Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New articles
New media comments
New article comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Articles
New articles
New comments
Search articles
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Dark Theme
Contact us
Close Menu
Are you a Tarantula hobbyist? If so, we invite you to join our community! Once you join you'll be able to post messages, upload pictures of your pets and enclosures and chat with other Tarantula enthusiasts.
Sign up today!
Forums
Tarantula Forum Topics
General Tarantula Discussion
Revision of Lampropelma, Cyriapagopus, and Haplopelma
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Nicolas C" data-source="post: 58146" data-attributes="member: 3795"><p>That's a hell of a change! No more "haplos"! Plus some minor adjustments (Haplopelma lividum -> Cyriopagopus livid<u>us</u> for instance)...</p><p></p><p>The fact is that such a massive change, which isn't very surprising for Lampropelma violaceopes and maybe even Haplopelma (it had to be done), has raised some controverses in Germany for instance. In another forum where I go (a swiss german forum), the discussion has been strong. It seems that the methods used by Smith and Jacobi were too old to be trustworthy. For instance, the works of Volker von Wirth (famous german specialist, specially into asian tarantulas) weren't taken into consideration. And some keys used now for determination (stridulation organs, spines on metatarsus IV, etc.) weren't used. What they say on this forum (and that I've been copying above) is: obsolete methods, controversial article, maybe we should wait a little bit before changing all the names... They certainly will be changed, no doubts, but this work may not be the final word on the subject (is there any kind of final word on taxonomy anyway???).</p><p></p><p>Let's see what the WSC will do, and were the research will lead the taxonomists...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Nicolas C, post: 58146, member: 3795"] That's a hell of a change! No more "haplos"! Plus some minor adjustments (Haplopelma lividum -> Cyriopagopus livid[U]us[/U] for instance)... The fact is that such a massive change, which isn't very surprising for Lampropelma violaceopes and maybe even Haplopelma (it had to be done), has raised some controverses in Germany for instance. In another forum where I go (a swiss german forum), the discussion has been strong. It seems that the methods used by Smith and Jacobi were too old to be trustworthy. For instance, the works of Volker von Wirth (famous german specialist, specially into asian tarantulas) weren't taken into consideration. And some keys used now for determination (stridulation organs, spines on metatarsus IV, etc.) weren't used. What they say on this forum (and that I've been copying above) is: obsolete methods, controversial article, maybe we should wait a little bit before changing all the names... They certainly will be changed, no doubts, but this work may not be the final word on the subject (is there any kind of final word on taxonomy anyway???). Let's see what the WSC will do, and were the research will lead the taxonomists... [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tarantula Forum Topics
General Tarantula Discussion
Revision of Lampropelma, Cyriapagopus, and Haplopelma
Top