Scolopendra galapagoensis

[Elytra and Antenna]

It is pretty obvious that the end of the stick opposite of the fingers is considerably wider.

Take a ruler (or paper and pencil) to the blow up to check the relative width of the stick versus the fingertips. They measure the same width and the fingers are further back in the photo.

 

[Nich]

The distal end of the stick is what the man is holding, and is about the same diameter as his finger. The proximal end is noticably wider. You can tell by the angle of the shoots coming off the branch which end is proximal to the tree or shrub.

 

[Elytra and Antenna]

What you're seeing as a thickened stick is the other pede. Look closer, compensating for the other pede you can't even estimate that end of the stick is wider. It's not sitting on a stick, it's sitting on a pede on top of the stick. Also, it's pretty hard to deny that the end of the stick with the pede is closer to the camera.

 

[Nich]

What you're seeing as a thickened stick is the other pede. Look closer, compensating for the other pede you can't even estimate that end of the stick is wider. It's not sitting on a stick, it's sitting on a pede on top of the stick. Also, it's pretty hard to deny that the end of the stick with the pede is closer to the camera.

....the one its either eating or mating with.....looks to be the same sp. At least the same coloration.

Wow, Im losing faith in you. I really thought that it would be obvious when you blew the pic up and actually measured it out.....IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE BASE OF THE STICK IS MUCH WIDER THAN THE MANS FINGER!!!!!!!!!! The base being the end that was attached to the tree or shrub. Its also obvious that the pede is as wide as the base. Last post for me, case closed. I have my belief in the pic you have yours, have a great day.

 

[Elytra and Antenna]

IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE BASE OF THE STICK IS MUCH WIDER THAN THE MANS FINGER!!!!!!!!!! .

I blew it up and drew lines on the picture for you. You can't see them? :wall:

 

[Matt K]

I have to agree with E&A. After fooling around with alot of camera angles myself, I figure the large one to be 8-9 inches max, and the smaller one to be 5-6 inches. But I am no one in particular... though a 9 inch pede is pretty huge...

 

[Galapoheros]

I have my own opinion too, it's basically the same as E&A's and Matt's. I typed it up a few days ago but I decided not to post it, I've been doing that a lot lately. I don't think they are as big as they seem in the pic but awesome looking pedes regardless.

 

[KyuZo]

i didn't read everything in this thread, but does this mean that S. galapagoensis is not such a big centipede after all? the rumor i have read in the past said that it can get as big as 24"

and i said *rumor*

 

[Galapoheros]

It kind of went from "wow, who knows how big these things can get!" to referring to this specific pic and the size of the pedes in the pic ...and then finding out that the ones in the pic are prob not galapagoensis pedes anyway. So, same old same old ...just talking about how big they can possibly get which is never ending (no pun intended). It's like somebody said, ...maybe Steven, "I leave for a while, come back and see that nothing much has changed" ha.

 

[Elytra and Antenna]

i didn't read everything in this thread, but does this mean that S. galapagoensis is not such a big centipede after all?

If you check out this paper done by taxonomists there is a list of real specimens with real measurements. The biggest S.gigantea is 274.6mm (not quite 11 inches) the biggest S.galapagoensis is 200.5mm (not quite 8 inches).

 

[Galapoheros]

I also looked at that a while back and was surprised. According to that info, the biggest S. heros pede I've seen comes close to the biggest pede length listed there.

 

[Steven]

So, same old same old ...just talking about how big they can possibly get which is never ending (no pun intended). It's like somebody said, ...maybe Steven, "I leave for a while, come back and see that nothing much has changed" ha.

yep it was I

i almost have given up :wall:
just check out how many times i and others have given info on articles regarding size and other info on gigantea vs galapagoensis , just check how many times the article of R.Shelley has been called up in gigantea-discussions



without any result sometimes


PS: just as extra info:
as i remember correctly Attems described galapagoensis to be 17cm.
ow yeah, don't remember who asked, but some of the biggest pedes i've seen where actually
Scolopendra subspinipes dehaani

 

[jettubes]

Well you never know who knows whats out there for all we know there could be 20 ft centipedes hiding deep in caves feeding on large prey i dont know about 20 ft but yeah you know what i mean.