"usambara" A bad name...?

Lopez

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Messages
2,040
Originally posted by MizM
THIS IS MY MYSTERY T!!!!!!!!



I guess I've got both versions now too!!!!! Here's my gorgeous orange girl:
Mystery over eh?

They look stunning just after amoult - really golden colours and an olive green carapace :)
 

Arachnopuppy

Arachnodemon
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Messages
715
Re: Re: ATS common names

Originally posted by Professor T

The only way to avoid confusion is to use scientific names (genus & specific epithet). Otherwise people from different regions use common names more common in that region.
That's why I stopped using common names a long time ago. I only go with scientific names now. You must admit, though, that petshops can get people's attention more with common names than scientific names.
 

MizM

Arachnoprincess
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Messages
4,918
:eek: Like Goliath Bird Eater!:eek:

Now THERE'S an attention getter!
 

Wade

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Aug 16, 2002
Messages
2,933
A standardized common name list would prove useful to the hobby if (HUGE GIANT "IF") everyone used it. It would give the laymen (those who don't want to imerse themselves neck deep into the world of spiders) something to call these things, plus it would give us a stable name to use during the all-to-frequent taxonomic upheavals. Yes, G. rosea is known by a number of common names, but it's scientific name has also changed a number of times in recent years. As recently as 5 years ago it was Phrixotrichus spatulata (before that, G. spatulata!), and it's also been misidentified as P. cala (and G. cala). However, it was always known in the hobby as "Chilean rosehair". Because common names aren't bound by the arcane rules of Linnean nomenclature, they could, in theory, be useful to individuals who aren't up to speed on the taxonomic history of each species. Unfortunately, in the real word, it doesn't work out that way, and for the most part common names are completely unreliable.

P.S.- Ironicaly, the best example of a common name proving useful (the above mentioned G. rosea situation), features a common name that is NOT on the AAS list. "Chilean roshair" is NOT the official AAS common name...it's just Chilean rose ;P Go figure!

Wade
 

Professor T

Arachnodemon
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
724
Originally posted by Wade

P.S.- Ironicaly, the best example of a common name proving useful (the above mentioned G. rosea situation), features a common name that is NOT on the AAS list. "Chilean roshair" is NOT the official AAS common name...it's just Chilean rose ;P Go figure!

Wade
Wade,

That is actually the best example of why common names will NEVER work. A body like the AAS can't come up with the most commonly used common name for the most commonly sold species!

Carl von Linné (Linnaeus) came up with the binomial system of nomenclature in the eighteenth century because common names were as hard to deal with back then as they are today.

I think he recognized that people have a hard time agreeing on anything, so he made rules for their own good, and their egos scurried to name as many things after themselves as they possibly could, using the law of priority and pig-latin. It was almost as fun as having "God-like" power...or at least as fun as playing video games... to people that had no TV.
 

deifiler

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
1,095
Regarding this topic - someone asked my opinions on the possibilites of breeding "usambara" with "mombassa"... now whilst the mombassa IS classed as p.murinus, the true classification of the 'usambara' is a little hazy....

I've seen it referred to as the 'murinus red form' a lot... so with this in mind, would it be like two humans from different ethnic groups reproducing?

Both of these spiders are from the same countries (to my knowledge) but live in different habitats within these... hence the colour variation for camoflauge do you think?

Anyway, this is what Phong from bighairyspiders says:

"Species Information:
Right now, there is some debate about what species this really is. Usambara is an illegal common name (hence the quotes). The current word is that the "Usambara" varieties (orange and red) are probably just highland color morphs of P. murinis, though it is still possible they are a separate species. Whatever it is, "Usambara" is the only real way to get across what you're talking about right now when you want to mention this species. They are beautiful monsters though! This species is supposedly from the Usambara region of Africa (near Kenya)? They like it dry and live in a variety of opportunistic retreats (i.e. anywhere they can find shelter, even off the ground). "

Sorry if I hijack your thread!
 

Wade

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Aug 16, 2002
Messages
2,933
Prof. T-

I don't think common names will ever work, either. Just trying to point out what they're trying to do. It's not likely to be successful, but when I sell tarantulas at reptile shows, I identify them by both the scientific name and the AAS common name (if one exists). To the newbie, common names are going to be used (regardless of accuracy and consistancy) until they become more familliar with the latin. I did once have someone argue with me that I labled my G. roseas wrong ("it's roseHAIR dude!"), which in the world of common names is laughable.

Deifiler-

The paper that officially identified "Usambara" as P. murinus was published last year, by Richard Gallon in the British Journal of Arachnology. Of course, someone else may come along and split it out again, so it goes in taxonomy!

As far as crossing them goes, it's probably possible (if it's not, that would be a solid argument for them being seperate species!). From a hobbyist's position, it's probably a bad idea to do so. As it stand now, we have bright orange/red spiders and yellow spiders. I don't see any advantage in an in-between spider, plus then the gene pool of the two varieties is hopelessly muddied.

