Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study demonstrates that Discocyrtus bos Roewer is the oldest potentially valid name associated with one of the most complex nomenclatural histories in Neotropical harvestmen. The confusion resulted from three historically independent factors: homonymy involving Gonyleptes curvipes C.L. Koch, incorrect authorship attribution of D. bos and the inclusion of an extraneous specimen in Roewer’s original concept of the species. Examination of the syntypes of D. bos (SMF RII/944) shows that they are conspecific with Discocyrtus flavigranulatus B. Soares, which is here placed in its synonymy, and a lectotype is designated from the syntype series. Accordingly, D. bos is recognised as the correct name for the species. The specimen illustrated by Roewer from Santa Catarina does not belong to the type series and probably represents an undescribed species of Conapesquius Carvalho and Kury, here described as Conapesquius permutatus sp. n. based on recently collected material. Redescriptive notes, new illustrations of type material, male genital morphology, intraspecific variation and updated distributional data are provided for D. bos. This study resolves a long-standing taxonomic problem and highlights the importance of re-examining historical type material in composite species concepts.http://www.zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0340434A-4FF7-433E-9FAB-2F5FD724A820https://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:9B48C3C5-0A7D-43C0-B16B-938F48E7A169https://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:39832546-F4EC-4036-8AB1-4CDA2026E7F4
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carvalho et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: