undescribed species?

[David Burns]

When an Undescribed species come onto the market, does someone compare the "new" species to all the known species and then say it is an undescribed species? wouldn't it be necessary for the person/people who did this work to name themselves?

Or does somebody catch a wild T and when it lays a successful egg sac, sells the slings as a "new"species? This scenario might involve some pics being posted and the resulting feedback leading the person to believe anything.

 

[scottyk]

When an Undescribed species come onto the market, does someone compare the "new" species to all the known species and then say it is an undescribed species? wouldn't it be necessary for the person/people who did this work to name themselves?

I believe that it will be considered an undescribed species "until" all of the leg work is done, not after. Once it is a confirmed new species it will be named, and no longer undescribed....

 

[GoTerps]

It's important to remember, that just because a spider is labeled as sp. "x", it doesn't necessarily mean it's undescribed... maybe only unidentified.

Many times, when dealing with new entries to the hobby, it is much better to leave things labeled this way until the species in question can be properly identified and/or examined against known type specimens if possible.

While this may seem easy, it can prove to be extremely difficult. On the upside, there are groups of theraphosids, especially ones that have have seen recent work, where an interested enthusiast could take a specimen/molt, sit down, and look for key characters... then making an informed dicission on the identity of the spider.

However, this is not the case with MANY groups. There are so many description papers (especially ones from way back) that really don't describe all that much. There's a group I'm very interested in. I have all the desciption papers and almost everything published on said group. There are quite a few species in this group that neither I, nor anyone else could identify based on any of the literature. There would really be no way to check and see if a spider has been described before without examining all the type specimens in question. So, where are they being held? Are they lost? Were they even deposited anywhere to begin with? Will the holders of said specimens allow you, or anyone, to examine them? Then, if you locate them and get permission to examine them... what condition will this specimen be in... will it have been preserved well enough to draw conclusions from?

Eric

 

[Stan Schultz]

When an Undescribed species come onto the market, does someone compare the "new" species to all the known species and then say it is an undescribed species? ...
Or does somebody catch a wild T and when it lays a successful egg sac, ...

Simple questions. Complex answers.

In a nutshell: No. There is no central authority to which anyone can go to have a tarantula identified.

And, yes. When an importer or dealer notices that a freshly imported tarantula has an eggsac it is normal to try to get babies from it. It's generally considered a bonus source of cash in a business that often runs pretty close to the red line. A very few might sell them as a "new" species, most will merely sell them as unidentified. (See below.)

Theraphosid systematics and taxonomy is a mess. Some scientific names are used for more than one species. (Did somebody ever get the Pamphobeteus antinous thing sorted out?) In other circumstances one species may be called more than one name. (Did anyone ever get the Hysterocrates gigas/hercules thing sorted out?) Most of the species we have in captivity are well known and named properly, but there are a few that are masquerading under the wrong name. Lastly, there are entire genera that are such a mess that our only realistic recourse is to label "strains" that we presume belong to it by their original location. Examples might be Pterinochilus, Aphonopelma, and Avicularia. There are others as well.

Worse yet, because so many amateurs have dabbled in tarantula taxonomy and made such a mess of things, the big time professionals are now shying away from the whole family of tarantulas rather than risking their professional reputations on it. So, the future looks bleak indeed.

Scientists seldom import pet tarantulas. The pet industry imports them by the thousands a month. Among those imported there may be a few oddballs, and the alert importer may recognize them, set them aside, and maybe attempt to identify them. But, importers are seldom (if ever) that well versed in Theraphosid taxonomy, and distressingly often a "different" species of tarantula may be given a completely wrong identity.

If the importer wanted to get an official opinion where would he go? There are a few (actually, VERY few) advanced amateur and professional arachnologists who are more than happy to look at new tarantulas, but because the science is in such a mess, their identifications are almost always "iffy" to some degree, sometimes to some LARGE degree. And, frankly, I've spoken with some of these people and been left with the impression that they may not know what they're talking about either.

Worse yet, there are a few importers who really couldn't give less of a rat's behind, and who'll slap on the tarantula just about any identification they think is ball park reasonable and that will sell the spider.

There are a few tarantula aficionados who do go to far away places to collect and import tarantulas, both as scientific endeavors and as a means of bringing new species into the hobby. These people usually are reasonably good in their understanding of taxonomy and have a fairly good idea of what to expect in the places they collect, but even they are not 100% trustworthy, again largely because the science is flawed.

Now here's another important point: There's a huge difference between UNIDENTIFIED and UNDESCRIBED. "Undescribed" means that it's new to science. No one has yet looked at it, measured it, drawn pictures of key parts of its anatomy, run the DNA analysis, determined that it isn't an already described species, then finally given it a name and fit it into the hierarchy of other tarantulas.

