AVICULARIA REVISION PUBLISHED!

[shaneshac]

Are there any pics of Avicularia subvulpina which has been moved to Grammostola

Would really like to see that one!

 

[Venom1080]

@Venom1080 I'm personally disappointed only in the fact that so many species were left out. I don't really know about scientific stuff and how long does it takes for it, but to me revision should mean you review all species, not just remove majority of species that you see fit, it looks like a half done job to me.

Better than nothing.

 

[The Spider Faery]

So I'm seeing nomen dudium next to the aurantica, I just picked one up. If the name doesn't exsist anymore, what is is it?

I noticed that Tarantula Canada is now labeling them Avicularia juruensis morphotype 'aurantica". Maybe if you send them a message they can give you more info?

 

[CEC]

I noticed that Tarantula Canada is now labeling them Avicularia juruensis morphotype 'aurantica". Maybe if you send them a message they can give you more info?

Well, the revision says otherwise. Avicularia aurantiaca is considered nomen dubium meaning the name is doubted but WILL still exist on the WSC species listing. Which is what most people follow for classification. Also, the authors say aurantiaca is most likely a morphotype of rufa (hobby juruensis) not the real juruensis which is possibly sp. Peru Purple.

I encourage everyone to read it thoroughly or even a few times if needed. Come back and comment with your interpretations. That's what this thread is for, read and then discuss. I wouldn't dismiss this revision so easily just because some species are missing when the previous authors never deposited their specimens where they were supposed to for future comparison. I bet a lot of these "nomen dubium" species are described in this revision as morphotypes(color forms) of one of 12 species listed. So do the authors, that's exactly why they are doubtful of the labels, they just can't prove it without specimens to compare. Therefore, I'll say it once again, if your species is considered nomen dubium KEEP it as labeled. These species may never be proven a junior synonym of another species. It's hard to prove when the original specimens used aren't available to compare. The silver lining is we should keep color forms separated for breeding purposes anyway, I think there's more confusion in using just morphotype numbers as labels oppose to their nomen dubium names, a lot more room for error.

The revision does have some weak spots, though, like describing a new species only using a male. That seems a bit rushed. Not using DNA is another, that would solidify any correct notion. Other than that, they did what they could, with what they had available. It's without a doubt a needed clarification of this notorious mess of a genus. Before this revision, you couldn't send your Avicularia to anyone and have them identify it with any certainty. Now hobby stock can be examined and determined one of the 12 species or not. I believe that's a giant step forward & a long time coming.

 

[CEC]

This really isn't that confusing. If your species got changed, change the name. If it didn't, like A. sp. Peru Purple, then keep it as it's labelled now.

I'm assuming sp. Peru Purple got examined, they just don't use hobby common names.
In fact, I'm almost positive sp. Peru Purple (Iquitos)/urticans is the original juruensis described... 1) urticans is now a junior synonym of juruensis. 2) Fukushima's color description matches; lack of yellow bands and a vivid purple sheen etc. 3) Iquitos is the correct locality for urticans/sp. Peru Purple and juruensis. 4) Rick West has sp. Peru Purple picture(s) on his site once labeled urticans. He has since changed the label to juruensis. Rick is no dummy and was in contact with the authors so I assume there's credibility.

 

[shaneshac]

There are a couple of different Avics from the Iquitos/Nauta region. One is very similar to the hobby type Peru Purple, another is rust coloured and quite a bit larger from the wild specimens I encountered. The third seems to be one of the three new species reported A linnae

 

[CEC]

There are a couple of different Avics from the Iquitos/Nauta region. One is very similar to the hobby type Peru Purple, another is rust coloured and quite a bit larger from the wild specimens I encountered. The third seems to be one of the three new species reported A linnae

Sure but you have to remember that size and color don't mean squat. That's proven by all the morphotypes. That large rust colored one could be huriana (they are that color and size) which they consider it nomen dubium because they think it's probably a morphotype of another species, again possibly juruensis.

