# Help on my Hottentotta hottentotta



## tzuruchi (Jun 10, 2009)

I just received two of these last week as a present, they've been eating small lateralis roaches. They're doing pretty well by the looks of it, although I'm not sure if I'm overfeeding them since they eat anything I give them. I've been feeding them roaches less than half their size every other day and they've grown a bit fatter compared to when I got them. They are about more than an inch in size from the mouth to the tip of the tail. They are kept in separate containers right now. Any additional info on how to care for these? The only caresheet I found didn't talk about them much. Thanks.


----------



## tabor (Jun 10, 2009)

they look healthy. here is the best care info online imo:

http://venomlist.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10986


----------



## tzuruchi (Jun 10, 2009)

Thanks, it the same one I've read earlier. But I still don't know when would be the safest time to put them together since I also read that they were communal, and matters concerning overfeeding and molting. I have experience with tarantulas but nothing concerning scorpions when it come to molts.


----------



## tabor (Jun 10, 2009)

i would never put them together. no need to, they are parthenogenic and do not need to breed to have babies 

however, i have housed other species of Hottentotta before together as adults for breeding purposes. no more than one male per cage, and never had any problems housing them, well fed, together for a few weeks.

H. hottentotta seriously have no reason to be housed together though.


----------



## tzuruchi (Jun 11, 2009)

How should I know if they're about to molt, on Tarantulas I usually notice darkening on the bald spots and rather sluggish movements when on premolt, how do you determine premolt on scorpions? And how do you know when to start feeding again after a molt? Are there any physical indications?


----------



## tabor (Jun 11, 2009)

not really, refusal of food is the most reliable, also is their fattening up. sorry, but that is all there is really to go on


----------



## tzuruchi (Jun 11, 2009)

Thanks again, so when do I stop giving them food, cause they don't seem to have enough. I'm feeding them every other day with lateralis less than half their size, is that overfeeding?


----------



## kendrickkey (Jun 11, 2009)

the color of your hottentotta hottentotta is so cool....






this is the color of my HH..


----------



## rd_07 (Jun 11, 2009)

nice dark morph
h.h


----------



## tzuruchi (Jun 11, 2009)

Thanks..
Still wondering, how do I know if I'm overfeeding them? Or do I stop when they stop accepting food?

And rd_07, I noticed your location, I too am from the Phil., any special tips on caring for them in our particular region? thanks..


----------



## alexi (Jun 11, 2009)

tabor said:


> i would never put them together. no need to, they are parthenogenic and do not need to breed to have babies
> 
> however, i have housed other species of Hottentotta before together as adults for breeding purposes. no more than one male per cage, and never had any problems housing them, well fed, together for a few weeks.
> 
> H. hottentotta seriously have no reason to be housed together though.


Wouldn't the babies be healthier if they were concieved sexually?  Or would that just be from an evolutionary standpoint?  Typically we think of sexual reproduction as superior since you're not just making a bunch of "clones," right?


----------



## jme (Jun 11, 2009)

if the female is 100% fit and has perfect jeans wouldnt you want those perfect jeans to be un tainted by another scorpion, if she's 100% healthy and has amazing coloring and apears to have no problems at all, her offspring would be equaly amazing clones   Also in breeding theres always that slim chance that something could go wrong and you might lose 1 or both of the scorps


----------



## tabor (Jun 11, 2009)

alexi said:


> Wouldn't the babies be healthier if they were concieved sexually?  Or would that just be from an evolutionary standpoint?  Typically we think of sexual reproduction as superior since you're not just making a bunch of "clones," right?


they are all females, they EVOLVED parthenogenesis as a means to survive. It is rare in scorpions but quite common in the animal kingdom. I mean, if there's no males around to breed with, they have to "come up" with something or go extinct. 

Remember Jurassic Park? All the dinosaurs were females yet they some how managed to reproduce (parthenogenesis)  

It's a perfectly sound and logical means of reproduction, there are plenty of asexual animals out there. Wikipedia it man!


----------



## alexi (Jun 11, 2009)

tabor said:


> they are all females, they EVOLVED parthenogenesis as a means to survive. It is rare in scorpions but quite common in the animal kingdom. I mean, if there's no males around to breed with, they have to "come up" with something or go extinct.
> 
> Remember Jurassic Park? All the dinosaurs were females yet they some how managed to reproduce (parthenogenesis)
> 
> It's a perfectly sound and logical means of reproduction, there are plenty of asexual animals out there. Wikipedia it man!


I didn't realize they reproduced ONLY by parthenogenesis.  Some animals can switch back and forth depending on the availability of partners, I mistakenly thought this was one of those cases.


----------



## Brandelmouche (Jun 11, 2009)

I have 5 Hottentotta trilineatus adulte female in the same terra for 3 years now and no problem at all, whit a lot of space, higing place and food no problem Tabor.


