Life after death?

[AphonopelmaTX]

Here is a link I found that may be useful between the A. geniculata and A. brocklehursti http://www.theraphosidae.cz/imagestar/acagen1.htm

Very useful indeed! It supports the research by Paula, et. al (2014) just fine. On the website, the picture of the "A. brocklehursti" papal bulb showing the absence of the prolateral accessory keel between the prolateral superior and prolateral inferior keels has been shown by Paula, et. al. (2014) to be a variation of the papal bulb of A. geniculata. Compare the pictures to the paper (page 66, figure 13) and it matches up quite well. It doesn't, however, match up at all to the illustration of the A. theraphosoides papal bulb.

The annotation by Richard Gallon at the bottom of the web page states he compared the hobby A. geniculata to Koch's type specimen of the same species and it matched up. This means the pet trade A. geniculata he examined was the real A. geniculata. It then goes on to say "Whether captive brocklehursti are conspecific with real brocklehursti we can't be 100% sure, but in the absence any evidence to the contrary (and given that they are phenotypically identical to dry material in the BM - presumable ID'ed by Cambridge himself), I see no reason to doubt it at the moment." Well, Cambridge's holotype of A. brocklehursti was examined by Paula, et. al. when conducting the study and found it to be synonymous with A. theraphosoides. Given Paula, et. al. (2014) we now have that evidence ten years after Gallon's statements were made to the contrary and can now determine that captive brocklehursti is conspecific with A. geniculata; not A. theraphosoides!

---------- Post added 09-15-2015 at 08:13 PM ----------

How about the two mature males "keel" pedipalps bulbs?

This was posted when I was writing my last reply. It also applies to these photos from Richard Gallon. Both pictures of the palpal bulbs clearly match to the pictures from Paula, et. al. (2014) showing the variation of the A. geniculata palpal bulb morphology- one with the accessory keel and one without.

A lot of us have been told that spermathecae is not valid to ID.

It depends on what taxon you are referring to. Sometimes the spermatheca is a generic character, sometimes it is a specific character, and in the case of the genus Haplopelma, it is used to group closely related species in the genus. The spermathecae of the Haplopelma spp. "minax group" has a different shape than the Haplopelma spp. "schmidti" group.

 

[Exoskeleton Invertebrates]

Very useful indeed! It supports the research by Paula, et. al (2014) just fine. On the website, the picture of the "A. brocklehursti" papal bulb showing the absence of the prolateral accessory keel between the prolateral superior and prolateral inferior keels has been shown by Paula, et. al. (2014) to be a variation of the papal bulb of A. geniculata. Compare the pictures to the paper (page 66, figure 13) and it matches up quite well. It doesn't, however, match up at all to the illustration of the A. theraphosoides papal bulb.

The annotation by Richard Gallon at the bottom of the web page states he compared the hobby A. geniculata to Koch's type specimen of the same species and it matched up. This means the pet trade A. geniculata he examined was the real A. geniculata. It then goes on to say "Whether captive brocklehursti are conspecific with real brocklehursti we can't be 100% sure, but in the absence any evidence to the contrary (and given that they are phenotypically identical to dry material in the BM - presumable ID'ed by Cambridge himself), I see no reason to doubt it at the moment." Well, Cambridge's holotype of A. brocklehursti was examined by Paula, et. al. when conducting the study and found it to be synonymous with A. theraphosoides. Given Paula, et. al. (2014) we now have that evidence ten years after Gallon's statements were made to the contrary and can now determine that captive brocklehursti is conspecific with A. geniculata; not A. theraphosoides!

---------- Post added 09-15-2015 at 08:13 PM ----------



This was posted when I was writing my last reply. It also applies to these photos from Richard Gallon. Both pictures of the palpal bulbs clearly match to the pictures from Paula, et. al. (2014) showing the variation of the A. geniculata palpal bulb morphology- one with the accessory keel and one without.


It depends on what taxon you are referring to. Sometimes the spermatheca is a generic character, sometimes it is a specific character, and in the case of the genus Haplopelma, it is used to group closely related species in the genus. The spermathecae of the Haplopelma spp. "minax group" has a different shape than the Haplopelma spp. "schmidti" group.

I'm glad that you agree 100% from my main point all along Tfishers spiders should have never tried to be crossbred and playing mad scientist with infertile eggs is asinine.

As you stated we should keep the two seperate.

 

[Tfisher]

my species is NOT Brocklehursti.

and your means of identifying arachnids are asinine.

 

[AphonopelmaTX]

I'm glad that you agree 100% from my main point all along Tfishers spiders should have never tried to be crossbred and playing mad scientist with infertile eggs is asinine.

