did some pairing last night

[Ceratogyrus]

Poecilotheria pederseni molting to 1st instar!

P.vittata.

 

[catfishrod69]

He sure is man! Smallest mature male Poeci i have seen! Thanks! Im sure he will do well with the other female too!

I told you that guy was small LOL. Glad to hear he is working for you man. Good luck with the sacks.

---------- Post added 10-31-2013 at 02:43 PM ----------

Not sure i follow you?

P.vittata.

 

[Ceratogyrus]

Pederseni has been changed to vittata.

 

[catfishrod69]

Seriously? Where was i? Thanks man! And that is crazy. Makes total sense to rename something that already had a name.:sarcasm:

 

[Ceratogyrus]

Man, trying to find the post here on arachnoboards, but tough to search on tapatalk.

Let's see if this works: http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=256004

 

[Poec54]

And that is crazy. Makes total sense to rename something that already had a name.:sarcasm:

If it has a name, but it's the wrong name...

 

[catfishrod69]

Thats some akward stuff man. I understand that pederseni is now vittata, but whats with the mentioning of striata, subfusca and smithi?

Man, trying to find the post here on arachnoboards, but tough to search on tapatalk.

Let's see if this works: http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=256004

---------- Post added 10-31-2013 at 03:33 PM ----------

This stuff makes absolutely no sense to me at all man. What is the difference between pederseni and vittata? Its still going to be the exact same spider. Why not just leave it the way it is, when it is first put into classification?

If it has a name, but it's the wrong name...

 

[Poec54]

This stuff makes absolutely no sense to me at all man. What is the difference between pederseni and vittata? Its still going to be the exact same spider. Why not just leave it the way it is, when it is first put into classification?

It makes perfect sense. Vittata was the first name 'put into classification', not pederseni. The rules for all plants and animals is that the first name is the correct name. Some species have been mistakenly given two or three names by different people over the years; this was especially common decades ago when it was difficult to locate original descriptions, or even know if it had been previously described. If you have person after person each giving the same animal a new name, eventually you have to stop the merry-go-round and unravel the confusion. First name takes priority; the others should have done more research to see if it had already been described. It's the only way you can do it. Otherwise it's out of control.

Unfortunately tarantulas have been ignored by most taxonomists until recently, so there's over a 100 years of duplication and sloppy work that needs to be sorted out. Just because an inaccurate name gets out to the hobby doesn't give it any validity. Who here has checked to see if their spiders fit the original species descriptions? We're just passing on names we're told, some of which are guesses (and there's rarely a taxonomist involved). When the wrong names get circulated, they still have to be corrected.

Look at Avicularia, total chaos. People kept naming 'new' species (based on god-knows-what characteristics), without checking the work others had done before them, and now no one knows what's going on. It's suspected that at least 6 species could all simply be regional forms of Avic Avic. That's why you have to take a stand and go back to the first legitimate description.

I'm just glad we finally have taxonomists working on tarantulas and getting things sorted out.

 

[catfishrod69]

Ok i can understand and appreciate that. But, wont adding another name into the mix only make it more complex? Say if there were a Poeci called 10 different names, and they renamed it another one, wouldnt that only add more confusion? Im not at all good at this stuff. Luckily im not a taxonimist .

As far as Avicularia, we might as well pitch most of that genus in the freezer. So many people pairing species that they are not sure of, and theres only a handful of ones that can be identified just by looking at them. Same goes with Aphonopelma. People pairing WC individuals that they identify based on location, even though there are other species overlapping.

 

[JadeWilliamson]

It makes perfect sense. Vittata was the first name 'put into classification', not pederseni.

I was completely in the same boat as John, completely confused about how it could be "the wrong name." I really appreciate you clearing it up in layman's terms. It makes complete sense now! It's probably gonna take a while for most hobbyists to realize the name changed and get used to calling it P vittatus instead, though obviously we should've been calling it that all along! For example, every now and then I you'll find someone still calling Chacos G aureostriata. I'm guessing that was a similar situation?

---------- Post added 11-01-2013 at 03:34 PM ----------

Thats some akward stuff man. I understand that pederseni is now vittata, but whats with the mentioning of striata, subfusca and smithi?

I'm gonna take a shot at it using logic and context clues. Whew, here goes:

P vittata is called P pederseni's "senior synonym." I assume that means that same species was described as vittata before it was described as a new species "pederseni" 106 years later. When he says that uniformis is a junior synonym of subfusca, it means that subfusca was established and uniformis was a name later given to the same species thought of as a new species at the time and we need to disregard uniformis. Same with pococki and smithi. Or it's just an excuse not to have to verbalize "Poecilotheria pococki" because it just sounds silly.

Am I in the ballpark?

 

[JZC]

I was completely in the same boat as John, completely confused about how it could be "the wrong name." I really appreciate you clearing it up in layman's terms. It makes complete sense now! It's probably gonna take a while for most hobbyists to realize the name changed and get used to calling it P vittatus instead, though obviously we should've been calling it that all along! For example, every now and then I you'll find someone still calling Chacos G aureostriata. I'm guessing that was a similar situation?

