Ts as feeders for other Ts

[JimM]

rather it's an objectively verifiable thing that exists regardless of whether it is perceived.

Doing some reading on quantum physics might leave you less assured that your post is absolute truth.

I'm loving the Schrodinger's Tarantula thing going on here.

 

[blooms]

Doing some reading on quantum physics might leave you less assured that your post is absolute truth.

I'm loving the Schrodinger's Tarantula thing going on here.

I could imagine Sheldon, Leonard, Howard and Rajesh debating this on the "Big Bang Theory".

 

[robd]

Just a little bit before all this piss slinging occurred over whatever that was all about.. something like cupcakes and freezing etc etc etc, I noticed this quote here:

Well, I sort of did this a couple of days ago. I was at my LPS getting a new UV for our chameleons and the resident T guy knowing I've got a MF P.fasciata, mentioned he had a MM of the same species who was a real runt. I had a look and he was right. He was the size of one of my girl's legs! The guy said he couldn't sell him so suggested I take him for free and see if he could do the deed. I knew that it was was a big ask, but I took him anyway. I thought to myself that at the least he'd provide a good meal for her. Well, I was right. Even though I fed her several large locusts beforehand, she still munched him just as I expected.

I've heard of people doing this when they have MMs on they're last legs (even when not the same genus or species). It certainly seems more practical than waiting for them to die and dumping them in the trash IMO.

I felt compelled to comment on this.

I don't know how this person went about trying to breed these P fasciatas, but if they locked the runt MM in with the big girl, no wonder he got eaten. Whether he's bigger than the female or a fraction of her size, you strongly increase the risk of him being eaten because he cannot get away. I don't know how much of it he observed, but if the female was mature and the MM was willing, I'm sure that she was interested. The MM might've just needed a little bit more time to work with her to get confident enough to get up in there.

I haven't bred a large variety of T species, but between Holothele, Cyclosternum, Grammostola, Brachypelma and Poecilotheria... to me Pokies are most certainly unique the way they go about it, with the marco polo game the MM plays with the female.

If you supervise pokies while they're mating and leave the females enclosure open, the MM will surely lure her out. Given the opportunity, they will always go for mating outside the cage rather than being stuck inside. Providing a large, long, flat piece of surface for them to crawl onto so the female can feel the males vibrations when he drums is good to have too. Placing the females enclosure inside a large rubbermaid container, opening it, and then introducing the male is a good method as well.

Just my experience with that so far, in case that helps anybody. Namely you, Londoner, if it applies to you.

 

[Londoner]

If you supervise pokies while they're mating and leave the females enclosure open, the MM will surely lure her out. Given the opportunity, they will always go for mating outside the cage rather than being stuck inside. Providing a large, long, flat piece of surface for them to crawl onto so the female can feel the males vibrations when he drums is good to have too. Placing the females enclosure inside a large rubbermaid container, opening it, and then introducing the male is a good method as well.

I'm fully aware of this, thanks. The MM was not locked in her enclosure with her.

 

[robd]

That's good to hear.

 

[curiousme]

Opinions do seem to vary greatly on this subject.

As for cupcakes. I never liked the idea of cupcakes. I think they are little imposters that want to be actual cakes. Cupcakes are a lie.

I finally decided to peek in this thread and this made me literally laugh out loud! Thank you!

If you didnt get the example, no matter how many times I explain it to you, you wont get it. Nothing I can do about it.

I don't think it is that people don't get it, I think they are trying to tell you it still made no sense. Sometimes nonsense happens when you're all fired up. I have been known to ooze it at times.


AND back on topic.....

This whole debate is FAILOR

There is no difference between Tarantulas and Roaches other than the emotional importance to said individuals.

Why must we anthropomorphize invertabrates, especially one over another? <--- kinda shows which side of the fence I am on.

For some people this is strictly a biological/scientific hobby, for others it is a Pet(biggest anthropomorphizers) hobby, and still others a little bit of both. There really is no point in arguing about this issue, it just makes for pages and pages of the same crap.

this was well said.



I feel that making an argument that tarantulas can feel pain is made with little knowledge of a tarantula's physiology/ anthropomorphizing. Tarantulas are a very primitive animal and therefore have an uncomplicated nervous system. It is made of two parts, an upper and lower.

The upper is the smaller round part that contains the eyes and receives information from its thousands of sensory hairs.(setae, and are the way a T feels vibrations, air currents, smell and taste) This upper part is considered the brain and it is teeny tiny knot behind the eyes.

The lower is a little larger and star shaped. It sits in the middle of the cephalothorax that has 'cords' that go to the organs, legs, pedipalps and chelicerae. So this lower part controls movement and bodily functions.

There isn't really room for anything as complex as pain receptors. If you think of how many thing a T is able to do with its setae(smell, taste, detect vibrations/ air currents) and its method of movement(similar to hydraulics, but using their hemolymph/ blood and muscles to flex the legs) where are you going to fit that capacity for pain in? It is highly improbable based on what I understand of their physiology.

