In 2006, doubt about the use of the scientific name S. speluncae for the mouse-coloured tapaculo surfaced. An examination of the type specimen of S. speluncae (Ménétriés, 1835) resulted in the conclusion that this name belonged to a relatively pale population from the Espinhaço Mountains that had been included within S. novacapitalis (vocally, this population is closer to S. pachecoi). This meant that the relatively dark population of the Serra do Mar region -the population that traditionally had been called S. speluncae- had to receive a new name: S. notorius (notorius to illustrate its problematic taxonomic history). This conclusion was questioned in 2007, which maintained that the population of the Serra do Mar region is S. speluncae, while the population of the central and southern Espinhaço Mountains was considered undescribed, and the population of the northernmost Espinhaço Mountains was described as a new species, S. diamantinensis. Although the possibility of two species in the Espinhaço Mountains was not questioned in an article published the following year, the conclusion that the name S. speluncae belonged to the species of the Serra do Mar was; mainly on the basis that no direct comparison of the type specimen of S. speluncae had been made in 2007 (unlike in the article from 2006). In 2010, other authors came to a different conclusion, as they suggested the original description by Édouard Ménétries in 1835 more closely matched the relatively dark species of the Serra do Mar region. They also concluded that the original type locality of São João del Rei (within the range of the relatively pale central and south Espinhaço Mountains species) provided by Ménétries was incorrect, and it actually was collected somewhere in central Rio de Janeiro (within the range of the Serra do Mar species). Following this, the relatively pale species of the southern and central Espinhaço Mountains region was described as a new species, S. petrophilus. This view was supported by SACC.