# A. seemani "blue form" now called A. guatemala??



## ArachnoFreak666 (Jan 25, 2015)

hi I bought a A. seemani from a local guy yesterday that was telling me how there was a name change for the A. seemani "blue form". he said it was because the regular A. seemani is from costa rica while the A. seemani "blue form" is from Guatemala... he then went on to say how because of this there was a name change to A. guatemala. I had speculation with this, but went ahead and bought a sling from him anyway, as well as a B. albopilosum sling. could someone please tell me whether this name change is true or not? 

thanks in advance, arachnofreak.


----------



## Poec54 (Jan 25, 2015)

I've had 3 w/c forms of that 'species': The blue form is the southernmost, from Costa Rica.  There's a brown form (same pink/salmon underside and spinnerets) from Honduras, and a smaller battleship grey form from Guatemala, that used to be common in the 1970's.

Reactions: Like 2 | Funny 1 | Creative 1


----------



## ArachnoFreak666 (Jan 25, 2015)

Poec54 said:


> I've had 3 w/c forms of that 'species': The blue form is the southernmost, from Costa Rica.  There's a brown form (same pink/salmon underside and spinnerets), and a smaller battleship grey form from Guatemala, that used to be common in the 1970's.


so was the guy correct with the name change he mentioned? or no?


----------



## Poec54 (Jan 25, 2015)

ArachnoFreak666 said:


> so was the guy correct with the name change he mentioned? or no?


Not from what I can tell.  The small grey form's from Guatemala, not the blue one.  What is there in writing on this?


----------



## ArachnoFreak666 (Jan 26, 2015)

Poec54 said:


> Not from what I can tell.  The small grey form's from Guatemala, not the blue one.  What is there in writing on this?


 I have no idea, I looked it up online and cant find any info on it. the most I find is links to here where people have brought up the subject about the blue one but havnt said anything about any name change or even stated where it was from. until I can find any credible info on it, then im going to just call my sling an A. seemani "blue" I guess.


----------



## Poec54 (Jan 26, 2015)

ArachnoFreak666 said:


> I have no idea, I looked it up online and cant find any info on it. the most I find is links to here where people have brought up the subject about the blue one but havnt said anything about any name change or even stated where it was from. until I can find any credible info on it, then im going to just call my sling an A. seemani "blue" I guess.


I had w/c grey ones from Guatemala, and blue ones from Costa Rica.  Unless there was a longterm importer conspiracy to throw us off, I'm pretty skeptical of what this guy said.


----------



## ArachnoFreak666 (Jan 26, 2015)

Poec54 said:


> I had w/c grey ones from Guatemala, and blue ones from Costa Rica.  Unless there was a longterm importer conspiracy to throw us off, I'm pretty skeptical of what this guy said.


okay well thanks for the help! he also sold me 3x C. darling slings, 1x B. albopilosum and 1 that was labled "?"... he said the person that gave them to him didn't know what species the egg sac was from so hes just giving them away as freebies, I don't care what it ends up being, as long as it isn't a rose hair lol


----------



## AphonopelmaTX (Jan 26, 2015)

ArachnoFreak666 said:


> hi I bought a A. seemani from a local guy yesterday that was telling me how there was a name change for the A. seemani "blue form". he said it was because the regular A. seemani is from costa rica while the A. seemani "blue form" is from Guatemala... he then went on to say how because of this there was a name change to A. guatemala. I had speculation with this, but went ahead and bought a sling from him anyway, as well as a B. albopilosum sling. could someone please tell me whether this name change is true or not?
> 
> thanks in advance, arachnofreak.


The way this is written implies that you were informed there is a new species of Aphonopelma from Guatemala called _Aphonopelma guatemala_ which isn't the case. If in doubt, always ask for the authority and year the species was described. Ray Gabriel wrote a good article for the British Tarantula Society (Volume 29; No. 2) that explains this mess of Aphonopelma seemanni "Blue Form" and an imported undescribed/ unclassified blueish Aphonopelma species from Guatemala.

