AVICULARIA REVISION PUBLISHED!

boina

Lady of the mites
Arachnosupporter +
Joined
Mar 25, 2015
Messages
2,205
So A.metallica no longer exists?
"Nomen dubium" only means the species hasn't been studied. The names and the species designations will be kept until someone else comes along who will take another look at this genus and find out if it is a valid species or not.

So, A. metallica still exists, at least for now :)
 

Magenta

Arachnosquire
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
55
Errmagerrrd!The world is upside down! Is today still Friday? Is the milk expired now? Is green still a color?:anxious:

Seriously though, What does this mean in terms of record keeping? When do I change their names in my records?

*I have had too much coffee this morning*:wideyed:
 

awiec

Arachnoprince
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
Messages
1,329
Errmagerrrd!The world is upside down! Is today still Friday? Is the milk expired now? Is green still a color?:anxious:

Seriously though, What does this mean in terms of record keeping? When do I change their names in my records?

*I have had too much coffee this morning*:wideyed:
Most of the species didn't have their holotype studied(ie the specimen kept in the museum if they even have one) so they can't say for sure if they are valid, basically says "Someone should look at this, but I'm not the one to do it". So for now just keep the name they have as they haven't been re-evaluated yet.
 

Chris LXXIX

ArachnoGod
Joined
Dec 25, 2014
Messages
5,693
So my Avicularia rickwesti is now Antillena rickwesti? It is its own in the genus? :wacky:
Like the Goddess 0.1 Pelinobius muticus my man :-s

until someone discover her 'MIA' sister somewhere deep in a "civil war area" burrow u_u
 

sdsnybny

Arachnogeek
Arachnosupporter
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
1,332
@CEC
The following new synonymies are established: Avicularia velutina Simon 1889, Avicularia exilis Strand, 1907, Avicularia ancylochyra Mello-Leitão, 1923, Avicularia cuminami Mello-Leitão, 1930, and Avicularia nigrotaeniata Mello-Leitão, 1940 are junior synonyms of A. avicularia;
So if I'm reading this right A velutina is just an Avicularia avicularia? (diff Local)
Also;
Avicularia urticans Schmidt, 1994 is a junior synonym of Avicularia juruensis Mello-Leitão
??
 

Red Eunice

Arachnodemon
Joined
Mar 2, 2014
Messages
667
@CEC, thanks for the information.
Doesn't pertain to my collection, but will read it in more depth this evening.

Aviculariinae keepers: reload those label makers. Lol!
 

Philip Fraley

Arachnopeon
Joined
May 14, 2016
Messages
1
Switching my A. diversepies label Y. diversepies is going to be lot easier for me to swallow than this part of the study " A more precise taxonomy and the proposal of a strongest phylogenetic hypothesis especially for theraphosid spiders are very urgent since constant habitat destruction and high rate of pet trade are pressing problems for spiders populations (Bond et al. 2005; Hamilton et al. 2011)." (emphasis added).

I'm not judging anyone here, this a fantastic community of kind helpful people. I'm just having a personal moral quandary on my hobby and the market I'm a part of. Newly captured species can pull a premium, the price people can charge for Pamphobeteus solaris right now is ridiculous, but we've seen it before in Harpactira pulchripes and Poecilotheria metallica. I think the price a seller can charge for a new species is an incentive for some to take specimens out of the wild. There are a lot of tarantulas in the trade that are listed as endangered on the iucn red list for the same reasons, habitat destruction and pet trade. Obviously the pet trade isn't the only culprit here, habitat destruction is probably a much more pressing problem. I just can't clear my conscious when the pet trade is listed in peer reviewed literature and by conservation groups as a problem for various tarantula populations. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
 
Last edited:

cold blood

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 19, 2014
Messages
11,936
Dang that was one long technical read...lucky for me I had my medic alert bracelet on....had an aneurysm halfway through...luckily the good paramedics revived me so I could finish.:wideyed:

Thanks for posting @CEC, as well as your interpretations.

And thanks @mygale for summing up the important points in one concise post:)

That post alone should be stickied somewhere!
 
Last edited:

Moonohol

Two Legged Freak
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
115
Switching my A. diversepies label Y. diversepies is going to be lot easier for me to swallow than this part of the study " A more precise taxonomy and the proposal of a strongest phylogenetic hypothesis especially for theraphosid spiders are very urgent since constant habitat destruction and high rate of pet trade are pressing problems for spiders populations (Bond et al. 2005; Hamilton et al. 2011)." (emphasis added).

