Arachnologische Mitteilungen 58

Infraspecific spider taxa of Embrik Strand 45 Leucauge grata squallyensis Strand, 1911 = Opadometa grata (Guérin, 1838) syn. conf. Leucauge grata tomaensis Strand, 1911 = Opadometa grata (Guérin, 1838) syn. conf. For Leucauge grata , known to be highly variable in colour pattern, Strand (1911a: 204, 1915b: 199-200) described seven different varieties from New Guinea and the Solo- mon Islands because of differences in colour patterns and illustrated them (Fig. 8). Bonnet (1957: 2461) saw them all as synonyms of the nominate form and the World Spider Catalog (2019) lists them as subspecies. All types are avail- able in the SMF (3892–3905) and were re-examined (TB vid.). Dorsal and ventral colour pattern vary a bit, also the triangular shape of the epigyne is slightly variable, the epi­ gynal opening, however, is always identical. Therefore, we conclude that all seven taxa are synonyms of the nominate form. Roewer (1938: 49-50) obviously came to a similar conclusion when he synonymized all seven subspecies sub Leucauge grata . In his Katalog der Araneae (Roewer 1942: 1006-1007), however, he did not follow or overlooked his former decision and listed all varieties as subspecies. Here we confirm Roewer’s (1938) first decision that all seven sub- species are synonyms of the nominate form which is now Opadometa grata . Leucauge meruensis karagonis Strand, 1913 = subspecies inquirenda Described by Strand (1913a: 363) from a female from Lake Karago in northern Rwanda (ZMB 26111–12, re-examined, CK vid.) as a new variety of Leucauge meruensis Tullgren, 1910 which was found at Mt. Meru, north-eastern Tanzania, 1400 km distant (type not available). Strand mentioned the usual colour differences but also differences in the structure of the epigyne. Strand’s description is rather confusing because he also argued with structural differences in the epigyne when comparing it dry and in alcohol. His conclusion was “Ich führe vorläufig diese Form als Varietät von L. meruensis auf, ohne die Möglichkeit, dass sie eine gute Art ist, bestreiten zu wollen.“ [I describe this form preliminarily as a variety of L. meruensis but do not deny the possibility that it is a good species.] Bonnet (1957: 2461) synonymized it with the nominate form. East Af- rican Leucauge species urgently need a revision and it is unclear whether both taxa are conspecific, especially because Strand ar- gued with differences in the female genitalia. We refrain from changing the current taxonomic status of this taxon, listed by the World Spider Catalog (2019) as a subspecies, but note that further study is needed: subspecies inquirenda. Theraphosidae Crypsidromus trinitatis pauciaculeis Strand, 1916 = subspecies inquirenda From Trinidad, which is also the location of the nominate form, Strand received one dark brown male (instead of black as in the nominate form) with 10 spines (instead of 12) on tibia II and a larger body size. He wrote (Strand 1916b: 85) that “das einzige mir vorliegende Exemplar nicht besonders gut erhalten” [his only specimen was not very well preserved] but nevertheless decided that it should be described as an own variety (as a subspecies in the World Spider Catalog 2019, transferred to Pseudhapalopus by Gabriel 2016: 87). The type should be in the SMF (Strand 1916), but Gabriel was not able to locate it and concluded that it is “probably lost” (Gabriel 2016: 87) . Only recently, the holotype could be found (SMF 2669) and is available for study. Therefore, we conclude that Crypsidromus trinitatis pauciaculeis Strand, 1916 is a subspe- cies inquirenda. Heteroscodra crassipes latithorax Strand, 1920 = syn. nov. of the nominate form of Heteroscodra crassipes Hirst, 1907 Originally described by Strand (1920: 107) from a female from Congo as a separate species H. latithorax , because it was smaller than the nearest related species H. crassipes Hirst, 1907, that also occurs in the Congo (Giltay 1929: sub crassipes , see also Laurent 1943). Laurent (1943) showed that H. latithorax falls within the body size variation of different populations of H. crassipes in the Congo area and downgrad- ed it to a subspecies of the later species: H. crassipes latitho- rax . We could not detect the type material in the Tervuren museum MRAC, nor in any of the other contacted muse- ums. Since body size, especially in theraphosid spiders, is not a suitable argument to separate species, we synonymize this subspecies with the nominate form of Heteroscodra crassipes Hirst, 1907. Hysterocrates affinis angusticeps Strand, 1907 = nomen dubium From the same location in Cameroon as the nominate form, Strand (1907d: 254) described a single female as the vari- ety angusticeps due to minor differences in the size of body and leg parts and there were also minor differences between eye distances. Strand’s concluded that it is hardly another species than H. affinis and described it as a variety. Bonnet (1957: 2274) saw it as a synonym of the nominate form and the World Spider Catalog (2019) lists it as a subspecies. The type material belonged to the museum Lübeck, that had been destroyed 1942. Also, we did not detect it in any of the other Fig. 9: Subspecies of Opadometa grata , as described and illustrated by Strand (1915b: pl. 13, Figs 2-6, 10). a. bukaensis ; b. squally- ensis ; c. tomaensis ; d. anirensis ; e. maitland- ensis ; f . salomonum . Strand’s arguments for creating different subspecies were differ- ences in colour or pattern