Theraphosinae sp.

[Philth]

Some dealers had these labeled as Crypsidromus, but I don't think that is recognized genus. This spider is from Costa Rica. Growing very slow, but just starting to show some adults colors. It gets a black triangle similar to B. emilia.

Theraphosinae (G.) sp. "Costa Rica"

Later, Tom

 

[Zoltan]

Crypsidromus is a junior synonym of Lasiodora.

Any reason not to label these Theraphosinae (G.) sp. "Costa Rica"?

 

[Philth]

Nope , thanks for the info and correction. I'll go back and edit it.

Later, Tom

 

[fartkowski]

Thanks for posting this Tom.
I got a sling a while ago and wow does it ever grow slow.
I was curious of how it will turn out
About how big is yours?

 

[GoTerps]

Based on material collected in Costa Rica and examined against specimens in the British Museum, it's my understanding that this spider will prove to be what is currently described as Lasiodora icecu. Not that it has anything to do with "true" Lasiodora, but I think that's what it's currently described as.

Eric

 

[Philth]

Hey Chris,

This one is a female and is barley 2 inches. Its my biggest one since I sexed it early on, and started feeding more than the other 2 I have.

I have one of the other sp. that came in with them that does not have the triangle, and its only like .75 inches. Unfortunately I lost a couple of them when they were smaller.

Later, Tom

 

[Philth]

Hey thanks Eric,

Do you know if that holds true for the other spider without the black triangle? I wonder if they are different spiders or just color forms?

Later, Tom

 

[fartkowski]

Thanks Tom.
I as well have the other one. I got mine labeld as Theraphosidae sp "Costa Rica II, and III.

 

[syndicate]

Nice one Tom!I remember when these spiders got imported.Looks like this species turned out pretty neat!
-Chris

 

[sjl197]

This should be the species imported to europe by Czech's as
Theraphosidae sp. II costa rica
or
Theraphosidae sp. costa rica 2

In my view, both the names Theraphosidae and Theraphosinae are appropriate (as they clearly have urticating hairs), but has anyone published anything to show taxonomically that they're theraphosinae yet, or demonstrated theyre 'Crypsidromus' yet...? not to my knowledge. At least, not in a publication with the characters explicitly presented. Then why has certain dealer(s) rushed to change names on this trade material without any published evidence ?? Why rush to change the name on the thread, and perhaps tanks with specimens, and perhaps the name of all future progeny bred from this material... wont this lead to confusing with later people asking does Theraphosidae sp. II costa rica = Theraphosinae (G.) sp. "Costa Rica"

Is there any rush to rename it ?Theraphosinae, or ?Crypsidromus, or ?Metriopelma, or ? etc.. ..doesnt this lead to confusion about whether we are all looking at the same material or not? Right now we have it as Theraphosidae sp. II costa rica..... so it has a name we all recognise for now. The number II is key to distinguish it from sp I, III and IV [isnt that taxonomy/nomenclature all about having a name we can all apply to specimens to know we are all looking at the same thing?]

If we want to stop potential confusion / naming uncertainty, lets look to ask the original dealers to improve the details on the original collection, and keep that linked to these specimens while taxonomy is in progress, leading to a smooth transition once an appropriate name is work out..., this is still possible as the original european breeders were also involved in field collection (rather than unknown collectors and large-scale commercial export). The fear is that collection location is more widely known, perhaps increasing chance that more specimens are collected for the pet-trade, but if the community breeds well and saturates the market, wont that limit that potential collection pressure.? The other issue is that multiple species co-exist in the same area.. (ie as i understand it Theraphosine sp IV Costa Rica was collected in the same province as sp II... )

Im worried that sp III 'costa rica' is already mentioned in this thread, i dont want to see these or others from these costa rican exports get mixed, else we could end up with a messy situation like Pamphobeteus sp ecudador I, II, III etc, Euathlus/Paraphysa sp I, II 'Chile'

Any better solutions to putting trade names on species while the taxonomy is in progress...?

