when taking the cocoon from "v.cristatus"

[medizinmann]

hi @ all !
my vitalius cristatus cocoon will have 50 days on saturday and i am asking myself when taking it away from mum? there are informations about it in the internet talking about 50 days and then taking it away, but now one friend told me absolutely not to open it before 100 days...cause they would be too little now...
but i don't want to have all the slings in there with mum like i had it 4 days ago with hysterocrates hercules... that was a party to catch all the slings...
can anyone tell me his/her experiences?

marc

 

[MrT]

Sorry buddy,
I can't find it in my list of T's. Has it been renamed? Can you give the common name?
BTW, Welcome to Arachnopets.

I thought by repling, but giving you no info, at least it whoud give other who may have miss this thread a chance to see it. And maybe you'll get a answer..


Ern

 

[TheDon]

Im not sure if this is the same tarantula but here is a pic
http://theraphosidae.netliberte.org/myg/photos/Theraphosinae_sp_Vitalius_cristatus_fem_1_JPO.jpg it has the same latin name on the pic. Anyways I think it has the new name for it also

Peace

TheDon

 

[ArachnoJoost]

To my knowledge the name Vitalius cristatus has been changed to Lasiodora cristata
greetz,
Joost

 

[Martin H.]

.

Hi@all,

a posting from this thread about this topic: >>click me<<



--8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<--



Hello,

I have not much time at the moment to explain it in details why I asked this quesion. The short version: The "Vitalius cristatus" in the pet trade is NOT the same species Bertani transfered in the genus Lasiodora.

Here are some elder mails from Lelle, me and Rogerio Bertani from the arachnid_world mailing list about this topic – hope it's ok to copy and paste them here.


#########################################

At 23:27 16.10.02 +0000, you wrote:

Hi all,

> > Im a bit confused. Some info says L. cristatus (Platnicks page) and some
> > L.cristata.
> > So whats the correct name for now?
> >
> > a slightly confused
> > Lelle
>
>My bad. I had a older version of Platnicks downloaded on the hard drive. I
>see
>the name is changed. L. cristata it is

Are you talking about the species described by Mello-Leitão in 1923 or about the one in the pet trade?

What about the pet trade "Vitalius cristatus/Lasiodora cristata"?
Baumgarten described a male as "Vitalius cristatus" in 1998 which is very likely the same as the "Vitalius cristatus" in the pet trade (because he introduced a species under this name in the pet trade). Bertani (2001) is of the opinion, that the male described by Baumbarten (1998) is not the same species of which Mello-Leitão described a female in 1923 as
Acanthoscurria cristata (transfered to Pamphobeteus cristatus by Schiapelli & Gerschman in 1964; transfered to Vitalius cristatus by Schmidt in 1998) and which was now transfered from the genus Vitalius to the genus Lasiodora by Bertani in 2001.

see the World Spider Catalog:
Vitalius cristatus Baumgarten, 1998: 1, f. 1-3 (Dm, misidentified per Bertani, 2001: 285).
Vitalius cristatus Peters, 2000b: 131, f. 383-385 (f, presumably misidentified m).
L. c. Bertani, 2001: 285 (Tf from Vitalius).


Does anybody in the meanwhile know, what species or even the genus the pet
trade "Vitalius cristatus/Lasiodora cristata" is?

all the best,
Martin

www.spiderpix.com

#########################################

#########################################

At 13:38 17.10.02 +0000, you wrote:


Hi Lelle,

>Well as long as I dont see another name for the pet trade cristata I just c=
>all it L. cristata.
>It never end does it?... ;-)

but Lasiodora cristata = Vitalius cristatus in the sence of Mello-Leitão 1923 is a different species!
=> I still call them "Vitalius cristatus" or "Vitalius" cristatus, but written in quotation marks because then everybody would know which species I am refering to and that it is not the real Lasiodora cristata (Mello-Leitão 1923) which would be a wrong label for them.
...imagine which confusion will be, when you call it Lasiodora cristata and sometimes in the future, the real Lasiodora cristata will be available!

