My pulchra is NOT a pulchra...don't know what it is...do YOU know?!

[dragonfly_dust]

I recently put up molt pics of my pulchra with its now his adult color at 3.5 inches in length on a different T forum.

The response was an overwhelming "sorry to say this but it's not a pulchra". This is due to the inconsistent black color on the legs and the triangle on the eye area.

So now I have a mystery T that I'm trying to figure out what is it. Here are the latest pics. Anyone have a thought on the species?

 

[Nada]

looks like an Aphonopelma Behlei. Let it harden and post some more pics and we'll be able to make a better guess.

 

[Atx13]

Looks like a california black, or whatever they're called.. not 100% sure on the scientific name, when I get on my comp ill let ya no.

 

[Nada]

Looks like a california black, or whatever they're called.. not 100% sure on the scientific name, when I get on my comp ill let ya no.

Aphonopelma Reversum. I think your right btw.

 

[Atx13]

Kenny with the save! That's the one I was thinking of.. I have a hard time remembering most of the north american species of Ts.

 

[dragonfly_dust]

That still doesn't explain the light forelegs tho...also this T has LARGE fangs much like a pulchra. Does a A. reversum have that too?

BTW the light-colored forelegs has been the same color in both pre-molt and post-molt.

 

[Nada]

Aphonopelma Females can get very large Chilecerae.
and individual members of a specific species can vary greatly in color. Go to Arachnoboards and look through the Aphonopelma gallery.

 

[dragonfly_dust]

I'll go do that. BTW the mystery T is male.

 

[Atx13]

Still a beautiful T regardless of what it really is .
Are you 100% sure its a male?

 

[dragonfly_dust]

Yes I'm 100% sure.

According to someone else on another forum, Apache might be a hybrid.

 

[Tgirl1010]

No telling. You can't ID a t 100% by photograph.