Type Material

 

            Holotype: “Male holotype and female allotype collected in can traps in a Larrea thicket, June 1, 1973, north of Deming, NM by M. H. Muma and K. E. Muma, in FSCA” (Muma & Brookhart, 1988, p. 12).  

 

            Measurements: “Males (17) somewhat variable in size; CP varies from 10.0-13.8 (mean 12.1). Legs long; A/CP varies from 6.3-6.9 (mean 6.6). Fondal notches longer than wide varying in length/width ratio from 1.3-1.9 (mean 1.7) (fig. 21). Males have small to medium sized mesal tooth on movable cheliceral finger; mode medium sized” (Muma & Brookhart, 1988, p. 12). 

“Females (15) more variable in size; CP varies from 9.8-15.3 (mean 11.6). Legs short; A/CP varies from 4.9-5.6 (mean 5.3). Females have small or medium sized mesal tooth on movable cheliceral finger; mode small. Opercula with anterior lobes undulate or concave mesally; opercular notches occupying 21-51% of opercula (mean 31) (figs. 23-24). Opercular notches with straight or concave lateral margins” (Muma & Brookhart, 1988, p. 13). 

 

            Ctenidia Description: “Males distinguished by lack of ctenidia…of many specimens examined casually and 17 examined closely only 1 had a single tiny (trace) ctenidium” (Muma & Brookhart, 1988, p. 12).

            

            Operculum Description: “Females distinguished by apically, broadly rounded, anterior lobes of opercula, concave lateral margins of posterior opercular notch, and the wide, bowed vulvular opening” (Muma & Brookhart, 1988, p. 12).  

            

            Chelicerae Description: “rounded elements of anterior tooth of movable cheliceral finger, and laterally obscure ventral notch of movable cheliceral finger…ventral notch of movable cheliceral finger always obscure from ecto-lateral view, although it becomes distinct if chelicera is rotated ventrally. Dorsal process of fixed cheliceral finger peaked over distal half of fondal notch” (Muma & Brookhart, 1988, p. 12). 

 

Diagnosis: 

 

Other Information: “This species has no known close relatives within the group and series. It is nearly as large as marathoni Muma with a deep narrow fondal notch but lacks the markings and ctenidia of that species. There are indications that this species hybridizes with norrisi new species. See remarks under that species for maturity dates” (Muma & Brookhart, 1988, p. 13).