Egg sac help

poppaJT

Arachnopeon
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
47
Hi everyone, my G. rosea layed an egg sac... I was just wondering what do I do when the babies come out?? I need help please!!:confused::confused::confused::confused:
 

JC

Arachnolort
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
1,423
Three questions:

1. Where did you purchase her and how big was she?
2. Did you mate her?
3. Has she molted in your care prior to laying the sack?
 

poppaJT

Arachnopeon
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
47
She's about 3.75, 4 inches maybe, I haven't mated her, and she hasn't molted, but I was looking in her hideout, and found kind of a round, white sort of thing, and her abdomen has shrunk! I just want to know if what to do with the babies when they hatch out of the sac?
 

JC

Arachnolort
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
1,423
You can leave the sack with mom to hatch or incubate them yourself by taking them from mom at 30 days. Robc has a good tutorial on egg incubation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri-m9ZMV-ZU&feature=channel

If you manage to get third instars, you will want to seperate them each into their own individual vials and start feeding them.


Edited to add information.
 

poppaJT

Arachnopeon
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
47
Hey I was wondering, is it normal for the mom to leave the sac? Because she got out and walked around her cage then went back in... was she looking for food or something?
 

JC

Arachnolort
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
1,423
I forgot to mention that it may also be a dud/phantom sack.(No fertilized eggs inside.)

And if the sack is good, you don't want to disturb her at all or she might eat it. No flash lights, no moving around the enclosure, no tapping on the cage, just let her be. It will be sometime before they hatch so don't give her a reason to destroy it.
 

poppaJT

Arachnopeon
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
47
Yeah I thought... It was actually kind of wrinkly when I found it, it wasn't like the pictures I saw on here where they are like golf ball sized... Dang!!
 

JC

Arachnolort
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
1,423
Yeah I thought... It was actually kind of wrinkly when I found it, it wasn't like the pictures I saw on here where they are like golf ball sized... Dang!!
Yeah, sounds like a dud.
 

Hobo

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Staff member
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
2,206
If you manage to get third instars, you will want to seperate them each into their own individual vials and start feeding them.


Edited to add information.
That's assuming you count the post embryo stage as an instar. Most don't and simply call 'em eggs-with-legs. After that would be first instar, then second instar. At second instar, most species, including the OPs G. rosea, will start to feed and should be seperated then if you don't want any cannibalism.
 

JC

Arachnolort
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
1,423
At second instar, most species, including the OPs G. rosea, will start to feed...
Do you have any evidence of this? According to what I've read (TKS 3rd Ed pg. 277), this species are one of the exceptions to the second-instar rule.


Here are some G.rosea 2nd instars molting into 3rd instar, being kept together with no problems. Not suggesting the video substantiates my position, only that it is and can be done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7RUifkEguE
 

Hobo

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Staff member
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
2,206
Do you have any evidence of this? According to what I've read (TKS 3rd Ed pg. 277), this species are one of the exceptions to the second-instar rule.


Here are some G.rosea 2nd instars molting into 3rd instar, being kept together with no problems. Not suggesting the video substantiates my position, only that it is and can be done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7RUifkEguE
We are talking about the same instar.
Like I said in my previous post, Most don't count the post embryo (eggs with legs) as an instar for whatever reason and therefore the typical "feeding stage" is called second instar. I felt like it should be clarified in case the OP finds seemingly conflicting info.

In the TKG, I so believe that they label a pic of post embryos as 1st instar. With that in mind I don't think rosea reach the feeding stage an instar later like P. formosa, metallica, etc.

EDIT: I just got home and took out my copy... it seems you might be right... maybe! Though to me, it still looks like what's labeled as "first instars" may just be post embryos in premolt.... perhaps the TKG considers 1st instar and post embryo synonymous? This makes the most sense to me as that's the situation with the two naming conventions for slings. Here's a thread about it. I am unsure what to think as far as roseas reaching the "feeding stage" an instar later, as most of the breeding reports for G. rosea don't mention a molt from post embryo to a similar looking "eggs-with-legs" stage. They all go

Eggs with legs/post embryo ---> first instar ---> second instar.

Anyway, if anyone can confirm whether or not they reach the "feeding stage" an instar later like P. metallica et al., that'd be great. It'd help the OP out too, if his sac ends up being good!
 
Last edited:

robc

Arachnoemperor
Old Timer
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
3,831
You can leave the sack with mom to hatch or incubate them yourself by taking them from mom at 30 days. Robc has a good tutorial on egg incubation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri-m9ZMV-ZU&feature=channel

If you manage to get third instars, you will want to seperate them each into their own individual vials and start feeding them.