Best wishes all.
s

 

[Philth]

Hi sjl197, you bring up some excellent points, and thanks for posting your thoughts. Unfortunately by the time the spiders have reached my hands, the names have already been altered. In fact I bought some from 2 different dealers, around the same time, with different names.

I'd be interested in seeing pics of the spiders labled as Theraphosidae sp. II costa rica , as well as sp. III, & IV , as I believe only 2 made it to the U.S. I have two , one has a black triangle on the carapace, and the other does not.

Based on material collected in Costa Rica and examined against specimens in the British Museum, it's my understanding that this spider will prove to be what is currently described as Lasiodora icecu. Not that it has anything to do with "true" Lasiodora, but I think that's what it's currently described as.

Eric

Thanks again Eric for the info. Its interesting, after reading your comments I was looking through an old ARACHNOCULTURE mag from Jacobi's trip to Costa Rica with Andrew Smith, and there are pics of the same spider. Pretty cool, But I do question the placement of it in the genus Lasiodora as well since the male is only about 2 inches big. :?

Later, Tom

 

[c.h.esteban]

Hi,

I'd be interested in seeing pics of the spiders labled as Theraphosidae sp. II costa rica , as well as sp. III, & IV , as I believe only 2 made it to the U.S. I have two , one has a black triangle on the carapace, and the other does not.

Pic´s of the sp. II and III you can find here

http://www.tarantulacanada.ca/gallery/images/864.php (II with triangle)

http://www.tarantulacanada.ca/gallery/images/865.php (III without)

The sp. I has a dark color, with dark carapace and some red setae on the back.
...just a pic of a juvenile

The sp. IV has only a brown color with darker femur.


bye

 

[jheane14]

what is the full grown size of this specie? :razz:

 

[sjl197]

Hi, i was just motivated by tom to update some pictures on Flickr.


adult female
http://www.flickr.com/photos/theraphosid_systematics/5766741768/in/photostream/

adult male
http://www.flickr.com/photos/theraphosid_systematics/5766754678/in/photostream/

others there also.

jheane14. Theyre a smallish species, the male was about 15cm legspan total, the females seem to get a bit bigger, but not much.

I looked at this male later, dead and preserved in 70% ethanol. This is why it is important to preserve your dead specimens everyone His morphology matches how Valerio defined his 'Cryspidromus sp' back in 1980, but those are all dumped in Lasiodora right now. Yes, it is close to one of those found by Smith/Jacobi/et al and reported in the arachoculture magazine. Not sure if same species, but same genus, whatever the future calls them...

so i prefer Theraphosidae sp II Costa Rica, as the original Czech imports

 

[dactylus]

Interesting to read this a few years down the road. Tom were you abe to find a mate for your Theraphosidae sp II Costa Rica female?

David

 

[Philth]

Interesting to read this a few years down the road. Tom were you abe to find a mate for your Theraphosidae sp II Costa Rica female?

David

Hey David, unfortunately not. I still have 2 females though. Although Michael Jacobi recently imported a spider labeled as Cryspidromus sp. "Pursical, Black emilia" that I suspect may be the same thing , so maybe males will be available in the future.


Later, Tom

 

[dactylus]

Hey David, unfortunately not. I still have 2 females though. Although Michael Jacobi recently imported a spider labeled as Cryspidromus sp. "Pursical, Black emilia" that I suspect may be the same thing , so maybe males will be available in the future.


Later, Tom

Tom,

Yes, from the photos that I've seen the recent import of Cryspidromus sp. "Pursical, Black emilia" appears to be the same spider that you have. I like the way that they look and I might pick up a few of those slings before Winter hits here in MN. Good luck coming up with a male for your two females!

David

 

[c.h.esteban]

for comparison

all juv. bodylength ca. 2,0 cm

Theraphosinae sp. Costa Rica I

Theraphosinae sp. Costa Rica II

Theraphosinae sp. Costa Rica III