Eucteniza Ausserer, 1875

Genus Eucteniza Ausserer, 1875 View in CoL View at ENA

Type species. Eucteniza mexicana Ausserer, 1875 View in CoL .

Diagnosis and General Discription. The genus was thoroughly diagnosed and redescribed by Bond and Godwin (2013): 36.

Composition. Eucteniza cabowabo ; E. caprica Bond & Godwin, 2013 ; E. chichimeca Bond & Godwin, 2013 ; E. coylei Bond & Godwin, 2013 ; Eucteniza cuixmala sp. nov.; E. diablo ; E. golondrina Bond & Godwin, 2013 ; E. hidalgo Bond & Godwin, 2013 ; E. huasteca Bond & Godwin, 2013 ; E. mexicana Ausserer, 1875 E. panchovillai Bond & Godwin, 2013 ; E. relata (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1895) ; E. ronnewtoni Bond & Godwin, 2013 , E. rosalia ; and E. zapatista . Total: 15 species.

Distribution. North America, mainly Mexico along the Sierra Madre Oriental , central parts of the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt, and the southern region of the Baja California Peninsula ( Bond & Godwin 2013: fig 1). Two species are described from the USA ( Texas).

Key to males

This identification key is an amended and exact copy of the key from Bond and Godwin (2013) and reproduced here with their permission, referred here as B&G (2013). As mentioned in Bond (2012) and cited in B&G (2013): “keys to many mygalomorph taxa are sometimes far from optimal and thus one should not rely too heavily on species determinations using this key. Instead, knowledge of where a specimen was collected and comparison to description and illustrations will likely prove more useful.”

1. Tarsus swollen mid-ventrally, width wider than metatarsus (B&G, 2013: fig. 8)........................... E. mexicana

- Tarsus width subequal to metatarsus width................................................................. 2

2. Tibia I swollen dorsally, behind tibia I metatarsus junction (B&G, 2013: fig 53)......................... E. chichimeca

- Tibia I not swollen dorsally behind tibia I metatarsus junction.................................................. 3

3. Ventral tibial megaspines borne on distinct apophysis (B&G, 2013: fig 31)....................................... 4

- Ventral tibial megaspines not borne on a distinct apophysis.................................................... 5

4. Tarsus I with short dorsal spines, tarsus III curved (B&G, 2013: figs 31, 35)................................. E. diablo

- Tarsus I lacks short spines, palpal tibia retrolateral surface with extensive spine patch (B&G, 2013: figs 48, 51, 52)................................................................................................... E. zapatista

5. Metatarsus I with ventral microspines and subdorsal row of spines on prolateral tibia II (B&G, 2013: figs 64, 66).. E. hidalgo

- Metatarsus I lacking ventral microspines, and leg II prolateral spines on tibia...................................... 6

6. Palpal tibia with row of retrolateral spines at distal edge and metatarsus I with patch of distal ventral spines (B&G, 2013: figs 69, 72, 73)................................................................................. E. golondrina

- Palpal tibia without row of retrolateral spines at distal edge; metatarsus lacks distinct ventral spines (numerous).......... 7

7. Very small (Cl < 3.5mm); very pale in coloration................................................... E. huasteca

- Typically larger in size (Cl> 4.00mm); darker in color........................................................ 8

8. Leg I metatarsus as long as or subequal in length to tibia; tibia slender with thin ventral megaspines (B&G, 2013: fig 37)............................................................................................. E. cabowabo

- Leg I tibia shorter than metatarsus, ventral megaspines typically thicker and tibia not slender (usually swollen mid-ventrally) 9

9. Leg I prolateral tibial spines are longer in length............................................................ 10

- Leg I prolateral tibial spines are shorter in length or with only one distal long spine ( Figs 13, 15 View FIGURES 12–15 )..................... 11

10. Leg I prolateral tibial spines fewer (10), longer in length, and thinner; spider paler in color (B&G, 2013: fig 14)... E. caprica

- Leg I with more prolateral tibial spines (14), which are relatively shorter in length and stouter (B&G, 2013: fig 19). E. coylei

11. Tibia I without prolateral spines, only with one distal long spine ( Figs 13, 15 View FIGURES 12–15 )..................... E. cuixmala sp. nov.

- Tibia I with prolateral spines (B&G, 2013: figs 26, 60)...................................................... 12

12. Tibia I with very few prolateral spines (<4), with few (1) spines situated distally (B&G, 2013: fig 60)....... E. ronnewtoni

- Tibia I with larger number of prolateral spines (>3), with spines more evenly distributed distally to proximally (B&G, 2013: fig 26)........................................................................................... E. relata