Edited to add information.
I am also making a updated incubator.
 

Stan Schultz

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
1,670
One and All -

I apologize for resurrecting a month old thread, but had we not been traveling at the time I probably would have responded in a more timely fashion.

... If you manage to get third instars, you will want to seperate them each into their own individual vials and start feeding them. ...
This is basically correct. Some people prefer to leave 2nd instar babies, especially of those species that produce huge numbers of very small babies (e.g., Lasiodora parahybana - Brazilian salmon tarantula [~2,000 per eggsac], Brachypelma smithi - Mexican redknee and B. emilia - Mexican redleg [~1,000 per eggsac]), in the incubator because the process of transferring them and of their resulting readjustment to a different environment at such an early age sometimes kills more babies than it saves. Others transfer 2nd instar babies, especially of those species that produce larger babies, to avoid any cannibalism whatsoever.

If you want to avoid rampant cannibalism you need to separate 3rd instar babies ASAP, or do so during the early part of the 2nd instar.

That's assuming you count the post embryo stage as an instar. Most don't and simply call 'em eggs-with-legs. After that would be first instar, then second instar. At second instar, most species, including the OPs G. rosea, will start to feed and should be seperated then if you don't want any cannibalism.
The exact course of events in spider development is often difficult for inexperienced arachnophiles to understand. I even had trouble with the details, and Dr. R. G. ("Spider Bob") Breene had to go through the entire process with me three times before I finally got it straight.

Here is how it works. I've numbered each stage in its turn.

First and foremost, an instar is defined as the stage in an arthropod's life after a molt. Hence, if there's no molt, there's no instar. And, an instar is numbered after its initiating molt.

Secondly, a molt (among arthropods at least) is defined as the casting off of an integumental layer produced by the individual animal itself.

TO BEGIN:

D) The female produces the eggs, each within its chorion, a thin membrane roughly analogous to an eggshell.

C) The female lays the eggs and encloses them in a silken construct, the eggsac.

B) The embryos begin development within the chorion.

A) When the embryos have reached the stage where they have both nearly functional appendages and an integument sufficient to support and protect them they cast off the chorion. Technically this act is called eclosion but most enthusiasts who know the system merely use the vernacular hatching. The problem is that most enthusiasts aren't familiar with the system and confuse eclosion/hatching with emergence from the eggsac. The two are not the same! Neither tarantulas nor any other spiders "hatch from the eggsac."

Casting off the chorion is not considered a form of molting because the chorion was produced by the mother tarantula during the creation of the egg, not by the developing embryo itself. You may complain that the difference is trivial and nit-picking, but if we aren't quite precise in our definition we can produce much confusion in the future, the precise numbering of instars and the exact developmental stage of a particular spider being a good case in point.

The resulting stage in the developing embryo's life is technically called a postembryo, but most enthusiasts have adopted the term eggs-with-legs. Note carefully that a postembryo is not in its "zeroeth," first, or any other numbered instar because there has not yet been a true molt. No molt: No instar!

How do you recognize a postembryo when you see one? The only sure way that I know of that works universally is to keep track of the shards of castoff membranes. If the developing baby has actually hatched you will see legs and other appendages, hence it's no longer an embryo, but rather in some later stage of development. If it hasn't yet shed a second layer, it's still a postembryo.

If you don't have this information, you can make a judgment based on the sophistication of the development of the appendages and the lack of any bristles. Postembryo spiders usually have only poorly developed appendages and no bristles. Postembryos are also largely immobile, barely being able to move their legs, much less make any progress in distance.

1) After further development and differentiation, the baby spider casts off another layer or membrane. Because this membrane was produced by the baby spider itself, not the mother, this is a true molt, and the first molt. And, the resulting spider is said to be in its 1st (first) instar.

First instar spiders almost always have appendages that, while still appearing "embryonic," are better developed than those of postembryos. First instar tarantulas can move their legs a little more and be able to change their orientation slightly by "snagging" their siblings, but are still largely incapable of organized walking. Cannibalism has been reported among some species of tarantulas in this stage, but it is unclear how pervasive this is among the 900+ species of tarantulas. And, 1st instar tarantulas (but perhaps not other kinds of spiders) almost always possess a few, well developed, pigmented bristles.

