why so many similar species!?

ornata

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
207
hello

I have another interesting question(if you ask me), why do you think it exist so many similar species within the subfamilys?

As everybody knows, it can sometimes be "very" hard to identefy a species (poecilotheria ex.)

It has to do something with genemutations and natural selection,that is the start of evolution, but why so "many" mutations? As we know, many similar genuses/species live in the same areas/habitats, so why has it evolved so many, almost, "identical" species!?

And with all respect, pleas do not bring God into this topic, if he exsist, I do not think he had enything to do with tarantula evolution;)

(and sorry if the english is not perfect)

take care,
Daniel
 

AfterTheAsylum

Arachnodemon
Old Timer
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
675
hello

I have another interesting question(if you ask me), why do you think it exist so many similar species within the subfamilys?

As everybody knows, it can sometimes be "very" hard to identefy a species (poecilotheria ex.)

It has to do something with genemutations and natural selection,that is the start of evolution, but why so "many" mutations? As we know, many similar genuses/species live in the same areas/habitats, so why has it evolved so many, almost, "identical" species!?

take care,
Daniel
This is a really good question. I mean adaptation is certainly a part of it when you look at it from an evolutionary stance. I mean, look at T. blondi and T. apophysis. I think your question is ahead of the time. There hasn't been a lot of research on Ts as there is with other animals. There could be "many" mutations because of what they might become in the future for all we know. They travel the same road (which eventually it splits in two) and the two roads get further apart. Maybe we're just at the beginning of the fork in the road.

All in all, I don't think I even semi-answered any questions. I don't feel accomplished at all.... :(
 

Crotalus

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
2,434
hello

I have another interesting question(if you ask me), why do you think it exist so many similar species within the subfamilys?

As everybody knows, it can sometimes be "very" hard to identefy a species (poecilotheria ex.)

It has to do something with genemutations and natural selection,that is the start of evolution, but why so "many" mutations? As we know, many similar genuses/species live in the same areas/habitats, so why has it evolved so many, almost, "identical" species!?

And with all respect, pleas do not bring God into this topic, if he exsist, I do not think he had enything to do with tarantula evolution;)

(and sorry if the english is not perfect)

take care,
Daniel
We divide the spiders into genus and species - not nature. And sometimes we fail and split up groups of spiders that have minute differencies and call them two species.
The reason why two have few small differences might lay in a barrier between the two groups which are not visible to our eye when we keep them in terrarium but might be clear when go and see how they live in the wild - the two groups might live in different regions etc.
 

ornata

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
207
We divide the spiders into genus and species - not nature. And sometimes we fail and split up groups of spiders that have minute differencies and call them two species.
The reason why two have few small differences might lay in a barrier between the two groups which are not visible to our eye when we keep them in terrarium but might be clear when go and see how they live in the wild - the two groups might live in different regions etc.
but you can finde species, with very small differences, in the same habitat/area!

The reasons for this may be genmutations, and actually just be "accidentaly". If evolution should happen, it MUST happen genmutations first, then natural selection will "choose" which individuals that survive and spread its genes...but if this should happen, the new individals(with genemutations) must not breed with rest of the normal poulation!?

So it must be some form of barries in nature, that seperate the new individuals from the rest of the population....or maybe something else!?
(sorry about the english)
 

Crotalus

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
2,434
but you can finde species, with very small differences, in the same habitat/area!

The reasons for this may be genmutations, and actually just be "accidentaly". If evolution should happen, it MUST happen genmutations first, then natural selection will "choose" which individuals that survive and spread its genes...but if this should happen, the new individals(with genemutations) must not breed with rest of the normal poulation!?

So it must be some form of barries in nature, that seperate the new individuals from the rest of the population....or maybe something else!?
(sorry about the english)
Small differences in the same area are likely not two species but one and the two differencies are within the same population.
It may not be anything that are "better" or more suitable for the species to have variation #1 or variation #2 - they are pointless in terms of "best" for the species - so both traits survives.
 

ornata

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
207
Small differences in the same area are likely not two species but one and the two differencies are within the same population.
It may not be anything that are "better" or more suitable for the species to have variation #1 or variation #2 - they are pointless in terms of "best" for the species - so both traits survives.
Yes, and if it is doesent matter if the species have variation 1 or 2(within same population) it will not happen natural selection and therfore probably not evolve a new species, maybe just colorvariations ex( it depends if the genmutation happend in the haploide cells/sexcells!?)