BTW, a friend of mine, who is working with the genus Pamphobeteus told me, that he thinks the "Vitalius cristatus" in the pet trade is a member of the genus Vitalius.

all the best,
Martin

#########################################

#########################################

Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 14:13:58 -0300
Subject: Re: [arachnid_world] Re: so.. cristatus or cristata?
Reply-To: arachnid_world@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <E182xAo-0007wr-00@mxng15.kundenserver.de>

Hi Lelle and Martin

Actually, the type of "Acanhoscurria cristata Mello-Leitão, 1923", which I have examined, has stridulating setae on the prolateral coxa of leg I and doesn't have the stridulating setae on the retrolateral face of the palpal trochanter. Along with the morphology of the spermathecae, it can be clearly included in the genus Lasiodora where it is now as Lasiodora cristata (Mello-Leitão, 1923). Whether it will be a valid species or not, it depends on the analysis of all available types of Lasiodora. I am presently reviewing this genus and examined all the available types. However, two are indispensable for the revision, L. klugi and L. striatipes, but, unfortunatly, I didn`t get the loan of these types from the BMNH.

Baumgarten, 1998 described the male of "Vitalius cristatus" on the assumption that it was the male of the species previously described by Mello-Leitão in 1923 which is discussed above. How did he reaches that conclusion is a mistery for me. Mello-Leiao's descrition is too poor and Schiapelli & Gerschman de Pikelin's paper transferring the species to the genus Pamphobeteus based the transferrence on the presence of stridulating setae on the trochanter of palps and spermathecae morphology (which have a similar morphology with species of Lasiodora).
It looks to me that he needed a name to give to the spider he began to sell in Europe. Systematics seemed no to be a real question for him.

However, the question involving the position of this species is not so easy. It shares characters with Vitalius, Lasiodora and Nhandu. Only a analysis including all species of these genera will demonstrate where it should be included. Together with the revision of Lasiodora, I am working on this question. I hope shortly to give an answer.

All the best

Rogerio

#########################################



hope these mails explains, why I asked this question! =;-)

all the best,
Martin



--8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<--



all the best,
Martin

 

[medizinmann]

hi martin, now we begin to talk in english? ok, let's start...
the thing about l.cristata and "v.cristatus" you have explained to me earlier, so that is not new for me, but thank you that you explained it here, i wasn't able at all...
however, what do you think, how many days should i wait till taking the cocoon from mum?

marc

 

[Martin H.]

Hi Marc,

I don't like to give advise on this topic because I don't want to be responsible: "You told me to take it away after XY weeks and now all died!"
I know people, who take eggsacks away after 3/4 weeks and put them in an incubator. IMHO a bit early and risiky. I know other people who wait minimum 42 days. Others wait 7 weeks. Personally I normally let the females take care about the eggsack because I am of the opinion that they know best (and a lot better than me) how to take care about their eggsacks. The only reason I take eggsacks away is because I don't like to catch/collect all the small slings out of the terrarium (or if a female has eaten an eggsack the year before) => I try to take them away short before they hatch. After about 7/8 weeks. But the development depends also on the species and the temperature. I never have bred "Vitalius cristatus".

all the best,
Martin

 

[pronty]

So what was the final name to be used?

"The species formerly known as Vitalius cristatus"?

 

[medizinmann]

thank you, martin, but i won't make you responsible for anything...cause it is always my decision, what i am doing...

@pronty: that depends on the species you're keeping...the general opinion is that the "vitalius cristatus" which is kept in germany is not the "v.cristatus" described 1923 by mello-l. which later has been "moved" by bertani to "lasiodora cristata"...
to understand this i also needed some time...
so now noone knows for real in the moment which species the "vitalius cristatus", kept and imported in germany, is...
they are imported as "vitalius cristatus", and the name still stays the same until a new description comes, and that' also the reason, why we now write it always with "..."

i hope, i was able to help you and you got it now...

best wishes from hannover
marc