Is it ok to separate slings on their 2nd instar?

UralOwl · Nov 30, 2012

Long story (fairly) short - a couple of months ago my wild caught female Euathlus Sp. "Red" unexpectedly laid an eggsack. I was a bit shocked and unprepared as it was my first egg sack, but I starting doing my research on how to care for eggs/slings.

I took the eggsack away from the mother after 30 days and placed the eggs in two separate incubators. The eggs became 'eggs with legs' about a week later and then proceeded to become '1st instar' about a week and a half after that.

Today, about 2 and half weeks since their molt into 1st instar, it looks like at least 30% of my slings have molted into their 2nd instar. They're able to walk and a couple of them have walked far away from the rest of their siblings. They're still white and don't appear to have any hair, but I was wondering if it would be all right to start separating the slings into pill containers with substrate (coco fibre) now, or if I should wait until their 3rd molt?

I'm a bit worried about cannibalism, but they still seem very tolerant of each other at the moment. I've done some searching on this and most of the threads/posts say it's best to separate the slings at 2nd instar, but it seems like some people have different definitions for what '2nd instar' is which makes it a bit confusing. I kinda explained my own definitions above, but I'll write it below just to make it clear:
Egg
Egg with legs
1st instar/post embryo
2nd instar (able to walk)

Hobo · Nov 30, 2012

IME, with the tarantulas that I've bred (C. perezmilesi, C. cyaneopubescens, A. avicularia), none of them had a molt between your "eggs with legs" and "first instar.
They went from "Eggs with legs" to your "second instar".

If it looks like that isn't the case with yours, then I'd wait until they molt one more time before seperating, though some do seperate at second instar (or first instar to most) and even sell/ship them at that stage with no problems.
Do you have pictures of the stages you mentioned, or at least a picture of what they look like now?

UralOwl · Nov 30, 2012

The molt after their 'eggs with legs' stage was more or less the same, except their legs were longer and they looked slightly more 'developed' to say the least.

I tried taking a picture of the slings in their current instar, but I only have the camera on my Blackberry phone and unfortunately all the photos I took came out far too blurry to be of any use.
I did some searching on Google images however and my slings look pretty much identical to these ones:
http://petcenter.info/petcenterstore/images/p.regalis1st instar.jpg.JPG

zonbonzovi · Nov 30, 2012

Based on that photo, I agree with Hobo that another molt is in order before separation

BrettG · Nov 30, 2012

I wish we could just standardize what they are referred to at different levels of development.I see no point in our 2i being someone else's 1i,or vice-versa.

Hobo · Nov 30, 2012

There is a standardization already.
You count by how many molts after "hatching".
For example, a tarantula that's molted for the first time after "hatching" is called a first instar. Second molt after that is second instar and so on, no matter what the stage looks like.

Perhaps the issue is that some species will apparently molt from a post embryo stage to a similar "eggs with legs" stage, instead of the typical post embryo to what most of us recognize as first instar (ability to walk around slowly, no color, picture linked above).
I was very careful to observe my GBB slings since I last had this very discussion with Stan, and can confirm that they molted from the post embryo stage straight to the typical first instar, with no post embryo/EWL-like intermediate.

BrettG · Nov 30, 2012

Hobo said:
There is a standardization already.
You count by how many molts after "hatching".
For example, a tarantula that's molted for the first time after "hatching" is called a first instar. Second molt after that is second instar and so on, no matter what the stage looks like.

Perhaps the issue is that some species will apparently molt from a post embryo stage to a similar "eggs with legs" stage, instead of the typical post embryo to what most of us recognize as first instar (ability to walk around slowly, no color, picture linked above).
I was very careful to observe my GBB slings since I last had this very discussion with Stan, and can confirm that they molted from the post embryo stage straight to the typical first instar, with no post embryo/EWL-like intermediate.

Eh,I don't think you understood what I meant. How our 2i is another Countries 1i,etc,or vice-versa.No offense,and all due respect,but I know how to count molts,I just want to know why the Europeans recognize the instars differently than we do here in North America.

Bugmom · Nov 30, 2012

UralOwl said:
The molt after their 'eggs with legs' stage was more or less the same, except their legs were longer and they looked slightly more 'developed' to say the least.

I tried taking a picture of the slings in their current instar, but I only have the camera on my Blackberry phone and unfortunately all the photos I took came out far too blurry to be of any use.
I did some searching on Google images however and my slings look pretty much identical to these ones:
http://petcenter.info/petcenterstore/images/p.regalis1st instar.jpg.JPG

Hobo said:
There is a standardization already.
You count by how many molts after "hatching".
For example, a tarantula that's molted for the first time after "hatching" is called a first instar. Second molt after that is second instar and so on, no matter what the stage looks like.

Perhaps the issue is that some species will apparently molt from a post embryo stage to a similar "eggs with legs" stage, instead of the typical post embryo to what most of us recognize as first instar (ability to walk around slowly, no color, picture linked above).
I was very careful to observe my GBB slings since I last had this very discussion with Stan, and can confirm that they molted from the post embryo stage straight to the typical first instar, with no post embryo/EWL-like intermediate.

