# Help identifying scorpion



## mayto (Dec 16, 2009)

Hi all,

I am new to this page and would like some help identifying a scorpion I found on the west coast of Mexico in the state of Jalisco.

I believe it is of the Centruroides family. Opinions and comments are welcomed.

Cheers!


----------



## tarzan2day (Dec 16, 2009)

Centruroides vittatus male


----------



## skinheaddave (Dec 16, 2009)

With the huge proviso that this is a hard genus and that there is a lot of polymorphism etc. I'd guess most likely C.elegans with a chance of C.limpidus, perhaps?  Both occur in that area.  There might be more to be garnered through closer examination of the pictures, but that is sort of off the top of my head.

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## mayto (Dec 16, 2009)

Thanks for the replies guys. 

From pics I've found on the web, I'm also guessing that it's a C. Elegans male. The Vittatus seems to always have a dark triangle on the head near the eyes.

Any more opinions are welcome.


----------



## Michiel (Dec 16, 2009)

Like already said, there is a huge number of mexican Centruroides species that all look very similar. This specimen lacks the dark triangle on the carapace, so I can only say that it is not C.vitattus.
It could very well be C.elegans, but I am not experienced enough to say anything more then just that.


----------



## skinheaddave (Dec 16, 2009)

C.vittatus also don't range anywhere close to there.  They don't all have the mask, but those that do are incredibly pale and not at all patterned.  So as Michiel says, it is not C.vittatus.

One I didn't mention that I believe ranges through there is C.infimatus.  I've only ever seen pics of fairly dark specimens, but being Centruroides it wouldn't surprise me at all if there were a paler variation tucked away somewhere.

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

Tarzan,

A man could get killed by such a misidentification.

Michiel, Dave, & Mayto

It is in fact C. elegans.


----------



## skinheaddave (Dec 16, 2009)

rasputin said:


> It is in fact C. elegans.


How do you come to such a firm conclusion?

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

Dave,

It say you quoted me in the post but when I go to quote you it says you quoted Tarzan.

At any rate, I guess I would need some clearer shots of the telson to come to a firm conclusion but for now I will maintain that it is _C. elegans edentulus_. The only other species it fits the description of and there was an note on the confusion of these two species in the JOA in 2005, is _C. limpidus limpidus_. I don't see a very pronounced subaculear tooth and that's why I say it's _C. elegans_, but if provided with some shots of the telson I could validate or trash my ID on this. I've got both the 1977 _Centruroides_ key and the JOA article out in front of me right now. Somebody needs to sit down and revise the key!


----------



## skinheaddave (Dec 16, 2009)

rasputin said:


> Somebody needs to sit down and revise the key!


That is basically my point.  None of the publications out there are good enough right now to be drawing conclusions from those photos.  Even once the revision is done (it is being worked on), I think you will find that you are still going to be dealing with a great deal of uncertainty in this genus.  More often than not, it seems to come down to a matter of numerous morphological features, some measurements/ratios and a decent understanding of the specimens out there.  Plus, of course, a specific collection locale.  

So without a good revision, the specimen in hand, a microscope and some callipers -- plus some time to examine a few hundred specimens in collections until I feel I understand the dynamics -- I'm not at all happy going beyond "probably C.elegans."  

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

Dave,

I hear ya on that. I do wanna say that _C. infamatus_ is unlikely though. Wanna pm me who's doing the revision?

Here's where anybody viewing this can make some notes:

http://www.redtox.org/RT2/servlet/CtrlInteriorSec?clv=10375&tipo=s
http://www.venomlist.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=25895
http://www.americanarachnology.org/JoA_free/JoA_v34_n3/JoA_v34-3-634.pdf
http://ia311009.us.archive.org/1/it...197778amer/entomologicalnew8889197778amer.pdf <--start at pg 111


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

Have to add this:

Mayto,

Cand you also get a ruler next to it or something for a size comparison?


----------



## Kugellager (Dec 16, 2009)

These are C.elegans and look significantly different that those pictured above IMO.  However, as is stated, there can be much variation and they probably not be conclusively ID'd w/o first-hand study.

I lean toward C.limpidus first and maybe toward C.limbatus based on what can be seen. I lean away from C.elegans.







Freshly molted:






John
];')


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

John,

Before you dismiss _C. elegans_, do take in mind the morphological differences. Note the collection of Roman on that SOTM from VL that I linked as well as the notes from the JOA. Also, Roman's pix here: http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=1441193&postcount=2870


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

Also, some opinions: _C. limpidus_, eh, slight chance. _C. limbatus_, very unlikely.


