# Poecilotheria:  ventral sexing vs. dorsal sexing



## xhexdx (Jul 31, 2009)

Alright, so I haven't really got this dorsal sexing thing down yet, and I hear so many people say that it's easier to dorsally sex a pokie than to ventrally sex one.

This formosa is 2".  Male, right?













I have a subfusca that's ~1" exhibiting the same 'dot'.  To me this is obviously male, as my female pokies that are larger than this don't have the dot.

I should also add I have a female regalis that's about 3" without the dot, too.  I got her much smaller and never saw one.

So am I correct in saying that it's possible to ventrally sex pokies that are sub 2" without much of a problem?

Any other pictures are welcome, and anyone who feels like going into detail about describing dorsal sexing would be awesome, too (pictures, what exactly to look for, etc.)

I should also add I found this relatively recent thread:

http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=156828

But it did not discuss dorsal sexing.  There is an interesting point about the possibility of the flash creating an issue with being able to sex the spiders, so I'll say right now that these dots are still there without use of a flash/flashlight.

Thanks.

--Joe

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## AudreyElizabeth (Jul 31, 2009)

I've been trying to figure this out myself. If I've learned correctly then I would say your formosa is male. 

I'm thinking that my regalis is female. 







I'm still not sure about dorsal sexing, so I'll leave that to someone else.

Reactions: Sad 1


----------



## xhexdx (Jul 31, 2009)

Your regalis looks female to me, too.  I'll photograph my 3" and my 7" and try some comparisons when I get the opportunity.


----------



## Endagr8 (Jul 31, 2009)

That _regalis_ looks male IMO.


----------



## xhexdx (Jul 31, 2009)

What do you see that indicates male?


----------



## Noexcuse4you (Jul 31, 2009)

Formosa is male.  Regalis is female.

http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=1447243&postcount=26

Dorsal sexing is not 100% accurate unless it is mature.  Ventral sexing is 99% accurate with a clear photo.


----------



## Endagr8 (Jul 31, 2009)

xhexdx said:


> What do you see that indicates male?


Well, I'm not the best at ventral sexing (obviously  ),  but I could swear that the MM that I had awhile ago looked identical ventrally. 


I'm still not seeing why it's an obvious female. :wall:


----------



## xhexdx (Jul 31, 2009)

Endagr8 said:


> Well, I'm not the best at ventral sexing (obviously  ),  but I could swear that the MM that I had awhile ago looked identical ventrally.
> 
> 
> I'm still not seeing why it's an obvious female. :wall:


Well, to me, the regalis has nothing similar to the 'dot' that I see indicating male.

I'm going to try to get some pics of my females.


----------



## Noexcuse4you (Jul 31, 2009)

I think these photos will help.  It will be painfully obvious when you have a male.

Female







Male

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## xhexdx (Jul 31, 2009)

Here come my pics:

P. rufilata 4" female:













P. rufilata 4" male:













P. regalis 4" female:













P. formosa 8" female:













The pics aren't as good as Kyle's, but hopefully they will do.

Btw, the female/male thing is what my *opinion* is based on ventral sexing.  Everyone is welcome to give their thoughts and reasoning. 

--Joe


----------



## Endagr8 (Aug 1, 2009)

Nice pics Kyle and Joe! Thanks!


----------



## lithiumflower9 (Aug 1, 2009)

I started digging around looking for dorsal sexing info all over the net.  Then I found a few posts that seemed to discredit this type of sexing for pokies.

In this link the user posted pictures of 3 Regalis of similar size.
(http://sfbats.myfreeforum.org/ftopic1165-0-asc-0.php)

Around post 19 some one brings up dorsal sexing.  Another post states it didn't work for his pokie.  I think it was a Regalis too.  
(http://venomlist.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7&st=0&start=0)

I also found on a euro site that said...

"There are exceptions to this, including younger P. Metallica, P. Rufilata, and colour variants of P. Subfusca, but it usually can be used relatively accurately."  It also says "How prominent the shapes and colour shades are, differ from specimen to specimen. I had to sell a sub adult Rufilata as unsexed recently, as it was too close to call either way. The most reliable method is to sex via an exuvium, however a combination of dorsal markings, and the shape of the epigastric region on suitably sized specimens is a very reliable method for the most part."
(http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/spiders-inverts/234784-newbie-guide-poecilotheria.html)

So I'm not sure that it can be a reliable way to sex pokies.  Then again maybe it works for some at a certain stage in their growth.  I'd be very interested in seeing more data on this though.


----------



## vvx (Aug 1, 2009)

So looks like the easiest way to sex the pokie ventrally is that little area.

Pics make it easier.

Even through the dirty container, this looks male.







Because of this area right here.







Am I getting this right?


----------



## Draiman (Aug 1, 2009)

Perhaps a little off topic, but Joe, you have a *8"* _P. formosa_? 

I thought they were one of the smaller _Poecilotheria_ species.

