- Joined
- Sep 22, 2007
- Messages
- 355
The spiders labeled as 'Latouchia batuensis' (in the US) are misidentified. L. batuensis is a Ctenizid.
I'm basing this info on the two specimens I purchased, which are identical in appearance to the image that accompanied the sellers description. I'm sure they are the same species that others have purchased as well.
A few obvious Ctenizid characters that apply to Latouchia, all of which are lacking in my specimens:
Short, thorn like spines on the distal segments of legs 1 and 2.
Carapace arched, glabrous.
Front eye row strongly procurved.
Apical segment of PLS domed.
Two rows of strong teeth on cheliceral furrow.
My so called 'Latouchia batuensis' are in fact Nemesiids, Damarchus cf. workmani. Compare to Damarchus description and D. workmani, fig 50-55, in Raven 1985. See also plate 3.5 in Murphy 2000.
Here is an image of some obvious traits noted in Raven, 1985.
Few cuspules on labium. Posterior sternal sigilla moderately large, oval, submarginal. Maxillae rectangular with slightly produced heel; anterior lobe absent; with numerous cuspules. Also note labiosternal junction as seen in fig. 53.
Some other easily observed features noted in Raven include:
Apical segment of PLS digitiform.
Fovea short, U-shaped.
Eye tubercle raised, well defined.
I'm basing this info on the two specimens I purchased, which are identical in appearance to the image that accompanied the sellers description. I'm sure they are the same species that others have purchased as well.
A few obvious Ctenizid characters that apply to Latouchia, all of which are lacking in my specimens:
Short, thorn like spines on the distal segments of legs 1 and 2.
Carapace arched, glabrous.
Front eye row strongly procurved.
Apical segment of PLS domed.
Two rows of strong teeth on cheliceral furrow.
My so called 'Latouchia batuensis' are in fact Nemesiids, Damarchus cf. workmani. Compare to Damarchus description and D. workmani, fig 50-55, in Raven 1985. See also plate 3.5 in Murphy 2000.
Here is an image of some obvious traits noted in Raven, 1985.
Few cuspules on labium. Posterior sternal sigilla moderately large, oval, submarginal. Maxillae rectangular with slightly produced heel; anterior lobe absent; with numerous cuspules. Also note labiosternal junction as seen in fig. 53.
Some other easily observed features noted in Raven include:
Apical segment of PLS digitiform.
Fovea short, U-shaped.
Eye tubercle raised, well defined.
Attachments
-
65.1 KB Views: 1,193