----------



## skinheaddave (Dec 16, 2009)

I'd agree that C.limbatus is out -- if only due to distribution.  I wouldn't subscribe a "slight chance" to C.limpidus, though.  If these species are cryptic when in hand then they are going to be a real mess off of photos.

As to the revision, no secret to it: http://scorpion.amnh.org/page1/page10/page10.html.  Lauren, while not the most communicative person, seems to really know her stuff and has access to a plethora of specimens, fantastic tools etc.  I am looking forward to her findings.   There was also the crew who did the C.exilicauda/C.sculpturatus split a few years back.  I don't know what they have been up to since.   If you will note that both of these groups focus on molecular work .. that is not just a symptom of the times.  I am pretty sure I have the Florida centruroides sorted, but I'm holding off on doing anything until Lauren has come out with some molecular work.  They are such a very hard genus.  

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

skinheaddave said:


> I am pretty sure I have the Florida centruroides sorted, but I'm holding off on doing anything until Lauren has come out with some molecular work.  They are such a very hard genus.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave


Thanks Dave. I'm interested in hearing about your Florida findings. Not to distract from the thread but what ever happened to that study on _C. sculpturatus_ in the Grand Canyon range? Was it conclusive?


----------



## mayto (Dec 16, 2009)

rasputin said:


> Have to add this:
> 
> Mayto,
> 
> Cand you also get a ruler next to it or something for a size comparison?


Rasputin: Here are a couple more pics with a ruler for size comparison. Couldn't get it fully extended but you can probably estimate from there.

Kugellager: To my untrained eye, the first pic you posted  looks identical to the one I have. What are the significant differences you speak of?

Cheers.


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

I'm still going with _C. elegans_ but I'm going to say the only other thing I may say it could possibly be is _C. tecomanus_ (previously _C. limbatus tecomanus_).


----------



## skinheaddave (Dec 16, 2009)

rasputin said:


> _C. tecomanus_ (previously _C. limbatus tecomanus_).


C.*limpidus* tecomanus.  ;P

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

skinheaddave said:


> C.*limpidus* tecomanus.  ;P
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave


Thanks for correcting that


----------



## redhourglass (Dec 16, 2009)

Hi all,

C. elegans is rather large as adults and if I recall the other species mentioned are smaller with general length.

The picture at the Scorpion Files I presented is a confirmed specimen of C. elegans.

Again, there is no need to pursue character diagnostics with species to key out for the polymorphism may or may not rep the whole in any one particular region.  Old issue IMO but may the molecular aspect turn the page ...

Sinc. Chad


----------



## Galapoheros (Dec 16, 2009)

Hi Chad, was that specimen alive when the pic was taken?


----------



## rasputin (Dec 16, 2009)

Galapoheros said:


> Hi Chad, was that specimen alive when the pic was taken?


Looks like a holotype to me


----------



## redhourglass (Dec 16, 2009)

Hey,

Nope, specimen placed on scanner from a vial.

Sinc. Chad



Galapoheros said:


> Hi Chad, was that specimen alive when the pic was taken?


----------



## Galapoheros (Dec 16, 2009)

Hmm, OK thanks, I was just wondering about the colors.  I know next to nothing about C. elegans.


----------



## athena az (Jun 3, 2017)

Hi 
I need help and I need it ASAP. is it venomous, keep in mind it's from middle east region, Iran. North of it though.


----------



## ArachnoDrew (Jun 3, 2017)

Looks like a dead deathstalker  (leirus) if so it is probably one of the deadliest to encounter,  Iran is home to many very dangerous BUT awesome scorps

Reactions: Agree 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Rugg the bug man (Jun 3, 2017)

Yeah definitely looks like a Leiurus sp.


----------



## Kugellager (Jun 3, 2017)

Could be a Leiurus. Has long thin pedipalps/pincers and from what little can be seen the right color on the last tail segment. Regardless, it probably has significant venom. Note:  all scorpions are venomous, but most are not dangerous. In Iran you are much more likely to encounter a dangerously venomous species.

John
];')


----------



## athena az (Jun 10, 2017)

well, the amazing things is that upon receiving several stings. Nothing happened even without antivenom, It didn't even hurt much. I think the tails is just muddy, and it's not black


----------



## ArachnoDrew (Jun 10, 2017)

What exactly stung you? The scorp in the picture looks very dead lol


----------



## Kugellager (Jun 10, 2017)

Could have been very lucky and received dry stings. Not that uncommon.

John

];')


----------



## darkness975 (Jun 10, 2017)

athena az said:


> well, the amazing things is that upon receiving several stings. Nothing happened even without antivenom, It didn't even hurt much. I think the tails is just muddy, and it's not black


Probably dry stings. 

Sad to see it is dead, though.  Where did you find it?

And yes, as others have said, looks like _Leiurus._


----------