As you stated we should keep the two seperate.

Lets be careful about how you phrase your statements. I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with any of Tfishers actions.

 

[Exoskeleton Invertebrates]

my species is NOT Brocklehursti.

and your means of identifying arachnids are asinine.

Okay boss! You win! Feel better.......

---------- Post added 09-15-2015 at 07:33 PM ----------

Lets be careful about how you phrase your statements. I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with any of Tfishers actions.

But you are agreeing of keeping the two separated. Which has been my point for many, many months.

 

[Tfisher]

Okay boss! You win! Feel better.......

somewhat. An apology would be more appreciated.

To be honest my intentions were never to point a finger and declare a winner.. Your own actions turned it into that.

 

[Exoskeleton Invertebrates]

somewhat. An apology would be more appreciated.

No because your female was the formerly known brocklehursti. I will still as many others call this species brocklehursti so it can be kept seperately from geniculata. Or I can call it Acanthoscurria sp. "Brocklehursti" regardless what the name is, it was called brocklehursti which I have known about it when Michael Jacobi posted.

It does not change the fact that you tried two different species together. There is no shame in facing the truth. You're problem is you are so certain that your female was genic. Accept that it wasn't.

I've made mistakes in the past and I welcome and thanked them for the corrections that needed to be made. Look what happen to my thread of my B. baumgarteni, in a lot of ways I'm glad I posted that thread even though I did not like the outcome. I know if it wasn't for me wouldn't have as much info. of the hybrids baumgarteni/boehmei. I was corrected by a person that annoyed the hell out me but it was good to know the truth about the hybrids between those two species.

 

[Tfisher]

Im happy that you can accept that you made mistakes.. Maybe you wont feel as bad when you find out shes genic.

 

[Exoskeleton Invertebrates]

Thomas, I be more than happy to post photo of your female brock. I'll I need is for you to say go ahead and we can start a poll. I have three photos of your female that is visible. Let me know.

 

[Tfisher]

Bombs away Jose. Bombs away. I have the molt right here so lmk if you want me to post pics of the spermatheca

 

[cold blood]

Ive seen a avic and g rosea pair up and they are DEFF different species. Sorry..

Whaaaa? Care to expand on that? Who would do such a thing? And why? I can't make any sense of this:?

 

[Tfisher]

[YOUTUBE]riiyBsOiKJw[/YOUTUBE]

IDk but its here::

 

[cold blood]

Wow, that's messed up.

I thought you witnessed it personally...you just saw it on youtube.

 

[Tfisher]

Yup. If i seen it in person i'd drop kick someone.

Maybe a flying knee just for good measures.

I GOT YOUR BACK ARACHNO HOBBY!

 

[Exoskeleton Invertebrates]

No problem! In regards of the spermathecae so far from both species that has been posted online or on the boards have been identical. Maybe that's something you did not know. But I be more than happy to post spermathecae of my brocklehursti as well. No problem. Let me finish posting all the photos. The first three photos are of your female.

Here is the male that now you are saying that you paired with your female.

---------- Post added 09-15-2015 at 08:55 PM ----------

My old female.

My A. brocklehursti spermathecae photo.

 

[Tfisher]

great pictures Jose. Thank you.

Do you have any current pictures of her??

Because if your going to start classifying species by their looks then you would have to look at them at every stage of their molts. Im assuming this is why sheer looks of a species are not used to discribe tarantulas.

 

[Exoskeleton Invertebrates]

great pictures Jose. Thank you.

Do you have any current pictures of her??

Because if your going to start classifying species by their looks then you would have to look at them at every stage of their molts. Im assuming this is why sheer looks of a species are not used to discribe tarantulas.

Keep living in denial. Here is a photo of the message that you stated she rejected the male. I specifically asked you if she paired on the first attempt you said yes.

Keep on living in denial!!!!!

 

[Tfisher]

At that point of time it may have been rejecting him but it wasnt the first time he was rejected.

I'D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU TOOK MY PERSONAL INFO OUT OF THAT!

and it says might Jose.

Keyword might. and using the rejection of pairing as a way to identify a species isnt used either.

SOMETIMES FEMALES JUST DENY THEM!

 

[Exoskeleton Invertebrates]

At that point of time it may have been rejecting him but it wasnt the first time he was rejected.

I'D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU TOOK MY PERSONAL INFO OUT OF THAT!

Showing the facts!

---------- Post added 09-15-2015 at 09:15 PM ----------

But I'll take it off since you asked nicely.

 

[Tfisher]

Thank you but im not denying I spoke with him.. However that doesnt prove that my female is brock.