But sometimes we can finde different species in same area/habitat, that have some differencies(poecilotheria, I think!?), and the reason for this, may be that the population have been splitted in some way!?

or what do you think:)
Crotalus,
kunne jo skrivd på norsk her egentlig, du er jo svenks:)
 

Cheshire

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 7, 2005
Messages
3,160
The answer to your question is this:

The term species is an artificial barrier in a straight continuum.
 

treeweta

Arachnobaron
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
362
I like to think of it as a bicycle wheel. The center hub are the ancestral animals of the same species, as you go out from the hub (time) on the spokes the descendants move to different areas or otherwise geographically separated one way or another.

As those separate groups evolve in their own ways the differences between the groups become more and more marked as you go towards the wheel rim, some spokes may at times then overlap and you will get two similar species together and now unable to breed (or maybe they still can!) What survives to be observed is as much luck as anything else, right now we have lots of similar brachypelma species but imagine a climate change wiping out many of them, you would be left with fewer species and then simply wouldnt have 'lots of similar species' but just a few.

Take theraphosa apophysis and blondi, at one time in the past (and probably not so long ago) they would have been in 'their' central hub as the same species, with time they have separated and become some what differentiated (if they can breed fertile then they are still the same species) it is of course possible that the ranges overlap and intermediate forms (or natural hybrids if they were truly separated)can be seen but i not sure about that with the male tibial hooks!! there quite possibly were/are other groups diverged from the central hub ancestors that have still to be found. what taxonomists have to be careful about is calling apophysis and blondi theraphosa but not realising that another similar spider with a different genus might well have started in the same middle hub with the Theraphosa ancestors, thus that animal would also be Theraphosa. The trick is to ensura that all those called theraphosa (for eg) did actually start at the same ancestral hub and that the name includes ALL the descendants from that ancestral hub (in practice very difficult).
 

ornata

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
207
I like to think of it as a bicycle wheel. The center hub are the ancestral animals of the same species, as you go out from the hub (time) on the spokes the descendants move to different areas or otherwise geographically separated one way or another.

As those separate groups evolve in their own ways the differences between the groups become more and more marked as you go towards the wheel rim, some spokes may at times then overlap and you will get two similar species together and now unable to breed (or maybe they still can!) What survives to be observed is as much luck as anything else, right now we have lots of similar brachypelma species but imagine a climate change wiping out many of them, you would be left with fewer species and then simply wouldnt have 'lots of similar species' but just a few.

Take theraphosa apophysis and blondi, at one time in the past (and probably not so long ago) they would have been in 'their' central hub as the same species, with time they have separated and become some what differentiated (if they can breed fertile then they are still the same species) it is of course possible that the ranges overlap and intermediate forms (or natural hybrids if they were truly separated)can be seen but i not sure about that with the male tibial hooks!! there quite possibly were/are other groups diverged from the central hub ancestors that have still to be found. what taxonomists have to be careful about is calling apophysis and blondi theraphosa but not realising that another similar spider with a different genus might well have started in the same middle hub with the Theraphosa ancestors, thus that animal would also be Theraphosa. The trick is to ensura that all those called theraphosa (for eg) did actually start at the same ancestral hub and that the name includes ALL the descendants from that ancestral hub (in practice very difficult).
Thats the reason for why we can crossbread some Brachypelma species(hybrid), because two species used to be one and the same species/or evolved from the same species,
but the population got splitted and it happend genmuatations,in one or bought pupulations, and then we got two/or one new species......the main thing is that if a new species should evolve, it "has" to be seperated from the orginal population

BUT one species can also evolve to an new species within one population, if the mutation will give it a advantege.
Then these new gen(s) can be more common by natural selection and a new species may evolve

(really sorry about the english)
 

treeweta

Arachnobaron
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
362
Thats the reason for why we can crossbread some Brachypelma species(hybrid), because two species used to be one and the same species/or evolved from the same species,
but the population got splitted and it happend genmuatations,in one or bought pupulations, and then we got two/or one new species......the main thing is that if a new species should evolve, it "has" to be seperated from the orginal population

BUT one species can also evolve to an new species within one population, if the mutation will give it a advantege.
Then these new gen(s) can be more common by natural selection and a new species may evolve

(really sorry about the english)
yes, for sure one species can change into another even without separation, the separation is through time so even though each parent/child is the same species its the vast line of dead ancestors that separates the founder members and the living descendants, if you took the live descendant back in time it would no longer be able to breed with its ancient ancestor (depending upon how ancient and just how much has changed between them).
 

