Breeding sac mates.

[syndicate]

I usually try and stay out of these types of threads but honestly there is zero evidence that long term inbreeding is going to affect your spiderlings!!I don't know if it has ever been studied but I often wonder if inbreeding within colonies of tarantulas in the wild can also happen??
Anyhow there are species of tarantulas in the hobby currently that came from very small wild caught imports and have been inbreeding together for years now with no issues!Look at most of the Poecilotheria species for example..How often are new P.regalis bloodlines brought into the hobby heh?Or the other Poecilotheria species..I once heard that the entire population of rufilata in the hobby came from under 20 specimens.I have no data to back that up but if it is true they are still being captive bred fine today no?Another quick example of a species that was imported in very small numbers is Acanthocurria geniculata.When these were smuggled out of Brazil there weren't many brought in to the hobby..1000's of these are produced yearly with no problems!
Many many captive bred species in the hobby that you see available for sale are the result of inbreeding.When an import of spiderlings comes in to the USA (Or any other country) and said breeder gets 10 or 12 of them to establish a breeding group should he just let all the males die off and cross his fingers someone imports more years down the road??!Absolutely not!This is how species get established in the hobby and its been going on for a long time now.If you have more bloodlines available should you use them?Absolutely!But this is often impossible with many rare species that are hard to obtain so it is essential to breed siblings if you want to keep said species around for more people to enjoy!
I also think trying to compare inbreeding between humans and Arachnids is ridiculous Stan and you know better than that hehe ;]
To the original poster chances are your Poecilotheria ornata are alreadly inbred and have been for years so you decide what route is best!
-Chris

 

[Tarac]

I also think trying to compare inbreeding between humans and Arachnids is ridiculous Stan and you know better than that hehe ;]
To the original poster chances are your Poecilotheria ornata are alreadly inbred and have been for years so you decide what route is best!
-Chris

Um... we are all built from the same nucleotides, are we not? Number of chromosomes, etc. is really what will distinguish the more "sensitive" to inbreeding from the rest generally speaking. Stan is right.

Hard to predict what is "deleterious" when you are talking about captive spiders. The thing to remember is that you are not truly keeping that species around by starting a line of pet trade spiders from handful of WC ancestors but rather making a slightly (at best) different spider altogether that may not be fit in the wild at all anymore because what is deleterious en natura might have no relevance in captivity. The tropical fish person here will probably know of several fish species which are now extinct in the wild but survive in captivity due to popularity in the trade. At least one is unfit for wild re-introduction, too susceptible to disease now in it's original habitat. It thrives in aquaria still. It's basically geographic separation- one population left in the wild and one population that occurs only inside terraria.

Like so many T issues, they are not understood. You can't prove that so many of the seemingly random deaths aren't related to poor genetics anymore than you can prove that they are so that is a fruitless argument to pose.

What we have is a ton of spiders that are all derived from that original handful of WC stock. That is, in effect, the line breeding to which Jay refers- keeping the genes within a limited group by virtue of there only being a limited group to select from period. Not on purpose, as in dogs, but by default. Inbreeding on a very short term scale, randomly, truly isn't harmful every time (but it can be- Stan's island population example is fitting because they are randomly inbred, not line bred like royalty formerly were in Europe. I have seen this "lazy" or "cross eyed" effect all over the place in rural Latin America from Patagonia to Mexico, most recently in Pedernales in the DR but it is common in many places with limited population mobility; seems to be one of the earliest signs of too much funny business in humans). But just because there isn't any evidence we can see yet doesn't mean that it isn't harmful. The gist of what I am reading is that we just accept it since there is really nothing else that can be done short of losing the captive populations altogether. And I do agree that having some is better than losing them altogether, both wild and captive. But that doesn't make it biologically sound. We're just defending the practice because there is no choice. If there were, I'm sure the argument would sound completely different.

 

[Thistles]

The tropical fish person here will probably know of several fish species which are now extinct in the wild but survive in captivity due to popularity in the trade. At least one is unfit for wild re-introduction, too susceptible to disease now in it's original habitat. It thrives in aquaria still. It's basically geographic separation- one population left in the wild and one population that occurs only inside terraria.

I think you are thinking of the white cloud mountain minnow, Tanichthys albonubes. There are other examples, but this is one of the most popular aquarium fish and it was thought extinct until a small population was discovered on an island recently.

 

[Tarac]

I think you are thinking of the white cloud mountain minnow, Tanichthys albonubes. There are other examples, but this is one of the most popular aquarium fish and it was thought extinct until a small population was discovered on an island recently.

I was thinking Ameca splendens which is totally extinct in the wild, but yes there are a number of small fish species which are extinct or almost completely extinct in the wild. White clouds can be re-introduced though, they were collected by the droves and have been popular consistently where Ameca splendens had a major drop in popularity in aquaculture and bottlenecked very badly. Still available rarely and perfectly hardy in most aquaria, they don't seem to be able to survive in any of their former habitats due to sensitivity to pathogens which have been present in those systems for untold centuries (or more).

With the white cloud though there is still the question of whether it is able to be considered an equivalent to the wild counterparts. Kind of like wild vs. farmed salmon. Not really the same anymore.

 

[Stan Schultz]

I usually try and stay out of these types of threads but honestly there is zero evidence that long term inbreeding is going to affect your spiderlings!! ...

I presume that you didn't read my posting (#20) just before yours. If not, please do so now. Pay particular attention to my very first paragraph, beginning "Rick C. West..."

... I don't know if it has ever been studied but I often wonder if inbreeding within colonies of tarantulas in the wild can also happen?? ...

It happens all the time, and very frequently. Read my posting (#10), paying particular attention to the paragraphs about halfway down, beginning with I've had people yell at me...

... Anyhow there are species of tarantulas in the hobby currently that came from very small wild caught imports and have been inbreeding together for years ...

An issue I addressed at length in my posting (#10).

In addition, because of the highly variable generation times between the various kinds of tarantulas, NUMBER OF YEARS is a bogus yardstick. What you really need to pay attention to is the NUMBER OF GENERATIONS that a given mutation has had to permeate a population (i.e., the number of opportunities that a given gene has had in order to re-sort itself through that population).

... now with no issues! ...

Go back and read my posting (#10), paying particular attention to the paragraph about half way down, just beneath the blue quote, that begins with, "In captive breeding..."

... Look at most of the Poecilotheria species for example. How often are new P.regalis bloodlines brought into the hobby heh?Or the other Poecilotheria species..I once heard that the entire population of rufilata in the hobby came from under 20 specimens.I have no data to back that up but if it is true they are still being captive bred fine today no?Another quick example of a species that was imported in very small numbers is Acanthocurria geniculata.When these were smuggled out of Brazil there weren't many brought in to the hobby..1000's of these are produced yearly with no problems! ..

The Poecilotheria are a good real-world example of the case that I presented in my posting (#20) for a relatively short generation cycle species. I quote the math below.

2012 - 1995 = 17 years.

With a 5 year life cycle:

17 ÷ 5 = 3.4 generations in captivity. Fewer than 4 generations! For a relatively fast growing, short life cycle species!

It is also interesting to note that I've seen a few comments by people who've been paying attention, that the individuals with 7" or 8" DLS are becoming rarer, and I remember one person positing that was because of the intense inbreeding.

And, Acanthocurria geniculata (which has been bred for a shorter period of time, and may have a longer generation time) might look like this.

2012 - 2000 = 12 years.

With a 5 year life cycle:

12 ÷ 5 = 2.4 generations in captivity. Not even 3 generations in captivity!

And, I stick by my assertion, "So, right now we're only beginning to see the beginning of the avalanche, the avant garde."

... When an import of spiderlings comes in to the USA (Or any other country) and said breeder gets 10 or 12 of them to establish a breeding group should he just let all the males die off and cross his fingers someone imports more years down the road??!Absolutely not! ...

No, the breeder does not have to allow all the males to die off without breeding them. That would be foolish. As stated or inferred in my posting (#10), however, the breeder should inspect and cull out any males with undesirable or deficient characteristics before beginning a breeding program (and do the same with the females), the selective breeding part. Then, with the resulting babies, the breeder should do something to weed out the "...smaller, weaker, slower, deformed, or more stupid brood mates," the culling part. To not employ selective breeding and culling principles is as foolish as not breeding the males at all!

... I also think trying to compare inbreeding between humans and Arachnids is ridiculous Stan ...

Heaven forefend that I should try to influence your "beliefs," and I am certainly not prepared to discuss any religious or moral issues you see, but the human race has been comparing the breeding of animals and humans and using the gathered data in their husbandry practices and choices of mates since the first farmers in old Mesopotamia. It's a bit late to start objecting now.

