CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Psellocoptus

Genus of spiders

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 revisionMar 20, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

Psellocoptus is a genus of South American running spiders first described by Eugène Simon in 1896. When Eugène Simon discovered the first species, he described it as a "beautiful and large species from the forests of Venezuela which [is] found running rapidly on the trunks of trees". The species name flavostriatus means "striped yellow". P. buchlii is named after the late Harro Buchli, and the species name prodontus is from the Greek meaning "tooth in front".

Editorial summary

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

Editorial reviewUseful for establishing the present vocabulary of the subject while preserving a route back to the evidence on which that vocabulary rests. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1896—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Psellocoptus, Genus and spiders.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Psellocoptus” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Psellocoptus, Genus and spiders 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 Mar 20, 2026. The first chronological checks are 1896.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. 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 “Psellocoptus”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Psellocoptus primary sources, Psellocoptus archive and Psellocoptus 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 “Psellocoptus”?
  2. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Psellocoptus” 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.