Basically, Aphonopelma seemanni can occur in various shades of brown, black, and blue and is found in Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, and El Salvador.  There is also an Aphonopelma seemanni look-a-like which is a distinct species occurring in Guatemala, but according to Gabriel is a distinct species based on taxonomic characters not found in A. seemanni.  The article doesn't describe what those characters are for us to accurately tell A. seemanni from A. sp. "Guatemala" but the article alludes to a paper in preparation.  They both look the same superficially so be skeptical with any spider called "Aphonopelma seemanni Blue Form".  They are not two species that can be told apart from each other by a picture.

So because the real A. seemanni can have blue coloration and the A. sp. "Guatemala" looks just like the former and is also blue, we have no way to tell them apart other than asking your seller where they were originally imported from.

Just for the sake of completeness, the use of the term "blue" is very subjective.

Reactions: Like 9


----------



## Steve123 (Jan 27, 2015)

Thank you AlphonopelmaTX for a truly valuable explanation of the conundrum brought up in the BTS article. I too found the article interesting and informative. It is well known that Ray Gabriel has almost singlehandedly advanced the scientific boundaries in key areas of tarantula arachnology. I summarize my take on this article:

(i) The A. seemanni type locality is in Costa Rica (now closed to exports). Ray reasonably argues collections from the country just to the north, Nicaragua, consisted of the same species.

(ii) Nicaraguan exports of A. seemanni tailed off, it is stated due to economic reasons and ultimately, lack of valid export permits. Exports of a “similar” species from Guatemala began, a country further north along the Central American isthmus, which Ray states is not the same species. He states a manuscript characterizing the differences is in preparation.

(iii) Ray probably correctly assumes most of us have this yet-to-be described species. For either species, he states blueness is promoted by moulting in a high humidity environment (reference not provided).

(iv) I wholeheartedly agree with AlphonopelmaTX that the article leaves us in limbo with respect to knowing what is in our collections, as these two “species” are so similar that Ray himself initially thought them to be the same species. Most of us don’t know the collection site of our “A. seemanni.” Ray suggests that “A. seemanni” derived from European stock before April 2014 be labeled as Alphonopelma sp. Guatemala striped legs. He did not state that he knows all future imports will be from Nicaragua, nor that no future imports from Guatemala will occur. He also does not state the distribution of A. sp. Guatemala striped legs—could it extend as far southward as Nicaragua (oh my what a headache that would produce)?

In my opinion, until the differences are published in a peer-reviewed document, I don’t see how changing the names on our tanks now is going to clarify things. Moreover, as AlphonopelmaTX might say, even after a document surfaces, will the hobbyist be able to detect the differences? Soon it will be April 2015. Shall we call all A. seemanni of European stock true A. seemanni based on the seemingly arbitrary cutoff of post April 2014? Until a trusted breeder on either side of the Atlantic (or Pacific) can state her/his slings are of Nicaraguan origin (A. seemanni true form), and the distribution of A. sp. Guatemala striped legs is proven to exclude Nicaragua, what is in most of our tanks now cannot be called more than A. seemanni hf (hobbyform), or at best, A. cf. seemanni.

Thanks for the post Arachnofreak.

Reactions: Like 2 | Informative 1


----------



## ArachnoFreak666 (Jan 28, 2015)

AphonopelmaTX said:


> The way this is written implies that you were informed there is a new species of Aphonopelma from Guatemala called _Aphonopelma guatemala_ which isn't the case. If in doubt, always ask for the authority and year the species was described. Ray Gabriel wrote a good article for the British Tarantula Society (Volume 29; No. 2) that explains this mess of Aphonopelma seemanni "Blue Form" and an imported undescribed/ unclassified blueish Aphonopelma species from Guatemala.
> 
> Basically, Aphonopelma seemanni can occur in various shades of brown, black, and blue and is found in Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, and El Salvador.  There is also an Aphonopelma seemanni look-a-like which is a distinct species occurring in Guatemala, but according to Gabriel is a distinct species based on taxonomic characters not found in A. seemanni.  The article doesn't describe what those characters are for us to accurately tell A. seemanni from A. sp. "Guatemala" but the article alludes to a paper in preparation.  They both look the same superficially so be skeptical with any spider called "Aphonopelma seemanni Blue Form".  They are not two species that can be told apart from each other by a picture.
> 
> ...


 no i was actually implying that the man who sold it to me mentioned that the sling i was buying wasnt a true A. seemani and he stated that it was from guatemala and was blue. he then said to me that the A. seemani "blue" was changed to A. guatemala and then said to me that they were actually from guatemala. But i thank you for your response! i couldnt have asked for anything better, it really cleared things up for me. i now know not to listen to this guy if he has something like that to say next time. i may even send him the link to this thread lol.


