Grammostola sp. north (F) Feb 9 2018

Grammostola sp. north (F) Feb 9 2018

@cold blood Please explain. It was labeled as G. spatulata. But I was told that's just the fancy name for rosea, and that this was in fact a porteri. I would like to get this correctly ID'd as I don't want my pictures mislabeled and confusing others.

G. spatulata is not a fancy name for rosea, its a now defunct name, that no longer applies to anything. When the name change occurred, it became rosea...although at the time little distinction was made between rosea, porteri, sp. north and probably a few others, as they were referred (wrongly) as color forms of the same, when in fact they were the different Chilean species that merely looked (and acted) similarly.

In the past few years, we have started seeing sp. north coming in more and more, labeled simply as "rose hairs", as pet stores tend to stores seem to have been/be doing most of the rose hair importing.

While sp. north, does look similar to porteri, its different, especially in that the colors of the front legs seem washed out, or lighter in color. For an example, this is a G. porteri...notice the differences between yours as its much darker.
@Exoskeleton Invertebrates was one of the people to notice this labeling mistake and begin to bring it to hobbyists attention (thank you Jose!), at least that's how I learned the distinction...perhaps he will have more to add and can give another confirmation of sp. north. He's one of the people I trust most when it comes to this jumbled mess we call rose hairs.
@cold blood Thanks for the info, greatly appreciated. Now that I have a picture to reference, I notice that mine has a lot more pink on its legs where the porteri is much darker.

Media information

Added by
Date added
View count
Comment count
0.00 star(s) 0 ratings

Image metadata

Canon Canon EOS REBEL T5
Focal length
33.0 mm
Exposure time
On, fired
G.porteri (F) Feb 9 2018.JPG
File size
7.3 MB
Date taken
Sat, 27 January 2018 4:03 AM
5184px x 3456px

Share this media