"Unidentified" merely means that no one has taken the time to determine what it is or if it's been described. Maybe it already has a scientific name, maybe not; at the current time there's no way to know.

The "good" importers and dealers try not to pull the wool over your eyes. If they get in a new tarantula and can't say within some high probability what species it is, they'll label it (for instance) Aphonopelma sp. "Run-Em-Over-Junction." They aren't telling you that it's a new species, there's no way to tell because, for the most part, we don't even know what the "old" species are for sure! That dealer is advertising "up front" that the tarantula you're looking at may or may not already be identified, but the dealer can't confirm it either way. You're buying it for what it is, an unidentified Aphonopelma that may or may not have a real scientific name now or in the future. It's a little like buying futures in hogs. If you're lucky, tomorrow someone will publish a paper about pork chops being an aphrodisiac. If you're not lucky, the whole world will convert to Judaism next Thursday!

My advice? Stop worrying so much about what kind of tarantula you have to the minutest degree possible. Start enjoying it as the priceless gem of nature that it is!

 

[David Burns]

Thanks Stan, that is all good info. I am interested in breeding, so identifying specimens from 2 sources is important. DNA identification sounds like it might hold some promises.

 

[matthias]

but even they are not 100% trustworthy, again largely because the science is flawed.
...
My advice? Stop worrying so much about what kind of tarantula you have to the minutest degree possible. Start enjoying it as the priceless gem of nature that it is!

So if the whole process is broke, how would you fix it? The philosophy of taxonomy in general has always seemed flawed to me. It appears to try to put hard definitions on things that are most often ranges than distinct parts. (Avics are a prime example) But it's the only game going right now. How could it be made better in general and specifically with regards to Theraphosidea.

I agree they are wonderfull to enjoy just on their own. But it tends to be helpfull when discussing them with other of like mind (and unlike mind) to describe what you have.

 

[David Burns]

If someone on the east coast is selling Stromatopelma sp."attackface" and someone on the west coast is selling Stromatopelma sp."mellowfeather", could these two people be selling the same species?

 

[Stan Schultz]

So if the whole process is broke, how would you fix it? The philosophy of taxonomy in general has always seemed flawed to me. ...

And me as well. I've been complaining for years that it's an antiquated, cumbersome business that attempts to shoehorn a basically analog phenomenon into a digital framework, and voiced a lot of other complaints as well. All it got me was mass hissing and booing from the taxonomists on the arachnology forum. Apparently they didn't appreciate some young upstart, who obviously didn't understand the subtle nuances of taxonomy, criticizing their life's work!

... But it's the only game going right now. ...

Not quite. There is another system being worked on called "Phylocode" that shows some promise. You can learn more about their effort by visiting their website at http://www.ohiou.edu/phylocode/ and the Wikipedia entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhyloCode.

I don't know enough about Phylocode to make any meaningful comments about it.

I received this notice by E-mail several days ago.

"3rd Meeting of the International Society for Phylogenetic Nomenclature
Halifax, Nova Scotia, July 21 – July 23, 2008"

If any wish to attend they might contact:

Harold Bryant
Chief Curator and Curator of Earth Sciences
Royal Saskatchewan Museum
2340 Albert Street
Regina, Saskatchewan
S4P 2V7 Canada
306-787-2826; FAX 306-787-2645
email: hbryant@royalsaskmuseum.ca

for more information.

... I agree they are wonderfull to enjoy just on their own. But it tends to be helpfull when discussing them with other of like mind (and unlike mind) to describe what you have.

And for the common species the Linnean taxonomic system works okay (not really well, just okay). For the not-so-common ones ... well, we just have to be patient I guess.

Like the vulture said: "Patience my @$$! I'm going to go out and kill something!"

 

[Stan Schultz]

If someone on the east coast is selling Stromatopelma sp."attackface" and someone on the west coast is selling Stromatopelma sp."mellowfeather", could these two people be selling the same species?

Yup! Worse yet, as far as anybody knows they could be selling siblings from the same eggsac. Somewhere along the line we have to trust that everybody who ever touches the tarantulas isn't "crooked as a dog's hind leg" or so incompetent they can't find their own behind with both hands and a road map. The Romans had a phrase for the situation: Caveat emptor, "Let the buyer beware."

I quote for emphasis the last few sentences from a previous post:

"You're buying it for what it is, an unidentified Aphonopelma that may or may not have a real scientific name now or in the future. It's a little like buying futures in hogs. If you're lucky, tomorrow someone will publish a paper about pork chops being an aphrodisiac. If you're not lucky, the whole world will convert to Judaism next Thursday!"

 

[reptist]

species

"If someone on the east coast is selling Stromatopelma sp."attackface" and someone on the west coast is selling Stromatopelma sp."mellowfeather", could these two people be selling the same species?"


