Thank you Deon and Patrick! Always nice getting positive feedback.

Patrick, the only reason that I would think it to change to Idiothele is exactly that it makes a trapdoor. If you read the same paper where Gallon synonimized Idiothele pluridentatum you will see a statement that trapdoor making is behaviourally distinct to Idiothele. You never know maybe the Botswana Pterinochilus lugardi also makes a trapdoor? ( You want to come with us in April?)

That is why this is such an exciting rediscovery because it raises lots of questions and shows how little we know about this species.

Very happy you enjoyed the video.

Thanks for the comments.

Cheers

Botswana is my backdoor, Ramatlabama border post is only 80 km's from my home. If you guys want/need/can take another person along I would very much like to go with you guys.

Patrick Gildenhuys wrote: Well put together piece Dimitri

Just a few comments:

Dimitri Kambas wrote: Nothing has been changed taxonomically yet...

And nothing will be changed taxonomically, EVER, for Pterinochilus lugardi. The fact that they have the ability to make a trapdoor has nothing to do with taxonomy, it's a behavioural characteristic.

Why the bold EVER Pat?

Dimitri Kambas wrote: ...but I believe it should become Idiothele lugardi.

I thought that you and Ian Engelbrecht worked together on this project? Why would you think that it should be Idiothele lugardi?
Anyway, you should probably ask Ian about his thoughts on this idea! According to Ian, males and females of this population both key out to Pterinochilus lugardi, and there is no doubt in his mind about this.

I agree with Dimitri, not going to go in to every in depth reason as we would go debating for ages but my personal take on this is that those spiders we found are NOT Pterinochilus for the simple reason that descriptions apart, when I look at any pterinochilus, this one we found simply looks nothing like a pterinochilus (my opinion), let alone anything at all like the only 'Pterinochilus lugardi' I ever saw in the flesh. (Granted, it may have been something else altogether.)
You were initially very confident that it was Idiothele nigrofulva, why then do you totally reject it being a different Idiothele?

The very cool thing that you guys discovered is that the South African population of Pterinochilus lugardi can make trapdoors, not that anything needs to change taxonomically.

Nice movie once again, good to see Taki scratching around! :lol:

Been scratching around for spiders from the age of about 5 lol, just learning a bit more about our local theraphosids now and learning fast! :laugh: :thumbsup:

On and btw, great to see you back on the forum!

Hi Taki

Sorry, the only reason I put "ever" in upper case, was because Dimitri had said "nothing's been changed taxonomically "yet", so I wanted to stress that for this species, nothing can be changed taxonomically, based only on the fact that they make trapdoors. I'm also not going to argue this point, but you must understand that a species can not be changed because of a behavioural characteristic. That's also why I said you should ask Ian about this, because he said that "all" of the characteristics of these spiders you found, key out to Pterinochilus lugardi!

Just to quickly list a few characters of Idiothele:
1. Conical apical segment on spinnerets
2. Non-lobed spermathecae
3. The embolus has keels

According to Ian regarding your spiders:
1. They have digitiform apical segments on the spinnerets
2. They have typically lobed spermathecae as per Pterinochilus lugardi
3. The embolus does not have keels

These are 3 very, very important characters linking your spiders with Pterinochilus lugardi...the only thing that's different is that they make trapdoors.
Do you see why, based on this one behavioural characteristic, you could never change the taxonomic placement from Pterinochilus to Idiothele? If you could change the taxonomy of a spider based on behaviour alone, you could theoretically lump any trapdoor making spider into Idiothele, which you obviously can't do.
Taxonomy is a science based on physical, not behavioural characteristics. I can't stress this point enough.

The second part of your post, regarding why I now reject this spider as being an Idiothele, is based purely on the scientific evidence that's now been pointed out to me, and the fact that the photo's you sent me before showed that your female spider had a conical apical segment on the spinnerets, and that you told me that the male and female were found close together.
The male is absolutely an Idiothele nigrofulva (so I wasn't wrong there), and this Ian told me himself, but he said that he's looked at the spinnerets of the female, and they are digitiform like Pterinochilus lugardi, so I'll admit to being wrong on this point...although, I'd be happy to point out from your photo that it does in fact have a conical apical segment, but that's going to be counter-productive :eyepoke:

I know that you're fond of disagreeing with scenarios based on "what it looks like to you" , but I've learnt that colour/patterns/shape etc. are very bad characters to base an identification on. When you use the science, and piece together the pieces based on the taxonomic character keys, you'll often be proven wrong.


Saying all of this Taki ... If the characters are indeed what Ian says they are, then I would have no problem in saying that this spider could be a new species ... of Pterinochilus! Not Idiothele. I agree with you that there is a HUGE visible difference between this population and all of the Pterinochilus lugardi's that I've ever seen, including pet trade specimens, and the ones from Botswana. I think that there are enough (as you said) visible differences to justify examining a new species of (trapdoor making) Pterinochilus, but definitely not Idiothele.

I hope that explains my point?

I'm sorry, but I still don't see what the questions are, that this "rediscovery" has raised?

I fully agree, I am not for 1 minute saying that the species should be changed because of the behaviour, as you said, I am fond of going by 'what it looks like to me' lol. Doesn't mean I'm definately wrong, I just go by my own instinct most of the time and will probably be wrong I guess. It's all very interesting never the less