Avicularia

[Steve Nunn]

Originally posted by TheEternal
Actually, the one in your picture is PROBABLY an A. metallica. They have a much brighter blue color when light is on them, and brighter purple hairs.

They're often sold as A. avicularias at pet shops, and it looks like you lucked out!

Hi,
I would say it's definately A.avicularia and I don't think your photo shows A.metallica either. As far as I'm aware A.metallica don't get bright red setae on the abdomen and they definately don't get red setae on legs IV, A.avicularia do(along with several other Avicularia spp.). The setae on A.metallica also have 'sliver' tips.

Just for further reference, here's another link to A.avicularia http://www.swiftinverts.com/pix/Pinktoe2.jpg

And here's a shot of A.metallica http://atshq.org/pix/SCHUMM/boots12.jpg

See the differences?

Cheers,
Steve

 

[blackacidevil]

I couldn't resist....

I recently bought an A_avicularia and when I told my wife what it was she seemed disappointed. I really specifically bought it so I could learn how to raise arboreals plus it was only 3 bucks and it looks cool as a sling. Now that I have seen these pics I am even more interested in watching it grow. It looks like this right now.....

 

[blackacidevil]

When they're small....

call them blacktoes.

 

[Lostkat]

ARGH! I really must stop looking at all these picture threads. I have room on my heatmat for another sling, and I would LOVE an A. avicularia or an A. versicolor. They're just absolutely stunning.

 

[SkyeSpider]

Originally posted by Steve Nunn
Hi,
I would say it's definately A.avicularia and I don't think your photo shows A.metallica either. As far as I'm aware A.metallica don't get bright red setae on the abdomen and they definately don't get red setae on legs IV, A.avicularia do(along with several other Avicularia spp.). The setae on A.metallica also have 'sliver' tips.

Just for further reference, here's another link to A.avicularia http://www.swiftinverts.com/pix/Pinktoe2.jpg

And here's a shot of A.metallica http://atshq.org/pix/SCHUMM/boots12.jpg

See the differences?

Cheers,
Steve

Your pictures prove a good counterpoint, but then look at the A. metallica on Rick West's site:
http://www.birdspiders.com/archive/3/0081.htm

This one seems to look a lot more like your 'metallica'
http://www.birdspiders.com/archive/1/0168.htm

-Bryan

 

[Steve Nunn]

Originally posted by TheEternal
Your pictures prove a good counterpoint, but then look at the A. metallica on Rick West's site:
http://www.birdspiders.com/archive/3/0081.htm

This one seems to look a lot more like your 'metallica'
http://www.birdspiders.com/archive/1/0168.htm

-Bryan

Hi Bryan,
Rick's photo shows the coloration of an A.metallica abdomen real well, while the setae aren't uniform in color with the body, they aren't red either and never become so (unlike A.avicularia) as far as I'm aware. A.urticans looks totally different to A.metallica IMO. The photo I used to represent A.metallica is from the American Tarantula Society's photo gallery and the specimen was photographed by Tom Schumm (webmaster of Phong's Tarantulas), neither the ATS's webmaster (Mike 'troll' Dame) nor Tom would get this ID wrong, that specimen was 100% A.metallica. Both of these collectors own numerous avic's and are amongst the most knowledgable enthusiasts around.

Regarding your specimen, who ID'd it as A.metallica? It looks like a real colorful A.avic to me (postmolt). Are you guessing it's an A.metallica based on photos you've seen?

Thanks,
Steve

 

[SkyeSpider]

Originally posted by Steve Nunn
Regarding your specimen, who ID'd it as A.metallica? It looks like a real colorful A.avic to me (postmolt). Are you guessing it's an A.metallica based on photos you've seen?

She was sold to me by Todd Gearheart as an A. metallica. That's the reason I'm fairly certain.

-Bryan

 

[Phillip]

what you have there is avic avic..

Metallica do not have the reddish abdominal hairs. Joys spider is avic avic. Also for the bijillionth time versis do to have pink toes. The toes are not as prominent as on avic avic but the ends of the toes do indeed have the pinkish tint. Geez I can't be the only one that has looked at my versis closely. lol

Phil

 

[Steve Nunn]

Originally posted by TheEternal
She was sold to me by Todd Gearheart as an A. metallica. That's the reason I'm fairly certain.

-Bryan

Ahhh, fresh from the cutting edge in arachnoculture I'd forward the photo to Rick West who'll confirm for you. Maybe Darin Vernier could also help, I'm sure he'd be appy to.

To be honest, it looks more like A.bicegoi, but the classificaion of Avicularia spp. is quite difficult to say the least, particularly without location data.

Cheers,
Steve

 

[xenesthis]

Settling the debate...

I have grown up a pet trade "A. metallica" spiderling of European origin. When it reached juvenile stage it had some reddish abdominal hairs. When it reached 4.5"-5" it lost those in the molt and replaced them with more silvery-frosted hairs. Now that spiderling is 5 years old and possesses a 7 3/4" legspan, has a gun metal blue carapace and femurs, frosted leg hairs and the silvery-frosted abdominal hairs.

Keep in mind, there is a natural hybrid of A. avicularia x A. metallica in the trade as well. They have reddish-brown hind legs hairs and some reddish abdominal hairs, but have the gun metal blue coloration and frosted leg hairs.

Normal A. avics do NOT have the frosted leg hairs and rarely exceed 5.5" legspans.

