Does Size Matter?

[Chilobrach]

Hi I'm just looking into size and thought I'd ask people's views on it, when would you consider a spiderling is classified as a juvenile and a juvenile to sub-adult? Would we refer to size, molts, genus, species, colouration?

 

[Mike Withrow]

Personally I give anything over two inches a juvenile class excluding dawrfs smallest I keep are a few trapdoor.
To me sub adult is same as juvenile. Most spider's I have unless you sex the molt I have no clue until they have a final molt.

 

[arthurliuyz]

The terms "sling" "juvie/juvenile" & how big should your t be to be called that is subjective, so unless they are mature the terms don't really mean anything. Before they are adults/mature, a more accurate way to express how big your spider is is by DLS.

 

[Chilobrach]

The terms "sling" "juvie/juvenile" & how big should your t be to be called that is subjective, so unless they are mature the terms don't really mean anything. Before they are adults/mature, a more accurate way to express how big your spider is is by DLS.

Thanks, It was just something I see alot of and have considered it some thought, all you seem to get is sling, grown on sling, juvie, juvenile etc when there's different growth rates to consider

 

[Finikan]

I reserve sub adult for males that have not yet reached ultimate molt. Other than that, large enough for me to sex molt I consider a juvenile.

 

[Mike Withrow]

Trying to understand your question and like most things in this field it's pretty broad when it comes to opinions.
You mentioned growth rate. To me that's something completely different when me saying I believe my spider is at whatever stage. I do not go with leg span to class any of my spider's. They are i1s and so forth until true slings and when body length hits two their juvenile. From there on I do my best to sex molts.
I mean seriously growth rate is certainly a thing. Like I've heard and read species like bracs vagen included grown slow.
Usually about a year is all it takes for most of what I have to mature. Esp my chilobrachys.
So much variation of opinions and like me who has virtually any experience outside of Asia old world spider's.

I reserve sub adult for males that have not yet reached ultimate molt. Other than that, large enough for me to sex molt I consider a juvenile.

This is actually a really good way to think about it. That makes more sense to me as a way to describe them than I've ever read.

Have no idea what happened to my post. New phone because old one camera sucked and yeah. Spider's and books are my thing so I suck at certain technology.

 

[Finikan]

Have no idea what happened to my post. New phone because old one camera sucked and yeah. Spider's and books are my thing so I suck at certain technology.

I have a new phone as well. Getting used to it... i miss my macro lens feature.

Yeah, life stage doesnt have to be complicated. DLS is more reliable, but it can turn into a guessing game when you have to eyeball a specific size. Thats when sling/juv descriptions come in handy. I usually use both terms when i am selling.

 

[Stylopidae]

I say that slings don't have any coloration. Juveniles have either just gotten adult coloration, or some (like GBBs) have their own juvenile coloration which appears after the sling stage. I personally consider subadults being 50% of the adult's size. IMO, the adult stage is reached after the female's spermethecae have sclerotized. The adult stage for males is maturity.

However, there's a lot of wiggle-room here. This is just how I divide them up.

 

[The Grym Reaper]

This is what I go by.

Sling - Under 1/3 of max size
Juvenile - 1/3 to 2/3 of max size
Subadult/adult - Over 2/3 of max size (The term "subadult" is basically reserved for males that are around adult size but have yet to have their maturing moult)

 

[Ungoliant]

Hi I'm just looking into size and thought I'd ask people's views on it, when would you consider a spiderling is classified as a juvenile and a juvenile to sub-adult? Would we refer to size, molts, genus, species, colouration?

Sometimes I just skip "sub-adult" and call any immature tarantula that has adult coloring a juvenile, but this is a basic scheme I use:

• egg with legs (EWL): the stage immediately after eggs
• 1st instar (1i/L1) sling: After EWLs molt, they are 1st instar. Some hobbyists refer to 1st instar slings are as "nymphs," although this term is more commonly used for immature insects. (At this stage, they look like tiny tarantulas but will generally not feed.)
• 2nd instar (2i/L2) sling: After 1st instar slings molt, they are 2nd instar. At this stage, they normally begin to feed, although they may not yet take live prey. (This is the earliest instar when it is considered acceptable to sell a tarantula.)
• sling: any baby tarantula (1st instar onward) that does not yet have adult coloring (usually smaller than 2" for non-dwarf species); most people don't track specific instars after 2i, because there is no practical reason to do so
• juvenile: a sexually immature tarantula that has adult coloring but is less than 50% grown.
• sub-adult: a sexually immature tarantula that is about 50-75% grown.
• adult/mature: a sexually mature specimen, even if it has not yet achieved maximum size (females often mature long before they max out)

 

[Chilobrach]

Sometimes I just skip "sub-adult" and call any immature tarantula that has adult coloring a juvenile, but this is a basic scheme I use:

• egg with legs (EWL): the stage immediately after eggs
• 1st instar (1i/L1) sling: After EWLs molt, they are 1st instar. Some hobbyists refer to 1st instar slings are as "nymphs," although this term is more commonly used for immature insects. (At this stage, they look like tiny tarantulas but will generally not feed.)
• 2nd instar (2i/L2) sling: After 1st instar slings molt, they are 2nd instar. At this stage, they normally begin to feed, although they may not yet take live prey. (This is the earliest instar when it is considered acceptable to sell a tarantula.)
• sling: any baby tarantula (1st instar onward) that does not yet have adult coloring (usually smaller than 2" for non-dwarf species); most people don't track specific instars after 2i, because there is no practical reason to do so
• juvenile: a sexually immature tarantula that has adult coloring but is less than 50% grown.
• sub-adult: a sexually immature tarantula that is about 50-75% grown.
• adult/mature: a sexually mature specimen, even if it has not yet achieved maximum size (females often mature long before they max out)

Thanks! This is the best information I've come across

 

[Mike Withrow]

Sometimes I just skip "sub-adult" and call any immature tarantula that has adult coloring a juvenile, but this is a basic scheme I use:

• egg with legs (EWL): the stage immediately after eggs
• 1st instar (1i/L1) sling: After EWLs molt, they are 1st instar. Some hobbyists refer to 1st instar slings are as "nymphs," although this term is more commonly used for immature insects. (At this stage, they look like tiny tarantulas but will generally not feed.)
• 2nd instar (2i/L2) sling: After 1st instar slings molt, they are 2nd instar. At this stage, they normally begin to feed, although they may not yet take live prey. (This is the earliest instar when it is considered acceptable to sell a tarantula.)
• sling: any baby tarantula (1st instar onward) that does not yet have adult coloring (usually smaller than 2" for non-dwarf species); most people don't track specific instars after 2i, because there is no practical reason to do so
• juvenile: a sexually immature tarantula that has adult coloring but is less than 50% grown.
• sub-adult: a sexually immature tarantula that is about 50-75% grown.
• adult/mature: a sexually mature specimen, even if it has not yet achieved maximum size (females often mature long before they max out)

I actually think @Finikan was the best way to approach this . Makes more sense to me than anything else I've read in a decade.

 

[Mike Withrow]

I hate this stupid phone

 

[Finikan]

I actually think @Finikan was the best way to approach this . Makes more sense to me than anything else I've read in a decade.

Thank you! @Ungoliant was quite a bit more detailed. while i still agree with his approach completely, i tried to simplify things a bit in my response.