2 T'z 4 IDz PLZ

[SuperRad]

Found these bad boys at a shop that really didn't know much about what these guys were. They gave common names but I wasn't able to find anything close to the earth tiger. Here's what they look like and what they were tagged as:

Chinese Earth Tiger (the weird stuff on the carapace is water, the guy just sprayed him down before I got there )

This one was listed as A. metallica and from what I've researched I suppose this is correct, but this guy seems fuzzier than most I saw.

In advance, thanks for the help!

 

[fastgixxerlv]

First one looks like a male Crawshayi to me, but I'm no expert. Does'nt it though?

 

[Talkenlate04]

First one looks like a male Crawshayi to me, but I'm no expert. Does'nt it though?

I think the top one might be a Chilobrachys sp. "guangxiensis" But I am really bad at the ID game.

 

[maxi_kdu]

Chilobrachys huahini??

 

[Talkenlate04]

Chilobrachys huahini??

Hey ya maybe, I just think it is a chilo at the very least. I am really not to sure of the species though.

 

[ShadowBlade]

Long abdomen and spinneretts, I'd bet its a Chilobrachys sp.

The second, I really doubt is metallica. They're rarer in petstores then most people think, its probably an A. avic. There's no way you can tell by looking at dorsal pics.

-Sean

 

[xhexdx]

You might get more replied by posting in the Tarantula ID forum.

 

[verry_sweet]

That Avic is an A. metallica or (to be politically correct) what is known in the hobby as an A. metallica. A pretty one at that

 

[BurrowDweller]

I would go with Chilobrachys sp. on the first one.

 

[ShadowBlade]

That Avic is an A. metallica or (to be politically correct) what is known in the hobby as an A. metallica. A pretty one at that

Hate to publicly bash someone, but there's no way in the world you can be sure of that. Full stop.

Unless you'd care to offer a reason he should believe otherwise, it should be labeled 'A. avic'.

-Sean

 

[Moltar]

Hate to publicly bash someone, but there's no way in the world you can be sure of that. Full stop.

Unless you'd care to offer a reason he should believe otherwise, it should be labeled 'A. avic'.

-Sean

I agree that you can't be sure from a pic (especially with avics) but it does have the whitish toes and lighter tipped setae that indicate it may be a metallica.

Of course I may be wrong and often am. Just my humble opinion.

As for the first T i agree that it looks like a Chilobrachys. My only Chilo is a C huahini that looks very similar but is somewhat lighter in color. A "Chinese Earth Tiger" is a H schmidti which that T most certainly is not.

 

[Truff135]

I agree that the first one is some sort of chilobrachys (at least that's what it looks like to me), the avicularia, to be politically correct, is probably NOT an avicularia metallica. HOWEVER, the avicularia metallica's that I have seen on this website and others (or the ones labeled as such) do look remarkably like the one you have. Whether or not they're actually avic. metallica's is unknown probably to everyone, but I agree that it does look like one. Even if it's just a good ol' avic avic, it's a very beautiful one (but I still agree with verry).

 

[verry_sweet]

I don’t feel that you are bashing anyone and I knew that you were going to argue me on it. I do realize that the avic genus is a mess but this T is what is known as the A. metallica in the trade and if you have proof other wise than I would like to see it.

You disagreed on this to be an A. metallica and told me it should be labeled as an Avic SP.

However after a molt it’s identical to the hobbies description of an A. metallica.

All pictures and classifications you search for A. metallica look like this so why are you saying that it can’t be. Unless someone classifies this as something different it is an A. metallica in my book. Until then I will agree to disagree with you Sean

 

[SuperRad]

You might get more replied by posting in the Tarantula ID forum.

I knew the general questions might not have been the best place, but in the T ID forum it seems like I can only post one pic per ID, so since I had more than one of each I figured I'd just make one post. Is that the proper protocol? If not what should I do? Still new here...

Chilobrachys, huh? So what are your general experiences with these dudes? The one at the store seems mean, but he's really nice to look at.

I can accept that pic #2 is an Avic avic, but it doesn't have the red hairs that mine has. Wassup wit that?

Ex:

 

[verry_sweet]

I’m not sure what you question is but the Avic in the last post is an A. avic due to the red setae.

 

[elyanalyous]

I had one that looked like you "A. metalica" only to turn out to be A. Avic on the next molt (MM too!:wall: )

 

[ShadowBlade]

I don’t feel that you are bashing anyone and I knew that you were going to argue me on it. I do realize that the avic genus is a mess but this T is what is known as the A. metallica in the trade and if you have proof other wise than I would like to see it.

The problem isn't what you believe, that's perfectly up to you. But as for identifying a tarantula as A. metallica, its impossible from a picture, period. You can have all the proof in the world a spider is A. met, and be perfectly correct. But by only providing pictures it cannot be determined.

All pictures and classifications you search for A. metallica look like this so why are you saying that it can’t be.

Because they are most probably incorrect as well. You said the answer yourself, 'the Avic genus is messed up'. End of story. This species, and A. avic are so screwed up, you cannot accurately determine which is which. In fact, they are quite probably overlapping/same species. (Kinda like the color forms of G. rosea).

-Sean

 

[phormingochilus]

The first spider is Chilobrachys sp. "guangxiensis"

Regards
Søren