I'm not judging anyone here, this a fantastic community of kind helpful people. I'm just having a personal moral quandary on my hobby and the market I'm a part of. Newly captured species can pull a premium, the price people can charge for Pamphobeteus solaris right now is ridiculous, but we've seen it before in Harpactira pulchripes and Poecilotheria metallica. I think the price a seller can charge for a new species is an incentive for some to take specimens out of the wild. There are a lot of tarantulas in the trade that are listed as endangered on the iucn red list for the same reasons, habitat destruction and pet trade. Obviously the pet trade isn't the only culprit here, habitat destruction is probably a much more pressing problem. I just can't clear my conscious when the pet trade is listed in peer reviewed literature and by conservation groups as a problem for various tarantula populations. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
I think, and I HOPE, that the vast majority of breeders do what they do not because they want to make money, but because they truly have a passion for the hobby and for arachnids in general. It's incredible how experienced breeders have developed methods for pairing even the most reluctant of species (P. metallica comes to mind). I think the moral and ethical incentive of captive breeding endangered species far outweighs the monetary incentive of illegal wild collection and exportation.

It's nowhere near a black and white issue, of course. But I find it hard to believe that our hobby has a net negative effect on tarantula populations compared to habitat destruction. Many of these species could likely go extinct within our lifetimes due to deforestation/habitat destruction, leaving behind only the captive bred populations to carry on their legacy. I'd rather see them continue to thrive in captivity than disappear altogether.

Just my two cents on the matter.
 

Magenta

Arachnosquire
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
55
Most of the species didn't have their holotype studied(ie the specimen kept in the museum if they even have one) so they can't say for sure if they are valid, basically says "Someone should look at this, but I'm not the one to do it". So for now just keep the name they have as they haven't been re-evaluated yet.

Ok, thanks:)
 

Arachnomaniac19

Arachnolord
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
654
I think, and I HOPE, that the vast majority of breeders do what they do not because they want to make money, but because they truly have a passion for the hobby and for arachnids in general. It's incredible how experienced breeders have developed methods for pairing even the most reluctant of species (P. metallica comes to mind). I think the moral and ethical incentive of captive breeding endangered species far outweighs the monetary incentive of illegal wild collection and exportation.

It's nowhere near a black and white issue, of course. But I find it hard to believe that our hobby has a net negative effect on tarantula populations compared to habitat destruction. Many of these species could likely go extinct within our lifetimes due to deforestation/habitat destruction, leaving behind only the captive bred populations to carry on their legacy. I'd rather see them continue to thrive in captivity than disappear altogether.

Just my two cents on the matter.
The main problem with captive specimens being released in the wild is the possibility of inbreeding and hybridization. Not to mention that lack of natural selective pressures.
 

Moonohol

Two Legged Freak
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
115
The main problem with captive specimens being released in the wild is the possibility of inbreeding and hybridization. Not to mention that lack of natural selective pressures.
I can't speak to releasing captive bred spiders in to the wild. Indeed, it seems like a bad idea for a few reasons I can think of. I am only in support of keeping the populations going in captivity.
 

Stugy

Arachnolord
Joined
Apr 21, 2016
Messages
648
Hah. So fun to see you silly tarantula peeps handling the destruction of "Avicularia" :D It seems that not enough people pay attention to scorpions (scientifically) compared to tarantulas to be changing the generas( families? ummm I keep forgetting. I'm not very good at the entire thing :confused:). Just watch. I'm gonna jinx it and Centruroides will be next xD
 

HybridReplicate

Spectrostatic
Joined
Jan 26, 2017
Messages
107
Switching my A. diversepies label Y. diversepies is going to be lot easier for me to swallow than this part of the study " A more precise taxonomy and the proposal of a strongest phylogenetic hypothesis especially for theraphosid spiders are very urgent since constant habitat destruction and high rate of pet trade are pressing problems for spiders populations (Bond et al. 2005; Hamilton et al. 2011)." (emphasis added).