So, with that said, Bryan's juvenile IS most likey the natural hybrid and/or real A. metallica hands-down. I've seen thousands of these Avics through the years from all life stages, captive-born and wild-caught. I do not base my opinion on somebody else's rumor or something in a book, but real-life, up-close observation of these creatures. There is several geographical color variations of A. avicularia that some consider sub-species, there is the true A. metallica and there is the natural hybrid of both species.

Todd

 

[Steve Nunn]

Re: Settling the debate...

Originally posted by xenesthis
I have grown up a pet trade "A. metallica" spiderling of European origin. When it reached juvenile stage it had some reddish abdominal hairs. When it reached 4.5"-5" it lost those in the molt and replaced them with more silvery-frosted hairs. Now that spiderling is 5 years old and possesses a 7 3/4" legspan, has a gun metal blue carapace and femurs, frosted leg hairs and the silvery-frosted abdominal hairs.

Todd,
Have you had this spider ID'd properly as A.metallica? As I'm sure you're aware, there are that many different species in the pet trade that just aren't correctly identified and the Avicularia spp. are among some of the main culprits. Unless many of these imported spidrs are checked against type material by those in the know, be it enthusiasts or taxonomists, you couldn't be certain. Of course color is definately NOT the way to identify anything (due to variation in molt cycle, species variation, etc) so of course I can't stipulate with any certainty at all that this spider isn't A.metallica. But I am curious as to how you are so certain.

Keep in mind, there is a natural hybrid of A. avicularia x A. metallica in the trade as well. They have reddish-brown hind legs hairs and some reddish abdominal hairs, but have the gun metal blue coloration and frosted leg hairs.

Really? Tell me more about this natural hybrid. Are you certain it's not just species variation? Are the offspring fertile and if so, then it's highly unlikely that it's hybridization, being that 99% of the time,mules are the result. Of course anything could be possible, but until breeding attemps with this species proved to fail, then I for one would be highly sceptical about natural hybridization. Of course tarantulas are not incapable of creating viable hybrids, just that the gross majority of them are mules(incapable of reproducing) and vanish after one generation.

So, with that said, Bryan's juvenile IS most likey the natural hybrid and/or real A. metallica hands-down. I've seen thousands of these Avics through the years from all life stages, captive-born and wild-caught. I do not base my opinion on somebody else's rumor or something in a book, but real-life, up-close observation of these creatures.

With all due respect, real life observation doesn't stand for squat if no real type material has been studied to ascertain that the species in question is correctly ID'd, something missed all to often in the pet trade (of this I'm sure you'll agree). If you don't base your opinion off something from a book then how can you identify anything? Being that published written material is the standard for scientific description of a species, this is a strange stance indeed.

This hobby is in it's infancy (relatively speaking) and has flown ahead in leaps and bounds with hobbyists and collectors discovering tens of new species and then for the sake of a quick sale, alloting that undescribed species to an identified name. I'm not accusing you of this, just stating a general fact. Maybe this IS the real A.metallica and the other species that are being sold as such are incorrectly ID'd, only a taxonomist could say.

You changed the title of this to "settling the debate", but I don't see that it can be settled from assumption alone, some scientific evidence to back up your post would do the trick. Got any?

Thanks,
Steve

 

[invertepet]

As for metallica, I've seen at least three decidedly different looking spiders claimed to be metallica. One is LARGE (7"+) with white-tipped setae and an integument of black with strong blue iridescence. The other lacks the white-tipping but also lacks any abdominal red. The last tends to be a kind of mixture of the two - - not terribly large but with mild white tips on the setae and perhaps some reddish abdominal coloration.

bill

 

[invertepet]

OK, in an honest attempt to dispell this Antilles 'pink'toe issue, I present two pic of two different specimen: One versicolor, let's call it 'A', is a little smaller and has darker legs with more purple. A. versicolor 'B' has more red and is a little bulkier (possibly closer to its next molt). Both spiders are of completely unrelated bloodlines.

These images should give a good cross-section of two rather different Antilles Pinktoes. Both images are undoctored (hence the slightly off color balance due to my single greenish-white light source).

Here's versicolor 'A':

 

[invertepet]

Here's versicolor 'B':

 

[Phillip]

talk about beating a dead horse...

Once again Bill I have to agree to disagree with ya. Granted the pics you have shown don't show a pinktoe but for someone who has supposedly been dealing with exotic inverts for 15 years or however long it is you say I cannot see where you have never seen a versi that did have this feature. Once again here are some versi shots showing the coloration on the toes. Granted this one needs to molt so color is not perfect and the last few pics were taken in a rush so forgive the crappy quality.

Phil

pic 1

 

[Phillip]

pic 2

 

[Phillip]

pic 3

 

[Phillip]

last pic

And the full body to show that yes indeed it is a versi. And granted the toe coloration is not as profound as that on avic avic but it is nonetheless a different color from the rest of the leg. Not trying to start an argument or to ruffle any feathers but this so called issue that you are attempting to dispell is in fact a reality.

Phil

 

[Phillip]

and by the way...

Yes I know that the parts in question are called tarsi but seeing as neither you nor I came up with the common name pinktoe in the 1st place saying that they are tarsi does not take away from the fact that they are indeed differently colored. Again not trying to belittle anyone or start a riot just though I'd save ya the effort on that one.

Phil

 

[petitegreeneyes]

You know I just looked at my antilles really good and the tip of her legs look like picture 3. It's not quite pink but there is some sort of light color there right at the very end or tip of her leg. Not trying to get in on the heated discussion but had me curious about mine. I tried to get a pic. but she is in her web.