Drachenjager

Arachnoemperor
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
3,513
well take the case ot US aphonopelma. I ahve talked wiht people who believe that there are not nearly as many species of them as what we now have listed. And some who believe that there may be more. I believe that we have a case of people trying to document these bugs and there is a not small amount of conciet inherant in higherlevels of education and percieved intelligence these people do not and or have not consulted each other about the bugs they are trying to document. Thus you have little (or at least not nearly enough ) cooperation between persons working on the taxonomy of invertibrates. I do understand however, that i would not want to share what i have learned about a new T until i had the work done and published , because i would really hat to have my work plagerised and credit given to someone who really didnt to all the leg work. but thats the way it is, and people being as they are dosent help a bit.
I know people who KNOW that A. hentzi and A. anax are the same bug, and i also know others that KNOW they are differant.
But i challenged the one in particular i spoke wiht to show me the differance so i would understand and he could not provide it. All he said is there is microscopic differances in the male sex organs of the anax and hentzi. but coulnt show me even so much as a diagram of the differance. So i truly question the honesty of that.


BUT to make a long story short, there may not be nearly as many species as we think there is. and also as you can see on the boards "color dosent mean anything" but i have never ever heard of a solid black P. metallica lol
 

treeweta

Arachnobaron
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
362
well take the case ot US aphonopelma. I ahve talked wiht people who believe that there are not nearly as many species of them as what we now have listed. And some who believe that there may be more.
as has been mentioned before the concept of species is very much artificial and one of convenience for people. Assuming that all live aphonopelma are truly from the same ancestral stock we could rightly call them aphonopelma, however where to divide the remaining animals as species is where the trouble starts. If all aphonopelma can inbreed and produce viable offspring then one could call them all by the same species name too and any further labelling would just be to differentiate sub species or whatever you want to call them. To say that anax is the same as hentzi is only realistic if they share a common ancestor which doesnt include any other aphonopelma species (as they too would be the same as anax/hentzi) and again if they are given a separate species designation it is one of convenience but presumably the taxonomist can differentiate one group (anax) from another group (hentzi) and that represents a real difference aquired during the animals separation in the distant past from their unique shared common ancestors. Of course relying on physical characters is difficult, only the genetic code provides the real story of where the 'anax' and 'hentzi' came from.
 

ornata

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
207
It is easy to finde out if a. anax and a. henzi is one and same species, if you take ex. a "anax" male and breed it with a "henzi" female, you will possible get a hybrid, and if this "hybrid" can breed with another anax/hentzi, you have solved the "problem":)
 

treeweta

Arachnobaron
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
362
It is easy to finde out if a. anax and a. henzi is one and same species, if you take ex. a "anax" male and breed it with a "henzi" female, you will possible get a hybrid, and if this "hybrid" can breed with another anax/hentzi, you have solved the "problem":)

ornata, true. the only issue then is one of convenience, if you can say breed theraphosa apophysis and blondi and give viable offspring then its still convenient to label as separate species/sub species as what you are then doing is using a technique to seperate the two distinct lineages from the old ancestor, and for somebody who is quite convinced that a blondi and an apophysis do NOT look the same (esp the males) I would rather know what im getting in a purchase so the labels are still useful.
 

Talkenlate04

ArachnoGod
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
8,662
Thats the reason for why we can crossbread some Brachypelma species(hybrid), because two species used to be one and the same species/or evolved from the same species,
but the population got splitted and it happend genmuatations,in one or bought pupulations, and then we got two/or one new species......the main thing is that if a new species should evolve, it "has" to be seperated from the orginal population

BUT one species can also evolve to an new species within one population, if the mutation will give it a advantege.
Then these new gen(s) can be more common by natural selection and a new species may evolve

(really sorry about the english)

Not really. In classification there has always been family, genus, and species. With Brachys there are different species within the same genus and because they are so close to each other genetically they can breed. The equivalent of that for comparison is humans black, white, Asian, all of them are clearly different cultures but still human and still can mate together and are not the same, but you can admit that white and black there is a big difference right?(thus the seperate species) So you could even break down the human race by family, genus, and species if you wanted to.