... and you know better than that ...

With respect, you are in no position to tell me what I know or don't know, morally, ethically, or otherwise, just as I am in no position to try to influence your fundamental beliefs. And, that statement could be construed as a personal attack. If that's true, it's very bad form. We're discussing and examining the issues on their intrinsic merits, not on the basis of who is better at demeaning the other. I'll not mention this again. Hopefully, neither will you.

To sum up my position:

1) We are currently breeding any and every individual tarantula that we possibly can. (Probably because of the overwhelming demand for them, and the prospect of financial gain.)

2) Little or no effort is made towards selective breeding to prevent defects from being passed on to succeeding generations.

3) Little or no effort is being made to cull defective individuals (i.e., the "smaller, weaker, slower, deformed, or more stupid brood mates") before being released to the general public for further breeding.

4) And indeed, most enthusiasts breeding tarantulas are entirely unaware of the issues. And, of those who have been introduced to those issues, many are unwilling to acknowledge that a problem is looming on the horizon, much less adopt the practices to solve the problem.

5) And, there is a very real problem looming on the horizon.

6) And lastly, all this is true in spite of the fact that the art of animal and plant husbandry has been developing for 15,000 years or more, and the science of animal and plant husbandry has been developing since the days of Darwin and Mendel in the middle of the nineteenth century!

We really need to catch up on current events, gang!


Enjoy your little 7-legged, 9-eyed What-the-!@#$!-is-that?

 

[Quazgar]

There are many plants and animals for which inbreeding is a beneficial trait that has evolved over time (yes, inbreeding is sometimes a good thing for a population).

Just wondering if you have an example of animals for which long-term inbreeding has been proven beneficial? I think if we are comparing between organisms, a tarantula-to-human comparison will be much closer and more accurate than a tarantula-to-plant comparison.

I will readily admit that I am not in a position to add more than my thoughts to this debate, and I certainly have no evidence to back up any thought I may have on the subject, but I do think that one of the biggest issues is what Stan has raised in that there just hasn't been enough time to know what the result of inbreeding in tarantulas may be. It seems like the people who are arguing that it will cause no problems are basing that on at most a handful of generations, but what happens when we get dozens or hundreds of generations in?

Of course this doesn't change the fact that there may be no way to fully avoid inbreeding, but perhaps out of caution one should try to avoid breeding sac mates unless absolutely necessary to keep the species going in the hobby. I would think a somewhat more distant relative would be preferential to a known closer relative.

 

[Stan Schultz]

Just wondering if you have an example of animals for which long-term inbreeding has been proven beneficial? ...

How about the beef steak and potatoes you had for dinner yesterday? It is arguable that because we were able to selectively inbreed and cull the wild aurochs and potato, that there are more of both alive today than ever before in history or prehistory. And, they've been spread from their restricted initial ranges to literally every available habitat around the planet. If the doomsdayers are correct and human civilization or the human race disappears on December 21, 2012 as predicted, these and hundreds of other domestic species have a million times better chance of surviving someplace than they ever would have had back in the "good old days."

... I think if we are comparing between organisms, a tarantula-to-human comparison will be much closer and more accurate than a tarantula-to-plant comparison. ...

Possibly, but the basic principles of genetics and animal/plant husbandry are the same for both vast groups of organisms. Only the details are different. The principles of sexual reproduction, genetics and selection (whether natural or artificial is largely irrelevant) go that extremely far back into the history of life on Earth. Literally a couple of BILLION years!

... one of the biggest issues is what Stan has raised in that there just hasn't been enough time to know what the result of inbreeding in tarantulas may be. ...

Au contraire. There are actually three huge issues.

1) We're failing miserably to use even the most basic principles of animal husbandry, artificial selection and culling, to prevent the proliferation of all sorts of anomalies and mutations throughout the captive bred tarantula populations.

2) If we wait for hundreds or even just a dozen generations to gather data, the damage will have been done and will be irreparable.

3) We're "sticking our heads in the sand," not merely failing to do anything about the issue, but actually resisting, even fighting, to avoid doing anything about the problem.

Stupid!

Stupid!

Stupid!

