OK I keep seeing certain breeders & dealers labeling Chileans as porteri?? I assume this is in debate or is this a final separation??
ftorres
Hello MAtt,
It seems to be more like a debate.
There are some people in Europe saying that G porteri has not been in the hobby.
CHilean exporters name theirs G porteri for the brown plain looking one and G rosea for the nice colorfull one or more ornate one.
at the same time we started seeing the so cal RCF red color form rosea.
G rosea and G porteri needs to be revised again
Matt Kogler
So should I consider my rosies to be rosea still, or switch them over to porteri, do you think this will stick??
cacoseraph
damned species vogues =P
in reality there should be no ambiguity unless the species weren't described well. it should be relatively simple to find the original descriptions and compare specimens to that... but if the original descriptions are vague or themselves have ambiguity then it is as francisco said, and they need to be reworked
according to platnick
G. argentinensis Strand, 1907 = G. rosea (Walckenaer, 1837) (Büch
G. cala Chamberlin, 1917 = G. rosea (Walckenaer, 1837) (Schmidt,
G. spatulata (F. O. P.-Cambridge, 1897) = G. rosea (Walckenaer, 1837) (Schmidt, 1996a: 17).
rosea was originally described as Mygale rosea by Walckenaer, 1837
porteri was originally described by Mello-Leitão in 1936 as Lasiodora porteri
one thing i find interesting is that Platnick has rosea from Bolivia, Chile, and Argentina but porteri from only Chile.
ftorres
cacoseraph wrote:
damned species vogues =P
in reality there should be no ambiguity unless the species weren't described well. it should be relatively simple to find the original descriptions and compare specimens to that... but if the original descriptions are vague or themselves have ambiguity then it is as francisco said, and they need to be reworked
according to platnick
G. argentinensis Strand, 1907 = G. rosea (Walckenaer, 1837) (Büch
G. cala Chamberlin, 1917 = G. rosea (Walckenaer, 1837) (Schmidt,
G. spatulata (F. O. P.-Cambridge, 1897) = G. rosea (Walckenaer, 1837) (Schmidt, 1996a: 17).
rosea was originally described as Mygale rosea by Walckenaer, 1837
porteri was originally described by Mello-Leitão in 1936 as Lasiodora porteri
one thing i find interesting is that Platnick has rosea from Bolivia, Chile, and Argentina but porteri from only Chile.
G rosea has many sinonims therefore is described in so many countries.
In my opinion, not an educated one.
ALl the brown with little accents are G porteri and all the really pink/redish ornate ones are G rosea.
francisco
cacoseraph
well... didn't TTKG say that all colorforms (NCF, RCF, and frosted pink) are known to be produced from the same sac?
of course, species that were really close combined with WC that mated with multiple males of different species might be able to do that
i can't wait until DNA sequencing is super cheap (and they store everything and do the cladograms for you hehehe)
