Gerstaeckerella gigantea Enderlein

Fig. 8

Gerstaeckerella gigantea Enderlein, 1910: 370. Holotype: female (MZPW). Type locality: Colombia

Notes.

This species also does not pose any taxonomic problems, but after the original description by Enderlein (1910), no subsequent taxonomic paper has commented on the holotype. This research gap can also be recognized by the fact that the holotype is a female (Fig. 8 K), and not a male, as claimed in the original description (Enderlein 1910) and followed by subsequent authors (Stange 1967; Penny and Costa 1983; Ohl 2004; Ardila-Camacho and García 2015). However, despite this error, the taxonomic understanding of this species in the literature corresponds exactly with the holotype, thus reinforcing the taxonomic stability of the species (Williner and Kormilev 1958; Poivre 1978; Penny and Costa 1983).

A question related to this species was raised by Penny and Costa (1983) regarding the type locality. Enderlein (1910) stated “ Columbien ” in the original description, which is corroborated by the specimen’s locality label (Fig. 8 B). However, Penny and Costa (1983) discussed that the type locality is dubious, since all other records of the species are from southern South America (Argentina, Brazil (Paraná and Santa Catarina states), Paraguay and Uruguay). Although most records for G. gigantea are indeed from the southern Neotropics, Penny and Costa (1983) ignored a second specimen studied by Williner and Kormilev (1958) from Colombia, Rio Claro in the Antioquia Department (erroneously mentioned as the type locality of the species by the authors, which was later followed by Ardila-Camacho and Garcia (2015)). The existence of this second specimen from Colombia strongly suggests that the type locality is likely to be correct. However, a genetic study of G. gigantea would be of great interest, considering the large geographic distance between the known records.