The picture linked is what I'd say is first instar. This is what I think when I hear "second instar" http://gallery.pethobbyist.com/photo.php?id=220008&cpage=0&size=big

Storm76 · Nov 30, 2012

Yeah over here it's L1, L2, THEN comes 1st instar and so on...

EDIT:
I think the reason for that is simply, that we Europeans consider a tarantula a tarantula once it is able to hunt and eat prey on their own. L1 (EWL's) can't do, the L2 right after that can't do either since although they aren't EWL's anymore, they are not yet fully "functional". So the stage right after is considered 1st instar here.

Correct me if I'm wrong...

UralOwl · Dec 1, 2012

Thanks for the replies. I've decided to separate the slings on their 3rd/next molt.

catfishrod69 · Dec 1, 2012

I dont get what everyone is saying. The OP said the were eggs when he opened the sac. Then they started sprouting into ewls. Then they molted to 1st instar. Then there is now about 30% of them molted into 2nd instar. Those 2nd instar are ready to be seperated.

Hobo · Dec 1, 2012

catfishrod69 said:
I dont get what everyone is saying. The OP said the were eggs when he opened the sac. Then they started sprouting into ewls. Then they molted to 1st instar. Then there is now about 30% of them molted into 2nd instar. Those 2nd instar are ready to be seperated.

Alright. I'll try to explain all the hubbub.
Read this post. This appears to be the sequence of molts that the OP has experienced so far. Please note how different it is from what we see as typically happening, namely:

Hatch --->post embryo(EWL)--->First instar(Ability to crawl around, still creamy white, not actively hunting)--->second instar(Fully formed, actively hunting slings)

instead, its:

Hatch --->post embryo(EWLs)--->First instar(slightly more developed EWLs)--->Second instar(Ability to crawl around, still creamy white, not actively hunting)--->Third instar(Fully formed, actively hunting slings)

Now if that's true, then that means that like what Stan has outlined with the G. rosea, The OPs Euathlus Sp. "Red" spiderlings will need one more molt to reach the stage where they are normally seperated, which in OPs case would be third instar.

Now, I was talking about how with the tarantulas that I've bred, I observed the typical sling development (EWL, first instar, second instar) and was just wondering if the OP perhaps had pics because it would be interesting to know if Euathlus Sp. "Red" developed the same way as what Stan observed with G. rosea.
Looking at the breeding reports and first hand accounts of other enthusiasts, it seems like the typical development is what is highlighted in green above.
I KNOW for a fact that GBBs and my A. avicularia follow this pattern, as I kept a very close eye on their development for just this purpose. Some of the other detailed breeding reports of G. rosea make no mention of a second, EWL-like instar so I've been left to wonder if maybe the enthusiasts just didn't pay attention (probable), Stan was wrong, or (more likely) that certain species just develop differently. If such is the case, then perhaps (as I've said in response to Brett's post which I see now I've misunderstood - he's talking about the difference in EU and US naming of instars) the naming confusion comes from different species developing differently rather than simply an issue with naming conventions. And that's not even taking into account those certain species that are already known to take an extra instar to develop (P. metallica, formosa...some others, I think). Do they have a second EWL-like instar too? Does that mean they actually begin feeding at fourth instar?

...and that's what whatever it was I was trying to say ...was. I think.

Bugmom · Dec 1, 2012

This is quite confusing.

In Stan's link, is there a molt between 1st instar and 2nd instar? Then another molt into 3rd instar? So by 3rd instar there have been TWO molts?

catfishrod69 · Dec 1, 2012

Thats really wierd. It looks like the 2nd pic Stan has there, that he has labeled 1st instar, is just the ewls only darkening up, getting ready to molt into 1st instar. Chad was reffering to that also. Ive never noticed anything like that myself. From my breedings, ive just done the normal stuff. Eggs, ewls, 1st instar, then 2nd instar are fully formed and ready to be shipped out.

Hobo said:
Alright. I'll try to explain all the hubbub.
Read this post. This appears to be the sequence of molts that the OP has experienced so far. Please note how different it is from what we see as typically happening, namely:

Hatch --->post embryo(EWL)--->First instar(Ability to crawl around, still creamy white, not actively hunting)--->second instar(Fully formed, actively hunting slings)

instead, its:

Hatch --->post embryo(EWLs)--->First instar(slightly more developed EWLs)--->Second instar(Ability to crawl around, still creamy white, not actively hunting)--->Third instar(Fully formed, actively hunting slings)

Now if that's true, then that means that like what Stan has outlined with the G. rosea, The OPs Euathlus Sp. "Red" spiderlings will need one more molt to reach the stage where they are normally seperated, which in OPs case would be third instar.

