COSMETINAE C.L. KOCH, 1839

Cosmetides C. L. Koch, 1839: 19 (vernacular ‘Breittasterige Kanker’; incl. Cosmetus, Cynorta, Discosoma, Flirtea, Gnidia, Paecilaema). Junior subjective synonym of Gonyleptidae Sundevall, 1833 by Sørensen (1873); synonymy disclaimed by almost every subsequent author, including Sørensen himself (1884).

Cosmetinae Pickard-Cambridge, 1904: 549. First use as a subfamily:

Comment: The monophylum labelled ‘clade C’ is herein called Cosmetinae, with a radically restricted sense as opposed to traditional sense in which it included 95% of the species in the family. In our analysis it comprises 14 terminals, representing three genera and roughly 20 species. Cosmetus Perty, 1833 is critical because it is the onomatophore of the family and the nominal subfamily. Medrano et al., (in press) deal with this genus (which has 22 species) and discuss its clear heterogeneity. Herein we included three better-known species from Brazil: Cosmetus arietinus (Mello-Leitão, 1940), Cosmetus delicatus (Soares & Soares, 1946) and * Cosmetus varius Perty, 1833, which are deemed to represent a natural nucleus of six or seven Brazilian species of the genus. Species from Panama, Venezuela and the Andes should probably not be included here (Medrano et al., in press). Following the restricted sense proposed in Kury & Medrano (2018), Metavononoides Roewer, 1928 is represented in our analysis by three terminals: * Metavononoides barbacenensis (Mello- Leitão, 1923), Metavononoides guttulosus (Mello-Leitão, 1935) and Metavononoides orientalis (Mello-Leitão, 1923). Paecilaema C.L. Koch, 1839 currently includes c. 100 species (Kury et al., 2021) of which only a fraction may represent a monophylum (as hypothesized by Kury & Medrano, 2018). Eight species of Paecilaema are included in our analysis. Neither Metavononoides nor Paecilaema resolve here unambiguously as clades, but this subfamily clearly needs more focused study to determine their composition and which possible extra genera might still be added or created to allocate some species.

Diagnosis: Small and delicate cosmetids with long and unarmed legs (Fig. 4B, C). Area I unarmed or with small, rounded tubercles and area III with two paramedian spines (Fig. 4B, C) that may be fused into one thick spine (Cosmetus). Other areas unarmed. Dorsal scutum (DS) beta-type, constriction between carapace and abdomen (scutal groove) marked in lateral view (Fig. 4B, C). Chelicerae monomorphic without a basal spine in the movable finger. Yellowish spots in the form of a lyre (except in some members of Cosmetus) or as large dots, sparse all over the scutum (Fig. 4B, C). Smooth claws in legs III and IV (except for some Cosmetus). Lateral part of coxa IV uniformly brown, but yellow spots may be present in Cosmetus. Basitarsomeres slightly enlarged in males, but not inflated. Ventral plate of the penis not elongated with enormous MS-C contrasting with other MS, flattened and curved. The MS-A and MS-D are short.

Type genus: Cosmetus Perty, 1833.

Included genera: Cosmetus Perty, 1833, Metavononoides Roewer, 1928 and Paecilaema C.L. Koch, 1839.

Combined distribution: Central portion of Brazilian Atlantic Forest (Fig. 8).

CLADE D

Comment: This monophylum includes the Discosomaticinae (which is treated later in greater detail than the other clades) and the clade F.

CLADE F

Comment: This monophylum includes the clades G and H, each of which includes two subfamilies and sundry unassigned genera.

CLADE G

Comment: This clade includes two well-supported new subfamilies: Ferkeriinae subfam. nov. and Taitoinae subfam. nov., plus four isolated genera: Acantholibitia, Eulibitia, Libitioides and Qarikichkauru.