Wade
 

sunnymarcie

Celestial Spider
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 13, 2003
Messages
1,294
..............Sorry if I hijack your thread!.............

It's all yours guys, I got the answer I was looking for.;P :rolleyes:
 

deifiler

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
1,095
Cheers wade!

You made some good points there, especially the one about if they won't breed, surely they arn't the same spider. I'd though the same, but it's nice to have things verified

Sunnymarcie - it's our thread now:p
 

Professor T

Arachnodemon
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
724
usambara x mombassa

Originally posted by deifiler
Regarding this topic - someone asked my opinions on the possibilites of breeding "usambara" with "mombassa"... now whilst the mombassa IS classed as p.murinus, the true classification of the 'usambara' is a little hazy....

deifiler,

There is no such thing as an illegal common name. All common names are equally non-scientific and non-illegal.

My opinion on the common names usambara and mombassa are that they are useful for hobbiest to ID different color morphs of the same species. I believe they are different races of the same species.

I totally agree with Wade about the foolishness of crossing these two varieties. You have a slightly different gene pool existing in two geographic races that natural selection produced. Why reverse in a generation what could have taken millions of years to produce?
 

MizM

Arachnoprincess
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Messages
4,918
Wouldn't ANY cross-breeding be foolishness?:?
 

Wade

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Aug 16, 2002
Messages
2,933
Originally posted by MizM
Wouldn't ANY cross-breeding be foolishness?:?
Most hobbyists are against hybridizing different species, but in this case the argument could be made that since they're the same species, what's the harm? The harm would be that instead of two intersting color morphs (probably more, really) of the same species, we could end of with one "mutt" that isn't as attractive as either of it's parents. This would be espesially bad if wild caught imports dissapeared (could happen) and all we'd be left with is our captive gene pool.

Wade
 

Mister Internet

Big Meanie Doo Doo Head :)
Arachnosupporter +
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
1,408
Originally posted by Wade
Most hobbyists are against hybridizing different species, but in this case the argument could be made that since they're the same species, what's the harm? The harm would be that instead of two intersting color morphs (probably more, really) of the same species, we could end of with one "mutt" that isn't as attractive as either of it's parents. This would be espesially bad if wild caught imports dissapeared (could happen) and all we'd be left with is our captive gene pool.

Wade
I know nothing about T genetics, but depending on what type of genetic trait it is, would there be a chance it's an either/or proposition? Like that a resulting sac would have mombassa OR usambara colored slings, but not slings that are a color mutt? Probably Vayu Son or Lam would need to explain that better... I'm way out of my league.
 

skinheaddave

SkorpionSkin
Arachnosupporter +
Joined
Aug 15, 2002
Messages
4,342
Tom,

Yes, there are several possibilities. Assuming it follows the basic simple dominant/recessive rules that everyone learned in high school, it would be an either/or situation. That assumption is almost certainly false, however. The simplest way to get the mutt effect was if one colour was dominant, but incompletely so. That would make heterozygotes a mixed colour. Since the mutts would have both genes, though, you would never completely eliminate the "pure" colours.

Of course both of these simple scenarios are unlikely. In reality, it is probably a much more complex system involving multiple genes and even various extragenetic or environmental factors. This is somewhat supported by the degree of variance within any particular colour pattern. There are "Usumbaras" that are more orange than others, for example. It would be very interesting to x-breed and see what happened. Incorporating information on the geodemographics of the spiders would actualy make such a project an interesting study in population genetics or perhaps evolutionary theory. What if the one colour phase was supported in the wild only through geographical isolation, for example. I mean, this is the type of stuff that keeps me awake at night. :)

Cheers,
Dave
 

Mister Internet

Big Meanie Doo Doo Head :)
Arachnosupporter +
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
1,408
Dave,

Interesting thoughts... I read quite a bit about Corn Snake genetics last year, which is a bit different. Basically, you have NO naturally occuring aberrant color morphs (barring albino and mutations) that are self-sustaining. The only localized color morph is the "Okeetee" color morph, which is no more than an extremely brilliant normal coloring/patterning. ALL the "designer" snakes (Butter Cream, Peppermint, Caramel, Charcoal, etc etc) are selective breedings of select mutations. I'm under no delusions that it would be this easy to manipulate T genes, but your questions about environment, locality, and other factors raise interesting possibilities.

I think there is probably far less complexity to T genes in the end, and the result is far less probabilty of color mutations naturally occuring. I mean, how many thousands of slings are hatched every month by Arachnopets members, yet I've never heard of someone mentioning, "hey, one of my rosie slings came out albino". IIRC, T's get their coloring not from pigment, but from the carapace, etc directly... the lack of pigment would indicate that the exterior biology of the Usambara spiders have fundamentally changed to give them the orange coloring, would it not?
 