That is entirely possible, in fact I have seen it happen on numerous occasions, take H hainanum & H schmidti for example, many sellers are still selling the darker colored hainanum as the dark form of H schmidti and it has been known for months (possibly years by some) that there is no dark form H schmidti period. unfortunately the science of classifieng tarantulas is based on such weak charactoristics and even weaker descriptions and informations about type specimen that even a fairly advanced hobiest will quickly find that without access to type specimen that they can positively verify verry few species from what is written in the description that realigated them to a documented species, if you can even find the description itself!

It realy sucks but it seems that most of what has been done in the way of classifieng T's in the past couple hundred years has been useless especialy for the layperson who hasnt mulled through hundreds of papers and descriptions, Andrew Smiths books are prob. the most complete works avail in english and they are largely out dated now as well, add to that the fact that alot of the people working in the field today dispute much of his work in the first place and then instead of classification guides you have got hundreds more pages of info that you dont know weather you can trust or not!

it does however seem that those doing the legwork today are trying their best to present only 100% factual and accurate info and that will be invaluable as this part of the hobby is deveioped once more, by more stable and informed descriptions than what is currently avail. I wish there was a quick fix it, but there is not, we may be able to rework the past 200 or so years in a fraction of that time, given that we learn from the mistakes made by those before us but that is still many years worth of frustration and research and I dont imagine that the funding for this huge undertaking does'nt even come close to "inspiring" anyone to dive in and sift through 2+ centuries of inaccurate or incomplete info.

So what is the answer, what can we do, some are going the route of working w/ DNA sequencing which is prob more of an exact method of comparison, but unless the technolegy is made to be simple to understand, portable for use in the feild or at home, and cost effective for the average hobbiest then I cant see it taking off as a new method of classification for the masses, it may prove usefull in re documenting some of the type specimen and giving a stronger base to the current system, which will also be an invaluable part of the task at hand but far from a solution or quick fix, any system is only as strong as its base and right now the base of the current system is at the point of collapse!!

I am constantly trying to come up w/ new ways to try and simplify the whole thing and make it ezier for those with little understanding of the process of classifying T's to jump in somewhere and start plugging away, but there realy is no substitute for the experiance gained by countless hours researching incomplete/outdated papers, or spending half the night w/ a micrometer measuring and documenting leg after leg after leg........ followed by twice the time documenting the individual segments of the leg, carapace, ocular region, epigastric area, foveal grove and so on......deffinately a labor of love by any standards.

one thing that would help I think is if all the newer descriptions that were coming out of germany were to be translated into english, and vice versa, its enough with the task at hand to make any progress but to have to learn another language at the same time to stay caught up w/ the latest info is enough to deture all but the obsessed or crazy, and if they are building the new base for the system then here we go again...... also I think that somehow there has got to be a way to generate a source of funding for those that are willing to give of themselves to the extent that you would have to to realy make a noticeable degree of progress in even one genus. I know from the experience I have had at collecting and documenting the 4 or 5species I have been able to isolate (using the same system as A smith) from here in arizona that there are many probs that need to be addressed as far as the # of animals documented and there has to be alot more work done w/ female specimen IMO as most all of the types of the current species are male and in just as many cases there isnt even a female documented at all, in essence each species documented is incomplete without 2 indepth descriptions, BAM!! just doubled the work load, when does it end? where is the ezier softer way? CALGON TAKE M................... PEACE, B.

 

[David Burns]

I am in no way trying to imply that people are intentionally using these "spurious species" names to fool people. I am just worried that this mixture of scientific and common names will do more harm then good.

 

[Stan Schultz]

I am in no way trying to imply that people are intentionally using these "spurious species" names to fool people. I am just worried that this mixture of scientific and common names will do more harm then good.

It probably already has. The scientific name/common name issue has been known to foster flame wars comparable to some African civil wars!

Love 'em or hate 'em, we still have 'em and might as well get used to at least understanding the advantages and limitations of both systems. They aren't going to go away tomorrow, maybe not even the day after.

There are a lot of other things about tarantulas that are at least as confounding and vexing. What name you call it shouldn't result in hyperventilation and sweaty armpits any more than any of the other issues.

Enjoy your controversial tarantula!

 

[Olan]

DNA sequencing is getting cheaper by the day. Maybe sometime in the future dealers will send samples to a sequencing company and post the sequence along with the picture of the tarantula, so everyone can see for themselves where the tarantula fits in the family tree.

 

[reptist]

That would be sweet!!

we can always hope for that type of a system, but like I posted above without some kind of funding we might as well get used to the system as is, and although it is far from perfect I have been at least 80+% succesfull in getting the T's I wanted on the orders I have done, give or take, not too bad of odds for what we have to work with, besides the other -20% gives the hobby a direction to grow, and allows us as humans to practice up on our mistake making skills! PEACE, and if you have time to realy screw something up today I say go for it! if you dont, you know he/she will. B.