----------



## Treynok (Jun 11, 2009)

You really can't overfeed them, if they are full / don't want to eat, they won't.
If they eat that well keep feeding them, they will metabolize it and grow that much faster, if they stop eating for a while no big deal either.


----------



## alexi (Jun 11, 2009)

But isn't it true that if you feed them more they (as you say) progress through life faster and will live shorter lives?  Not a concern for everyone I know, but if you want them to live a long time power feeding's not the way to go.  Hehe, has anyone ever had a contest to see how long they could get a scorpion to live by keeping it at lower temperatures and feeding it just the right amount?


----------



## Treynok (Jun 11, 2009)

I don't really think anyone has done thorough enough research to support that it shortens their life, it is believed that since they grow faster they reach maturity faster, thus having a shorter life.  I would like to see more research done on this with a control group to see if there is any noticeable difference to be honest.  I feed mine whenever they eat, my imperators barely eat, my gracilis eat every other day or so, and my arizonensis eats daily even know it is an adult.  I feed a mixture and crickets and very few roaches as my colony isn't fully established yet.  Personal experience is really all there is to go by and it can vary greatly from one person to another, and everyone keeps them differently.


----------



## tzuruchi (Jun 11, 2009)

I have read somewhere in the tarantula section that some tarantulas reach maturity when their time comes regardless of feeding. I believe it was a male P. Murinus which reached maturity despite being small compared to others. I don't know if this is applicable to scorpions as well.


----------



## deadly_elegance (Jun 12, 2009)

tzuruchi said:


> I have read somewhere in the tarantula section that some tarantulas reach maturity when their time comes regardless of feeding. I believe it was a male P. Murinus which reached maturity despite being small compared to others. I don't know if this is applicable to scorpions as well.


yes it can, I have seen some centruroides species giving birth at 6th instar


----------



## tabor (Jun 12, 2009)

deadly_elegance said:


> yes it can, I have seen some centruroides species giving birth at 6th instar


which species? there are quite a few centruroides species that mature at that instar.



alexi said:


> I didn't realize they reproduced ONLY by parthenogenesis.  Some animals can switch back and forth depending on the availability of partners, I mistakenly thought this was one of those cases.


in theory I be they could switch back if some how males were introduced to their population. in fact I would bet money on there being populations of H. hottentotta out there in the wild of Tanzania or some such place that still reproduce sexually. 

I think I read an article that there is some species of Tityus (serrulatus perhaps?) that have confirmed both asexual populations and sexual populations. But I could be mistaken on this.

It just so happens that all of the Tityus serrulatus and H. hottentotta are parthenogenic, it doesn't mean that there aren't sexual populations of the species in the wild. 


Again parthenogenesis isn't really my strong point but just of the top of my head and typing as the thoughts pop into my head that is what I pulled out of my memory banks... :?


----------



## phear_me (Jun 13, 2009)

tabor said:


> they are all females, they EVOLVED parthenogenesis as a means to survive. It is rare in scorpions but quite common in the animal kingdom. I mean, if there's no males around to breed with, they have to "come up" with something or go extinct.
> 
> Remember Jurassic Park? All the dinosaurs were females yet they some how managed to reproduce (parthenogenesis)
> 
> It's a perfectly sound and logical means of reproduction, there are plenty of asexual animals out there. Wikipedia it man!


For the record, evolution cannot possibly work that way. Organisms don't suddenly 'realize' they are missing a large number of one sex and then their genes somehow know about it and suddenly "make" another set of chromosomes. That would imply that genes have the ability to react to outside stimuli, which is simply false. Evolution, if it is indeed correct in its current description, is moved forward by mutation and natural selection. The mutation that elicits change is a random happening. Suddenly running out of males is wholly irrelevant to a random and impersonal process. 

I don't mean to be a stickler about it, but it amuses me that every time someone talks about evolution they wind up making subconscious arguments for design.


----------



## tabor (Jun 13, 2009)

phear_me said:


> For the record, evolution cannot possibly work that way.


I realize they don't "sense" a sudden shortage of males and instantly turn parthenogenic.

I'm looking for a good article describing how it evolved online, the two books I have, which are consindered must haves, just talk about parthenogenesis (but dont mention how it evolved) but go into way more detail about scorpions that give birth multiple times from one mating. It says that this strategy evolved in population where females outnumbered mature males by a number as high as 2:1.

My interest in the evolution of parthenogenesis is high, so if you can explain it before I find an article on it that would be nice


----------



## tabor (Jun 13, 2009)

here is a good read:

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0104-79301995000200002&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en


it's interesting, and one of the best articles i've read on the subject. to be honest i dont think anyone knows how long it takes something like that to evolve in a species of scorpions. They give reasons for WHY it evolved, but not how. And the article also touches on the benefits of parthenogenesis versus conventional bisexual reproduction.