Wade

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Aug 16, 2002
Messages
2,933
Cross breeding to see what happens is one thing, but is quite annother to sell or otherwise allow the resulting spiders to enter the trade. If Tom's suggestion is correct, and it's an either-or type thing, then the crossed spiders would end up being identified as whichever parent they look like. If you're a T breeder, you might want to breed the Mombassa (since it's not as common in the hobby as the Usambara), so you breed what you think are pure Mombassas, but when they emerge half the slings are orange! Personally, I'd be pretty PO'd! Also, down the line annother taxonomist may come along and revise the whole thing and want to call the Usambaras a subspecies (subspecies are not popular among T taxonmists at the present time, but that could change), then we are talking hybrids.

The either/or hypothosis also assumes that the color morphs are mutations, like albanism and hypermelanism we see in snakes. I don't think this is the case with the usambaras, or with any T species I've heard of. The various hybrids of Brachypelma species do not follow an either/or pattern and indeed, look like a cross. In reality, crossing the two named forms of P. murinus might result in nothing worse than spiders that look like the naturally occuring intergrades between the two forms. Maybe not a big deal, but still I think the best course of action would be to try to preserve the spiders as they are and leave the experimenting to a later date when we understand them in their present form (which we don't yet).

In the end, it's quite obvious that T's and many other invertebrates aren't always going to fit into our neat little classification system. There's always going to be grey areas where the boundery between "species", "subspecies" and "color variant" is not clear, and we are forced to make judgements as we try our level best to establish as many species in captivity as we can. If we were at a point where either morph was becoming endangered in the hobby, then crossing them (color morphs, not species) to preserve the line may be in order. We still have plenty of fresh genetic stock of a variety of P. murinus forms available, I see no reason to start mixing it up.

Wade
 

MizM

Arachnoprincess
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Messages
4,918
My question was hypothetical, but has been answered to the fullest:

Originally posted by MizM
Wouldn't ANY cross-breeding be foolishness?:?
The technicality of this discussion is too much to absorb on a Friday... and Mister Internet's display of intelligence AND biceps is overwhelming. I'm going to lunch!
 

Mister Internet

Big Meanie Doo Doo Head :)
Arachnosupporter +
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
1,408
Wade, you said it much better than I could have... I agree that we shouldn't go crossing them just to "see". I would hate to see the same thing happen to the invert hobby that's happened to the herp hobby, with everyone chasing after the next designer snake.

Although an albino centipede would be ALL kinds of cool. ;)

MizM: it has nothing to do with intelligence... I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I just sometimes like using bigger words, simply because I feel obligated to use them since I did learn them at one point. This incessant proclivity towards overwhelming verbosity is indiscriminately perceived as possession of uncommon mental prowess, but I assure you, it's simply the subconscious urge to eliminate all barricades separating myself from the first container of brewed spirits with which I come into contact upon departing my place of employment.

Translation: I'm trying to wear my brain out, so I have no guilt about drinking as soon as I hit the door tonight. ;)

And thanks for the compliment, but if that impresses you, you obviously haven't seen Botar's pic in the Tattoos thread.... YOWZAH! Needless to say, I try to remain on his good side for a reason. :)
 

MizM

Arachnoprincess
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Messages
4,918
Originally posted by Mister Internet
MizM: it has nothing to do with intelligence... I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I just sometimes like using bigger words, simply because I feel obligated to use them since I did learn them at one point. This incessant proclivity towards overwhelming verbosity is indiscriminately perceived as possession of uncommon mental prowess, but I assure you, it's simply the subconscious urge to eliminate all barricades separating myself from the first container of brewed spirits with which I come into contact upon departing my place of employment.
UR SO funny... a sense of humor too!! I try not to use the vocabulary that I've learned because then I'll be held accountable for my intelligence and have to work twice as hard!:D

Anyway, you're a cutie and this is the end of this thread... before I get a verbal warning!!
 

skinheaddave

SkorpionSkin
Arachnosupporter +
Joined
Aug 15, 2002
Messages
4,342
Wade,

Firstly, taxonomy is an attempted reflection of biology, not the cause of it. Subspecies designations are losing popularity across the board, as they have very little biological significance. Should they later chose to designate subspecies, this will not in any way change whether or not they can interbreed. I think people sometimes get too worked up about designating things as "hybrids," at the subspecies level. For example, yellow and everglade's ratsnakes naturaly interbreed to create "deckert's ratsnakes." With regards to the biological species concept, these two snakes are the same thing, with the pure forms being different populations and with a hybrid zone present. There is a big difference between violating the metapopulation dynamics of the natural populations and violating the biological species concept in artificial conditions.

Originally posted by Wade
The either/or hypothosis also assumes that the color morphs are mutations, like albanism and hypermelanism we see in snakes.
If there is any genetic basis for the colourations then yes, one or the other (or both) will have come from mutations of one form or another. Note, I'm not suggesting that this IS the case, but merely that if there is a genetic backing for colouration then there will be at least some variation in alleles.

I'd like to know a lot more about their natural population dynamics before damning crossing between the two colour morphs -- and experimental crossing might go a long way towards interpreting population dynaimcs if they are properly studied.

Cheers,
Dave
 
Top