Worse yet, the evidence is right there before us, staring us in the face. Consider the plights of both the dog fancy and the tropical fish hobby. Because we didn't "take care of business," we now have dogs that pass out when the door slams, grievous birth defects, and inheritable cancer; and tropical fish with bent spines, deformed gill covers, and tailess fish.

Here are some interesting links if you need more convincing.

Deformities in Tank Raised Fish

Dog Deformities

... Of course this doesn't change the fact that there may be no way to fully avoid inbreeding, ...

WRONG CONCEPT! Inbreeding is not a bad thing as long as its effects are controlled by intense selection and culling (actually, these are really just two aspects of the same principle). It happens all the time in nature, and indeed it's a very useful tool for conserving the very rare, new, beneficial changes in a population. We don't necessarily WANT to avoid it.

We just need to learn to be very selective in which individuals we're using as breeders, and about carefully culling out any offspring that may not be up to some basic standards before we release them into the general gene pool.

... but perhaps out of caution one should try to avoid breeding sac mates unless absolutely necessary to keep the species going in the hobby. I would think a somewhat more distant relative would be preferential to a known closer relative.

That's a nice thought, but in many cases it's impossible or at least impractical for all the reasons that syndicate mentioned in posting #21. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try. It just means that we shouldn't get our hopes too high.


Enjoy your little 7-legged, 9-eyed What-the-!@#$!-is-that?

 

[salmonpink]

Wow this went off topic. On another note my male p. ornata molted. How do u tell when a p ornata has matured. Sperm webs?

 

[syndicate]

Well if inbreeding tarantulas does severely effect the captive populations in the hobby I hope somebody can go and illegally smuggle some new bloodlines out of Brazil,Africa,Mexico,India,Malaysia,Australia ect.... in a hurry before its to late!!

I think the reality of this situation is tarantulas have and are being inbred for some time now and I don't see it changing anytime soon unfortunately.I would also venture to say there are wayy more than 3.5 generations of inbred Poecilotheria among other genera of tarantulas currently in the hobby!

I am in know way supporting the idea that "Hey lets all inbreed for fun!" and of course I will mate different bloodlines together whenever I have the chance but I feel like there's not to much that can be done now!A lot of the damage is done and at times there is no choice but to mate siblings.
Also someone mentioned re-introducing spiders into the wild and that will prob never happen in a million years.Nobody cares much about spiders and if a species go's extinct no government is gonna try and re-introduce arachnids.they don't exactly get the same appreciation as other animals haha!
Stan you bring up a excellent point about selective breeding and I do think this is very important.I try to practice this whenever possible and just recently a few months back I actually refused a male that was sent to me on a breeding loan.Said male had a slight deformation of its folio pattern (Could this be a result of many generations of inbreeding? D: ) and instead of using it with my females I decided I would send it back to him to avoid passing this gene on.

I also found this article googling this topic and I think it is well worth a read!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1560033/
They refer to problems resulting from inbreeding as "inbreeding depression"
It seems that many social spiders will inbreed together.It makes me wonder if any tarantulas species who live in colonies may to?Certain Poecilotheria species live together in the wild as do a couple other species of tarantulas like the chicken spiders (Pamphobeteus) so is it possible they mate with siblings to?I have noticed when rearing captive groups of Poecilotheria together it is also not uncommon for the females to mature quicker than the males...
I however have never witnessed mating inside a colony of captive Poecilotheria..
Another article I found searching online regarding spiders inbreeding was about a study on a species of Argiope where males have a better chance of survival post mating when courting with siblings..Pretty interesting stuff!Article can be seen here:
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/04/spider-incest
It seems that inbreeding in spiders does in fact happen quite often in the wild and even in one case (social spiders) they have even evolved from solitary species to routinely inbreeding within a colony!
I wonder how many other species of arachnids may inbreed with each other?Also what about stuff like Parthnogenic scorpions that don't breed with any one D:
How does that effect future bloodlines when there is no mating?!
OK gonna stop rambling now....
@ Stan sorry if you felt I was attacking you with my comment..I meant no disrespect by it!
-Chris

 

[Hobo]

Wow this went off topic. On another note my male p. ornata molted. How do u tell when a p ornata has matured. Sperm webs?

Bulbs at the end of the pedipalps.

 

[Sharno]

How do you tell if a male tarantula is "stupid"?

And I am not being snarky!

I understand culling deformed or weaker ones, but I don't know how you could begin to identify subtle things.

