Cyriocosmus
genus of arachnids
Cyriocosmus is a genus of tarantulas that was first described by Eugène Louis Simon in 1903. They are small to medium spiders, with a bicolored or one same color carapace.
Diagnosis
The genus differs from all other tarantulas by the paraembolic apophysis in the palpal bulbs of males, and a spermatheca with two spiral receptacles, which usually end in a caliciform or globular extension. Except for C. nogueiranetoi, which owns a S shape extension. All the species also own type 3 urticating hairs.
Species
As of January 2026, this genus includes 24 species:
In synonymy
C. chicoi Pérez-Miles, 1998 = Cyriocosmus bicolor
C. planus (Fischel, 1927) = Cyriocosmus elegans
C. rogerioi Pérez-Miles & Weinmann, 2009 = Cyriocosmus pribiki
C. semifasciatus Mello-Leitão, 1939 = Cyriocosmus elegans
Transferred to other genera
Cyriocosmus butantan Pérez-Miles, 1998 → Hapalopus butantan
Cyriocosmus nigriventris Mello-Leitão, 1939 → Hapalopus nigriventris
References
Gabriel, Ray (2017), "The revised taxonomical status of Cyclosternum bicolor (Schiapelli & Gerschman, 1945) (Araneae: Theraphosidae)", Journal of the British Tarantula Society, vol. 32, no. 1, British Tarantula Society, pp.
The public source identifies “Cyriocosmus” as genus of arachnids. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Cyriocosmus, genus and arachnids.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Cyriocosmus”, the useful work is to connect “genus of arachnids” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
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 27, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1816333. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1903, 2026, 1998 and 1927.
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.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Cyriocosmus”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Cyriocosmus primary sources, Cyriocosmus archive and Cyriocosmus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Cyriocosmus”?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Cyriocosmus” 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.