----------



## sjl197 (Aug 11, 2015)

"(i) The A. seemanni type locality is in Costa Rica (now closed to exports). Ray reasonably argues collections from the country just to the north, Nicaragua, consisted of the same species."

The ecological conditions are really very similar all the coast from Guanacaste Costa Rica (type site) to Golfo de Fonseca (Honduras/El Salvador). It's ecology and environment that's important for species, not human drawn lines on maps (borders). 

(ii) Nicaraguan exports of A. seemanni tailed off, it is stated due to economic reasons and ultimately, lack of valid export permits. Exports of a “similar” species from Guatemala began, a country further north along the Central American isthmus, which Ray states is not the same species. He states a manuscript characterizing the differences is in preparation.

It seems a large reptile exporter in Guatemala started exporting tarantulas. Because they had striped legs they got labeled as A. seemanni. Would anyone here trust an average reptile exporter for tarantula taxonomy skills? [personally i struggle with how export documentation can be made saying any particular species name, without particular justification]

"(iii) Ray probably correctly assumes most of us have this yet-to-be described species. For either species, he states blueness is promoted by moulting in a high humidity environment (reference not provided)."

If he does assume that most people had Guatemalan ones, he did so for European collections.  The Guatemalan stuff flooded into Europe in early 2010. However, some were around before, for example i got a subadult in late 2008. All were missold as A.seemanni. But, some REAL A.seemanni were around then too (from Nicaragua or Costa Rica - i dont know), both in Europe and beyond - I guess most of you want to know for the US.

And, I'm not sure the high humidity environment promotes blue colour. Nevertheless, any blue colour is most apparent in freshly moulted specimens, and photographed in strong light (i.e. lots of camera flash)

"(iv) I wholeheartedly agree with AlphonopelmaTX that the article leaves us in limbo with respect to knowing what is in our collections, as these two “species” are so similar that Ray himself initially thought them to be the same species. Most of us don’t know the collection site of our “A. seemanni.” Ray suggests that “A. seemanni” derived from European stock before April 2014 be labeled as Alphonopelma sp. Guatemala striped legs. 

Then I'd say the lesson here can be important to know the export origins of your stock. I'd not agree to relabeling stock prior to April 2014 so liberally. It seems prior to this date, two species were in the hobby (both Europe and worldwide), for example i specifically got some USA stock sold as Aphonopelma sp. blue in 2007 from Tarantula Inc. These turned out to be true A.seemanni, in the sense of Nicaraguan/Costa Rican ones.

"He did not state that he knows all future imports will be from Nicaragua, nor that no future imports from Guatemala will occur." 

For the record, there are now multiple breeders/exporters in Nicaragua, and in the last year or so, i've seen massive exports of Nicaraguan ones again.

"He also does not state the distribution of A. sp. Guatemala striped legs—could it extend as far southward as Nicaragua (oh my what a headache that would produce)?"

It's possible that both species occur in the same region and overlap. Country names really don't mean anything, but for now only 'sp. Guatemala' is secure in Guatemala, and only A.seemanni is secure in Nicaragua and Costa Rica. If we go for two distinct species, both occur for sure in Honduras, and seem to both be in El Salvador. Is that the headache you mean? Yes, with more data the sp. Guatemala may also be in Nicaragua. Get your boots on people and make a trip!
We could add in what are the small grey ones mentioned earlier in the thread - because there are other similar species without much leg striping in all those countries too!

"In my opinion, until the differences are published in a peer-reviewed document, I don’t see how changing the names on our tanks now is going to clarify things. Moreover, as AlphonopelmaTX might say, even after a document surfaces, will the hobbyist be able to detect the differences? Soon it will be April 2015. Shall we call all A. seemanni of European stock true A. seemanni based on the seemingly arbitrary cutoff of post April 2014? Until a trusted breeder on either side of the Atlantic (or Pacific) can state her/his slings are of Nicaraguan origin (A. seemanni true form), and the distribution of A. sp. Guatemala striped legs is proven to exclude Nicaragua, what is in most of our tanks now cannot be called more than A. seemanni hf (hobbyform), or at best, A. cf. seemanni."

