New Species - Hmmm is it really? Guess what WHO KNOWS - Controversial Thread enter at your own risk

[KenTheBugGuy]

Ok I have been seeing this stuff more and more. Its really getting to me and I am sure I am not the only one.

First I want to point out that just because someone calls something SP. "name" that does not in anyway mean its a new species.....that is myself included. Now there are times that they probably are a new species but all the SP. means is that the person selling it is not sure of species. That does not mean its undescribed, new or even anything special. I would also like to point out that just because someone calls something sp. "name" and someone else calls it sp. "name" does not always mean you are getting the same species cause the "name" is sometimes just a place collected or some pretty name made up to sell tarantulas.

I have seen some things sold and resold as something entirely different. I have seen people remove what is most likely the species name and add sp and some sp "name" to things. Know what you are buying . Look at pictures and compare to other pictures. Just cause its an SP. "Name" does not mean its worth more and you might just be buying what someone else has a species name on for cheaper.

We all mislable things at one time or another and sometimes we just can't be sure so it gets an SP. but I have seen some exploitation out there of certain species....I pointed it out in one thread about Apophysis....some people sold blondi(or maybe an sp. species ) as apophysis just cause they had blond feet even though it was pointed out that the parents did not match that of apophysis. There are a lot more examples out there people just have to look for themselves though and think about it.

I would also like to point out that you can't truely ID tarantulas because of thier color, shape, location or (the best one I saw recently) because its hairs make me itch.....

Now I know we all try to use a combination of these at times to ID which means that not everything is absolute 100%...but that is something all dealers and people in the hobby have to deal with. True taxonomy is not to looking at a tarantula and say it must be "name". Thats part of the reason some of our species in the hobby are such a mess.

 

[gromgrom]

not to mention alot of the SP.'s I see are around 60-100$+

... so yeah, playing on the SP to make more money.

 

[Jilly1337]

I think most people on here would agree with you. Just because something is of an unknown species doesn't mean it's never been described before. We've all seen an exploitation here or there where some funky named species fetches a high price. Everyone wants to have something new and rare, myself included, but it leaves us oped to manipulation, whether intentional or incidental.

 

[Kirk]

Much of what you say, Ken, regarding tendencies to rely on color, shape, etc., rather than the actual systematic/taxonomic characters that formally determine species membership, is what stirs much of the hyperbole in the "Do I have a hybrid?" threads.

 

[Philth]

Not sure how this could be controversial, seems pretty dead on to me.

Later, Tom

 

[zonbonzovi]

Lack of understanding of taxonomic features, lack of access to keys & unwillingness to share the hows & whys of taxonomy only deepens the sh...uh, mystery. I fear this is why there is so much speculation/conjecture/question marks. Well...the infinite pages of mindless bickering don't really help either...but back to taxonomy: at the very least it would be helpful if a sticky could be made on where to find some of these keys. Often, anybody with a library card/interlibrary loan access could make a contribution or at least get some idea of what is staring back at them from the vivarium.

If this already exists on AB, I apologize and could somebody point me in the right direction.

 

[KenTheBugGuy]

hybridize

Much of what you say, Ken, regarding tendencies to rely on color, shape, etc., rather than the actual systematic/taxonomic characters that formally determine species membership, is what stirs much of the hyperbole in the "Do I have a hybrid?" threads.

I agree that hybrids probably do happen here and there. I think its impossible to lable everythign correctly too. I know every dealer includeing myself at some point has sold something wrong. I think its just the nature of the beast. We do our best......what I am referring to mostly is intentional changing for hopes of a better species than what you have.

Grasping at straws....

Oh and I do lable many things by some of the characteristics I said is not taxonomy all of us do on many species....what gets me is when someone takes something that is almost positively that species then changes it to an SP because hey maybe its not cause of this one little reason. Now my tarantula is worth 2 times as much....

 

[presurcukr]

Not sure how this could be controversial, seems pretty dead on to me.

Later, Tom

Yes ! Ken I think you make a good point.

 

[AzJohn]

The real problem occurs when we are dealing with very similar species. Look at all the aphonopelma SP "what ever". I have two eggsacks of real CB A. schmidti. At least I think that's what they are based on range and local expert opinion. I'm 90% certain, but that 10% chance of mistake could really mess up the genus as far as future breeding. It doesn't help that to the casual observer they look like chalcodes. When I try and move the babies what do I call them? I'll probably use Aphonopelma sp "locality". I'll make some attempt at getting them figured out fist, and would be willing to send one off to get IDed. But if I can't find some one to ID it for me what should I do?

As far as people changing the name and reselling. That can't be good for the hobby. At least with location info being used as the identifier we shouldn't see to many mistakes in breeding attemepts.


John

 

[spiderfield]

I agree with you Ken on the entertainment factor of urticating itch-factor as a dependable means of identification, albeit a mis-guided one. Macroscopic observations though, as you and Kirk stated, can sometimes be misleading. As you put it, we "grasp at straws" and sometimes see what we want. I think we could all do a little more in terms of our own research in determining what makes species 'A' actually what it is purported to be rather than making assumptions. If anything, it'll reinforce one's knowledge of what the defining characteristics of a certain species should be.

Great topic!

 

[KenTheBugGuy]

yah

The real problem occurs when we are dealing with very similar species. Look at all the aphonopelma SP "what ever". I have two eggsacks of real CB A. schmidti. At least I think that's what they are based on range and local expert opinion. I'm 90% certain, but that 10% chance of mistake could really mess up the genus as far as future breeding. It doesn't help that to the casual observer they look like chalcodes. When I try and move the babies what do I call them? I'll probably use Aphonopelma sp "locality". I'll make some attempt at getting them figured out fist, and would be willing to send one off to get IDed. But if I can't find some one to ID it for me what should I do?

