The Grammostola pulchra myth

[NevularScorpion]

Sure it does, the term "slow growing" only has any meaning at all in comparison to other species/specimens... it's a qualitative term completely based on context. In normal keeping conditions, pulchra grow quite slow. Read carefully... In. Normal. Conditions. That's all anyone was trying to point out. He is keeping them in VERY abnormal conditions compared to what the average hobbyist is willing/able to provide, therefore the "myth" that they grow slow is anything but "debunked".

Clarity is important. Correct information is important. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT HE'S LYING. He's just committed what's called in logic circles a "Category Error"... comparing two things from different categories to make definitive statements.

Look at it this way... if everyone in the world that ever kept a tarantula kept them at 100F and fed and watered them twice a day to compensate, guess what? Everyone would still think pulchra grow slow! Why? Because everyone's regalises, parahybanas, and geniculatas would be monstrous adults in the space of 6-8 months, and dear God, puchras would be know to reach adulthood SO SLOW because it took 1.5 years... see? Context is everything.

I LIKED his post. I thought it was AWESOME. I just felt compelled to point out that it did not do what he was trying to claim it did, which was debunk any standard knowledge on this species... puchra grow slower than almost all other species, regardless if you're keeping them in a cold basement or in a sauna. That cannot possibly change. If you WANT THEM TO GROW FASTER THAN THEY GROW FOR 99% OF HOBBYISTS THAT KEEP THEM "NORMALLY", then by all means, follow Talon's lead as he's seemed to have gotten it figured out!

nice explanation Sir

 

[Fran]

i guess maybe i read more threads and talk to more ppl than you


it definitely is a hobby tenet that pulchra grow slow. i suppose if you *really* want i could search pwn you... but i just realized this thread is crapped up beyond usefulness (odd how seemingly so many threads get corrupted by so few...) so i don't really see any point.


yet another thread that could have been much more interesting and useful but utterly ruined by militant know it alls

I yet have to see where he got bashed,or thread-ruined.

I just dont see it. Maybe we just need to agree with everybody, applaud all the info and in between lollypops and rainbows fill up the boards with wrong information.

 

[WARPIG]

Maybe we just need to agree with everybody, applaud all the info and in between lollypops and rainbows fill up the boards with wrong information.

LMAO!!!

I read this entire thread, saw where the OP was trying to make statements that did not apply to the way all hobbyists keep their T's and saw the wheels coming off this bad boy quick.

In his experience, with his techniques, his pulchras grew fast, thats all I take from his post, nothing else.

G pulchras grow slow relatively speaking. I have a lil guy, two yrs now and he's not 2" yet. I'm in no hurry to watch him die, let him grow at his own slow pace.

PIG-

 

[Ictinike]

Read the entire thing, word for word, and yes it took me nearly 25 minutes

Not siding with anyone/thing here but a point I think Talon mentioned that goes without saying that in the past he's rebutted several times that he has had specimens of various species that are generally considered "slow growers" that he's had success with.

In knowing this, reading those posts, he has caught some "flames" from others pretty much denying the facts of his statements. Typically he will give examples of his own experience where, in this case a G. pulchra, grew some 4-5 inches in a year and others will come in and blast the notion wherein the whole "slow grower", myth if you will, spawns from.

I can see at some point the notion that he's, I'm sure, become upset at those comments on his experience and honestly who wouldn't wish to disprove those that try to state he's wrong to the many legions of new keepers?

All in all I think Mr. Internet stated it well. While I'm sure there was no real intention to cause the mass debate, in this case more wording than tarantula science, it goes without saying that words must be chosen properly in a format that doesn't allow much in the way of forgiveness.

It's good info and a good debate that all new keepers should read and take in to better these boards with more useful information in lieu of the most recent rash of, what I consider, not click worthy posts

 

[pato_chacoana]

I really had a good time reading this thread!! :clap: I don't doubt the good intentions of the OP, but please read basic biology and you'll understand why the ''experiment'' doesn't prove anything at all! Although many posters basically explained it before...

Cheers,
Pato

 

[efmp1987]

8 years after this post people still swear their pulchras grow slow. I guess they missed reading this? Lets bring it up! I'm sorry for the necro. The info the OP is trying to convey is legitimate and given the popularity of the species today, this might [the post] prove helpful.

 

[Ungoliant]

8 years after this post people still swear their pulchras grow slow. I guess they missed reading this? Lets bring it up! I'm sorry for the necro. The info the OP is trying to convey is legitimate and given the popularity of the species today, this might [the post] prove helpful.

I have not experienced anything with my two pulchras to suggest that they aren't the slow growers they are reputed to be.

When we talk about fast growers versus slow growers, we are necessarily comparing different species. Can you make a pulchra (or any other tarantula) grow faster by keeping it warm and feeding it more? Sure. That has been known for years.

But if you keep a Grammostola pulchra and a Pterinochilus murinus or Poecilotheria at the same temperatures and on the same feeding schedule, will the pulchra grow as quickly as the other two? I would be stunned if it did.

That's why we say pulchras are slow growers: because all other things being equal, they take longer to reach maturity than many other species.

 

[The Grym Reaper]

8 years after this post people still swear their pulchras grow slow. I guess they missed reading this? Lets bring it up! I'm sorry for the necro. The info the OP is trying to convey is legitimate and given the popularity of the species today, this might [the post] prove helpful.

@Ungoliant has pretty much nailed it with this:

When we talk about fast growers versus slow growers, we are necessarily comparing different species. Can you make a pulchra (or any other tarantula) grow faster by keeping it warm and feeding it more? Sure. That has been known for years.

But if you keep a Grammostola pulchra and a Pterinochilus murinus or Poecilotheria at the same temperatures and on the same feeding schedules, will the pulchra grow as quickly as the other two? I would be stunned if it did.

But I'll go with examples of members from the same genus:

- G. pulchripes are commonly acknowledged to grow faster than G. pulchra
- G. iheringi is the fastest growing member of the genus (it's also pretty fast in general by NW standards).

I keep my Tarantulas at the same temps and on the same feeding schedules and my G. pulchripes is growing painfully slowly (she's actually growing at around the same rate as my B. emilia which are known to be slow growers) compared to my G. iheringi, G. iheringi has both shorter moult cycles and gains more size per moult, when I got the iheringi she was smaller than the pulchripes, she very quickly overtook her in size.

To quote @Ungoliant again:

That's why we say pulchras are slow growers: because all other things being equal, they take longer to reach maturity than many other species.

 

[miss moxie]

Exactly what has been said. They're still slow growing even if you can speed them up a tad with feeding and temperatures. Likewise, you could slow then down even -further- by keeping it cool and feeding less. It's not legitimate information-- it's something basic that all T keepers should grasp if they do the appropriate research.

 

[efmp1987]

The topic is the hastened growth rate of the pulchra species only, and pulchra alone. How pulchra 1, 2, 3, grew faster than pulchra pulchra 4, 5, 6. It is irrelevant to compare it with another species universally-acknowledged to grow faster even when fed twice a month because presented with the same optimal conditionals the pulchra subjects in this thread were given, that species (non-pulchra)will grow faster yet. The conversation is on an intraspecific level only.

@miss moxie it might not be that basic. If it was, everyone pulchras will be growing up to 5.5 inches in a single year by now. Even yours took 3 years to become a juvenile. OP mentioned a lot of food. But how much? Is it enough to challenge the belief of most to feed only twice or once a week. Because for all we know the OP fed daily.

If faster growth occurs under optimal conditionals (1 year growth spurt), will that render our husbandry conditions "sub-optimal" because ours take twice or thrice as longer to grow?

 

[miss moxie]

The topic is the hastened growth rate of the pulchra species only, and pulchra alone. How pulchra 1, 2, 3, grew faster than pulchra pulchra 4, 5, 6. It is irrelevant to compare it with another species universally-acknowledged to grow faster even when fed twice a month because presented with the same optimal conditionals the pulchra subjects in this thread were given, that species (non-pulchra)will grow faster yet. The conversation is on an intraspecific level only.

@miss moxie it might not be that basic. If it was, everyone pulchras will be growing up to 5.5 inches in a single year by now. Even yours took 3 years to become a juvenile. OP mentioned a lot of food. But how much? Is it enough to challenge the belief of most to feed only twice or once a week. Because for all we know the OP fed daily.

If faster growth occurs under optimal conditionals (1 year growth spurt), will that render our husbandry conditions "sub-optimal" because ours grow take twice or thrice as longer?

I purchased her as a juvenile. You're also taking OP's words on faith. The fact that -one- person has produced these results and no one else has should be all you need to realize it's hinky.

 

[efmp1987]

I purchased her as a juvenile. You're also taking OP's words on faith. The fact that -one- person has produced these results and no one else has should be all you need to realize it's hinky.

The OP seemed to be no different from most of you here, with years of experience behind his back. It appears everyone knew him too. No reason to think he's a fraud.

 

[efmp1987]

I have not experienced anything with my two pulchras to suggest that they aren't the slow growers they are reputed to be.

When we talk about fast growers versus slow growers, we are necessarily comparing different species. Can you make a pulchra (or any other tarantula) grow faster by keeping it warm and feeding it more? Sure. That has been known for years.

But if you keep a Grammostola pulchra and a Pterinochilus murinus or Poecilotheria at the same temperatures and on the same feeding schedule, will the pulchra grow as quickly as the other two? I would be stunned if it did.

That's why we say pulchras are slow growers: because all other things being equal, they take longer to reach maturity than many other species.

I dont understand why you need to bring up other species in a intraspecific (pulchra-only) test? Under good wind conditions, will the sparrow fly as fast as the falcon? Of course not, because under good wind conditions, the falcon will fly faster yet than the falcon who is not under good wind conditions, and who in turn is already faster than the sparrow by default.

When fertilizer is used, will this orange grow as red as those apples? Of course not, because apples are by default red already.

Will this G. pulchra, under optimal conditions grow was fast as P. murinus. Heck no. Because P. murinus by default already grows twice as fast. Example P. murinus normal growth rate: 30 days. Pulchra growth rate: 60 days. With optimal conditions: murinus, 15 days. Pulchra, 30 each grew 50% faster.

However what you are are asking if can the pulchra take 15 days like the murinus? Which is not fair because the murinus remains at 50% (15 from 30 days)faster while you want the pulchra to be 75% (15 days from 60) faster to acknowledge the point.

The question really is, "By the standard of the Grammostola pulchra species ONLY, did it grow fast?". And the answer is yes.

 

[The Grym Reaper]

The question really is, "By the standard of the Grammostola specie ONLY, did it grow fast?". And the answer is yes.

It's one of the slower growing species out of its genus, that is fact, I could keep a Grammostola iheringi in a cool room and feed it half as often as I would normally and keep a Grammostola pulchra in a warm room and feed it twice as often as I would normally, the Grammostola pulchra still won't outgrow the Grammostola iheringi, hell, it won't even outgrow a Grammostola pulchripes.

You can get the pulchra to grow slightly faster than it would normally if you ramp up its temps and feed more often but it won't magically become a fast-growing species, it's only marginally faster compared to other pulchra, not other Grammostola.

 

[efmp1987]

It's one of the slower growing species out of its genus, that is fact, I could keep a Grammostola iheringi in a cool room and feed it half as often as I would normally and keep a Grammostola pulchra in a warm room and feed it twice as often as I would normally, the Grammostola pulchra still won't outgrow the Grammostola iheringi, hell, it won't even outgrow a Grammostola pulchripes.

You can get the pulchra to grow slightly faster than it would normally if you ramp up its temps and feed more often but it won't magically become a fast-growing species, it's only marginally faster compared to other pulchra, not other Grammostola.

Corrected my post above. I meant by the standards of the Grammostola pulchra species only. Im on mobile to its hard to type. I also noted how you cannot compare species 1 with species 2 due to morphological physiological ecological adpatations.

 

[efmp1987]

So by the standards of the Grammostola pulchra species only, did the OPs specimen grow faster? 1 year vs 3 years?

 

[miss moxie]

So by the standards of the Grammostola pulchra species only, did the OPs specimen grow faster? 1 year vs 3 years?

What I'm saying is that if no one else around here is reporting that, then either OP got lucky or something is hinky with his story. You can't do an experiment once and then say "This is proof that this is a definite thing and I proved it!"

 

[efmp1987]

What I'm saying is that if no one else around here is reporting that, then either OP got lucky or something is hinky with his story. You can't do an experiment once and then say "This is proof that this is a definite thing and I proved it!"

Hence I necro'ed the thread. So people can try - I myself will try. And If no one else is reporting it, they're probably not very accepting of change and are strictly adhering to known husbandry methods e.g. "don't overfeed that or this, it will cause molt problems" or "feed it only twice a week" etc., when the hard truth is no study has been conducted to associate bad molting with feeding frequency, nor is there a study to prove that increased feeding shortens the lifespan of an arachnid. @KezyGLA for example has some of the fattest T's I have seen on here and his T's in fact look very healthy with the vibrant coloration as compared to some T's that while are lithe in appearance, look dull nonetheless. IMO increased feeding simply improves the size increase after each molt, hence specimens of the same species, from the same clutch, or of the same age bracket or even of the same sex, will show marked differences in size despite undergoing molting the same number of times, which is attributed to the tendency of some to be complete pigs where food is concerned.

 

[miss moxie]

This is what I mean when I say people need patience to do well in this hobby. Forcing your G. pulchra to speed grow is for your benefit and your benefit alone. I'm content with my small G. pulchra and her slow growth rate. If you want a fast growing grammy, purchase a G. iheringi.

 

[The Grym Reaper]

If you want a fast growing grammy, purchase a G. iheringi.

Or if you just want a fast growing big black tarantula then get a female P. antinous.