Elsalvadoria tomhaasi Bott, 1970

Magalhães, Célio & Wehrtmann, Ingo S., 2025, Taxonomic revision and distribution of the freshwater crabs of the family Pseudothelphusidae (Decapoda, Brachyura) from Guatemala, with the descriptions of two new species and keys to the species of all genera, Zoosystema 47 (26), pp. 581-615 : 587

Elsalvadoria tomhaasi Bott, 1970

( Figs 3 A-C; 14)

Elsalvadoria tomhaasi Bott, 1970: 361 , figs 5-8. — Pretzmann 1972: 97, figs 492-495, 578-580. — Rodríguez 1982: 95, figs 59b, c, e, 61a-d. — Villalobos F. 1982: 220 (in list). — Ng et al. 2008: 173 (in list). — Wehrtmann et al. 2016: 779 (in list). — Acevedo-Alonso & Cumberlidge 2022: 578 (Appendix 2, in list).

Elsalvadoria tomasi – Villalobos Hiriart & Álvarez 2008: 295 (in list) [error].

TYPE MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Holotype. Guatemala • 1 ♂ (41.1:25.1); Sacatepéquez, river near Volcán de Aguas [ 14°27’54”N, 90°44’35”W]; 900 m elev.; date and leg. unknown; SMF 4354 .

OTHER MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Guatemala • 1 ♂ (25.8:16.5); Guatemala, Mixco [ 14°38’N, 90°36’W; 1637 m elev.]; Finca La Esmeralda ; 17.VIII.1993; C. Cardona Gonzalez leg.; UVGCR 344 .

DISTRIBUTION. — Guatemala ( Guatemala, Sacatepéquez) ( Bott 1970; Wehrtmann et al. 2016; this study) ( Fig. 14). The only two available records point to a distribution in the Pacific drainage of southern Guatemala.

DESCRIPTION OF G1 ( Fig. 3 A-C)

Stem moderately sinuous, moderatley compressed in caudocephalic direction, distal portion distinctly curved in laterocephalic direction, slightly wider subdistally; caudal margin, in mesial view, with strong median constriction and enlarged subdistal hump-like lobe, followed by irregular row of variable-sized spines; cephalic margin regularly convex medially in mesial view. Marginal suture on mesial surface, sinuous, gently following curvature of stem, with row of long and short setae along its proximal portion. Marginal process simple, nearly straight in mesial view, not overreaching apex. Lateral suture incomplete, marked by sulcus extending slightly beyond level of median constriction of caudal surface. Mesial process absent. Cephalic surface with cephalic process greatly developed as subdistal unilobed or faintly bilobed enlargement, directed basally and partially twisted towards mesial side, with row of minute spines along its proximal margin. Lateral process enlarged, tongue-shaped; distal margin rounded, situated subdistally on laterocephalic surface, somewhat curved towards cephalic side. Distal portion of lateral surface with distinct rounded (in cephalic view) spiny distolateral lobe. Apex open, oblong, elongated mesolaterally, directed cephalad; mesocaudal margin smooth, produced into small angled lobe, slightly more elevated in relation to laterocephalic margin. Field of apical spines moderately developed, elongated mesolaterally, with small spines.

REMARKS

When comparing the G1 of both examined specimens, we noticed a small variation in the morphology of the cephalic process: in the holotype it is clearly unilobed, with its distal margin broadly rounded ( Fig. 3C), whereas in the male UVGCR 344 it seems to be faintly bilobed, with its distal margin bearing a slight median concavity.