As far as people changing the name and reselling. That can't be good for the hobby. At least with location info being used as the identifier we shouldn't see to many mistakes in breeding attemepts.


John

And here is the contreversal part I mentioned.....I believe that the new river, flagstaff and chalcodes are all the same tarantula just labled that way to have more tarantulas....have I changed it no, but I have thought about makeing them all chalcodes on my list. I do mention to people that try and order more than one of these species that they are probably ordering the same tarantula in my opinion.

 

[AzJohn]

And here is the contreversal part I mentioned.....I believe that the new river, flagstaff and chalcodes are all the same tarantula just labled that way to have more tarantulas....have I changed it no, but I have thought about makeing them all chalcodes on my list. I do mention to people that try and order more than one of these species that they are probably ordering the same tarantula in my opinion.

Getting a good ID on a navtive Aphonoplema is hard. I heard rummor of some research being done on all of the species in Arizona, I wish they try and hurry up. I think a lot of the "new" aphonoplemas will end up chalcodes or one of the established species. If you're not certain about giving them the most likely species name I can't see how you'd do it. The ones I bred this year were found less than 15 from the place were the original A schmidti was found by the people who frist named the species. I'm still not 100% certain, however. So Aphonopelma schmidti "location"?? I don't know. If the people who end up with them change the name it wont matter what I call them.

I've heard some crazy things about Az aphonopelmas. I wont go into all of it here. It does make me laugh how they end up with scientific sounding names. A "paysoni", A "chocisei".

I hope things get cleared up soon. All this confusion isn't good for people who want to breed these species.

John

 

[AbraCadaver]

Well, this is a tricky subject, but you make som very good points.

The biggest problem we have here in Norway, is that alot of slings of the same genus look alot alike, and is sold at a much higher/lower price than usual, because T keeprs and breeders don't know any better, or are trying to earn a nifty buck on some mislabeled T's.. It's so sad really..

 

[KenTheBugGuy]

I heard rummor of some research being done on all of the species in Arizona, I wish they try and hurry up.

As do I. Then it would confirm my suspicions I had about 50 of each species and well if they did not have thier "name" on them I would never have been able to tell them apart really. Some stood out a little more but I am sure that was just some local coloration and about it really. Now I could be wrong so can't wait to see the real taxonomy being done finished......

 

[KenTheBugGuy]

oh

and I would like to add to that post that I would be less suprised to see that there are more than one species but that they cross over in territory and where they were collected has little to do with it .....as most people know "New River" and "Flagstaff" are just places collected not too far from eachother in Arizona.

 

[AbraxasComplex]

Thanks for the stab at me. I'm sorry, but if one type has different urticating hairs than another extremely similar species it's the start of a qualitative characteristic that can help differentiate between a proposed species and a current one. Actually read my thread on the chicken spider.

From a chat transcript with Rick West and Martin Nicholas on the BTS site:

Martin Nicholas: The truth is that we simply don't know what this, we do know that is not anitious as the rear leg is too fat... and interestingly are not really urticaceous.

http://www.thebts.co.uk/chat_martin_nicholas.htm

Edit: To clarify I never defined the chicken spider as a specific species. Just that it was not P.antinous. Hence the Pamphobeteus sp. chicken spider (arana polito). The whole thread was to help differentiate between the two. Macro photos coming soon of both P.antinous and P. sp. chicken spider.

If your mention of it "makes me itch" was not geared towards me I apologize.

 

[KenTheBugGuy]

Thanks for the stab at me. I'm sorry, but if one type has different urticating hairs than another extremely similar species it's the start of a qualitative characteristic that can help differentiate between a proposed species and a current one. Actually read my thread on the chicken spider.

From a chat transcript with Rick West and Martin Nicholas on the BTS site:



http://www.thebts.co.uk/chat_martin_nicholas.htm

Edit: To clarify I never defined the chicken spider as a specific species. Just that it was not P.antinous. Hence the Pamphobeteus sp. chicken spider (arana polito). The whole thread was to help differentiate between the two. Macro photos coming soon of both P.antinous and P. sp. chicken spider.

If your mention of it "makes me itch" was not geared towards me I apologize.

I just found that funny no offence was really ment and this thread was not aimed at you I probably should not have said that but just found it funny. I was gearing this thread toward a more general problem. I do apologize though I do not know you and hope I have not offended you too badly

 

[KenTheBugGuy]

also

I just found that funny no offence was really ment and this thread was not aimed at you I probably should not have said that but just found it funny. I was gearing this thread toward a more general problem. I do apologize though I do not know you and hope I have not offended you too badly

The reason i mentioned that though is I recently saw an almost positive antonious sold as a "chicken spider" with little regard to if it really was one and little evidence also. Once again I apologize if that was offensive and like I said this is not geared at you at all or any one individual out there really.

 

[AbraxasComplex]

No worries. It was just that I own both species and wanted to point out the fact that the P.antinous made me break into hives and have my hands feel like they were on fire for nearly a week straight vs nothing from the chicken spiders.

So if anyone wants to purchase a Pamphobeteus sp. chicken spider off someone call me up first, I'll stop by and rub my hands all over the container and the tarantula. Sure it won't be a 100% proof of species, but we'll know it's not the chicken spider if run to the bathroom screaming.

 

[KenTheBugGuy]

Lol

No worries. It was just that I own both species and wanted to point out the fact that the P.antinous made me break into hives and have my hands feel like they were on fire for nearly a week straight vs nothing from the chicken spiders.

So if anyone wants to purchase a Pamphobeteus sp. chicken spider off someone call me up first, I'll stop by and rub my hands all over the container and the tarantula. Sure it won't be a 100% proof of species, but we'll know it's not the chicken spider if run to the bathroom screaming.

Mind if I test my blondi on you too?