Do those who have dozens of Ts in their care actually know which ones are a little dim?

 

[BrettG]

God I bet there are some buck toothed,slack jawed Holothele out there then....

 

[Stan Schultz]

Wow this went off topic. ...

On the one hand, yes. And, I am deeply sorry for that.

But, on the other hand, no. You did ask, "What's that mean towards breeding."

... On another note my male p. ornata molted. How do u tell when a p ornata has matured. Sperm webs?

Sperm webs are a good indicator, but only if you manage to catch him "in process." Many enthusiasts have never seen their mature males' sperm webs because the males are so secretive about making and using them. Just like humans!

A much better indicator is the presence of the clubbed pedipalps and palpal bulbs. See Do I have a mature male? (P. subfusca). Yes, it's a different species, but all Poecilotheria are built pretty much alike from the enthusiast's point of view.

As a general rule, the presence or absence of the tibial hooks is a bit tricky because there are a whole slew of species in which the males either don't have them, or they're so diminutive that you can't see them without a magnifier or a microscope. So, it's best not to rely on them as an indicator.


Enjoy your little 8-legged super-stud!

---------- Post added 08-26-2012 at 03:37 PM ----------

Well if inbreeding tarantulas does severely effect the captive populations in the hobby I hope somebody can go and illegally smuggle some new bloodlines out of Brazil,Africa,Mexico,India,Malaysia,Australia ect.... in a hurry before its to late!! ...

...@ Stan sorry if you felt I was attacking you with my comment..I meant no disrespect by it!
-Chris

'Nuff said. I'm considering the topic closed unless someone else comes up with something important, relevant, and that I missed.


Enjoy your little 8-legged warmonger!

---------- Post added 08-26-2012 at 04:19 PM ----------

How do you tell if a male tarantula is "stupid"?

And I am not being snarky! ...

I was wondering if anyone was going to catch that one! Actually it really is a fair question. And, it doesn't only apply to males. Heaven forefend, but females can be stupid too!

First, you need to read and look at the photos in Ping Pong?. At which point your next reaction should be, "Really? So there are differences in the mental abilities of tarantulas!"

Then, you should read "HOW THIS THING WORKS: Magic Dancers". And, your next reaction should then be, "Wow! So, if one is a little bit physically or mentally slow, it won't respond in time to defend itself against one that is a little faster!" It's called "survival of the fittest."

... I understand culling deformed or weaker ones, but I don't know how you could begin to identify subtle things. ...

We really don't have to learn to recognize the subtle things. If we keep all the babies from an eggsac together in one or a few common containers for several weeks (say, until 1/4 of them had been cannibalized), the tarantulas will have done most of the job for us. Remember that in a previous post I pointed out that a survivor in nature had to be BOTH perfect and INCREDIBLY LUCKY. Thus, in nature, a bunch of each brood gets killed in spite of the fact that they're good breeding material. They just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. From our points of view, that's a waste of good money. (25% losses are always better than 99% losses!)

And so the topics of business, finance, and profit raise their ugly heads!

... Do those who have dozens of Ts in their care actually know which ones are a little dim?

There are indicators. For instance, it would be my contention that those tarantulas that come to the front of the cage when I entered the room are a little brighter than the pet rock in the cage next to it. The bright bulb gets bred. The dim bulb next door gets sold! The same rule would also hold for those that seemed to enjoy handling. And, that played with their ping pong ball.


Enjoy your little 8-legged survivor!

 

[Tarac]

I also found this article googling this topic and I think it is well worth a read!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1560033/
They refer to problems resulting from inbreeding as "inbreeding depression"

Did you read the paper? It says

"Two clear patterns emerge from our results: (i) the presence of inbreeding depression only during the solitary phases of this spider's life cycle and (ii) the predominance of extrinsic ecological and demographic factors, over intrinsic genetic factors, in determining fitness during its social phases"

This means that inbreeding didn't effect fecundity during that cycle of the spider's life. But it did effect the spider- smaller females, etc.- as reported by the authors. They are discussing only the social phase of this spider.

"Three hypotheses can explain the absence of inbreeding depression early in the life cycle of this spider (or near absence, depending on how the slight difference in eggsac emergence time is interpreted): (i) inbreeding effects tend to show up late in the life cycle of organisms; (ii) inbreeding effects show up late in the life cycle of this species, because low levels of inbreeding have already weeded out the most damaging deleterious recessive alleles, i.e. those with early life action (Husband & Schemske 1996); (iii) maternal care and group living provide a buffer against severe effects of inbreeding during the social phase of this spider's life cycle."

