Malaysian Brown?

Ok, I found this BEAUTIFUL T in my local (small town) petstore. This girl is Big and Scary, and will probably give me nightmares. The owner told me she is a Malaysian Brown. Tried to look that up, and huh- no results- Anywhere! So my closest guess is Malaysian Giant Tan Tarantula. She's pretty big (to me!) maybe 4-5'' and looks almost black but in the light is in fact brown. I'm going to TRY to post my amature shots of her. I have NO CLUE what scientific name she is. She isn't arboral, she makes nice webs, is aggressive, and looks to be solid in color. If you want better shots come take them yourself because she scared the living hell out of me just getting her out of her traveling container and into her terrarium. These are the shots I have. Thanks much in advance. Any care advice (if you can figure out what she is) would be appreciated as well. I have her in a basic set-up, but I'd like to make her as comfortable as possible.

I can narrow it down to about 15. Get an arial shot in. The carapace will give a better idea to what it is. Also, don't shoot through the glass, it blurs and lightens and all that junk. I have an idea of what it is, but before i say anything I need to see the arial shot.

T.S.

given the size of the spinerettes and the overall look I'm going to tenatively say a possible
(Chilobrachys huahini) or Asian giant fawn. They're relatively defensive and have the ability to stridulate .

I suppose next you want an upclose shot of her fangs? (sarcasm). My hands were shankin' taking these. Hope it helps. Certainly didn't help my heart. She didn't do much while I took these, but I watched while they wrangled her into the traveling container at the petstore. I have newfound respect for speed for larger sized Ts. She was not a happy camper. So please PLEASE tell me I don't need to take any more "up close and personal" shots? And thank you for any help, I don't mean to sound ungrateful- just nervous

Everything points me to guestimate it to be one of the Chilobrachys species imported as "burmensis", though I doubt any of them actually originates from Burma. Typical features for these critters are the smokeybrown colouration, long spinnerets, longer and more robust front legs with dense setation, and undivided scopula on tarsus IV. And then of course the high strung aggression. They have a characteristic arboreal outline, and in nature many of the large species found in this group are actually arboreal in nature, living in hollow trees and behind loose bark.

Regards
Søren

SydneySpider said:

I suppose next you want an upclose shot of her fangs? (sarcasm). My hands were shankin' taking these. Hope it helps. Certainly didn't help my heart. She didn't do much while I took these, but I watched while they wrangled her into the traveling container at the petstore. I have newfound respect for speed for larger sized Ts. She was not a happy camper. So please PLEASE tell me I don't need to take any more "up close and personal" shots? And thank you for any help, I don't mean to sound ungrateful- just nervous

Click to expand...

Thanks very much. Ok, so what type of set-up should I have for her? I have her in a much more terrestrial set-up, for burrowing with a log hide-out, and eco-earth to dig in. Should I switch to a more arboral set-up? What do you think she would like? Also temp and humidity? I have her at about 75-80 (F) and 60-70%(H).

And I looked all around the internet at pictured and was going to guess Chilobrachys something or other so I'm very happy! Especially since I've never typed a spider before

Fortunately in captivity the large species of Chilobrachys adapt very well, and may be considered largely opportunistic. Temps in the range 24-28 celsius degrees are fine and the humidity sounds fine to me. With time she most likely will cover all surfaces with a dense carpet of silk, she may construct a burrow, but just as likely stay out in the open all the time. If you fancy you could construct an arboreal setup for her, just as you would for the members of the genus Poecilotheria to observe a more natural behaviour, but she will most likely thrive no matter which setup you supply her with if you give her food and water regularly ;-) BTW this particular species is notoriously known for infertile "ghost (egg)sacs" if kept well-nourished and plump.

Regards
Søre

SydneySpider said:

Thanks very much. Ok, so what type of set-up should I have for her? I have her in a much more terrestrial set-up, for burrowing with a log hide-out, and eco-earth to dig in. Should I switch to a more arboral set-up? What do you think she would like? Also temp and humidity? I have her at about 75-80 (F) and 60-70%(H).

And I looked all around the internet at pictured and was going to guess Chilobrachys something or other so I'm very happy! Especially since I've never typed a spider before

Click to expand...

If it is the same mystery sp. as the one I came up on, and it *looks* like it, you will be pleasently surprised when it molts. The color change is drastic. Beautiful T.

At first when you mentioned Malaysian Brown, the first species that came to my mind is the Coremiocnemis Sp.