So, while I wouldn't feed off a MM to a T myself, I see nothing (in)human(e) in doing so. I also don't see a problem with allowing a sac to engage in survival of the fittest either, it may help the breeding line in the long run anyway. I won't put a T in the freezer either, because I have no idea whether it is a better way to die than the natural way and since they don't have the capacity for pain there is not reason to, except to make it over sooner/ the keeper feel better about it. So, I guess it boils down to :

Do what you want with your T and I will do the same.

 

[Fran]

I don't think it is that people don't get it, I think they are trying to tell you it still made no sense. Sometimes nonsense happens when you're all fired up. I have been known to ooze it at times.

.

I yet dont get WHY is not a valid example.

The example was made to show that the size has nothing to do with the quality of the food.
A cupcake, for the love of God, is bigger than a roach yet it has no nutritional value neither consitute a meal to the T.
I said cupcacke as I could have said a grilled cheese sandwich.

:?

 

[xhexdx]

I said cupcacke as I could have said a grilled cheese sandwich.

And neither would have made any more sense than the other.

That's like me saying, "A porterhouse is bigger than a filet mignon" and you responding with, "So is a bowling ball".

You're comparing something that isn't even a valid food source for the animal.

 

[jebbewocky]

I yet dont get WHY is not a valid example.

The example was made to show that the size has nothing to do with the quality of the food.
A cupcake, for the love of God, is bigger than a roach yet it has no nutritional value neither consitute a meal to the T.
I said cupcacke as I could have said a grilled cheese sandwich.

:?

I got it if that helps!

 

[Chris_Skeleton]

And neither would have made any more sense than the other.

That's like me saying, "A porterhouse is bigger than a filet mignon" and you responding with, "So is a bowling ball".

You're comparing something that isn't even a valid food source for the animal.

I understand what he means. He's just saying bigger does not mean better.

 

[Fran]

You're comparing something that isn't even a valid food source for the animal.

Neither I think a male is a valid food for the female, BTW.

Again, it was an example , as _Skeleton said, bigger doesnt mean anything at all in terms of quality food. Simplier than what you guys are trying to get out of my sentence.

 

[KoriTamashii]

How in the devil is this thread still alive?

Shoo, kids. Go on. Get lost.

 

[robd]

You know, you guys really make me wanna put a cupcake in with one of my T's, leave and come back hoping I find it munching on it, take a picture, show it off and then resurrect this thread 6 months later to show off like a 9" rose hair.

 

[Musicwolf]

You know, you guys really make me wanna put a cupcake in with one of my T's, leave and come back hoping I find it munching on it, take a picture, show it off and then resurrect this thread 6 months later to show off like a 9" rose hair.

Science at it's best :clap:

 

[starlight_kitsune]

I yet dont get WHY is not a valid example.

The example was made to show that the size has nothing to do with the quality of the food.
A cupcake, for the love of God, is bigger than a roach yet it has no nutritional value neither consitute a meal to the T.
I said cupcacke as I could have said a grilled cheese sandwich.

:?

I got what you were trying to say,
but the reference distracted everyone and made them get off topic which was my point when I mentioned them earlier.


What you were trying to say is that just because cupcakes are big doesn't make them proper food anymore than a MM.

NOW-

CAN WE ALL STOP TALKING ABOUT CUPCAKES???:wall::wall:

 

[Terry D]

Hi all, I'm agreeing with Fran here. Feeders are cheap. Sure, with a dying male the risk is much less risky, but still....a risk- much moreso than a cricket or a roach.

On the other hand, and quite offtopic, I can see where allowing cannibalism after successfully producing a sac to weed out the geneticly weak could only be a plus. Maybe then we'd see much less new threads about dks, t's not eating, etc.,- especially when they're being kept in exact same conditions as a healthy sibling in the container right next to them. If and when I ever breed this will certainly be part of my regimen. It may sound barbaric to some but that's the nature of things.

 

[BCscorp]

23 skidoo!!!!!!

 

[LV-426]

I read in the Tarantula Keepers Guide that some individuals us as feeders "less desirable" species such as P cancerides. What is the concencess on this subjuct? I own a P cancerides and I think is awsome T

I created a monstrosity

 

[starlight_kitsune]

I created a monstrosity

LOL.
Yeah,
A little bit.
I think this is going to end up being one of those threads where people just go rounds and rounds.

 

[starlight_kitsune]

By the way,
I can see both sides of the arguement on this one.

Not wanting to let a dying, weak MM just waste away and go into the garbage,
Andm
There really being no real reason to nutritionally speaking and with the risk of potential injury to the healthy tarantula you want to keep.

IMO, I wouldn't do it because I don't want my ladies to get injured, and I don't think I'm capable of throwing another tarantula in to be eaten.

Crickets yes, Tarantulas no.

And Yes I know thats anthromorphizing, and such, but still.
I'm much more likely to be attached to a MM I've raised then a cricket with a signifigantly shorter life span.