----------



## tabor (Jun 13, 2009)

I'm talking to a very good board of people about how it evolved, as well as the two leading scorpiologists in the world about how it evolved. So, they all admit its a really gray area, i mean, the know the benefits of it, and possibly why it happened, but i mean, scorps have been around for 400mil years... The fossil record is sparse, and almots non-existance for modern day species. Plus, if you find the fossil of a scorp, there is no way to say OH it was parthenogenic! 

So i am trying my best to figure out WHY rather than when, but believe me, it is in line with evolution. Scorps are a "survivor" (k or r in science talk, i cant remember) species, they want to get as many of their off spring out there as efficiently as possible, especially buthids. 

Once I piece together as best I can I will post a new thread with links to articles or atleast quotes from scorpiologists to back up my best guesses. 

that's all im posting in this thread as i dont like arguing with people who completely misinterpret what i wrote.


----------



## alexi (Jun 13, 2009)

phear_me said:


> For the record, evolution cannot possibly work that way. Organisms don't suddenly 'realize' they are missing a large number of one sex and then their genes somehow know about it and suddenly "make" another set of chromosomes. That would imply that genes have the ability to react to outside stimuli, which is simply false. Evolution, if it is indeed correct in its current description, is moved forward by mutation and natural selection. The mutation that elicits change is a random happening. Suddenly running out of males is wholly irrelevant to a random and impersonal process.
> 
> I don't mean to be a stickler about it, but it amuses me that every time someone talks about evolution they wind up making subconscious arguments for design.


Pretty sure that wasn't a subconscious argument for design.  All he was  saying was that if a group of female scorps run out of males and they don't have a different mode of reproduction they die out.  So in a species that has a high female-male ratio, evolution favors them if they can reproduce parthenogenically when the need arises.  I know he said "come up" with something else, but those quotes seemed to "suggest" to me that it was a "figure" of "speech."  I know what you mean, but evolution is just a lot easier to talk about as if it had intentions.  It's kinda like physics or chemistry - you always hear people say "the atom wants a full valence shell."  Of course an atom doesn't have any desires, but physical laws operate in such a way saying they "want" a full valence shell gets the point across easily enough.  It's a lot easier than a long winded description about orbital stabilities.  Sorry if I'm coming off like a jerk or something, but as long as we're being "sticklers"...


----------



## tabor (Jun 13, 2009)

thank you for helping clarify stuff alexi

i understand evolution, but i challenge ANYONE to try and make an educated, easy to understand, explanations of how parthenogenesis evolve in scorpions. And oh, keep in mind, no one knows exactly why it happened, and just hint at theories and inevitably involves a break-off population that emerged from a sexual population that began to run low on the ratio of mature males to females.


----------



## alexi (Jun 13, 2009)

tabor said:


> and just hint at theories and inevitably involves a break-off population


Isn't that how most new separate species are supposed to be formed?


----------



## tzuruchi (Jun 14, 2009)

Wow, this topic has gotten to another level, well anyway I just got my camera back after having it cleaned, here's a few decent pictures of one of them. Are they fat, thin or just right? Don't know what instar they are right now but they are around more than an inch from their mouth to the tip of the tail.


----------



## tabor (Jun 14, 2009)

alexi said:


> Isn't that how most new separate species are supposed to be formed?


yes, so in most cases they are a new species, who knows what happened to the other part of the population? Remember 400 million years of evolution.

There are some cases where there are parthenogenic populations of a species AND sexual population species. In these cases, the parthenogenic population has the benefit of rapid, steady growth, enough to out number their non-parthenogenic counterparts. What are the cons? Swapping of DNA and the benefits of sexual reproduction stop.

What about the sexual populations? Are they a different species? I mean, physically they seem to be the same, but they reproduce entirely differently. Scorpion taxonomy is a mess as it is, and with so few cases of parthenogenic populations and sexual population of the same species i think it will be a while before things are sorted out. Will they eventually be described as a seperate species? It is possible, perhaps likely. 

Here's a thought experiment for you - What if you started reintroducing males into the parthenogenic population that is nothing but females? Would they begin to breed sexually? Would the males even attempt to breed with them? Furthermore, how would we know (if they did breed) that the resulting offspring were the result of a sexual breeding and not parthenogenesis? (the likely answer the the last question is that there would be males and females in the brood.)

We're talking cutting edge research in the field of scorpiology. I can't wait until someone smarter than me figures it all out


----------



## tabor (Jun 14, 2009)

tzuruchi said:


> Wow, this topic has gotten to another level, well anyway I just got my camera back after having it cleaned, here's a few decent pictures of one of them. Are they fat, thin or just right? Don't know what instar they are right now but they are around more than an inch from their mouth to the tip of the tail.


they look to be about 3i (maybe 4i) and average weight/bulk. keep up the good work. they can be slow growers at times, but the pay off is worth it :clap:


----------