In malaysia, Malaysian Brown or Burmese brown are common names for Chilobrachys andersoni. I would not say your T is definitely a Chilobrachys andersoni because i am not good at ID'ing a tarantula from a picture. But just letting you know what the common name refers to here in malaysia.

welcome to the hobby. I'm sure it will be your first of many. And worry I was just as nervous with my first. My old rosie had my hand shaking so bad trying to het her out of the little container from the petstore.

malaysian earth tiger? pretty rare

Definitely not Malaysian Earth Tiger from what i see

Wow thats a rare earth tiger!

Randy said:

At first when you mentioned Malaysian Brown, the first species that came to my mind is the Coremiocnemis Sp.

In malaysia, Malaysian Brown or Burmese brown are common names for Chilobrachys andersoni. I would not say your T is definitely a Chilobrachys andersoni because i am not good at ID'ing a tarantula from a picture. But just letting you know what the common name refers to here in malaysia.

Click to expand...

I checked out some pictures of the Chilobrachys andersoni, (links; http://www.chameleoncounters.com/tarantulas/Chilobrachys_andersoni.htm - and - http://www.timart.be/Npaginas/pictures/chilobrachysandersoni.html) and it REALLY REALLY looks like her. I know I can't be 100%, but I'm pretty sure it is. Plus the name fits too. Thanks a bunch, I think she finally has an ID.

Whilst I really don't like to use common names, I've seen "Malaysian Earth Tiger" used in this thread which is generally accepted to be Cyriopagopus schioedtei

I am relatively confident you do not have a Cyriopagopus schioedtei - this is what one of those looks like:



And I don't believe it is a Coremiocnemis either, look at the hind legs of a Coremiocnemis:



I think you should stick with listening to Søren

phormingochilus said:

and undivided scopula on tarsus IV.

Click to expand...

Hi,
Søren is right on the money with this call The very first character you should be looking for is the divided/undivided tarsus IV. You will need to look at the spiders back "foot" underneath, best to do this on some glass, hopefully if the spider climbs the walls you will see. You are looking for a line that runs down the length of the foot/tarsus, if you see it, then it does not belong to Simon's tribus Selenocosmieae (Selenocosmia, Chilobrachys, etc) if it is present, then it will belong to the currently defunct, but soon to be resurrected tribus Phlogieae (Phlogius, Phlogiellus, Coremiocnemis, etc) also created by Simon.(post note edit: I was wrong here, Volker has corrected me, read on :0)

To those of you a little more experienced in the Asian taxonomy, it has now been shown that tarsal scopula division is indeed a valid character (Ghent 2004, in press), hence the probable and now justified reinstatement of the old tribus Phlogieae. Incidently, now you will see how the Coremiocnemis are closely related to other genera then the true Selenocosmia from Java Sorry guys, no synonymy will ever take place between these genera, now you will soon see why

If you can determine this character, then it will greatly narrow down your choices on genus.

Cheers,
Steve

phormingochilus said:

Everything points me to guestimate it to be one of the Chilobrachys species imported as "burmensis", though I doubt any of them actually originates from Burma. Typical features for these critters are the smokeybrown colouration, long spinnerets, longer and more robust front legs with dense setation, and undivided scopula on tarsus IV. And then of course the high strung aggression. They have a characteristic arboreal outline, and in nature many of the large species found in this group are actually arboreal in nature, living in hollow trees and behind loose bark.

Regards
Søren

Click to expand...

I'll second that opinion... looks almost exactly like the T sold to me by a very reputable dealer as a "Burmese Brown".. hard to tell for certain from any pictures though.
Assuming that what you, it is a pretty adaptable spider & will survive most living conditions ok, but you'll see a lot more of it if you keep temps above 75f.

Lopez said:

I think you should stick with listening to Søren

Click to expand...

Sound advise indeed id say.

As for the pic's on the net of C.andersoni i would take a lot of them with a pinch of salt most of what have i seen being sold in resent years as "real" C.andersoni have been reddish spiders wereas what i remeber as far back as 18-20 years ago were dark things offen dark brown or with darker legs like todays C.sp "burmensis" and were offen sold along side Malay exported Coremiocnemis.sp.

In fact one lot of "burmensis" i saw for sale this year were being sold along side W/C Cyriopagopus schioedtei (maybe be they were moved more then once, but more lightly they were Malay too seeing as the dark one's years ago were malay collected).

All that said the reddish one's could well be Malay collected too .