 

[shaneshac]

I understand what you mean

I have the spermathecae of a rust coloured on I collected. Will be good to compare to the Peru purple

The rust coloured one as an example

Avicularia sp

• shaneshac
• Apr 10, 2016
• 4

 

[CEC]

I understand what you mean

I have the spermathecae of a rust coloured on I collected. Will be good to compare to the Peru purple

The rust coloured one as an example

Avicularia sp

• shaneshac
• Apr 10, 2016
• 4

I remember that picture, Pretty Avicularia none the less...

If my memory serves me correct, A. lynnae was discovered by Rick West and named after his wife Lynn. I also remember an assumption that the hobby hirschii with the single bold black abdominal stripe is actually lynnae. All Rick's pictures of lynnae match what I know as hobby hirschii. While his hirschii pictures are close in appearance but lack that obvious black abdominal stripe.

 

[shaneshac]

Yes the lynnae also has more pronounced banding on each leg segment that the specimens i encountered which is a trait of the hobby juruensis.
I would be more comfortable calling it a huriana at the moment

 

[CEC]

Yes the lynnae also has more pronounced banding on each leg segment that the specimens i encountered which is a trait of the hobby juruensis.
I would be more comfortable calling it a huriana at the moment

Not only the obvious differences in appearance, Avicularia lynnae & Avicularia hirschii are also small species like Avicularia minatrix, they probably only get about half the size of Avicularia huriana.

 

[The Spider Faery]

Nomen dubium....meaning these can be revised as well in the near future

Yep, considering nomen dubium means "doubtful name". But until or unless that list also officially gets changed, Avicularia stays, at least for now.

 

[Siderum]

In instances where we find multiple morphotypes for a species (like A. juruensis and those formerly known as A. urticans), how do we go about refering to them in the pet trade? "A. juruensis morphotype 2"? Also, do we go about only breeding one morphotype with the same kind? (I think we should).


Some of these morphotypes (assuming A. metallica ends up being an A. avicularia, which I know is not a conclusion of this study) really do seem to have size, color, and temperament differences. Obviously confirmation biases come into play, but I think the differences are obvious enough between these "different species" with a nomen dubia that the question should be considered.
I am eagerly awaiting molecular data to clarify these questions.

 

[viper69]

They should have used DNA.

I'd like to know if A. metallica is a true species/sub-species etc.

 

[aurusantula]

Dang, gonna need to read this paper. One of my other favorite animal groups (Dinosauria) also just went through a taxonomic shuffling, so this will be fun to read.

 

[N1ghtFire]

This change is going to be so confusing for me. Time to go re-lable half of my tarantulas. XD

 

[Andrea82]

Dang, gonna need to read this paper. One of my other favorite animal groups (Dinosauria) also just went through a taxonomic shuffling, so this will be fun to read.

Dinosaurs are being revisited still?
Ugh, they are better off studying Theraphosidae species instead of fossils...

 

[aurusantula]

Dinosaurs are being revisited still?
Ugh, they are better off studying Theraphosidae species instead of fossils...

Well, they just moved Theropoda out of Saurischia (which is no longer a clade) and now Ornithischians and Theropods share a combined clade Ornithoscleida. that's at least what people are going with for now, I am not sure I trust the analysis though.

 

[Andrea82]

Well, they just moved Theropoda out of Saurischia (which is no longer a clade) and now Ornithischians and Theropods share a combined clade Ornithoscleida. that's at least what people are going with for now, I am not sure I trust the analysis though.

I'm sorry...but that went straight over my head.... To each his own, dinosaurs are not really my cup of tea

 

[JoshDM020]

do we go about only breeding one morphotype with the same kind? (I think we should).

I disagree entirely. While it WOULD be a form of hybridization, it wouldnt be a bad thing as it would still be the same SPECIES. As i understand it, the issue with hybrids is they dilute the species. This wouldnt happen with breeding different morphotypes of the SAME species. It would provide genetic diversity and possibly help them develop. Odds are, a different morphotype probably didnt come from parents of identical morphotypes in the wild.