Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Xenesthis spp.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Xenesthis spp.

    Hey, I don'd see difference beetwen X.immanis, X.intermedia, and X. sp "blau". Can You help me?

  • #2
    Re: Xenesthis spp.

    Originally posted by Zibi
    Hey, I don'd see difference beetwen X.immanis, X.intermedia, and X. sp "blau". Can You help me?
    Try looking at the price

    I'm sure Andy or Ray will give you a more sensible answer....

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi

      How big are your specimens? where did you get them from?

      Ray

      Comment


      • #4
        Now I haven't read the paper on Xenesthis 'intermedius' intermedia (Schiapelli 1945) but unless there is distinct taxonomical differences its my opinion that along with Xenesthis spp they are mere colour variants of Xenesthis immanis (Ausserer 1875) this is the thing with Systematic Zoology.
        'some taxonomists base there descriptions
        on differences like a few additional leg spines, slightly variation
        to the genitalia, etc. ... all normal variations found in any given
        species and population ... even individuals from the same eggsac.
        One of the biggest problems with theraphosids (and mygalomorph
        taxonomy) is that their anatomical structures are so primitive and
        variable and require enormous population and range sampling ... not
        one or two specimens ... to determine if you have a new species.
        DNA profiling is more exact but complicated and requires working
        with an additional expert in that field. (RCW)'

        Who knows? I don't know if any one is doing a revision of this genus but I personally think it needs one along with many others and unless the taxonomist/systematic work direct from 'types' and not descriptions the genus maybe sorted out that's if indeed the 'type' was deposited or hasn't got lost!.
        maybe Martin Huber can shed a little more light on the genra for you if he gets chance to read this thread. as there was a good debate on another board regarding Martin and these spp.

        Comment


        • #5
          OK, but how tu difference with naked-eye metod? Is that possible?

          Comment


          • #6
            Hiya in my opinion unless you have a very very common sp or 100% identification by a trusted taxonomist/systematic the only way to identify any sp is via dissection . You could use an exuvia to a degree but its just not the same as a 'type' specimen harsh I know but that's the rules of zoological nomenclature.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Zibi,

              Some friends of mine are working on Xenesthis, I have specimens of 4 "species":

              Xenesthis sp "Blau"
              Xenesthis sp "Hell" (German for light)
              Xenesthis sp intermedia
              Xenesthis sp immanis

              From what i have been told the specimens of X. intermedia come from the type location of X. intermedia, but are very close to X. immansis (specimens of X. immanis have not come from the type location for this sp). And i seem to remember something about the males of X. intermedia being different in some way to the males of X. immanis, so still maybe 2 different species.


              At the taxonomists meeting in Stuttgart last year i saw the skin of an adult female of the "Blau" sp, this was the same size as an adult female T. blondi.

              The carapace is very densley clothed in pink -red hairs with a distinct blue sheen on the upper femur of each leg.

              The sp X. "Hell" as adults are basicly brown, withthe typical Xenesthis scopulae on the hind leg, the taxonomic feature for the Genus.

              With the exception of X. intermedia and X. immanis, the differances can clearly be seen in pictures.

              All the specimens i have are spiderlings or juvenile (Mark if i email you the pics can you post them please, you may even have some pics on the disc i gave you), so not showing adult colouration.


              Ray

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by RichardDegville
                harsh I know but that's the rules of zoological nomenclature.
                Forgive me if I'm wrong here Rich, but I thought the rules of Zoological Nomenclatur (Nomen meaning "name") referred to the rules and procedure regarding naming of genus, species and so on. What's that got to do with dissecting specimens?

                Comment


                • #9
                  I knew i would get pulled on that one what I should have put is establishing identity

                  Now back to business lol this is why I feel arachnoculture is in such disarray colour coding spp is not really a taxonomic guide look at Avicularia!. The odd few extra hairs or a 'type' is found bigger in the area or described via exuvia lol or the odd extra leg pattern on a pokie does that really warrant a new sp? what has to be considered is the 'type' that's being identified could be an genetic variant or mutant or evolution due to geomorphological conditions? working with paratypes helps but like Rick C West has said DNA profiling is really the answer and a wider collection area and not just one or 2 'type' specimens is really the way forward but with many taxonomists being unfunded this is not really feasible I know its going off topic a bit guys but it just has to be said. Regarding Xenesthis ssp I couldn't tell you only offer my opinion for what its worth but I would defiantly not consider a few extra fuzzy hairs and a blue sheen enough to warrant a new sp? if the males are indeed different then that's a new kettle of fish and could be worth a look into.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X