- Joined
- Feb 3, 2008
- Messages
- 240
Well, if certain 'taxonomists' had described/named new species WITH DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS + QUALITY DRAWINGS/PHOTOS after examining BOTH sexes FROM A SINGLE LOCALITY ... AND NAMED THAT TYPE LOCALITY .....well. ... we might know some alot better !! In the deep past, like the 1800's some of this is excusable, as its difficult to exactly name a locality you found the specimen at after weeks sailing up the amazon, but in the modern age with modern technology... well its not excusable.
What i like is many of the American issues track back to Ralph Chamberlin, to which (amongst others) i'd gladly add
'Aphonopelma' stoicum (Chamberlin, 1925)
Aphonopelma latens (Chamberlin, 1917)
'Aphonopelma' aberrans (Chamberlin, 1917), etc.. Get the idea?
In part i'd agree with 'Earth Tiger' on some points that [too] much is devoted to tigers or other bigger animals with spines (im sure i read there are more captive tigers in California than their are supposed to be in india these days..), and much to hunt down these critters is like Crytozoology.. and while frustrating at times, thats actually makes it fun, enjoyable and challenging to me (and others i'd guess)!
I'd disagree on some of those Chinese species, when the Zhu and Zhang 2008 paper does very detailed descriptions, and for example with S.jiafu when the male is transfered from huwenum they give a locality with GPS, then nominate a female alotype from the same location .. I do see that they dont give that locality in much detail (and the GPS is for a huge area), but i'd like to guess this might have been done to protect the locality from pettrade collectors. Unless it was, as seems for many vague 'type localities' of Brachypelma first collected BY pettraders, which do actually seem purposely wrong (?maybe to protect the site from exploitaton by rival pettraders), or by 'taxonomists' who never even visited the country, let alone questioned the vague location data the collectors gave.... another case in point i suspect is the enigmatic A.borealis..
Anyway, back to the original question. I'd also agree all those factors can play a role in why we dont understand a species/genus. But, i'd say some species going extinct or being super-rare are least useful explanations. Yes, many species have likely been greatly affected by habitat destruction, but really much more commonly, the lack of knowledge is likely a consequence of minimal fieldwork, poor descriptive papers and historical confusion. The world has changed radically with the modern international/electronic age. Just think back to the 1800's when for a european to go to the amazon, you'd have to take a steam ship for weeks, then once there go further up river for weeks to a nameless piece of jungle and catch a spider (along with various other random creatures), which then dont really preserve well in the bottles of low quality rum on the lengthy trip back. Then on your return you have a letter waiting on your desk that someone else in another european country museum has named a spider from the amazon, in a really obscure journal, written in lengthy prose in a foreign language. Then consider the 100's of specimens that likely got brought back from each trip, each getting a brief description from someone often not an expert, and almost always without drawings as those were super expensive to put in books papers, and no photographs given as again super expensive...
I'll happily acknowledge that in the modern age its so much easier now to find out about a species or group of species in far distant countries, we can now fly almost everywhere and (sometimes) do safe and lengthy fieldwork. We can collect habitat and ecology data with ease (like climate parameters) and take amazing photographs. Most important we can share all these things quickly with others electronically.. or occasionally also shared in published research papers! It's never been easier for everyone to go into the world and collect valuable data on mystery species.. or any species really!
? Why Avicularia panamensis ... its now Sericopelma panamense, and it looks like many other panamanian Sericopelma. Just that it was a specimen sitting in a jar of alcohol on a museum shelf that no-one bothered to examine for about 100 years..
No-one is going to find out about all such cryptic species by google alone, best way is to get muddy and sandy by revisiting the type localties and turning some big rocks or looking in tree holes !!
Happy hunting everyone.... oooooohh,, find me M.brevipes too please...
What i like is many of the American issues track back to Ralph Chamberlin, to which (amongst others) i'd gladly add
'Aphonopelma' stoicum (Chamberlin, 1925)
Aphonopelma latens (Chamberlin, 1917)
'Aphonopelma' aberrans (Chamberlin, 1917), etc.. Get the idea?
In part i'd agree with 'Earth Tiger' on some points that [too] much is devoted to tigers or other bigger animals with spines (im sure i read there are more captive tigers in California than their are supposed to be in india these days..), and much to hunt down these critters is like Crytozoology.. and while frustrating at times, thats actually makes it fun, enjoyable and challenging to me (and others i'd guess)!
I'd disagree on some of those Chinese species, when the Zhu and Zhang 2008 paper does very detailed descriptions, and for example with S.jiafu when the male is transfered from huwenum they give a locality with GPS, then nominate a female alotype from the same location .. I do see that they dont give that locality in much detail (and the GPS is for a huge area), but i'd like to guess this might have been done to protect the locality from pettrade collectors. Unless it was, as seems for many vague 'type localities' of Brachypelma first collected BY pettraders, which do actually seem purposely wrong (?maybe to protect the site from exploitaton by rival pettraders), or by 'taxonomists' who never even visited the country, let alone questioned the vague location data the collectors gave.... another case in point i suspect is the enigmatic A.borealis..
Anyway, back to the original question. I'd also agree all those factors can play a role in why we dont understand a species/genus. But, i'd say some species going extinct or being super-rare are least useful explanations. Yes, many species have likely been greatly affected by habitat destruction, but really much more commonly, the lack of knowledge is likely a consequence of minimal fieldwork, poor descriptive papers and historical confusion. The world has changed radically with the modern international/electronic age. Just think back to the 1800's when for a european to go to the amazon, you'd have to take a steam ship for weeks, then once there go further up river for weeks to a nameless piece of jungle and catch a spider (along with various other random creatures), which then dont really preserve well in the bottles of low quality rum on the lengthy trip back. Then on your return you have a letter waiting on your desk that someone else in another european country museum has named a spider from the amazon, in a really obscure journal, written in lengthy prose in a foreign language. Then consider the 100's of specimens that likely got brought back from each trip, each getting a brief description from someone often not an expert, and almost always without drawings as those were super expensive to put in books papers, and no photographs given as again super expensive...
I'll happily acknowledge that in the modern age its so much easier now to find out about a species or group of species in far distant countries, we can now fly almost everywhere and (sometimes) do safe and lengthy fieldwork. We can collect habitat and ecology data with ease (like climate parameters) and take amazing photographs. Most important we can share all these things quickly with others electronically.. or occasionally also shared in published research papers! It's never been easier for everyone to go into the world and collect valuable data on mystery species.. or any species really!
? Why Avicularia panamensis ... its now Sericopelma panamense, and it looks like many other panamanian Sericopelma. Just that it was a specimen sitting in a jar of alcohol on a museum shelf that no-one bothered to examine for about 100 years..
No-one is going to find out about all such cryptic species by google alone, best way is to get muddy and sandy by revisiting the type localties and turning some big rocks or looking in tree holes !!
Happy hunting everyone.... oooooohh,, find me M.brevipes too please...
Last edited:
