Tarantula behavior

[phoenixxavierre]

And that is pure speculation. There are no scientific facts that proves so.

You can call it speculation if you like, I call it hypothesis or theory. Of course I can't promise that a particular tarantula will react a particular way. They are individual animals, and there are measurable and perhaps unmeasurable variables involved. And that is why it's my THEORY, my HYPOTHESIS. However, tarantulas CAN be conditioned. That IS a fact. I've already verified it for myself, through repeated observation of the reaction to various stimuli. Your problem is that you can't accept it because you haven't verified for YOUR self (or is it because very few people other than myself have verified such observable facts to your knowledge). So in essence, you're calling me a liar and trying to do it in a slick way. And that IS a speculation, obviously I can't make a promise of truthfulness to a statement that is reliant on input by yourself. You're also trying to disregard the method by claiming that my "speculation" is incorrect.

The process I'm explaining however is classical conditioning, just one form of behavioral study. There are others. And that is a process that's been in use for a long time and is well known.

 

[Fran]

You can call it speculation if you like, I call it hypothesis or theory. Of course I can't promise that a particular tarantula will react a particular way. They are individual animals, and there are measurable and perhaps unmeasurable variables involved. And that is why it's my THEORY, my HYPOTHESIS. However, tarantulas CAN be conditioned. That IS a fact. I've already verified it for myself, through repeated observation of the reaction to various stimuli. Your problem is that you can't accept it because you haven't verified for YOUR self (or is it because very few people other than myself have verified such observable facts to your knowledge). So in essence, you're calling me a liar and trying to do it in a slick way. And that IS a speculation, obviously I can't make a promise of truthfulness to a statement that is reliant on input by yourself. You're also trying to disregard the method by claiming that my "speculation" is incorrect.

The process I'm explaining however is classical conditioning, just one form of behavioral study. There are others. And that is a process that's been in use for a long time and is well known.

And when did I Say that I dont think tarantulas can be conditioned to a certain degree?
What you dont seem to understand is that what you call verification, does not mean anything in science.
You can say what you think it is , it doesnt make it an empirical fact.
And thats the ONLY thing im saying all long.

 

[phoenixxavierre]

Fran, you have had more than one person express personal observations regarding how a tarantula has exhibited responses to stimuli suggesting the ability to be conditioned, yet you claim there is no empirical evidence. In the field, empirical evidence IS observations, experiences OR experiments, objective of the one experiencing the observed reactions. So we have separate people pointing out separate yet similar experiences, which scientifically would suggest an empirical bent to the observations. Science doesn't have to be limited to a laboratory or a scientific paper.

 

[Fran]

Fran, you have had more than one person express personal observations regarding how a tarantula has exhibited responses to stimuli suggesting the ability to be conditioned, yet you claim there is no empirical evidence. In the field, empirical evidence IS observations, experiences OR experiments, objective of the one experiencing the observed reactions. So we have separate people pointing out separate yet similar experiences, which scientifically would suggest an empirical bent to the observations. Science doesn't have to be limited to a laboratory or a scientific paper.

But what I question is the source. For example, many people can claim that using their own observations, they are stating that ghosts exists. They can give you a million "personal reasons".

Now does that make it valuable? Not in the least. Not in science.

 

[phoenixxavierre]

And when did I Say that I dont think tarantulas can be conditioned to a certain degree?
What you dont seem to understand is that what you call verification, does not mean anything in science.
You can say what you think it is , it doesnt make it an empirical fact.
And thats the ONLY thing im saying all long.

You said so when you expressed your opinion that tarantulas possess no intelligence. To be conditioned requires an ability to learn.

Fran, do you know what an empirical fact IS?

How do you suppose that scientists figured out how intelligent rodents are, specifically prairie dogs? They observed them in the field. More than one individual observed them, studied their chirps, barks, whistles, etc., providing them with various stimuli in their "town" and recorded their reactions and the vocalizations they made. Now, granted, they're mammals, however, they are mammals that use 80 or more different vocalizations, and can identify a man with or without a gun, and can describe color in their vocalizations to their den mates.

Observations ARE empirical evidence. However, because the observations aren't recorded and put into a scientific paper, or perhaps because those observations are coming from me, and perhaps you don't care for me (even though you don't even know me), you are rejecting them. But you aren't rejecting them because they aren't "empirical".

---------- Post added at 02:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:34 PM ----------

But what I question is the source. For example, many people can claim that using their own observations, they are stating that ghosts exists. They can give you a million "personal reasons".

Now does that make it valuable? Not in the least. Not in science.

In this case, these observations have been made by others, not just me.

Were you even aware that scientists are studying the possibility of human creation by angels/aliens? Yes, scientists do study such things.

I was going to go into parapsychology there for a while, as I've had some rather unusual experiences in my life, but didn't. However, just because you have some idea of what science is and what science isn't, doesn't mean that's what it is or isn't.

Science is all about testable observations, and predictions, based on logic and ration, with the end goal being acquisition of knowledge. One can't acquire knowledge without sometimes going out on a limb.

 

[Draychen]

For example, Let's take an arboreal tarantula up in the trees, an Avic.
Now let's say this avic has built it's nest in between some broad leaves and the tree. Now lets say some wind causes her web to be torn every day/night.

What do you think it will do?

Stay there, rebuild it's home time and time again, wasting time and resources?

They'll rebuild in that exact spot for the 4th time in 5 years... Because they LOVE the view!

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

 

[Travis K]

Ugh these threads make the pressure in my head increase to the point that I think I should wrap it up in duct tape so it doesn't explode.:wall:

Personally when it comes to behavior and actions/reactions I think Ts are no smarter than a standard calculator. They are essentially pre-programmed organisms.

The only thing I have ever seen or heard of that would suggest they have even a small amount of cognitive ability the video clip below and even this can probably be explained without any functioning cognitive behavior going on.

[YOUTUBE]QYwSt2uxmCs[/YOUTUBE]

I can even give a logical hypothesis as to why this 'organic calculator' behaved in the manor, but if you want to anthropomorphize these creature go right ahead.

and Fran/Joe, boys can't you just get along?

Cheers,

 

[Draychen]

As stated in a previous thread (and being called an idiot numerous times for it) My MF P. regalis would consistantly open the right side door of her cage. I had to put a pencil in the track to keep her from doing this. I gave her to a friend. After 1 night, he gave my cage back to my roomate, saying he'd find something else to house her in. She was found wandering the outside of her cage that morning. Granted, the right sliding glass door opens with little resistance, where the left sliding door 'sets' into place firmly.

Since her departure, I have housed a small community of A. metallica inside of said cage with absolutely no problems.

 

[Rue]

Is this actually true?
You say its environment, but really its ours, isnt it?
Also, if it is true, wouldnt it take years and years of death for a specific reason, for an animal to start evolving?
I mean, that would mean that technically a goldfish can condition itself to live in a tortoise set up. Fish have done this, such as the Aussie and African Lungfish, but this has taken hundreds of years, if not more.

Yes it's true. It doesn't necessarily take years for a species to evolve...we breed animals...that's fast-paced evolution. How about insects developing resistance to pesticides? That's very fast evolution as well...

If an animal (as in a population thereof) doesn't evolve quickly enough to survive changing environmental pressure it will die.

Our environment? If we take an animal out of an environment it's adapted to for millenia...and try to mimic that environment (successfully in many cases) who's environment is it? Yet look how many animals can survive...even unhappily...in substandard set-ups...lots of plasticity...

Evolving to a changing environment AND changing morphology along the way? Well yes...that would take a little longer...

 

[Slimdean]

linky

I had a topic similar to this in my psychology class a couple weeks back. It was more so towards evolution. We were given a couple articles and websites, but i liked this one the best. It's a good read for anyone interested in such thing.

Principle 2. Our neural circuits were designed by natural selection to solve problems that our ancestors faced during our species' evolutionary history.

 

[Travis K]

I had a topic similar to this in my psychology class a couple weeks back. It was more so towards evolution. We were given a couple articles and websites, but i liked this one the best. It's a good read for anyone interested in such thing.

Principle 2. Our neural circuits were designed by natural selection to solve problems that our ancestors faced during our species' evolutionary history.

How does your link apply to Tarantulas?:?

 

[Suidakkra]

How does your link apply to Tarantulas?:?

Although it was an interesting read, I fail to see how the understanding the evolutionary development of our species being anyway related to the evolution of arachnids.

So I agree as well, it's like comparing apples to asparagus.

 

[Travis K]

So I agree as well, it's like comparing apples to asparagus.

more like apples to mosquitoes...

 

[phoenixxavierre]

Ugh these threads make the pressure in my head increase to the point that I think I should wrap it up in duct tape so it doesn't explode.:wall:

Personally when it comes to behavior and actions/reactions I think Ts are no smarter than a standard calculator. They are essentially pre-programmed organisms.

The only thing I have ever seen or heard of that would suggest they have even a small amount of cognitive ability the video clip below and even this can probably be explained without any functioning cognitive behavior going on.

[YOUTUBE]QYwSt2uxmCs[/YOUTUBE]

I can even give a logical hypothesis as to why this 'organic calculator' behaved in the manor, but if you want to anthropomorphize these creature go right ahead.

and Fran/Joe, boys can't you just get along?

Cheers,

That was a great video! Thanks! It reminds me of the L. parahybana "Sadie" that I was talking about, who took a stroll through the apartment and then went back into her tank. She left a trail of web through the whole apartment evidencing her stroll from one end to the other and then back to the center of the apartment. The thing is, in order to even have escaped, she had to "unscrew" the lid which was a hamster style plastic locking screen lid with a couple of round holes with lids where hamster tubes normally go.

---------- Post added at 06:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:29 PM ----------

Although it was an interesting read, I fail to see how the understanding the evolutionary development of our species being anyway related to the evolution of arachnids.

So I agree as well, it's like comparing apples to asparagus.

About half way down the page it discusses the design of organisms, including non-human organisms.

 

[kgeyer1985]

new to this site and t's

Just got my first t, and because I tend to jump right into things I did not research this one. I was looking for a chaco golden because I really want to handle and I read that they are fairly docile by nature. When I was at a local pet store ( definatly take good care of their T's and were moderately knowlegeable) I told them What I would like , a lage, fast growing, and docile T. The directed me toward the Acanthoscurria geniculata (Brazilian Giant White Knee Tarantula)
And because it had just molted hours earlier they were going to raise the price from 45 to 99 dollars, so because of my nature I beleived what I heard and bought it. It is about 3 inches and when handled at the pet store it seemed very docile. After reading alot about this species I have found out that they are not and do not hesitate to flick hairs. Since it just molted I will not attempt to handle him/her for at least a week and after a good meal. I was wondering if anybody had any suggestions/experience with how I should approach my first handling. How are the effects of the hairs, I have just read "expert" oppinions and have not heard actual testimony. Thank you for any info!

 

[phoenixxavierre]

Just got my first t, and because I tend to jump right into things I did not research this one. I was looking for a chaco golden because I really want to handle and I read that they are fairly docile by nature. When I was at a local pet store ( definatly take good care of their T's and were moderately knowlegeable) I told them What I would like , a lage, fast growing, and docile T. The directed me toward the Acanthoscurria geniculata (Brazilian Giant White Knee Tarantula)
And because it had just molted hours earlier they were going to raise the price from 45 to 99 dollars, so because of my nature I beleived what I heard and bought it. It is about 3 inches and when handled at the pet store it seemed very docile. After reading alot about this species I have found out that they are not and do not hesitate to flick hairs. Since it just molted I will not attempt to handle him/her for at least a week and after a good meal. I was wondering if anybody had any suggestions/experience with how I should approach my first handling. How are the effects of the hairs, I have just read "expert" oppinions and have not heard actual testimony. Thank you for any info!

When I first started out in the hobby, I used suede welding gloves to handle the tarantula at first. I used a paint brush to let him know I was there, along with a very light breath of air. This lets him/her know that there's something bigger nearby, and in most cases (IME) has an effect on them, sort of "scaring" them into docility. My red morph roseas I do this with (with the light breath), otherwise they're cantankerous boogers. So, a watercolor paint brush, one of those thin little brushes, and gloves. I would start with two gloves on, and when I was comfortable with it, would remove one glove. Next step, of course, is no gloves. So for this allowed me to guage the tarantula's response to my hand, grow comfortable when no biting or hair kicking took place, and then eventually led to a fairly relaxed, worry free handling.

 

[kgeyer1985]

When I first started out in the hobby, I used suede welding gloves to handle the tarantula at first. I used a paint brush to let him know I was there, along with a very light breath of air. This lets him/her know that there's something bigger nearby, and in most cases (IME) has an effect on them, sort of "scaring" them into docility. My red morph roseas I do this with (with the light breath), otherwise they're cantankerous boogers. So, a watercolor paint brush, one of those thin little brushes, and gloves. I would start with two gloves on, and when I was comfortable with it, would remove one glove. Next step, of course, is no gloves. So for this allowed me to guage the tarantula's response to my hand, grow comfortable when no biting or hair kicking took place, and then eventually led to a fairly relaxed, worry free handling.

Thank you for the advice, I will heed the advice you have given me.

Just one other question. How likely are they to mistake my hand for food? More so when they are hungry vs fed? I also hear that they cannot be satisfied in term of food and will eat until you stop feeding them.

 

[Fran]

Thank you for the advice, I will heed the advice you have given me.

Just one other question. How likely are they to mistake my hand for food? More so when they are hungry vs fed? I also hear that they cannot be satisfied in term of food and will eat until you stop feeding them.

Incorrect . They are animals, they have instinct, they wouldnt eat and eat till they die because of it. When they are full they stop.

 

[phoenixxavierre]

Thank you for the advice, I will heed the advice you have given me.

Just one other question. How likely are they to mistake my hand for food? More so when they are hungry vs fed? I also hear that they cannot be satisfied in term of food and will eat until you stop feeding them.

I've never had a t bite me thinking I'm food. They can tell the difference. But then I let them know I'm there before I attempt to reach into their home.

They will stop eating once they're full.

 

[RyTheTGuy]

Well as you should know Ts can't eat their prey in solid form. They secretes digestive enzymes that turn the victim's body into soup. The spider can then suck up its meal using straw-like mouthparts.....so they just dont eat and eat and eat it takes a little time for them to finish a meal, and some are ready for another right after it just depends on your T really.

P.s. the only way i can see a T biting you is:
1. You did something very wrong that made it feel feared for its life
2. Aggressive/defensive species
3. You're not using tongs and instead using your fingers to put the prey in front of your T (which i don't recommend)

otherwise a T should never bite you