I'm not judging anyone here, this a fantastic community of kind helpful people. I'm just having a personal moral quandary on my hobby and the market I'm a part of. Newly captured species can pull a premium, the price people can charge for Pamphobeteus solaris right now is ridiculous, but we've seen it before in Harpactira pulchripes and Poecilotheria metallica. I think the price a seller can charge for a new species is an incentive for some to take specimens out of the wild. There are a lot of tarantulas in the trade that are listed as endangered on the iucn red list for the same reasons, habitat destruction and pet trade. Obviously the pet trade isn't the only culprit here, habitat destruction is probably a much more pressing problem. I just can't clear my conscious when the pet trade is listed in peer reviewed literature and by conservation groups as a problem for various tarantula populations. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
I'm not opposed to WC specimens so long as it is done responsibly, but there doesn't seem to be a mechanism or organization in place that monitors such things or has policies & procedures in place to give guidance on WC practices. Without that structure in place there's no way to engage in education & advocacy for responsible buying practices, namely because there is no clear way to identify responsible vendors; e.g. "sustainably harvested" certifications or something of the like. The only way to personally avoid contributing to the problem (that I can determine) is to buy from reputable vendors who captive breed. Even then you can't be assured that those bred aren't WC, or if they are that it was performed sustainably--whatever "sustainably" means in this context.

As far as I can tell there isn't much organization in place that would allow self-governance so if/when it becomes a problem inevitably governments will have to step in with bans & criminal penalties to dissuade folks from harmful practices. Ideally vendors would operate completely transparently & document/share their supply chain & breeding practices & what they do to avoid harm to wild populations. Problematically, there likely isn't enough money in the sustainability business (or suitably expensive consequences) to encourage this.

I think, and I HOPE, that the vast majority of breeders do what they do not because they want to make money, but because they truly have a passion for the hobby and for arachnids in general. It's incredible how experienced breeders have developed methods for pairing even the most reluctant of species (P. metallica comes to mind). I think the moral and ethical incentive of captive breeding endangered species far outweighs the monetary incentive of illegal wild collection and exportation.

It's nowhere near a black and white issue, of course. But I find it hard to believe that our hobby has a net negative effect on tarantula populations compared to habitat destruction. Many of these species could likely go extinct within our lifetimes due to deforestation/habitat destruction, leaving behind only the captive bred populations to carry on their legacy. I'd rather see them continue to thrive in captivity than disappear altogether.

Just my two cents on the matter.
When the monetary incentive for sustainable collection & breeding practices outweighs that for "strip harvesting" specimens then irresponsible practices will dwindle. It will not be a moral imperative that prevents this.

Inarguably habitat destruction is probably more of a concern than the pet trade but given that habitat destruction has occurred & the incentive/consequences for continued habitat destruction do not exist the focus turns to conservation of the wild populations which the pet trade directly depletes.

thediplomat_2015-02-11_11-46-25.jpg

Interestingly, I never see mention of the food trade. I do not know numbers of imported species, but the volume by which tarantulas are harvested from the wild as delicacies is astounding, or at least appears so at market. & they charge something like 10¢/spider!
 

Stugy

Arachnolord
Joined
Apr 21, 2016
Messages
648
I'm not opposed to WC specimens so long as it is done responsibly, but there doesn't seem to be a mechanism or organization in place that monitors such things or has policies & procedures in place to give guidance on WC practices. Without that structure in place there's no way to engage in education & advocacy for responsible buying practices, namely because there is no clear way to identify responsible vendors; e.g. "sustainably harvested" certifications or something of the like. The only way to personally avoid contributing to the problem (that I can determine) is to buy from reputable vendors who captive breed. Even then you can't be assured that those bred aren't WC, or if they are that it was performed sustainably--whatever "sustainably" means in this context.

As far as I can tell there isn't much organization in place that would allow self-governance so if/when it becomes a problem inevitably governments will have to step in with bans & criminal penalties to dissuade folks from harmful practices. Ideally vendors would operate completely transparently & document/share their supply chain & breeding practices & what they do to avoid harm to wild populations. Problematically, there likely isn't enough money in the sustainability business (or suitably expensive consequences) to encourage this.



When the monetary incentive for sustainable collection & breeding practices outweighs that for "strip harvesting" specimens then irresponsible practices will dwindle. It will not be a moral imperative that prevents this.

Inarguably habitat destruction is probably more of a concern than the pet trade but given that habitat destruction has occurred & the incentive/consequences for continued habitat destruction do not exist the focus turns to conservation of the wild populations which the pet trade directly depletes.

View attachment 232947

Interestingly, I never see mention of the food trade. I do not know numbers of imported species, but the volume by which tarantulas are harvested from the wild as delicacies is astounding, or at least appears so at market. & they charge something like 10¢/spider!
bruhhhh. some scary stuff right there. I would love to know how many people faint when they see that xD
 
Top