2) As development and differentiation proceeds, the baby spider will molt again, the second true molt, and enter the phase called 2nd instar. Keeping track of the number of times the individual has cast off some sort of membrane or skin is still the only way to know absolutely for sure the instar number, but 2nd instar tarantulas are usually capable of organized walking and possess large numbers of recognizable bristles. In many if not most tarantula species cannibalism is present during this stage. In many if not most species, the babies chew their way out of the eggsac at this stage. This process is called emergence as both a technical and a vernacular term. Emergence and eclosion (aka, hatching) are not the same. Emergence occurs many days to several weeks after eclosion.

3) After further development and differentiation the baby spiders molt yet again. This is the third true molt and it gives rise to the 3rd instar. Third instar babies look like little tarantulas with well developed appendages and bristles. They are quite active and are aggressively predacious. Thus, if they haven't already begun cannibalism it is usually rampant from this stage onward, and any that have not yet left the eggsac and dispersed are in grave danger of being eaten by their siblings.

Those that possess urticating bristles as adults usually possess a small patch of them on the top, rear of their opisthosomas at this stage.

... Do you have any evidence of this? According to what I've read (TKS 3rd Ed pg. 277), this species are one of the exceptions to the second-instar rule. ...
This is incorrect. On that and related pages the only references to predation and cannibalism appear in the captions to the two photos on page 277. The top figure merely mentions fully formed chelicerae and fangs. And, the bottom figure mentions that 3rd instar G. rosea are predacious carnivores, but neither states whether G. rosea are cannibalistic or not, or at what stage if any they become so. We simply didn't have any data for any such statement.

We are talking about the same instar.
Like I said in my previous post, Most don't count the post embryo (eggs with legs) as an instar for whatever reason ...
The logic is covered above.

... and therefore the typical "feeding stage" is called second instar. I felt like it should be clarified in case the OP finds seemingly conflicting info. ...
You are confusing the 'typical "feeding stage",' which can be defined as the stage at which the babies become actively predacious carnivores, with a stage where occasional cannibalism by precocious individuals occurs. We need to be precise here to avoid a gross misunderstanding or confusion.

... In the TKG, I so believe that they label a pic of post embryos as 1st instar. ...
No. The photos are labeled correctly. Compare the appendage development and the lack or presence of bristles. Remember that the instar's number is determined by the number of molts (which is often not readily apparent) rather than by the appearance of the spider. We only use the spider's appearance as a guesstimate because we seldom know the exact number of times the spider has shed some sort of membrane or skin.

In this case, Tabbie Norton was meticulous in noting the stages as the babies passed from one to another. There is no mistake or confusion. (We need to thank her profusely for her contribution of these photos to the book. Without her and all the other photo contributors (http://people.ucalgary.ca/~schultz/photocontributors3.html) the Tarantula Keeper's Guide, 3rd Edition, wouldn't be anywhere near the book it is. Hats off to Tabbie and all the others!)

Remember too that the differences are somewhat subtle and not easily differentiated by the uninitiated eye and the limits of the book printer's art. Here are higher resolution portions of the relevant images. (Click or right-click each thumbnail to get a larger version. Click the larger version to get an even larger one!)


Grammostola rosea - Postembryo


(Uploaded with ImageShack.us)


Grammostola rosea - 1st Instar


(Uploaded with ImageShack.us)


Grammostola rosea - 2nd Instar


(Uploaded with ImageShack.us)


Grammostola rosea - 3rd Instar


(Uploaded with ImageShack.us)

... With that in mind I don't think rosea reach the feeding stage an instar later like P. formosa, metallica, etc. ...
I would be most interested in seeing some sort of believable documentation (other than unsupported surmise) of what instar G. rosea, P. formosa, and P. metallica begin cannibalism. Mind you, I don't doubt you because the Poecilotheria, among others, are known to live in semi-social groups at nearly all stages from (reportedly) 3rd instar to adults, apparently due mostly to a suppressed tendency towards cannibalism. And, there is no reason to believe that this also wasn't true in the eggsac. But, I would like to incorporate that data in TKG4, and I need something just a little better than an off-handed allusion. Where did you get this data?

... EDIT: ... perhaps the TKG considers 1st instar and post embryo synonymous? ...
No, no, no! Absolutely not! See the discussion above.

... This makes the most sense to me as that's the situation with the two naming conventions for slings. Here's a thread about it. ...
The "naming convention" propounded in that thread is bogus, a mistaken adulteration of the one proposed by Downes, 1987 and detailed above. It is without any real merit, and if you start trying to use it around any professional arachnologist you're either going to be corrected "real soon now" or laughed out of the room.