---------- Post added 11-01-2013 at 03:34 PM ----------



I'm gonna take a shot at it using logic and context clues. Whew, here goes:

P vittata is called P pederseni's "senior synonym." I assume that means that same species was described as vittata before it was described as a new species "pederseni" 106 years later. When he says that uniformis is a junior synonym of subfusca, it means that subfusca was established and uniformis was a name later given to the same species thought of as a new species at the time and we need to disregard uniformis. Same with pococki and smithi. Or it's just an excuse not to have to verbalize "Poecilotheria pococki" because it just sounds silly.

Am I in the ballpark?

Is pockocki a species? I googled it once, and some kind of pokie with pink came up. I prefer pederseni to vittata. What is the new common name?

 

[Poec54]

Say if there were a Poeci called 10 different names, and they renamed it another one, wouldnt that only add more confusion? Im not at all good at this stuff. Luckily im not a taxonimist.

As far as Avicularia, we might as well pitch most of that genus in the freezer. So many people pairing species that they are not sure of, and theres only a handful of ones that can be identified just by looking at them. Same goes with Aphonopelma. People pairing WC individuals that they identify based on location, even though there are other species overlapping.

Actually, vittata isn't a new name. It's been around for years. Just so happens it was the first valid one, so that's what the species gets.

It happens that Aphonopelma is being straightened out, some species are being merged, and some new ones added. There's hope on the horizon for that genus. Avicularia may be a more daunting task, but I'm sure some brave soul will volunteer to wade thru the descriptions and get it sorted out.

 

[JadeWilliamson]

Is pockocki a species? I googled it once, and some kind of pokie with pink came up. I prefer pederseni to vittata. What is the new common name?

I based my post on what Jacobi wrote.

 

[Poec54]

I prefer pederseni to vittata. What is the new common name?

Back in the 1990's and early 2000's, vittata was the name used, so people had gotten used to that. P. pococki was merged with smithi (pococki was the name we used to hear previously).

It's all part of revisions: there's always names cirulating in any animal or plant hobby that were based on some loose taxonomy that people have gotten familiar with, but still need to be corrected. The big problem is that if the first name doesn't get priority, it encourages people to keep giving names to the same animal or plant in the hope that theirs will win out. If you think it's confusing now, the alternative would be far worse.

 

[catfishrod69]

Ok man i completely understand that. Hopefully it all works out. I dont see how it could hurt with a genus like Poecilotheria, being they can visibly be told apart. But with Aphonopelma, as hard as it is to tell one species from another, either way, i think it will be a loss. And whoever tackles Avicularia, they have some work cut out for them!

Actually, vittata isn't a new name. It's been around for years. Just so happens it was the first valid one, so that's what the species gets.

It happens that Aphonopelma is being straightened out, some species are being merged, and some new ones added. There's hope on the horizon for that genus. Avicularia may be a more daunting task, but I'm sure some brave soul will volunteer to wade thru the descriptions and get it sorted out.

 

[BrettG]

Wasn't there supposed to be some long awaited revision of Avicularia that was supposed to be released in 2013???Sure as heckfire haven't heard a thing about that anymore.........

 

[grayzone]

Figured I'd drop in after my long break to check in and see how u been... very busy seems to be the answer.
Congrats as usual for.all your breeding and pairing attempts bro. One of these days I will be restarting my massive collection and I know one of my first contacts will be

 

[catfishrod69]

Holy crap! Look at ^ this guy! Hope your doing good bro, great to hear from you. Thanks for the support! Im doing as best i can, sacs here, sacs there lol. Hope to see you back on here going strong soon bro! Take care!

Figured I'd drop in after my long break to check in and see how u been... very busy seems to be the answer.
Congrats as usual for.all your breeding and pairing attempts bro. One of these days I will be restarting my massive collection and I know one of my first contacts will be

---------- Post added 11-03-2013 at 07:21 PM ----------

Psalmopoeus irminia female #1 sac!

 

[Poxicator]

...Avicularia may be a more daunting task, but I'm sure some brave soul will volunteer to wade thru the descriptions and get it sorted out.

A preview of this was made available in 2011, although it was released in Spanish

Bertani, Rogério. 2012. Revision, cladistic analysis and biogeography of Typhochlaena C. L. Koch, 1850, Pachistopelma Pocock, 1901 and Iridopelma Pocock, 1901 (Araneae, Theraphosidae, Aviculariinae). ZooKeys 230: 1–94

Resurrected genus:
Typhochlaena

New Species:
Typhochlaena amma
Typhochlaena costae
Typhochlaena curumim
Typhochlaena paschoali
Pachistopelma bromelicola
Iridopelma katiae
Iridopelma marcoi
Iridopelma oliveirai
Iridopelma vanini

New Synonymies:
Avicularia pulchra & Avicularia recifiensis=Pachistopelma
rufonigrum
Avicularia palmicola=Iridopelma hirsutum

New Transfers:
Pachistopelma concolor=Tapinauchenius concolor

 

[catfishrod69]

Uh oh a new Tappie

New Transfers:
Pachistopelma concolor=Tapinauchenius concolor