"Other observations, however, suggest that inbreeding is only partial, at best, as there is strong asynchrony in the maturation times of male and female clutchmates (Bukowski & Avilés 2002), both males and females mate multiply (Klein et al. in press), and the proportion of males in the populations drops significantly—from 0.5 to 0.28—from pre- to the post-dispersal phases, as would be expected if a fraction of the males dispersed beyond the local area without being replaced by a similar number of incoming males due to mortality of migrating males (Avilés & Gelsey 1998)."

If you read in full, this paper in no way suggests that inbreeding has no negative effects or positive effects per se, only that no signs of inbreeding depression occur during the early stages of their development. It is, in fact, implied that there are "severe effects" of inbreeding but that the spider has basically evolved a way to cope with this naturally occurring phenomenon by taking advantage of it during early development but that it is not the strict mode of reproduction within the species, rather just one way of handling inadvertent inbreeding.

The second paper also is not really any evidence toward no effect of inbreeding on overall population health. In this particular species, the males can only mate twice regardless of the chosen mate due to damaging palps. What was found is simply that males who mated with females they were related to would mate for shorter amounts of time and thereby escape with their lives. There is an easy an obvious explanation here that is actually contrary to what you might be trying to derive from this article- males who mate with related females and thereby lose one of their chances to mate with a genetically unrelated female survive to try to find a mate that is unrelated by reducing the time they are actually mating. Males that find an unrelated female first just keep mating until she eats him. "What is the advantage of this?" is what we need to ask. The advantage is obvious- if you mated with your sister you will get another chance to mate with someone not in your family before your chances are done. If you get it right the first time and find someone not in your family then there is no need to use that second chance, rather better to stick around and make sure you really got the deed done. Then it is fine to self-sacrifice for the benefit of your genetically more diverse offspring. The summary says:

"This finding of inbreeding avoidance in males intrigues Trine Bilde of Aarhus University in Denmark, who has studied the female side of inbreeding in spiders. It’s another twist in the tale of cannibals, which have proved quite informative to biologists. “It is interesting to study sexually cannibalistic species to understand how evolution can possibly favor self-sacrificing males,” she says."

That statement in itself implies that the self-sacrificing males, or in this study those which mate with non-related females- are favored. Read carefully in full.

---------- Post added 08-27-2012 at 08:07 AM ----------

Enjoy your little 7-legged, 9-eyed What-the-!@#$!-is-that?

Lol. Does it play the banjo eerily well?

 

[Thistles]

How do you tell if a male tarantula is "stupid"?

I have one that attacks the vent in his cage every time I try to feed him. The cricket will walk right by and he persists in attacking the vent. Sometimes he'll even walk away from the vent for a while, then when the cricket makes a motion he runs right back up to the vent. Needless to say, my OTHER male gets first dibs on my 2 ladies.

 

[salmonpink]

Ok so clearly I won't be breeding them. Manly cause my male is bigger then my female but he will likely mature at his next molt so I will likely trade him off or sell so someone can use him for what he is supposed to do. The question is what should I expect in a trade or cash.

 

[Tarac]

Ok so clearly I won't be breeding them. Manly cause my male is bigger then my female but he will likely mature at his next molt so I will likely trade him off or sell so someone can use him for what he is supposed to do. The question is what should I expect in a trade or cash.

In a trade it would be a 50/50 generally of any resulting slings. Use the search, lots of discussion of what the "standard" 50/50 implies. Advice is to ensure you have the details hashed out in advance- who pays for return shipping/forwarding on, evidence of death, etc. Suggest using someone reputable that has references but it's up to you. Everyone has to start somewhere after all. This was all discussed ad nauseam just recently, use the search so you know what to expect and what you need to discuss with any potential trading partners in advance.

For cash, again use the search. Advanced search the classifieds and invertsonals. No clue what the market price is a for a MM ornata. MM are usually not terribly valuable by themselves but who knows what demand will be like at the time he matures.

 

[Stan Schultz]

Ok so clearly I won't be breeding them. Manly cause my male is bigger then my female but he will likely mature at his next molt so I will likely trade him off or sell so someone can use him for what he is supposed to do. The question is what should I expect in a trade or cash.