Reactions: Helpful 1


----------



## xhexdx (Aug 1, 2009)

Vvx, that's what I think based on your pictures, too.

Gavin,  I'll go try and get a picture without losing the damn spider. :}

Later, though.  Gotta party today.


----------



## billopelma (Aug 1, 2009)

I know it's a grainy blown up pic, but this one looks 'iffy' to me, regalis are not always really obvious in my experience, striata even less so.









 I have some ventral pics of a 6" regalis that you'd swear are female in one and male in another. I had a striata that I thought was changing sex every other molt till he finally matured.

Male P. striata









Not that I'm doubting it's possible but I'd also like to see an 8" P. formosa.



Bill


----------



## Draiman (Aug 1, 2009)

xhexdx said:


> Gavin,  I'll go try and get a picture without losing the damn spider. :}


I'm not doubting you Joe, just a tad surprised. I sure wouldn't mind a measurement pic though - if she really is 8" then my 6" female _might_ have some hope of getting a little larger.


----------



## xhexdx (Aug 1, 2009)

Heh, I'll work on pictures once there are more people in the house.  My son is asleep right now and I'm the only one here; I don't want to start working with her and have him suddenly wake up.

I admit I haven't actually measured her yet, it was a rough guess.  We'll see how she measures up when I get out there.  I'll also go measure her last molt and get a pic when I can.


----------



## TalonAWD (Oct 11, 2009)

From my experience the dot is a dead giveaway. Its basically a patch of darker hair that makes it look like a dot formed.

Male P regalis. Clearly see the dot. (The foto is flipped)







Here he is again at 6" You can see the dot still just not as clear in this shot.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## xhexdx (Nov 2, 2009)

By the way, I got pics of the formosa.  I was off a little, I'll get them posted soon.


----------



## ZergFront (Mar 22, 2010)

Draiman said:


> Perhaps a little off topic, but Joe, you have a *8"* _P. formosa_?
> 
> I thought they were one of the smaller _Poecilotheria_ species.


 Check out his new T.bondi video. It's gigantic! :liar:;P

 This will be helpful once my Pokies will actually let me see under them. I'll have a little more advantage once they outgrow the deli cups.


----------



## Skullptor (Apr 14, 2010)

I'm thinking male on this one, right?


----------



## BCscorp (Apr 15, 2010)

hey Joe
check out this, its helpful
http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/spiders-inverts/234784-newbie-guide-poecilotheria.html


----------



## xhexdx (Jun 8, 2010)

Thread resurrection! 

I was curious what some of the members who prefer dorsal sexing think of these two P. subfusca:


----------



## MichiganReptiles (Jun 8, 2010)

xhexdx said:


> Thread resurrection!
> 
> I was curious what some of the members who prefer dorsal sexing think of these two P. subfusca:


I'm obviously very new to the hobby, but I have read quite a bit about dorsal sexing of pokies and I would say male.


----------



## Protectyaaaneck (Jun 8, 2010)

Toni, there are two different specimens pictured.


----------



## MichiganReptiles (Jun 8, 2010)

Protectyaaaneck said:


> Toni, there are two different specimens pictured.


I know. I say male.. for both. According to everything I have read, the inner patterning on the abdomen is usually is much darker than the outer patterning for males. And of all the comparison pictures I have seen, the females inner pattern is much lighter - very close to the same color as the "border" of the pattern on the abdomen. That's why I am guessing male for both. I could be wrong, but that is the information I have gathered in the weeks I have been researching this. I'm fascinated with pokies, although it will be a very long time before I have one. If anything, the first would be female because it is slightly lighter, but I think male.


----------



## MichiganReptiles (Jun 8, 2010)

OK, well after skimming through the gallery of pokies and comparing P. subfusca I have to admit that with this particular pokie - the female isn't as light as the rest of them so it's very possible that the first pic is a female.


----------



## xhexdx (Jun 8, 2010)

Skullptor - what species is that, and how big?

BCScorp - thanks for the link; I just now got to reading it.  Great thread. 

I never did post pics of the P. formosa...I'll have to dig through and see if I can find them.  I was definitely wrong when I said she was 8", that's for sure.

MichReptiles - Thanks for your guesses, and for your explanation.  Gives me a little more to think about.   I need to get some ventrals of the larger (pictured first) subfusca.  I haven't had a good luck since it was about 1-1.5".

--Joe


----------



## Protectyaaaneck (Jun 8, 2010)

xhexdx said:


> I need to get some ventrals of the larger (pictured first) subfusca.  I haven't had a good luck since it was about 1-1.5".
> 
> --Joe


Gotta dig em' out.


----------



## Crows Arachnids (Jun 9, 2010)

Skullptor said:


> I'm thinking male on this one, right?




Typically that white furrow indicates female. I have never seen a male with one that obvious.


----------



## Anastasia (Jun 9, 2010)

Skullptor said:


> I'm thinking male on this one, right?


yes, that would be correct 
formosa, right?


