Avicularia fasciculata - NEW in breed

[SOAD]

and who the hell collected them?

 

[david goldsboro]

and who the hell collected them?

has this offended you in some way ?

 

[SOAD]

Nop, I'm just angry cuz this spcies isn't present in the Brazilian hobby, and It's brazilian lol. Probably just this collector has them.

 

[david goldsboro]

sorry , as far as i know only 20 was found now they are in breeders hands it wont be too long till they are avalible to the hobby ,

 

[Tescos]

and who the hell collected them?

No big secret I think. It was Marc Baumgarten .

here is even an add he put up for them on this pages but because it updates often you may need to search for it.
click here to search for the add if you can really be botherd to.!

cheers
Chris

 

[SOAD]

LOL thanks for info chris.

 

[david goldsboro]

Sorry for my ignorance but were these spiders Avicularia sp. "fasciculata" found naturally in the wild??

there was only 20 colected from brazil , i just lost 1 of my female to a wet moult just have 3 females to mate this week then the males off to germany

 

[david goldsboro]

as far as i can see these are no avicularia speices since no avics show the shape of the sperm bulbs at sub adult maybe a moult or 2 be for sub adult we will see as they grow also i am 99% certian our female has double clutched ??

 

[GoTerps]

as far as i can see these are no avicularia speices since no avics show the shape of the sperm bulbs at sub adult maybe a moult or 2 be for sub adult we will see as they grow also i am 99% certian our female has double clutched ??

I won't necessarily disagree with you David. However, certainly not for those reasons. Also, it needs to be decided what characters DO define an Avicularia. I think in the future you'll see some spiders we all now call Avicularia being a new group. But I digress.

A spider double clutching should have absolutely no implication on there taxonomic placement.

Anyway, it's a very interesting spider for a number of reasons. I should have a group in a couple weeks! I'm looking forward to raising them.

Take care,

Eric

 

[david goldsboro]

I won't necessarily disagree with you David. However, certainly not for those reasons. Also, it needs to be decided what characters DO define an Avicularia. I think in the future you'll see some spiders we all now call Avicularia being a new group. But I digress.

A spider double clutching should have absolutely no implication on there taxonomic placement.

Anyway, it's a very interesting spider for a number of reasons. I should have a group in a couple weeks! I'm looking forward to raising them.

Take care,

Eric

i am not just going on her producing a second sac mainly the males showing the shape of the sperm bulbs just like true spiders also they behave differant to i left the male and female together for roughly 10 weeks they was fine together so i have kept 3 slings together and ther doing fine maybe communal speices i have kept back 20 slings will keep another 20 from this second sac for future breeing ,

good luck with your group they are very fast and jump alot very skitty even as adult they are skitty and jump if dissturbed

 

[Gesticulator]

I always look at the Avicularia threads, and this is one of the most interesting I have read in a while. Great to see Steve's and Martin's input. Whether the tarantula pictured is an Iridopelma or an Avicularia, it is absolutely stunning. I couldn't help but notice the markings on the tarsus, similar to Psalmopoeus. But of course I have little to no knowledge of taxonomy, so it's just a mere observation. I do hope that one day I will be able to look at a tarantula that I was unsure of and take an educated guess as to which genus it belongs.

 

[ChrisNCT]

Alright.... I got just my order in for 5 of these bad boys! I am sooo exicted to see what they look like here at home when they get larger! Soon they will be here at home! :drool:

 

[Elaine]

The slings of these are amazing to see in person. They arent quite as calm as my other avics either. Very skittish and jumpy. A whole load of fun during feeding and watering lol.
I have 7 fasciculata slings and feeding takes ages :wall:

 

[Becky]

Sorry for my ignorance but were these spiders Avicularia sp. "fasciculata" found naturally in the wild??

Am I the only one that find that this spider looks like an Iridopelma sp.?:?

Just curious if anyone had the same idea, because it is the first thing that pops to my mind when I see the pictures.

Now before I get blasted and inquisitionned on to how I can say such a thing and everyone wants to burn me on a stake... I just looked at the picture and said to myself, hey it looks "related" to what we are being sold as I. hirsutum in the hobby. Nothing more, just an observation.

Anyone else?

Martin

Yep.. i do but.. they're not Iridopelma as far as i know as Iridopelma males have 4 tibial spurs. Male Avicularia fasciculata only have 2


I have 4 of these lil beauties.. and they're fab!

 

[tarcan]

I have a question for the taxonomist people in here, maybe someone can help.

How can tibial spurs be a taxonomic feature for some genus and not for other?

Exemple, T. blondi has no spurs and T. apophysis has some, but they are in the same genus?

N. carapoensis has no spurs and the rest of the Nhandu genus has some.

So why in this case, suddenly one having 4 and the other having 2 is being a valid taxonomic point?

I am not questionning the identity of the spider, I am just curious since theraphosid taxonomy is way beyong my grasp.

Take care

Martin

 

[hamfoto]

Ding, ding, ding! Martin hits on a major complaint of theraphosid taxonomy!

Think of it this way...say there are 40 features you look at to determine species...one genus has 10 of those features and another has 15. Well, where a spider goes into which genus depends on how each character is weighted (on a scale)...and how many, in combination, of those characters it possesses...among other techniques.
My choice...would be to use some morphological characters that we deem to be important in distinguishing genera and families...and adding molecular data.

It's the crappy way of trying to make a "species" fit into a nice category and definition...which they don't.

Chris

 

[GoTerps]

Hi Martin,

I have a question for the taxonomist people in here, maybe someone can help.

How can tibial spurs be a taxonomic feature for some genus and not for other?

Exemple, T. blondi has no spurs and T. apophysis has some, but they are in the same genus?

N. carapoensis has no spurs and the rest of the Nhandu genus has some.

So why in this case, suddenly one having 4 and the other having 2 is being a valid taxonomic point?

I am not questionning the identity of the spider, I am just curious since theraphosid taxonomy is way beyong my grasp.

Take care

Martin

I was going to make a post on these same lines Martin, but hadn't got around to it yet, very good thoughts my friend!

So, yes, males in the genus Iridopelma (which currently has 3 recognized species, but one of which is due to be moved to a different, soon to be revalidated genus) have been recognized as having tibial spurs on both Leg I and Leg II. This has been used as the key generic feature in the genus. Pocock also discusses another character (Leg IV being shorter than Leg I), but this is highly variable (from Smith's diagnoses and others).

So, I'm in no way suggesting that this spider belongs to the genus Iridopelma... I haven't even had the chance to see these spiders in person yet. The only thing I will comment on is this: the fact that a male of a given species doesn't show the 4 tibial spurs, doesn't necessarily mean that it's closest relatives won't as well. As Martin mentioned above, there are a few genera of theraphosids in which some members posses tibial spurs while others don't (the case in at least 3 subfamilies). It's certainly a feature to strongly take into account!... but I don't feel you can just say "It only has tibial spurs on Leg I, so there's NO WAY it can be an Iridopelma".

Eric

 

[metallica]

Male Avicularia fasciculata only have 2


I have 4 of these lil beauties.. and they're fab!

are you sure?

 

[FryLock]

Remember A. versicolor had no apophysis at all or so the describers claimed.

 

[M4S73R]

Wonderful spider.