My advice will be don't relabel unless its clear - which often isn't when looking at a couple of photos shared over the internet. I'd also avoid 'hobbyform' as i prefer this to refer to known hobby hybrids, whereas in this case seems to be two distinct species, just that some are mislabeled. Juveniles are really hard to tell apart - scale helps greatly as true A.seemanni get stripes much younger, then develop much stronger striping. Side by side comparison is the only way really with juveniles. Also just because it's sold as sp.blue, doesn't mean its one or the other. I've seen BOTH sold as 'blue', true A.seemanni go bluish mostly on the front half, whereas A.sp Guatemala can go bluish overall. But we're talking vague colour tones, not diagnostic. My real advise is to learn the ACTUAL geographic origins of as much of your hobbystock as you can, and label with those locations.

---------- Post added 08-11-2015 at 05:08 PM ----------

Specifically to the OP.

"no i was actually implying that the man who sold it to me mentioned that the sling i was buying wasnt a true A. seemani and he stated that it was from guatemala and was blue. he then said to me that the A. seemani "blue" was changed to A. guatemala and then said to me that they were actually from guatemala. But i thank you for your response! i couldnt have asked for anything better, it really cleared things up for me. i now know not to listen to this guy if he has something like that to say next time. i may even send him the link to this thread lol."

A. seemanni "blue" was certainly NOT changed to "A. guatemala", nor changed to Aphonopelma sp. Guatemala 'stripe legs' or other such names. It was that SOME stock (not all) that has been missold as A.seemanni or A.seemanni 'blue' with Guatemalan origins was suggested in that Gabriel article to be treated as Aphonopelma sp. Guatemala 'stripe legs'. Not all stock sold as 'blue', because some traders/breeders needlessly added the 'blue' moniker onto stock that seems to be REAL A.seemanni (from Nicaragua/Costa Rica), while others needlessly added it to the OTHER Guatemalan stock. The question to now ask the guy is if he is sure it was Guatemalan stock or unclear. My betting is it's geographic origins is unclear, and if so, then its species identity is also probably unclear!

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## Poec54 (Aug 11, 2015)

sjl197 said:


> It seems a large reptile exporter in Guatemala started exporting tarantulas. Because they had striped legs they got labeled as A. seemanni.
> 
> For the record, there are now multiple breeders/exporters in Nicaragua, and in the last year or so, i've seen massive exports of Nicaraguan ones again.



What species are coming into Europe from Guatemala and Nicaragua?  Any big terrestrials or arboreals?


----------



## AphonopelmaTX (Aug 11, 2015)

sjl197 said:


> And, I'm not sure the high humidity environment promotes blue colour. Nevertheless, any blue colour is most apparent in freshly moulted specimens, and photographed in strong light (i.e. lots of camera flash)


I wouldn't be too sure about this either.  Dr. Rainer Foelix came to the conclusion that blue coloration in tarantulas was due to the micro structure of the setae that reflects blue light wave (please excuse the crude vagueness).  I don't see how humidity can effect the structure of setae over time.  Compared to all other blue tarantula species, the final micro structure of setae appears to be genetic.  I would assume this would be the case too with A. seemanni "blue form."

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## sjl197 (Nov 12, 2015)

Poec54 said:


> What species are coming into Europe from Guatemala and Nicaragua?  Any big terrestrials or arboreals?


I haven't seen European imports from Guatemala now in the last four/five years.

I've seen new European imports from Nicaragua, during 2015. At least one direct, another via USA.
Aphonopelma seemanni
Brachypelma albopilosum (Nicaragua 2015)
Theraphosinae sp. (i've seen sold as juvenile A.seemanni, i guess exported as that too). [p.s. I know exactly what, but it's in taxonomic revision]

I would expect a few "Aphonopelma crinirufum" also to slip the net with the Nicaragua imports and be mixed in [dark spiny ones with reddish hairs, not the "stocky blue chelicerae alleged crinirufum/burica"]. 

The Nicaraguan exporters can diversify stock if simply go collect in the central highlands. For arboreals, only Psalmopoeus sp. seems likely.


----------