I don't have a much of a clue how you tell C.andersoni from C.huahini from C.sp "guangxiensis" from C.sp "burmensis" other then there colours really , i know there lyra patten and row counts from what few pic's/drawings iv seen are very close, that said i think some one else may know better then me >Here< .

Problem here Steve is that within Chilobrachys we have both adult species with divided scopula IV and undivided scopula IV.

But then again I personally do not think that one should consider Chilobrachys grouped too closely with the rest of the present Selenocosmiinae due to the structure of the retrolateral cheliceral strikers ;-)

Have you received the registration papers yet?

Regards
Søren

Steve Nunn said:

Hi,
Søren is right on the money with this call The very first character you should be looking for is the divided/undivided tarsus IV. You will need to look at the spiders back "foot" underneath, best to do this on some glass, hopefully if the spider climbs the walls you will see. You are looking for a line that runs down the length of the foot/tarsus, if you see it, then it does not belong to Simon's tribus Selenocosmieae (Selenocosmia, Chilobrachys, etc) if it is present, then it will belong to the currently defunct, but soon to be resurrected tribus Phlogieae (Phlogius, Phlogiellus, Coremiocnemis, etc) also created by Simon.

To those of you a little more experienced in the Asian taxonomy, it has now been shown that tarsal scopula division is indeed a valid character (Ghent 2004, in press), hence the probable and now justified reinstatement of the old tribus Phlogieae. Incidently, now you will see how the Coremiocnemis are closely related to other genera then the true Selenocosmia from Java Sorry guys, no synonymy will ever take place between these genera, now you will soon see why

If you can determine this character, then it will greatly narrow down your choices on genus.

Cheers,
Steve

Click to expand...

Steve Nunn said:

Hi,
Søren is right on the money with this call The very first character you should be looking for is the divided/undivided tarsus IV. You will need to look at the spiders back "foot" underneath, best to do this on some glass, hopefully if the spider climbs the walls you will see. You are looking for a line that runs down the length of the foot/tarsus, if you see it, then it does not belong to Simon's tribus Selenocosmieae (Selenocosmia, Chilobrachys, etc) if it is present, then it will belong to the currently defunct, but soon to be resurrected tribus Phlogieae (Phlogius, Phlogiellus, Coremiocnemis, etc) also created by Simon.

To those of you a little more experienced in the Asian taxonomy, it has now been shown that tarsal scopula division is indeed a valid character (Ghent 2004, in press), hence the probable and now justified reinstatement of the old tribus Phlogieae. Incidently, now you will see how the Coremiocnemis are closely related to other genera then the true Selenocosmia from Java Sorry guys, no synonymy will ever take place between these genera, now you will soon see why

Click to expand...

Hi Steve,

sorry for that, but I'm ABSOLUTELY NOT of your opinion. I agree with Sören, that the tarantula which is shown here in the threat, is that Species, which is imported into the european Pettrade under the name "Chilobrachys burmensis". Furthermore I am of the opinion that this Species is in reality Chilobrachys dyscolus (I came to this conclusion because I have examined all the Holotypes of the Chilobrachys species, which were described from middle/south Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam). The Holotype from Chilobrachys dyscolus differs in no way from Chilobrachys "burmensis", but with the exeption, that some of my Material of Ch. "burmensis" has entire scopula on Met. IV, whereas Ch. dyscolus type has divided scopula on Met. IV. Steve,does it really make sense to put two specimen, which are identical in stridulating organ, leg length relation, body structure, genital morphology and so on, in two different tribes?
In young but not full-grown matured females of Chilobrachys species, you can often find a division of the scopula on Tars. IV. In large matured females of the same Species, the scopula is mostly undivided! In inadult specimen, the division of the scopula of the Tarsi IV is often well developed and often Tarsi III is also divided! To my opinion, which is based on long experience in keeping, raising and examining asian Theraphosidae, the division of scopula on Tarsi of legs is only useful as a taxonomical tool in large adult females. Males do have in most cases divided scopula on Tarsi IV, whereas the adult females of the large Chilobrachys Species (for example Ch. dyscolus, Ch. paviei) have entire scopula!
BTW, a friend of mine collected Chilobrachys dyscolus in Thailand (Hua Hin and Ranong) and he could only find them in burrows in the ground!
You should always have the whole asian area in your mind, if you are mentioning statements about the usability of characters which seems to give a phylogenetical signal, which appear to define different branches within the Selenocosmiinae phylogeny!

With best regards, Volker