Avicularia geroldi - I'm in love

[WYSIWYG]

Well.....today was a little interesting. All along, I've been nervous about getting too close to my geroldi because I'd heard about it biting someone at the pet store a couple years ago when I first got it. It was time to change him over to cleaner quarters (AGAIN) so I got his silk plant and cork bark out to wash them up and I set up another container so I could face the two together and nudge him to get him to move. (He/she was eating a cricket at the time I decided to do this and amazingly,was out of its nest).

I decided to take a few pix before moving it, figuring it might be a very LONG time before I ever saw it again. As I said earlier, this is a VERY messy creature so you'll notice some of his droppings on the side of the cage. (Believe it or not, this is the CLEAN side of his messy container!)

I went ahead and took a few pix of him because I figured it would be impossible to do it after it was moved. As it turns out, we (my husband and I) had no trouble moving him. My husband used his hand (and then a ruler) to nudge the fellow over to the clean container that was all set up for him. Because he was moving so slowly, my husband thought maybe he just wasn't feeling well?

I figured if he wasn't feeling well, he wouldn't be eating. Even though he was hardly moving, it was easy to see he was being stubborn and not really wanting to be moved, but we finally did it. Maybe some day, I'll get another chance to get some more pix of it with a nice CLEAN poopless background. Hope you enjoy it anyway.

Wysi

 

[Steve Nunn]

Originally posted by Code Monkey

I think that like a lot of the Avicularia complex, it will turn out to be a subspecies of A. avicularia, and because of the hatred for subspecies by arachnologists, it will just wind up synonymized.

Hi Chip,
I find it so interesting that it's the amateurs who have pushed to describe so many tarantulas within the hobby, yet are also the ones to stuff things royally doing these descriptions. They mean to do good, but do so much worse in the process. The family Theraphosidae gets worked on by hundreds of these enthusiasts each year, they're making the job that much more difficult.

Is Avicularia avicularia variegata still valid? I think subspecies work for some classes/orders, just not the Mygalomorphae. I'd think some arachnologists really go for subspecies concepts, look at scorpions.

Short of DNA revisions, I would also believe the isolated reproduction mechanism is the best basis to determine theraphosid species, although a lot of these "expert" enthusiasts don't believe so, I would imagine in order to get a paper published in a BS rag as quick as possible. These guys still use leg lengths, minor spermethecae variation, spination and even eye measuremes to define new species (oops, don't forget color). It may all sound impressive but when one or two specimens are used (even as little as one exuvium from a pet) to describe a new species based on these morphological variations alone, it means nothing, that's why these jerks skip peer review. Calling these guys "splitters" is an embarrassment to splitters. The family Theraphosidae are one tough taxonomical nut to crack, the variation found among species is amazing. Within any given true species, leg lengths, eye formation, spination, spermethecal morphology and scopula lengths can vary vastly. These previous methods once used to define new species are now worthless, someone needs to explain it to these people.

If anyone is really interested in how a theraphosid should really be described, try to find a copy of Tom Prentices species descrition of Aphonopelma paloma:

1992 T. Prentice. A New Species of North American Tarantula, Aphonopelma paloma (Araneae, Mygalomorphae, Theraphosidae). Journal of Arachnology 20, pp 189-199.

Cheers,
Steve

 

[luther]

Originally posted by greensleeves
You know, a tarantula would be a perfect accessory for my desk at work. I work with about 65 other women, so you can just imagine the sensation it would create.

Hehehe, I've thought the same too. I work in an office with a dozen blokes and I think every one of them would pee their pants if I brought a real T in. I did bring in an exuvium once and a couple of guys wouldn't even come near it. Its sad how prejudiced some (most) people are.

 

[greensleeves]

Originally posted by WYSIWYG
Here's another distinguishing characteristic for you (though it is behavioral and not physical).....

Geroldis are little piggies and I don't mean eating-wise. I mean MESSY-wise!

I have an Avic. avic AND a geroldi of the same size (around 3.5-4 inches) and the geroldi's container is always 100 times more full of poop all over the side than he avic's is. I can clean both of their containers both at the same time and the geroldi's will always end up intolerable in no time. (I'm about to get it cleaned out again today).

Hmm, has anyone else had this experience? As a pathetic newbie I don't want to clean up after an especially messy tarantula since I already have to do a stinky kitty box, LOL.

Maybe, as suggested, I should get one of the other pinktoe types - their colours seemed quite attractive too. Maybe a versicolor? They look sweet.

Oh well, still plenty of time to decide. I love hearing about everyone's experiences - it's almost as fun to live vicariously.

Greensleeves

 

[RugbyDave]

Mine aren't.. they're just normal Ts.. i don't think one person who has one T can make a judegement call about the whole species or family that should come across in a joking, but true, manner!

i'll post some of my breeding mother soon and my 2 new slings.
also mine are able to be handled.. i don't handle many of my Ts (i'm from the "undue stress and pointless" school of thought ), but they def. have been handled before and are very calm.. not really skittish at all... but i have a theory on why some Ts are skittish for some people... probably not good for me to post it here though

peace
dave

 

[Vys]

Originally posted by Code Monkey


But a German shepherd still isn't a different species than a wolf just because it looks different.

Hmm, lol, yeah they do look a bit different
As for you meaning the dog, I thought dogs were Canis familiaris while wolves were Canis lupus?

 

[Code Monkey]

Most wolves and dogs are simply subspecies of the Canis lupus complex. Dogs are Canis lupus familiaris, the grey wolf is plain old Canis lupus lupus, the Colombian wolf is Canis lupus columbianus, etc.

 

[Vys]

Ah. While I suspect you didn't snicker at my joke, it does seem as if though most old sources cite dogs and wolves' names as Canis familiaris and Canis lupus, while most new ones do indeed recognize the house-dog and common wolf as the same species.
I'm going to have some weird eyes to throw at mastiffs, to be sure.