FA+
Shop
455
Views
Views
2
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Photography / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1200 x 383
File Size 299.8 kB
Report this content
More from CockroachMonster
I am not sure anyone on here can help me with this, but I thought I'd try. Tarantula sexing seems very difficult; the appearance of the underside varies considerably from species to species. From what I've learned, I should be looking for something called "epiandrous fusillae", but I'm still not sure what that is. From illustrations I've seen, the females' genitals appear more wide and boxy and the males have a curved area. If I could venture a guess, I'd say these are (from left to right), male/female/male or female/male/female. The middle one seems a little different from the other two. I'll edit this once I find out for sure - I've also asked some of the "pros" at InsectGeeks.com.
Category Photography / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1200 x 383px
File Size 299.8 kB
It seems like a male to me because of the "plates" on either side of a smaller area in the middle... ergh, I suck at explaining, so here's an outline XD http://i559.photobucket.com/albums/.....bt_sexing1.jpg
The "plates" are lungs.
What I find most important about the middle one, is the very visible arch of darker hairs. That seems compelling to me.
You can also make it out on left spider, but it's a bit harder to see.
The right one seems like it might not be developed enough to tell very well.
Do any of them have any molts left in them, do you know?
What I find most important about the middle one, is the very visible arch of darker hairs. That seems compelling to me.
You can also make it out on left spider, but it's a bit harder to see.
The right one seems like it might not be developed enough to tell very well.
Do any of them have any molts left in them, do you know?
i still vote with this method, that examining a molt is the easiest, if you can manage to get it back from the T intact enough
the inside of a molt is so much more conclusive than the outside since it's not exposed to the environmental anomalies
and you aren't subject to poor lighting/positioning whims of the live T that way
though i think you would find that you wouldn't even have to pin it down and analyze it under glass
with very few exceptions, it's pretty obvious using a decent molt, certainly by this size anyway
females practically shed the lining of their entire insides in a molt
the inside of a molt is so much more conclusive than the outside since it's not exposed to the environmental anomalies
and you aren't subject to poor lighting/positioning whims of the live T that way
though i think you would find that you wouldn't even have to pin it down and analyze it under glass
with very few exceptions, it's pretty obvious using a decent molt, certainly by this size anyway
females practically shed the lining of their entire insides in a molt
The only meathod I know of has been determined inaccurate, so I shall point you to more information on the method that you are referring to.
http://www.birdspiders.com/faq_sex.php
http://www.birdspiders.com/faq_sex.php
From what I know normally males have small pedpalps and females have large pedipalps.
I've heard and even read pedipalps are used in regards for reproduction it would probably be useful to guess with that... but then again, this is a method used for spiders, and not tarantulas...
Thorndraco above put up a link and looking at it for a bit made me think that the method explained there would be a viable choice.
I've heard and even read pedipalps are used in regards for reproduction it would probably be useful to guess with that... but then again, this is a method used for spiders, and not tarantulas...
Thorndraco above put up a link and looking at it for a bit made me think that the method explained there would be a viable choice.
Comments