Now, I was talking about how with the tarantulas that I've bred, I observed the typical sling development (EWL, first instar, second instar) and was just wondering if the OP perhaps had pics because it would be interesting to know if Euathlus Sp. "Red" developed the same way as what Stan observed with G. rosea.
Looking at the breeding reports and first hand accounts of other enthusiasts, it seems like the typical development is what is highlighted in green above.
I KNOW for a fact that GBBs and my A. avicularia follow this pattern, as I kept a very close eye on their development for just this purpose. Some of the other detailed breeding reports of G. rosea make no mention of a second, EWL-like instar so I've been left to wonder if maybe the enthusiasts just didn't pay attention (probable), Stan was wrong, or (more likely) that certain species just develop differently. If such is the case, then perhaps (as I've said in response to Brett's post which I see now I've misunderstood - he's talking about the difference in EU and US naming of instars) the naming confusion comes from different species developing differently rather than simply an issue with naming conventions. And that's not even taking into account those certain species that are already known to take an extra instar to develop (P. metallica, formosa...some others, I think). Do they have a second EWL-like instar too? Does that mean they actually begin feeding at fourth instar?

...and that's what whatever it was I was trying to say ...was. I think.

Hobo · Dec 1, 2012

Bugmom said:
This is quite confusing.

In Stan's link, is there a molt between 1st instar and 2nd instar? Then another molt into 3rd instar? So by 3rd instar there have been TWO molts?

Not exactly. There is apparently a molt between post embryo/EWL and First instar.
There is ALWAYS a molt between instars, so third instar (no matter what it looks like) will have three molts; its how they are named. The confusion comes from the apparent molt from post embryo/EWL to a more developed EWL, which I've never experienced myself or read about outside of Stan's postings and now, this thread.

catfishrod69 said:
Thats really wierd. It looks like the 2nd pic Stan has there, that he has labeled 1st instar, is just the ewls only darkening up, getting ready to molt into 1st instar. Chad was reffering to that also. Ive never noticed anything like that myself. From my breedings, ive just done the normal stuff. Eggs, ewls, 1st instar, then 2nd instar are fully formed and ready to be shipped out.

Exactly!
That's what's got me all confused and led me to many email and board discussions with Stan about it a while back. He assures me that the second EWL stage is slightly more developed, with bristles. I'll have to dig out thoise emails, but IIRC he thinks most tarantula shouldn't deviate from this developmental pattern.
I'm planning to breed my G. rosea when she molts, and if I can find a RCF MM at that time. I'm planning to seperate some post embryos and watch them like a hawk

catfishrod69 · Dec 1, 2012

Yeah its got me confused too. Ive never noticed it. Do you mean most tarantulas shouldnt deviate, as in most species will have this happen too? Ive got a couple sacs brewing, so will keep an eye on them as well. I have a MM RCF who is a major stud for sale. Too bad your in canada. Ill just stick him in a envelope with a stamp on it, whats your addy?

Hobo said:
Exactly!
That's what's got me all confused and led me to many email and board discussions with Stan about it a while back. He assures me that the second EWL stage is slightly more developed, with bristles. I'll have to dig out thoise emails, but IIRC he thinks most tarantula shouldn't deviate from this developmental pattern.
I'm planning to breed my G. rosea when she molts, and if I can find a RCF MM at that time. I'm planning to seperate some post embryos and watch them like a hawk

Bugmom · Dec 1, 2012

Hobo said:
Not exactly. There is apparently a molt between post embryo/EWL and First instar.
There is ALWAYS a molt between instars, so third instar (no matter what it looks like) will have three molts; its how they are named. The confusion comes from the apparent molt from post embryo/EWL to a more developed EWL, which I've never experienced myself or read about outside of Stan's postings and now, this thread.

That's where I'm confused too. I would say that what Stan has listed as "second instar" is just the slings darkening.

catfishrod69 · Dec 1, 2012

This is what i was thinking as well. Possibly Stan's eyesite starting to wan?

NO offense Stan!

Bugmom said:
That's where I'm confused too. I would say that what Stan has listed as "second instar" is just the slings darkening.

Bugmom · Dec 1, 2012

The solution, clearly, is to breed more tarantulas and make very scientific notes, with lots of pictures of lots of wiggly legs. For science, of course

Hobo · Dec 1, 2012

catfishrod69 said:
Do you mean most tarantulas shouldnt deviate, as in most species will have this happen too?

Here's his exact quote to me in my email, when I asked if G. rosea become fully formed active hunters an instar later than most tarantulas,

No data. We don't know. I doubt that they are different from the
"generic" tarantula, however.

So it would seem his answer is "yes". Keeping an eye on your post embryos would help to see if that's true, I think.

I mean, how hard could breeding every tarantula be? hahah.
I await that envelope

And for interests sake, here is the original thread where led me to email Stan in the first place. His answer there is pretty much the same as the sum of his email correspondance with myself.

Is it ok to separate slings on their 2nd instar?

Arachnosquire

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Arachnosquire

Creeping beneath you

Arachnoprince

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Arachnoprince

Arachnolord

Arachnoemperor

Arachnosquire

Arachnoemperor

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Arachnolord

Arachnoemperor

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Arachnoemperor

Arachnolord

Arachnoemperor

Arachnolord

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)