Is this a calisoga longitarsis? I found it last night in my garage. I live is San Francisco Bay Area.
Attachments
-
492.1 KB Views: 55
Looks like a Calisoga -- I can't be sure of the species, as there may be other species of Calisoga in California.Is this a calisoga longitarsis? I found it last night in my garage. I live is San Francisco Bay Area.
What makes you think it isn't Calisoga? Seems to be from my perspective: the macrosetae spines on the legs are pretty telling. There have been a lot of them found and posted to /r/spiders recently as well, so the males are definitely out in abundance.Tough to say, but I don't think it is a Calisoga sp. @Smokehound714 may be able help ID it further.
Thanks,
Arthroverts
I dunno, something is just throwing me, although it very well could be a Calisoga. I am by no means an expert, so if you are steeped in the ways of Calisoga I will defer to you . That's one of the reasons I always try to tag in others with my posts to get more eyes on the subject at hand.What makes you think it isn't Calisoga? Seems to be from my perspective: the macrosetae spines on the legs are pretty telling. There have been a lot of them found and posted to /r/spiders recently as well, so the males are definitely out in abundance.
Definitely not trying to call you out in any way or take the position that you're definitely incorrect, I was just curious if there was a specific feature that you noticed that was pointing you in another direction. You could be correct.I dunno, something is just throwing me, although it very well could be a Calisoga. I am by no means an expert, so if you are steeped in the ways of Calisoga I will defer to you . That's one of the reasons I always try to tag in others with my posts to get more eyes on the subject at hand
Agree with Calisoga sp.What makes you think it isn't Calisoga? Seems to be from my perspective: the macrosetae spines on the legs are pretty telling. There have been a lot of them found and posted to /r/spiders recently as well, so the males are definitely out in abundance.
If I'm wrong, I need to be called out on it (just like everyone else needs to be in my opinion). Otherwise false information can spread, and as we all know that can lead to the needless deaths of many a specimen (like what happens with so many Avics, unfortunately).Definitely not trying to call you out in any way or take the position that you're definitely incorrect, I was just curious if there was a specific feature that you noticed that was pointing you in another direction. You could be correct.
From my perspective it does seem consistent with other recent examples, but there's always wiggle room when making ID attempts from photos.
For the time being, there is only the one species of Calisoga in the USA, Calisoga longitarsus from central and northern California. The spider pictured here is definitely C. longitarsus as it is the only non-tarantula mygale that is large and hairy. For more info, see "Spiders of North America An Identification Manual 2nd Edition" by Ubick, et. al.Looks like a Calisoga -- I can't be sure of the species, as there may be other species of Calisoga in California.
Interesting. I was led astray by BugGuide, which has some finds classified only to the genus level, implying there are other options.For the time being, there is only the one species of Calisoga in the USA, Calisoga longitarsus from central and northern California. The spider pictured here is definitely C. longitarsus as it is the only non-tarantula mygale that is large and hairy. For more info, see "Spiders of North America An Identification Manual 2nd Edition" by Ubick, et. al.