# The difference Avicularia avicularia??



## wilson1983 (Mar 1, 2011)

can anyone tell me if theres any way of telling the difference between a male and a female Avicularia avicularia without having a look at the moult, like suttle differences?? i know i will not be for sure untill i see the moult, but i would like to know if it may or may not be a female!

thanks: victory:


----------



## wilkinss77 (Sep 23, 2008)

until they're mature, that's the only way, i'm afraid.


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

Well there is always ventral sexing, lol, jk, it's pretty difficult.

I'm sorry but you're just going to have to wait on it moulting.

Also, it's an _Avicularia sp._, there is no proper description for _A. avicularia_, and until that new paper comes out nothing is one in my eyes (cos, y'know, I totally get to decide these things). Anyone calling it _A. avicularia _is guessing, and probably/possibly wrong.


----------



## Ben.M (Mar 2, 2008)

Hedgewitch said:


> Well there is always ventral sexing, lol, jk, it's pretty difficult.
> 
> I'm sorry but you're just going to have to wait on it moulting.
> 
> Also, it's an _*Avicularia sp.*_, there is no proper description for _A. avicularia_, and until that new paper comes out nothing is one in my eyes (cos, y'know, I totally get to decide these things). Anyone calling it _A. avicularia _is guessing, and probably/possibly wrong.


Arnt they now classified as _Avicularia sp._ 'Guyana'??? :whistling2:


----------



## wilson1983 (Mar 1, 2011)

Ben.M said:


> Arnt they now classified as _Avicularia sp._ 'Guyana'??? :whistling2:


ahhh, thank you very much


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

Ben.M said:


> Arnt they now classified as _Avicularia sp._ 'Guyana'??? :whistling2:


Not exactly, it's just what folk tend to call them, half won't even be from Guyana but it's still more accurate than calling them _A. avicularia._


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

I don't understand where this A. avicularia being non-existant comes from. Quite a few repeat it, and to me it seems one of those internet myths that gets repeated enough to become real.

The paper that is planned for release in 2013 was previewed with the following identified species of Avicularia:
avicularia, juruensis, purpurea, taunayi, variegata, velutina, rufa, aymara & 6 new ones.


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

Poxicator said:


> I don't understand where this A. avicularia being non-existant comes from.


Ray Gabriel and other's work on the supposed holotype I believe. If anyone has access to the article I'd be indebted.

Gabriel, R., Gallon, R. C. & Smith, A. M. 2007. Examination of the _Avicularia avicularia_ specimens from the Linnaean Collection_Journal of the British Tarantula Society, November 2007, Vol. 23 No. 1. pp. 22–30._



> Quite a few repeat it, and to me it seems one of those internet myths that gets repeated enough to become real.
> 
> The paper that is planned for release in 2013 was previewed with the following identified species of Avicularia:
> avicularia, juruensis, purpurea, taunayi, variegata, velutina, rufa, aymara & 6 new ones.


I know that paper recognises it as a species, and like I said, when it's published I'll accept it. Never said it was non-existent anyway, only that it cannot be identified. As I understand it there's currently no proper description of the species and no holotype unless someone has unearthed one while I wasn't looking (entirely possible).


----------



## joseguervo (Nov 15, 2010)

A good way to tell is how fast the avic grows, your males will grow much quicker, being full grown within a year or two and have longer, skinnier leg types. Sometimes you can see hooks on the fist set of legs, sometimes not. If a mature male is reaching the end of his life, he won't be able to climb as well and will desperately look for a mate. Females will grow much slower and have a more bulky appearance, somewhat more fuzzier and much prettier. My predictions based on growing times have all been very accurate for my avics, as well as other species.


----------



## Poxicator (Nov 14, 2007)

Toby, that article is always a good read and always leaves more questions than it answers. 
From my understanding the holotype is completely wrong, that somehow there was a mix up and an African species substituted the American species. This could have happened in so many areas, and its quite likely that it occurred after Linnaeus's death. Perhaps a label fell off some specimens that lay in his house or when they were moved by his son. 6 years after Linnaeus's death (and that of his son) his widow sold the collection off, perhaps in transit or perhaps in the 5 year period before the collection was given a proper home.

However, Avicularia avicularia was also described by Latrielle, Ausserer, Cambridge and more recently Schmidt and Peters.

You can find the paper here:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...iKXNBQ&usg=AFQjCNFHmGuYNEJTY5m__UNhg9iHJCQ-TQ

or you can read Craig McKay's translation here:
Caroline_Fukushima_english.pdf


----------

