# Largest old world terrestrial?



## ezberserk (Jan 14, 2011)

Wanted to know what the largest old world terrestrial is actually available in the hobby?


----------



## EightLeggedFrea (Jan 14, 2011)

Wild guess: P. muticus (formerly C. crawshayi).


----------



## codykrr (Jan 14, 2011)

If memory serve me right I think it may be one of the Australian tarantulas.


----------



## jbm150 (Jan 14, 2011)

I think Phlogius sp. Aussie goliath is supposed to reach the 10" leg span range....


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Jan 14, 2011)

EightLeggedFrea said:


> Wild guess: P. muticus (formerly C. crawshayi).


That's not a terrestrial


----------



## Zoltan (Jan 14, 2011)

Chris_Skeleton said:


> That's not a terrestrial


Yes it is.


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Jan 14, 2011)

Zoltan said:


> Yes it is.


What? I thought it was fossorial :?


----------



## neubii18 (Jan 14, 2011)

Chris_Skeleton said:


> What? I thought it was fossorial :?


I believe you are correct...


----------



## Zoltan (Jan 14, 2011)

Chris_Skeleton said:


> What? I thought it was fossorial :?


Yes it is. 

Terrestrial means living on the ground/land/earth, as opposed to aquatic or arboreal. Fossorial means "fitted for or having the habit of digging."


----------



## jbm150 (Jan 14, 2011)

For the sake of the conversation, I'd assume the question to include any non-arboreal Ts.  Fossorial would be a subset of terrestrial.  "Largest old world primarily-ground-dwelling tarantula?" more or less.  

Anything described larger than the Aussie goliath?  P. muticus tops out at about 8" or so right?  Same with H. gigas, NSW Phlogius sps, and the schmidti Haplos?  What about Thrigmopoeus truculentus, I've heard hushed whispers in back alleys of wild ones being pretty damn big....


----------



## dtknow (Jan 14, 2011)

Pretty sure H. gigas doesn't get any larger than 7. 

I'd say C. crawshayi until someone shows us a full grown Pholgius.


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Jan 14, 2011)

Well I don't consider the obligate burrowers like H. lividum and P. muticus to be terrestrial because they are always under ground and rarely out in the open. I wouldn't put them in the same category as species such as Lasiodora and Acanthoscurria, because they truly are different types. 

But... That's how I see it, and the OP might have meant fossorial also.


----------



## Zoltan (Jan 14, 2011)

Chris_Skeleton said:


> Well I don't consider the obligate burrowers like H. lividum and P. muticus to be terrestrial because they are always under ground and rarely out in the open. I wouldn't put them in the same category as species such as Lasiodora and Acanthoscurria, because they truly are different types.
> 
> But... That's how I see it, and the OP might have meant fossorial also.


Please read my post again carefully.


Zoltan said:


> Terrestrial means living on the ground/land/earth, *as opposed to aquatic or arboreal*.


Another way to put it might be "inhabiting the earth." By definition, a fossorial animal is a terrestrial animal. Many species which don't have a high tendency to burrow in captivity do burrow in the wild, make abandoned burrows their own or exploit natural cavities, but they don't sit out in the open all day waiting to be eaten. The term for these is opportunistic burrower. Both opportunistic burrowers and obligate burrowers are terrestrials since they don't live in the water or in trees.

BTW, about large Old World terrestrials:


Zoltan said:


> RichardG said:
> 
> 
> > What's all the fuss about Hysterocrates hercules - it's just a stumpy-legged, brown Hysterocrates with a large carapace :?
> ...


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Jan 14, 2011)

I see what you are saying Zoltan, but they're still separate in my records  

And I should be getting my aquatic T soon, It's a C. submarineus


----------



## 2oCHEVYo0 (Jan 14, 2011)

Honestly, just because a spider spends alot more time in a burrow than actually out in the open doesn't mean that it isn't a terrestrial. Take a look at the all mighty T. Blondi... The "Largest terrestrial on the planet" and alot of research and reading other posters stories lead me to believe that they spend long periods of time in burrows rather than running around in the open. Just because it's a obligate burrower/ opportunistic burrower does not NOT make it a terrestrial. Hopefully someone understands what I'm trying to say :}


----------



## jbm150 (Jan 14, 2011)

Well, seeing as how the OP hasn't been back to qualify his question, lets just group them together for the time being....




dtknow said:


> Pretty sure H. gigas doesn't get any larger than 7.
> 
> I'd say C. crawshayi until someone shows us a full grown Pholgius.


Really?  I could swear I've read H. gigas routinely hit 8", if not larger.  Hopefully anyways....

As for Phlogius, Steve Nunn has an 8" crassipes (hope he doesn't mind me showing it off):
http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=1577291&postcount=71


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Jan 14, 2011)

I still see it as:
(And I guess this applies to in captivity)

1. Terrestrial
2. Fossorial
3. Arboreal
4. Semi-Arboreal

I mean what if you were new to Ts and someone sold you a H. lividum and said it was a terrestrial. Wouldn't you think it would stay out in the open? 

And yes, I understand that many terrestrials will burrow and utilize burrows, but is it to the extent of what the obligate burrowers use them?

Sorry for the derailment.