----------



## xhexdx (Jul 6, 2010)

P. subfusca - any guesses at gender?







FYI - this is the ventral of this specimen:







Here are two more dorsal shots:


----------



## Noexcuse4you (Jul 6, 2010)

Female fo' sho'


----------



## xhexdx (Jul 6, 2010)

Noexcuse4you said:


> Female fo' sho'


I agree, but would you say female based on both ventral and dorsal shots, or would you pick one over the other as being more obvious?

For me, the ventral shot is *much* more obvious.

Btw, grats on your sac.


----------



## Noexcuse4you (Jul 6, 2010)

xhexdx said:


> I agree, but would you say female based on both ventral and dorsal shots, or would you pick one over the other as being more obvious?
> 
> For me, the ventral shot is *much* more obvious.


I'd pick the ventral shot as being the most obvious.  These guys are easy to sex, even at 4i.



xhexdx said:


> Btw, grats on your sac.


Thanks!


----------



## BCscorp (Jul 6, 2010)

Joe, the dorsal sexing I think is for older specimens, because the folio fades or stays dark depending on sex as they age. So for small specimens I would think that ventral is better.


----------



## xhexdx (Jul 6, 2010)

BCscorp said:


> Joe, the dorsal sexing I think is for older specimens, because the folio fades or stays dark depending on sex as they age. So for small specimens I would think that ventral is better.


Good point, thanks.  I had actually forgotten about that.


----------



## xhexdx (Jan 26, 2012)

Just wanted to update this part, since we're discussing pokie sexing in another thread:



xhexdx said:


> This formosa is 2".  Male, right?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The formosa and subfusca both 'hooked' out (more like 'bulbed' out ), and the regalis was indeed female.


----------



## kevp (Jan 27, 2014)

This is my confirmed female p.formosa 4/5 inch


----------



## sbullet (Jan 28, 2014)

Noexcuse4you said:


> Formosa is male.  Regalis is female.
> 
> http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=1447243&postcount=26
> 
> Dorsal sexing is not 100% accurate unless it is mature.  Ventral sexing is 99% accurate with a clear photo.


curious about why you can have an avi with drugs on it. im down, but still, this board seems to be very strict. 

back on topic, the regalis looks male to me as well.


----------



## oddT (Apr 14, 2014)

Noexcuse4you said:


> Formosa is male.  Regalis is female.
> 
> http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=1447243&postcount=26
> 
> Dorsal sexing is not 100% accurate unless it is mature.  Ventral sexing is 99% accurate with a clear photo.


I totally agree with you thanks, this confirms that im able to sex my T's properly! so Awesome!!


----------



## iCookBacon (Apr 14, 2014)

Any guesses on this? I've posted to the epiandrous fusillae boards and (almost) everyone says male.

That folio just looks like it's gonna be a girl. =3


----------



## Pociemon (Apr 14, 2014)

It is a male. On p metallica you cant use the folio, they look almost the same on both sexes. Many have made this mistake and try to dorsally sex p metallica. But hopefully you have a female ready soon ;-)


----------



## iCookBacon (Apr 14, 2014)

Pociemon said:


> It is a male. On p metallica you cant use the folio, they look almost the same on both sexes. Many have made this mistake and try to dorsally sex p metallica. But hopefully you have a female ready soon ;-)


Man, I wish I did. The idea of sending this one off is stressing me out. I've been debating on whether I should sell him and buy another sling or risk loaning him out for 50/50. One guarantees at least one sling and the other is risky bidness.


----------



## Pociemon (Apr 15, 2014)

iCookBacon said:


> Man, I wish I did. The idea of sending this one off is stressing me out. I've been debating on whether I should sell him and buy another sling or risk loaning him out for 50/50. One guarantees at least one sling and the other is risky bidness.


On top of that they are not easy to get sacs from, but not impossible of course. They do need to be tricked to do it.


----------



## Dan2905 (Mar 20, 2016)

Hi can someone help me with my regalis? Tryed to get they as clear as I could


----------



## bryverine (Apr 5, 2016)

Dan2905 said:


> Hi can someone help me with my regalis? Tryed to get they as clear as I could


You might get better results posting in the correct location. 

Try posting in Tatantula Sexing >>Epiandrous fusillae sexing.


----------



## Toxoderidae (Apr 5, 2016)

Anyway the spider is female, and we need to figure out how to tell people HEY WE HAVE AN AREA WHERE YOU CAN SEX TARANTULAS SO YOU DONT SPAM

Reactions: Agree 3 | Funny 1


----------



## MikeC (Apr 6, 2016)

Toxoderidae said:


> Anyway the spider is female, and we need to figure out how to tell people HEY WE HAVE AN AREA WHERE YOU CAN SEX TARANTULAS SO YOU DONT SPAM


That is true!

But at the very least it seems s/he used the search function, which not doing so is a bigger issue if you ask me.

Reactions: Agree 3


----------

