Communal Ts that aren't M. balfouri?

[The Grym Reaper]

Pokies can be quite communal too

Nope, regalis are probably the least likely out of the genus to have incidents of cannibalism but it still happens on a regular basis.

I've lost count of how many Pokie communals I've seen go boobs-up since I started keeping.

 

[atraxrobustus]

No, T.'s have not been scientifically proven as communal, only "observed". In captivity (hobby), the only communal T. with the most success is the M. balfouri and all other species are a hit or miss. Many communals have mostly failed after reaching the sub-adult/adult stages. Many people argue that pokies are communal but no one has yet have success of adult pokie communals that has also successfully reproduce in a communal. A true communal must be able to thrive together from slings to adults and also must have reproduce offspring to be considered communal on my terms. The closest thing to a successful pokie communal is Marks Tarantulas on Youtubve, as his P. regalis communal are sub/adults and adults together, but all his other pokie communal such as the P. rufilata communal and his P. subfusca communal have both failed. Any T. communal can fail, even M. balfouri, so it's a risk that is gambling.

I can't say anything on H. gigas because that's not something I know about in terms communals in captivity (hobby) for me.

The thing is that "scientific proof" and "observation" are pretty much equivalent in this respect- as observation is about the only manner of experimentation, especially in the wild. My point was that the listed species have been known to be kept communally based upon at least one credible account- and I'm sure that the source I found this from wasn't the first person to get the idea and be successful doing this.

 

[EtienneN]

The thing is that "scientific proof" and "observation" are pretty much equivalent in this respect- as observation is about the only manner of experimentation, especially in the wild. My point was that the listed species have been known to be kept communally based upon at least one credible account- and I'm sure that the source I found this from wasn't the first person to get the idea and be successful doing this.

Yeah but a success (or a string of isolated anomolous cases of success) does not make a trend. Isolated incidents that are successful are just statistical 'noise' when comparing it to the greater scatter plot chart of successes and failures. If 96% of people have cannibalism in a communal; the 4% that last for years mean nothing. It's not like you can go out and repeatably have the successes happen predictably. No one knows what makes a communal tarantula 'experiment' last for however long it does. It might just be sheer dumb luck. It's not like someone can point to one thing they are doing and say "There! That is the secret that reliably allows communal tarantula setups to thrive!" And because this hinges on so much luck; I don't think any person; on any continent; on this planet can truly say "I can keep tarantulas communally reliably enough to prevent cannibalism greater than 51 percent of the time."

 

[atraxrobustus]

Yeah but a success (or a string of isolated anomolous cases of success) does not make a trend. Isolated incidents that are successful are just statistical 'noise' when comparing it to the greater scatter plot chart of successes and failures. If 96% of people have cannibalism in a communal; the 4% that last for years mean nothing. It's not like you can go out and repeatably have the successes happen predictably. No one knows what makes a communal tarantula 'experiment' last for however long it does. It might just be sheer dumb luck. It's not like someone can point to one thing they are doing and say "There! That is the secret that reliably allows communal tarantula setups to thrive!" And because this hinges on so much luck; I don't think any person; on any continent; on this planet can truly say "I can keep tarantulas communally reliably enough to prevent cannibalism greater than 51 percent of the time."

Not necessarily if one compares notes- the 4% may be applying some different variable that the 90 something isn't. Rather- it is the systematic study of seemingly insignificant environmental variables that would contribute to the research.

 

[The Seraph]

Not necessarily if one compares notes- the 4% may be applying some different variable that the 90 something isn't. Rather- it is the systematic study of seemingly insignificant environmental variables that would contribute to the research.

Why not think of it like this? If 100 hundred people each ingest a half a grand of cyanide and four survive, does that mean the human race is immune to cyanide and everybody else was a fluke? No, it means there was not enough cyanide. In this case, the fluke is that those pokie communal survived, probably due to some unknown variable but it may be entirely dependant on unusual individuals that are just somehow predispositioned to community life. That does not mean you should ignore the extremely overwhelming majority and suggest that tiny percentage is representative of the whole.
Edit: Also wanted to add; if we use the cyanide example, it just means that we need to reach a tipping point to kill somebody. Maybe, all pokie communals reach a tipping point and those that survive reach it slower.

 

[EtienneN]

No, most people doing communals are not introducing controlled variables when keeping them. And what magic variable do you think this 1-4% have? Temperature doesn’t make a difference, frequency of feeding doesn’t, size of enclosure doesn’t either. Literally you can do nothing and have it go on for a year or more but then wake up to find a single fat spider. I want to reiterate that it’s not just that we know it can’t work for the majority through observations and inferences, it’s that the reason why some people have so called communal success stories is literally unknowable because it’s not repeatable.

 

[Theneil]

Cracks me up everytime people post about communals.

Obviously there are all the regurgitators, who have never witnessed anything, but read it once on the internet.

The random numbers people generate for the successes and failures.

The more often than not, unbased claims of things that do or don’t make a difference.

A lack of common definition of what makes a difference.

I am by no means pretending to be an expert, but from my minimal experience with communal setups, the info i have received from friends and aquaintences, and a little bit of personal thought (yep, did it all by myself instead of stealing it from some random on the internet) i have come to the conclusion that there are some double standards around the subject and that a person is usually better off digging for old threads on communal species and even sometimes looking on NON AB sources for information on the subject. While generally a good source of info, the amount of assumption, exaggeration, group think, and parroting/regurgitation gets in the way of actually providing information on certain subjects (such as this one LOL).

I am not trying to promote or discourage anybody on anything. Simply find it humerous that ‘this’ thread is repeated so routinely.

 

[VermillionFox]

I have an empty 29 gallon aquarium and had the idea to turn it into a balfouri communal until I found out how much they cost a piece. Are there any other communal species that might do well in a 29g?

Neoholothele incei , and if vertical, some pokies. Just.... none do nearly as well and some will eat each other most likely.

 

[viper69]

Are there any other communal species that might do well in a 29g?

No species of T has been observed in the wild to be communal. People should stop playing god on this issue. "here I have a bunch of Ts, I'll throw them in together, why...because I can"