----------



## jbm150 (Jan 14, 2011)

Chris_Skeleton said:


> I still see it as:
> (And I guess this applies to in captivity)
> 
> 1. Terrestrial
> ...


Yes, we get that there is a distinction.  Ok, for the sake of your argument, what in your opinion would be the largest terrestrial OW T?  I can't think of any non-burrowing terrestrial OW Ts at all.  They're all fossorial to some extent.... :?  Something like an M. balfouri?  Even the Chilos, which web a lot, burrow like hell.


----------



## AussieT (Jan 14, 2011)

Hey guys,

Ok I found some images from Steve Nunn I thought were long lost since the Australian Tarantula Association closed down. These were the best I could do:
Here is Steves largest Phlogius Crassipes - the tank measures 190-200mm across and this big girl is easily longer than that. Steve had mentioned that this individual was just short of 9".





And here is the thread:
http://www.inverts.com.au/showthread.php?14689-Largest-single-spider-in-the-hobby-premium
I'll keep trying to find the pic of the huge Phlogius sp.Goliath Steve was handling, from what I remember Steve said it was bigger than his largest Crassipes.

---------- Post added at 02:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:06 PM ----------

Ok one more thread I found on the Phlogius sp.Goliath where Steve states it to be our largest recorded spider
http://www.inverts.com.au/showthread.php?8963-largest&highlight=Largest+hobby
Sadly the images I was looking for have disappeared.


----------



## toidy (Jan 15, 2011)

i'll go for selenocosmia crassipes! wish mine gets bigger already!


----------



## Najakeeper (Jan 15, 2011)

All fossorials are terrestrials.


----------



## AussieT (Jan 15, 2011)

You will also notice that in the first thread I included, another member (Grant)has a pic of an even bigger P.Crassipes (over 9"), the same length as the house brick behind it. So 9" won't be uncommon for this species and the scary thing is they are still growing. It just goes to show that given enough study and exposure information we once thought correct may need revising (the largest maximum projected size for Phlogius Crassipes 10 years ago was 6"). At this point in time, we still don't know enough of Phlogius sp.Goliath to also give a definate size - the 2 largest specimens at around 10" had met an untimely end and may have had potential for more growth. Though you should also note that males for this species that are powerfed in the hobby may mature at ridiculously small sizes (4"), and wild caught males measure at 7-8". I just hope Dr Raven's revision is released soon on the Australian groups and we have a proper described name for Phlogius sp.Goliath, as this current substituted name causes alot of confusion with the South American giant.


----------



## jbm150 (Jan 15, 2011)

Thanks for all that AussieT.  I take it the Australian Tarantula Association has closed down permanently?

In the Genus Phlogius picture thread, Steve talks about the size discrepancy in males of the Aussie goliath (and all Phlogius for that matter).  Apparently their size at maturity can range within an egg sac!  Our "new" bloodlines are showing early maturity but as generations progress under stable captive conditions, they should start to increase in average size (unless I'm misreading his assertions). Pretty cool either way.

So unless someone else can chime in with something different, the award goes to the Aussie Ts, most likely to the goliath.  I've heard of H. hainanum and P. muticus reaching 9" but thats still short of the goliath.  Why oh why can't we get more of these here


----------



## Merfolk (Jan 15, 2011)

For legspan, crassipes seems to win (BTW, I still prefer calling it Selenocosmia). But if we go by weight, African giants seem to be a bit more bulky.


----------



## Pociemon (Jan 15, 2011)

Haplpelma hainanum gets to decent size, though not like the big africans. My girl here is 8 inch in ls, and are very bulky.


----------



## AussieT (Jan 16, 2011)

Hi Jeff,

Unfortunatley the Australian Tarantula Association Forum has closed down permanently mate, though the same amount of information can be found at the Green scorpion's forums. I remember Steve also saying that size variations for males were found within a egg sac. However when it comes to size stability - only time will tell, either way the smaller males are still viable and may be mated effectively with a receptive female. 

As far as weights are concerned, the size of a tarantula's cephalothorax will generally project its weight to a degree, and the size of the 10" Phlogius sp.Goliath is almost 10mm larger than the largest Crassipes Cephalothorax, at the same time almost doubling the weight. So large specimens of Phlogius sp.Golaith would be a hefty spider. The genus name Selenocosmia is still valid at the present time for the Australian genera, however as soon as Dr Raven's revision is complete, the name change to Phlogius will be permanent.

---------- Post added at 06:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:21 PM ----------

Oh I forgot to ask  - for the keepers of Aussie T's on this forum, how large are your spiders now? As far as I can remember they have been getting exported for 3 years now and have had time to grow to an extent.


----------



## LV-426 (Jan 16, 2011)

i got 3 P. crassipes slings. the largest is 1.25 inches and the others 1 inch


----------



## jbm150 (Jan 16, 2011)

I had a mature male Aussie goliath, was about 4.5", maybe a bit larger, he was all legs lol

I have a 3.25" P. crassipes male, not yet mature.  And a couple CB slings, bout 1" or so.


----------



## Merfolk (Jan 17, 2011)

Bought several crassipes and lost them (incredible!!!) and I bought a guaranteed female that is pushing 4" and is in need for a molt.


----------

