CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Cesonia

genus of arachnids

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionNov 12, 2025
Entity authorityQ2547298
Source-derived summary

Cesonia is a genus of ground spiders that was first described by Eugène Simon in 1893.

Species

As of May 2019 it contains thirty-one species:

Cesonia aspida Chatzaki, 2002 – Greece (Crete), Turkey

Cesonia bilineata (Hentz, 1847) (type) – North America

Cesonia bixleri Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – USA

Cesonia boca Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Panama

Cesonia bryantae Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Jamaica

Cesonia cana Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Jamaica

Cesonia cerralvo Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Mexico

Cesonia chickeringi Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Jamaica

Cesonia cincta (Banks, 1909) – Cuba

Cesonia classica Chamberlin, 1924 – California, Nevada, Arizona, Mexico

Cesonia coala Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Mexico

Cesonia cuernavaca Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Mexico

Cesonia desecheo Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Puerto Rico, Virgin Is.

Cesonia ditta Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Dominican Rep.

Cesonia elegans (Simon, 1892) – St. Vincent, Dominica

Cesonia gertschi Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Southern Arizona, Mexico

Cesonia grisea (Banks, 1914) – Cuba

Cesonia irvingi (Mello-Leitão, 1944) – Southern tip of Florida, Bahamas, Cuba

Cesonia iviei Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Mexico

Cesonia josephus (Chamberlin & Gertsch, 1940) – USA

Cesonia lacertosa Chickering, 1949 – Panama

Cesonia leechi Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – Mexico

Cesonia lugubris (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1896) – Mexico, Honduras

Cesonia maculata Platnick & Shadab, 1980 – St.

Editorial summary

“Cesonia” enters the record as genus of arachnids. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Cesonia, genus and arachnids can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1893, 2019, 2002, 1847—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Cesonia, genus and arachnids.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Cesonia” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Cesonia, genus and arachnids provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Nov 12, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q2547298. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1893, 2019, 2002 and 1847.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Cesonia”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Cesonia primary sources, Cesonia archive and Cesonia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Cesonia”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Cesonia” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.