|
PHYLOGENY/TAXONOMY
EREMOBATINAE
Eremobates angustus group aztecus group lapazi group pallipes group palpisetulosus group ajoanus series Eremobates affinis Eremobates ajoanus Eremobates bixleri kraepelini series Eremobates gracilidens Eremobates inkopaensis Eremobates kraepelini Eremobates otavonae Eremobates pallidus Eremobates pimanus Eremobates pyriflora Eremobates titschacki nodularis series Eremobates nodularis palpisetulosus series Eremobates bajadae Eremobates bantai Eremobates kiseri Eremobates marathoni Eremobates norrisi Eremobates palpisetulosus Eremobates polhemusi Eremobates texanus scopulatus series Eremobates fagei Eremobates girardi Eremobates inyoanus Eremobates kastoni Eremobates leechi Eremobates nanus Eremobates nivis Eremobates papillatus Eremobates scopulatellus Eremobates scopulatus Eremobates spissus Eremobates tejonus Eremobates tuberculatus Eremobates vicinus Eremobates villosus Eremobates williamsi unplaced Eremobates bajaensis Eremobates coahuilanus Eremobates guenini Eremobates hessei Eremobates hystrix Eremobates purpusi scaber group vallis group Eremocosta Eremorhax Eremothera Horribates THEROBATINAE Chanbria Eremochelis Hemerotrecha
|
Eremobates palpisetulosus species group
Diagnosis: Muma (1951) recognized this species group as including those species of Eremobates in which the fixed cheliceral fingers of males are straight or at most slightly sinuate in dorsal view, bear a constriction but no distinct notch at their base, have an ectodorsal, toothlike process near their base, and have the mesoventral groove dilated basally. Males are also provided, he noted, with two to 10 ctenidia on the first post-spiracular abdominal sternite. Females have roughly triangular genital opercula which are adjacent anteriorly, widely separated posteriorly, and have a deep oval pit near the ectal margin of each plate. Muma (ibid.) reported the fondal dentition as being the same as in the scaber group, except that the females have the ectal row graded II, I, III, IV in size. He later (Muma 1986, 1987) suggested that fondal tooth formulae are not valid for genus or group separation, as they are subject to wear, especially by females. Muma (1989), in a key to the species groups of Eremobates based on males, characterized males of this group as having the mesal groove of the fixed cheliceral finger mesoventral in position, narrowed apically (occupying less than half of finger width), and distinctly dilated basally, with the fixed cheliceral finger straight or at most slightly sinuate in dorsal view and with an ectodorsal, ridge-like or tooth-like process near its base. In an accompanying key to the species groups of Eremobates based on females, he characterized the females as having opercula that are widely separated posteriorly and/or slightly to distinctly lobate at their posterio-ectal angles, with a pair of deep, distinct pits about midway along their ectal margins and a posteriomesal notch that is wide and long (occupying at least a third of the opercular area) and smoothly flared or arched mesally, . Distribution: Widely distributed in western North America. Included species: Key to subgroups:
Notes: Muma (1986) commented that this is proving to be the largest and most difficult species-group of Eremobates. The fondal tooth formulae, he observed, are no longer considered valid for genus or group separation, as they are subject to wear, especially by females. He further opined that females, unless collected in association with males or from within known distribution ranges, are nearly impossible to place to species.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