Now we know there are some naturally occurring hybrids occurring in the wild, that might not be enough to call it its own species to some, but if not what would you call it? If a Smithi and a Vagans mate somehow and have offspring what would you call that? Just a Brachypelma? It has to be classed something and the offspring of those two don't fall into any species category, but they do still fit the genus.
Were it gets even weirder to me is if someone can get a Rosea and a Vagans to mate and produce offspring, doesn’t that mean that everything on a whole when it comes to classifying the family of arachnids has to be re evaluated all together? Because the offspring would not only not fit in a species, they would not fit in a genus ether, they would only fall under the same family.
It's plenty confusing that’s for sure. I can't imagine being a part of classifying new animals and insects. That has to be a headache and a half. I get all turned around just trying to talk about it. Half of what I said is wrong more then likely, please correct me cause it sort of makes sense in my head but I know I am wrong somewhere. :p
 

Drachenjager

Arachnoemperor
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
3,513
It is easy to finde out if a. anax and a. henzi is one and same species, if you take ex. a "anax" male and breed it with a "henzi" female, you will possible get a hybrid, and if this "hybrid" can breed with another anax/hentzi, you have solved the "problem":)
lol i believe that the "distribution" of anax and hentzi overlap in many places and that may be happening in the wild. If they are differant at all .
if they are the same then its really irrelavant since the distrubution is the same .
I do however believe no matter how close to the same species a bug is if they look considerably differant they should be at least given sub species distinction IE
Scolopedra heros heros, castaniceps and arizonensis. they look nothing alike in color pattern and even the castaniceps is not found in the same kind of habitats as heros heros and i assume arizonensis is similar habitat to heros heros . but thats just my opinion based only on common sense...
See now i have goten off into pedes AHHH
anyway if you have a bug thats the same as another but except for habitat and coloration id say call it somethign else. if it looks the same and is found in the same type of habitats and is taxonomicaly the same its the same
 

Talkenlate04

ArachnoGod
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
8,662
Oh man you get into "sub species" and things like that and it could be worse then it already is. Could you imagine?

Oh I have a RCF Phase II lowland G Rosea for sale. Lol. It could easily get so so confusing.
 

ornata

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
207
ornata, true. the only issue then is one of convenience, if you can say breed theraphosa apophysis and blondi and give viable offspring then its still convenient to label as separate species/sub species as what you are then doing is using a technique to seperate the two distinct lineages from the old ancestor, and for somebody who is quite convinced that a blondi and an apophysis do NOT look the same (esp the males) I would rather know what im getting in a purchase so the labels are still useful.
I think that t. apophysis an t.blondi isent the best exampel, because they can not be found in the same area(I think!?) and I think that most "experts" agree that they are two different species(thinking about the males)
So I think they will produce a hybrid, that is unfertile
 

Talkenlate04

ArachnoGod
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
8,662
I think that t. apophysis an t.blondi isent the best exampel, because they can not be found in the same area(I think!?) and I think that most "experts" agree that they are two different species(thinking about the males)
So I think they will produce a hybrid, that is unfertile
Recently at tarantulas.com they had what was thought to be a blondi apophysis hybrid (I think), I won't say much more but maybe Dan will come weigh in on the slings they had. They were interesting and defiantly not one or the other. I don’t want to mess up any of the particulars so I will see if he comes on here and says something.
 

Drachenjager

Arachnoemperor
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
3,513
Were it gets even weirder to me is if someone can get a Rosea and a Vagans to mate and produce offspring, doesn’t that mean that everything on a whole when it comes to classifying the family of arachnids has to be re evaluated all together? Because the offspring would not only not fit in a species, they would not fit in a genus ether, they would only fall under the same family.
It's plenty confusing that’s for sure. I can't imagine being a part of classifying new animals and insects. That has to be a headache and a half. I get all turned around just trying to talk about it. Half of what I said is wrong more then likely, please correct me cause it sort of makes sense in my head but I know I am wrong somewhere. :p
lol a Bracystola rosans
 
Top