Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Tarantula Chat' started by Tia B, Feb 18, 2018.
Back in the summer or recently?
No, they’re still there. I think they showed up in early December, when I got my OBT (though I got mine from Ken since his were a bit bigger). The prices for those OBTs are actually not bad consider the terrible prices on some of their other slings.
Okay, so here are some pics of this mystery Aphonopelma.
First almost certainly a male. I posted a underside photo if someone wants to check but I'm pretty sure the black triangle means male...
In terms of size, approaching 4 inches I think...
As far as what it is, with it being male, that opens A LOT more species that it could be just based on the visual comparison with the examples in the Aphonopelma redescription paper. How much do male Aphonopelma change in terms of coloration as they age? Are they darker than females even as sub-adults?
Possibly a ecently molted A. steindachneri
Look like this?
I don't think that's an Aphonopelma at all. As far as I know that genus only has one urticating patch, and that spider appears to have two.
some notes on behavior: Quite docile and quite active. Not sure if that helps, but it definitely isn't aggressive.
Maybe Aphonopelma catalina?
Carlsbad green maybe?
@AphonopelmaTX knows his aphonopelma, perhaps he can help. As EulersK said, perhaps its not even an Aphonopelma.
I did have a similar though when I first saw it. I wondered if it was an Aphonopelma at all, and seeing the pictures has only made me more unsure.
I can’t ID this one. With no collection information, it could be one of many.
I’m only seeing one urticating hair patch that has been rubbed off on both sides. In genera that have two urticating hair patches, they are very obvious and located more on the sides of the abdomen.
But to your point though, I would agree that there is a chance it isn’t an Aphonopelma species at all. The only info we have is what the pet store label says and when is that ever accurate?
Thanks for your help. The only info I have was that it was part of someone's collection and they sold it to Tropical Kingdom when they were looking to downsize (or more accurately, when they realized it was male).
I still think it's a fine specimen and a worthwhile purchase, whatever species it is.
Considering how slow they grow, I'm a little less sad about finding out he's a male than I was when I found out that my P. cambridgei sling was a male and it matured within four months...
Karl molted in the last few days so I have some photos of him freshly molted. In life, he is a very black spider (to the point that I briefly entertained the possibility he was actually a Grammostola pulchra, but he has no mirror patch on his abdomen) with grey long setae. He did not mature (but from his molt, he is 100% a male though that was pretty obvious from the dark patch on the underside of his abdomen).
As to what he is, I think his size can eliminate a lot of possibilities. The DLS of his molt is 128 mm (or a little over 4.5 inches). his carapace is 18 mm long and 17 mm wide, give or take a mm. Still looking like steindachneri is the best guess. another possibility is Brachypelma schroederi, except the description paper does suggest it to be a bit smaller than Karl, and also aggressive, which Karl is not.
@thevez2 is a US Aphonopelma fanatic, perhaps he has an idea
What a handsome boy. Did you save the molt? That could be a big help for identification.
I can't imagine it could be a Brachypelma schroederi, those come from the southernmost part of Mexico, right?
I still have the molt, but I need to retrieve the carapace and the top of the abdomen piece from his hide. I'll try that later today. He's pretty docile so that shouldn't be a problem.
Oh I still think Aphonopelma is the most likely genus; I'm just spitballing other potential NW all-black tarantulas that he could possibly be. A US Aphonopelma just makes the most logical sense. He was sold to Tropical Kingdom by someone who didn't know what he was. The "Mystery Aphonopelma" label comes from that shop, not the original owner. Someone just collecting a wild specimen they found is the most logical explanation for them not knowing what they had, rather than a rare Grammostola or Brachypelma species that they would have had to buy from somewhere. The species that's been suggested, steindachneri, is from the California coast line, so that's a bit far, but none of the local species look like a good match.