2 spidies...ID?

[buthus]

First, a Steatoda like spider I collected in a canyon in Anza Borrego.
Ever tear apart your room to find some dumb insignificant spider? Dumped its cup when taking its mug. Got the one pic.

Excited about this one ...maybe Filistata ?? Eyes look right...or at least with what can be seen in this crappy pic.
Found it in an overhang area of the canyon, in a crevice with a perfect example of a "crevice spider" web. Body length 3/8"+ / leg(diag.) 3/4". If it is an adult, then its a heck of a lot smaller than hybernalis.

Its taken a med. crix and a woodlouse. Seems healthy ...waiting for a molt or a sac! :reindeer:

 

[David_F]

Excited about this one ...maybe Filistata ?? Eyes look right...or at least with what can be seen in this crappy pic.
Found it in an overhang area of the canyon, in a crevice with a perfect example of a "crevice spider" web. Body length 3/8"+ / leg(diag.) 3/4". If it is an adult, then its a heck of a lot smaller than hybernalis.

Its taken a med. crix and a woodlouse. Seems healthy ...waiting for a molt or a sac! :reindeer:

No idea on the first one, man, but the second is a Filistatidae sp. According to Platnick there are no Filistata spp. found in the US. There is a list of Filistatidae spp. in CA found on this page. I think you can rule out a couple of the species listed there based on locale data but then you're still left with ~five other possibilities.

Nice lookin' spiders.

 

[pitbulllady]

Not sure what the Steatoda species is, but I AM pretty sure she(looks female) is a Steatoda. As for the second one, the genus Filistata is no longer used for spiders in the US; that genus designation has been changed to Kukulcania, and there are a few species in that genus found in California, including K. arizonica and K. hibernalis, which look very similar outwardly. The one in your pic looks exactly like an immature K. hibernalis. That is a slow-growing species, comparable to many tarantulas. Juveniles and pre-ultimate males are brownish in color, as are females in bad need of a moult, again, like many normally-black tarantulas. You should try keeping it if you can get food for it, and see what happens with the next moult. It it's a male, it will mostly likely mature with the next moult, and if it's a female, it'll probably become much blacker in coloration.

pitbulllady

 

[buthus]

Not sure what the Steatoda species is, but I AM pretty sure she(looks female) is a Steatoda. As for the second one, the genus Filistata is no longer used for spiders in the US; that genus designation has been changed to Kukulcania, and there are a few species in that genus found in California, including K. arizonica and K. hibernalis, which look very similar outwardly. The one in your pic looks exactly like an immature K. hibernalis. That is a slow-growing species, comparable to many tarantulas. Juveniles and pre-ultimate males are brownish in color, as are females in bad need of a moult, again, like many normally-black tarantulas. You should try keeping it if you can get food for it, and see what happens with the next moult. It it's a male, it will mostly likely mature with the next moult, and if it's a female, it'll probably become much blacker in coloration.

pitbulllady

Ok.. have read and understood that. Should have stuck with family:Filistatidae
I am very happy to read you confirming that Im in the ID ballpark.
Hope its not hybernalis ...just because new flavors are fun.

List I have of species found out this way...

Kukulcania arizonica
Kukulcania geophila
Kukulcania geophila wawona
Kukulcania hibernalis
Kukulcania hurca
Kukulcania utahana
Kukulcania tractans (mex)


FILISTATIDAE check list: San Diego County
source

Filistatinella sp. #1 Prentice 1998
Filistatinella sp. #2 Prentice 1998
Kukulcania arizonica (Chamberlin & Ivie) Chamberlin & Ivie 1935c
Kukulcania geophila (Chamberlin & Ivie) Chamberlin & Ivie 1935c
Kukulcania utahana (Chamberlin & Ivie) Chamberlin & Ivie 1935c

 

[lhystrix]

Ever tear apart your room to find some dumb insignificant spider? Dumped its cup when taking its mug. Got the one pic.

Yes!

Very cool spiders.

Dorsal markings match Steatoda medialis.

Excited about this one ...maybe Filistata ?? Eyes look right...or at least with what can be seen in this crappy pic.
Found it in an overhang area of the canyon, in a crevice with a perfect example of a "crevice spider" web. Body length 3/8"+ / leg(diag.) 3/4". If it is an adult, then its a heck of a lot smaller than hybernalis.

A Kukulcania. The light coloration suggests male, although immature.

 

[buthus]

Yes!

Very cool spiders.

Dorsal markings match Steatoda medialis.

Interesting. Ive been getting into keeping these little ones ...esp Steatoda. I cant believe I lost her in my room. Somehow bumped the cup and it fell to the floor. I immediately grabbed a light and looked for her... but she vanished! :? Hopefully she finds her place in her new "niche" (tough one with all those grossa hiding about) and produces a few sacs. Be neat to have a bit more "exotic" room guard specie. Im getting bored with those grossa.

 

[eresus]

where is the archive

of the other posts in true Spiders & Other Arachnids section?
Thank you.

 

[eresus]

First it is a Steatoda sp.


"the genus Filistata is no longer used for spiders in the US; that genus designation has been changed to Kukulcania,"

The genus Filistata is valid, indeed! See here:
http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog/FILISTATIDAE.html

 

[pitbulllady]

First it is a Steatoda sp.


"the genus Filistata is no longer used for spiders in the US; that genus designation has been changed to Kukulcania,"

The genus Filistata is valid, indeed! See here:
http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog/FILISTATIDAE.html

Filistata is NOT, as was confirmed by your site, a valid taxon IN THE UNITED STATES, which is exactly what I said in the first place. While still valid in the Old Word, that designation has been changed to Kukulcania, for the most part, here in the US, where the spiders in question were found.

pitbulllady

 

[buthus]

Filistata is NOT, as was confirmed by your site, a valid taxon IN THE UNITED STATES, which is exactly what I said in the first place. While still valid in the Old Word, that designation has been changed to Kukulcania, for the most part, here in the US, where the spiders in question were found.

pitbulllady

That is correct.
But, I will be a rebel until the rest of the world catches up.

BTW...the now semi-official name for any unknown Filistata sp collected is: Some sorta Kuk. So, please make a note of that change ...so to lessen the confusion.

 

[eresus]

Filistata is NOT, as was confirmed by your site, a valid taxon IN THE UNITED STATES, which is exactly what I said in the first place. While still valid in the Old Word, that designation has been changed to Kukulcania, for the most part, here in the US, where the spiders in question were found.

pitbulllady

hmm.. you have reason. I supposed that in USA there was Filistata.