There is no "official" or legally mandated set of guidelines. Everything is up for negotiation.

However, when loaning a male for breeding, it is customary in the hobby for the two enthusiasts to share any resulting offspring 50/50. But, if one tarantula eats the other they just shrug and move on with their lives with no one getting anything. If the mating simply is unsuccessful, the male may be returned to the original owner if still alive, and both participants just move on. Even if the mating is successful, very often the male is returned to the original owner possibly for loaning to someone else. The male's owner stands to ultimately make more money, but takes a greater risk.

However, "money talks, b@#$s@#$ walks," and some enthusiasts prefer a guaranteed cash settlement up front. In this case the female's owner merely buys the male outright. The male's owner usually gets the short straw in this case, but is absolutely guaranteed some compensation. The female's owner takes all the risk, but stands to make a much larger score if successful. Less risk, smaller return. More risk, larger return. Simple.

And, there are sometimes rather complicated business deals negotiated. For instance, what is the male's owner going to do with 500 baby B. smithi? Instead, since the female's owner is already going to have to dispose of their share (500 babies), often a deal is made whereby the female's owner sells the entire brood (except perhaps a very few for personal pets) to a dealer. The male's owner gets half the proceeds in cash plus a few babies previously agreed upon.

But sometimes in order to make the deal a little more fair, some major expenses like gas money or air freight (if a long trip is involved), are deducted from the proceeds first.

Or, since dealers often prefer to work on a barter/trade basis, there may be some very complex negotiations between all three parties (i.e., the dealer, the female's owner, the male's owner) with little or no cash transfer at all.

Also, it is customary in the pet industry (and business in general) for the recipient of a shipment to always pay the shipping expenses. Often, the shipper merely adds a little amount to the bill, the classic "shipping and handling." Or, if the shipping costs are relatively small, the shipper may merely absorb them as part of the "cost of doing business," and forget it. But, a common mistake among laymen is to fail to appreciate the costs of shipping in advance and deal with them as part of any negotiation. Sending a shipment via air freight, for instance, seldom costs less than $100! Often more. Sometimes much more! So obviously, shipping 6 baby B. smithi by air freight would be silly! ALWAYS discuss shipping and handling and come to a firm agreement on the subject before finalizing a business deal!

Lastly, I once worked for a real estate management firm that was negotiating the sale of a condominium complex in Tuscon. The agreement among the several business partners that were considering the sale was that the proceeds would be divided according to some complex formula AFTER DEDUCTING EXPENSES. One of the partners flew his family to Tuscon for a 3 week vacation and tried to claim the full $25,000 expense against the sale as a business trip to inspect the property and negotiate with the buyers face to face. And, that's when the fight started. They did settle out of court, but the lawyers' fees were something in the neighborhood of ... are you ready for this? ... $25,000! (Note that, regardless of the outcome, the lawyers are the only ones who ALWAYS win!)

The agreement should have read, "... after deducting the following expenses, if present ..." and appending a specific list.

My recommendation is a 50/50 split with the shipper paying the first $10 for shipping and handling, and the recipient paying anything over that (applicable to both a round trip for the male and for the potential shipping of any babies back to you). You assume the responsibility for disposing of your share of the babies.


Enjoy your little, high finance, 8-legged Wunderspinne!

 

[advan]

Lol. Does it play the banjo eerily well?

A few of us like banjo music. ;P Clicky I don't see where the OP mentioned a breeding loan. Just for trade or sale.

Another inbreeding thread with some interesting replies. Also, make sure to follow the link to the UK board. Clicky

 

[Jaromysfuneral]

I personally wouldn’t breed if I knew any tarantula was within 5 generations. What I will do is wait to breed a tarantula until it’s been adult for long enough that it’s sibling males should have died by then, or if I have an adult that I don’t know the age I can usually assume male siblings have decease. theoretically that can happen after a t is adult size and molts one more time without gaining size, to which I’ll then start shopping around preferably with out of state keepers as to increase odds of them not being as close in blood lines. I have purchased slings from individuals that have had poorer success rates that also bred siblings together so it left a bad taste in my mouth, while breeding in my method I’ve had phenomenal success rates like 1600+ babies and only 20ish dying from an LP. Anything you can do to breed two healthy unrelated spiders will increase your chances of healthy spiders, while those who take the risks also risk their reputation