoventral groove. First postspiracular abdominal sternite of males with ctenidia on its dorsal margin. Mesal tooth of movable finger of males and females present or absent. Opercula of females variable.

         Muma (ibid.) initially included nine species in the genus, which he divided into three species groups: the bilobatus group, the branchi group, and the imperialis group.  The bilobatus group included only the species now known as Eremochelis bilobatus (Muma 1951).  The branchi group included Eremochelis branchi (Muma 1951), Eremochelis medialis (Muma, 1951), Eremochelis morrisi (Muma 1951). Eremochelis gertschi (Muma 1951), Eremochelis iviei (Muma 1951), Eremochelis malkini (Muma 1951), Therobates cameronensis Muma 1951 (subsequently recognized as  a synonym of Eremochelis insignatus Roewer 1934). The imperialis group consisted solely of the species currently known as Eremochelis imperialis (Muma 1951).
         Muma (1962) added ten species to the genus, placing them into either one of the species groups described earlier, or into one of three newly defined species groups: the arcus group, the andreasana group, and the striodorsalis group.  He affiliated the species currently known as Eremochelis coloradensis (Muma 1962) with the branchi group, those currently known as Eremochelis acrilobatus (Muma 1962) and Eremochelis plicatus (Muma 1962) with the bilobatus group, and those now known as Eremochelis arcus (Muma 1962), Eremochelis macswaini (Muma 1962), Eremochelis cuyamacanus (Muma 1962) with the arcus group.  He placed the species currently known as Eremochelis andreasana (Muma 1962) and Eremochelis larreae (Muma 1962) into the andreasana group, placed what is now Eremochelis rothi (Muma 1962) into the imperialis group, and placed Eremochelis striodorsalis (Muma 1962) by itself in the striodorsalis group.  Therobates arcellus Muma 1962, placed into the bilobatus group, now recognized as a synonym of Eremochelis bidepressus (Muma 1951), currently in the branchi group.
         Muma (1970) synonymized Therobates Muma 1951with Eremochelis Roewer 1934, without changing altering the diagnosis of the genus.
         Rowland (1974) Rowland (1974) raised his concerns over utilizing the development of the apical plumose bristles of the flagellum complex in grouping species naturally within the genus, and noted that the apical bristles of Eremochelis rothi (Muma 1962), especially the apical two, are very similar in nature to those of Hemerotrecha banksi Muma, 1951.  Rowland (ibid.) noted that Muma (1962, 1970) had also noted the similarity of Eremochelis rothi to members of the genus Hemerotrecha Banks.
         Muma (1986) added three new species to the genus (Eremochelis sonorae Muma 1986, which he placed in the andreasana group, and Eremochelis rossi Muma 1986 and Eremochelis truncus Muma 1986, which he placed in the bilobatus group), noting that their addition did not alter the concepts of the curent subgeneric groupings.  He also listed Eremochelis flexacus (Muma 1963) within the bilobatus group without explanation.
         Muma (1989) offered the most recent diagnosis of Eremochelis (see above), and added ten new species to the genus: Eremochelis cochiseae Muma 1989, Eremochelis giboi Muma 1989. Eremochelis kerni Muma 1989, and Eremochelis noonani Muma 1989 were placed into the bilobatus group; Eremochelis bechteli Muma 1989, Eremochelis flavus Muma 1989, Eremochelis fuscellus Muma 1989, Eremochelis saltoni Muma 1989, and Eremochelis tanneri Muma 1989 were placed in the branchi group; and Eremochelis undulus Muma 1989 was placed in the imperialis group.  He also transferred Eremochelis larreae (Muma 1962) to the imperialis group, transferred Eremochelis rothi (Muma 1962) from the imperialis group to the andreasana group, refined his diagnosis of the andreasana group, combined the arcus and bilobatus groups into an expanded, redefined bilobatus group, and transferred Eremochelis morrisi (Muma 1951) from the branchi group to the bilobatus group.  Muma (ibid.) also provided a Key to Subfamilies and Genera of Eremobatidae (Males Only), in which he utilized the following characters to distinguish Eremochelis: Leg 1 with 2 claws; chelicerae 2.5–3 times longer than wide; Fixed cheliceral finger style-like or needle-like, straight, curved, or undulate but not S-shaped; with mesoventral groove that varies from one or more indistinct creases to an elongate hollow or cup; dorsal flagellum complex setae striate, ventral setae striate or plumose; small to moderate-sized species.
         Vázquez (1991) added Eremochelis lagunensis Vázquez 1991 to the genus, placing it in the bilobatus group, and Brookhart & Cushing, (2002) added Eremochelis oregonensis (Brookhart & Cushing, 2002), placing it in the branchi group.
         Brookhart and Brookhart (2006) slightly modified Muma's (1989) Key to Subfamilies and Genera of Eremobatidae (Males Only), retaining Muma's most recent characterization of the genus with little change.