... I am unsure what to think as far as roseas reaching the "feeding stage" an instar later, as most of the breeding reports for G. rosea don't mention a molt from post embryo to a similar looking "eggs-with-legs" stage. ...
This happens because these people don't understand the system and naming conventions, but are rather trying to reinvent the wheel imperfectly from flawed anecdotal references and a flawed understanding. Or, they simply haven't looked carefully enough at their developing babies.

This is even further muddied by the fact that not all baby G. rosea are going to be rabidly cannibalistic at some specific instar. In fact, it is probably rather rare in nature or else nearly all kinds of tarantulas would become extinct as the current generation dies out because not enough babies would survive to maintain the populations. I have a strong suspicion that the only reason we see any cannibalism in our incubators at all is that the eggs are no longer wrapped and therefore hidden in a labyrinth of folds of silk. What we see may actually be an artifact of captive breeding and almost unheard of in nature.

Finally, the terms "baby," "spiderling" (in all its variants), "juvenile," and "sub-adult" do not correlate closely with any instar or stage in a tarantula's development and differentiation except in the very most vague senses of meaning. Do not be led into trying to make any deep philosophical sense of it, or find any profound, formal, relationships. You have better things to waste your time on!

Now, go back and try to enjoy your little 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. instar, 8-legged darlings!
 
Last edited:

Stan Schultz

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
1,670
I need to add parenthetically that there is another system for naming the various stages in a spider's development and differentiation, largely used by the European community. However, I had enough trouble with the New World version and have not yet undertaken to understand the underlying philosophy and naming conventions of that system. So, I've largely ignored it here.

Any of you who want to explore it are encouraged to contact any of the more advanced European enthusiasts on their various forums and message boards, and ask for help.

Once you get it under your belt, you may tutor me! {D
 

Hobo

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Staff member
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
2,206
I would be most interested in seeing some sort of believable documentation (other than unsupported surmise) of what instar G. rosea, P. formosa, and P. metallica begin cannibalism. Mind you, I don't doubt you because the Poecilotheria, among others, are known to live in semi-social groups at nearly all stages from (reportedly) 3rd instar to adults, apparently due mostly to a suppressed tendency towards cannibalism. And, there is no reason to believe that this also wasn't true in the eggsac. But, I would like to incorporate that data in TKG4, and I need something just a little better than an off-handed allusion. Where did you get this data?
First off, thanks for clearing all that up. I think I've gotten most of it down now!

Second, I got that info about the P. metallica (which also mentions that they are "like P. formosa") from The Arachnoculture E-zine, when they featured an article on the sucessful breeding of P. metallica by Kelly Swift. Here's a link to it.

I'll quote the relavent part here, with the interesting/confusing bits in bold:
After approximately five to seven days I attempted feeding them 1/8 in [3.2 mm] crickets. All the spiderlings refused to eat. This was very odd to me. Within all of my experience I had never witnessed one hundred percent of a group of fully hardened 2nd instar spiderlings refusing food.

In a conversation with Frank Somma I explained that none would feed and Frank replied, "Oh, they're like P. formosa." Apparently, like Poecilotheria formosa, P. metallica spiderlings don't feed until they reach 3rd instar (one molt later than most tarantulas). This next molt came in record time and within a week they had all molted again! After a few days of hardening they finally began to feed.
 

Stan Schultz

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
1,670
... Second, I got that info about the P. metallica (which also mentions that they are "like P. formosa") from The Arachnoculture E-zine, when they featured an article on the sucessful breeding of P. metallica by Kelly Swift. Here's a link to it. ...
Great! I love data!

... I'll quote the relavent part here, with the interesting/confusing bits in bold:
From the way the article is written he got the instars correct. In most tarantulas, 2nd instars probably occasionally become cannibalistic, and they also emerge from the eggsac. At that point in their lives they are apparently able to feed and after leaving the eggsac are capable of predation.

And, the fact that some species of Poecilotheria delay this predation instinct for an instar is an interesting datum. It appears that at least these species of Poecilotheria may avoid cannibalism not because everybody is great buddies (semi-socialism or socialism), but because everybody is given a running start!

So, the next question is, "What mechanism is at work to prevent cannibalism as they grow to adulthood?"
 

spidersnstuff

Arachnopeon
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
29
I'm am by no meaning of the term an expert, but the spiders who exhibited traits of not eating eachother, and no agression towards eachother have a larger chance of living, so maybe its like natural selection.
 
Top