Vitalius or Pamphobeteus?

[AlanMM]

Is Vitalius platyomma still an existing species? Or is it Pamphobeteus platyomma?

thanks

 

[MizM]

The answer is here:

http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog/THERAPHOSIDAE.html

 

[AlanMM]

In that list i see:

Gen. Vitalius Lucas, Silva & Bertani, 1993:
Nomina dubia:
V. platyomma (Mello-Leitão, 1923a: 228, originally in Pamphobeteus, T here by Lucas, Silva & Bertani, 1993: 245, jm, Brazil) -- Bertani, 2001: 309.

and:

Gen. Pamphobeteus Pocock, 1901
Transferred to other genera:
P. platyomma Mello-Leitão, 1923 -- see Vitalius.

Nomina dubia ?? hmm...
So, i presume, it's Vitalius platyomma then...

(because i still see lots of Phampobeteus platyomma's in describtions and other sources...)

 

[Sheri]

No, Pamphobeteus platyomma that we have in the trade is a Pamphobeteus sp. and many different species of Pamphobeteus may have been sold under the name platyomma. This entire genus is a mess because of exports of similar spiders being sold as sp. bolivia, sp. peru, sp. platyomma etc.

There was a Vitalius, but it has never been available in the hobby and is now called Vitalius wacketi.

So, aside from confusion because someone a long time ago mistakenly ID'd a Vitalius wacketi as a Pamhobeteus platyomma the two have nothing to do with one another.

Or... at least this is how I understood it. So until the bug being sold in the hobby right know known as Pamphobeteus platyomma is classified, we will continue to call it that, which actually has nothing at all to do with the spider Vitalius wacketi.

Please correct me if I am in error, or missing crucial parts of the timeline and events here.