dwarf tarantulas

fang333999

Arachnodemon
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
727
could someone throw out some genus' for me? also h incei is considered a dwarf t right? or am i thinking of something else
 

tmanjim

Arachnodemon
Old Timer
Joined
Nov 24, 2004
Messages
671
I have a Paraphysa Parvula that was sold to me as a dwarf. She is about 3 inches and docile. I take her to my spider presentations.
 

J.huff23

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
3,015
Cyricosmus elegans (spelling) is definitly a dwarf. Along with the entire Cyricosmus genus.
 

Richard McJimsey

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
1,727
Tapanauchenius are rather small too, i beleive.
Aswell as Metriopelma, they are quite small.
Some Cylosternum I think too...
 

Protectyaaaneck

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 2, 2008
Messages
3,105
taps arent that small....yeah a little smaller than most but i wouldnt consider them a dwarf genus.
 

gumby

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
1,659
could someone throw out some genus' for me? also h incei is considered a dwarf t right? or am i thinking of something else
yup h incei is a dwarf get one they are one of my favorite Ts just amazing looking and cool webbers
 

redsaw

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
205
I believe that Paraphysa scrofa (Chilean copper) is dwarf
 

Goomba

Arachnobaron
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
520
I wouldn't say that. I've seen some big females. Especially a couple of massive "New River" species.
 

Goomba

Arachnobaron
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
520
Perhaps there's some technicallity I'm missing. But it's hard for me to consider a 6 inch spider a dwarf, haha. The paloma dwarfs, and cochise dwarfs, now those are another story. ;)
 

gumby

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
1,659
lol, in this case I don't think size matters, I think the species is considered a dwarf species.
Im going to have to go with size does matter when talking about a dwarf :? I would agree that ive always thought of Aphonopelmas as a smaller species but not a dwarf species. there are a few you can label as dwarf though. I think we are also missing one of my fav. Cyclosternum fasciatum but I may be wrong here as well as Ive notice C. fasciatum up to 5" being sold but I thought there was a larger species labeled D. fasciatum that may be the large ones out there and C. fasciatum being smaller. ill do some searching and see what I find but anything that reaches 5" I wouldnt label as dwarf.
 

Moltar

ArachnoGod
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
5,438
Not all Aphonopelmas are dwarfs by any means. I have a 4" subadult A anax and a 5.5" "Paysoni Blonde". Most Aphono's get around 4.5-5.5" with a few exceptions such as the "Huachua", Cochise and Paloma. There are a few others but they don't spring immediately to mind.

The word dwarf gets tossed around a lot. I don't know if there is a specific size below which a T is technically a dwarf or not. Personally I don't think t's that can push 4" such as C fasciatum are really to be considered dwarfs. Species such as C elegans and some of the Aphono's barely exceed 2". Now THOSE are dwarfs!
 

gambite

Arachnoprince
Arachnosupporter +
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,020
I have never heard of a clear classification either. I consider 'dwarf' T's that dont get much larger than 2, maybe 3". I would call 4-6" a normal sized tarantula, and 7+" quite large.
 

Zoltan

Cult Leader
Old Timer
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
1,465
The members of the mygalomorph family Mecicobothriidae are commonly called "dwarf tarantulas", according to Wikipedia. As for theraphosid spiders, I'm sure that the species of the genus Magulla would qualify as "dwarf", for example Magulla obesa with its body lenght of 1-2 cm (0.4-0.8").

Reference:
  • Indicatti, R. P., Lucas, S. M., Guadanucci, J. P. L. & Yamamoto, F. U. 2008. Revalidation and revision of the genus Magulla Simon 1892 (Araneae, Mygalomorphae, Theraphosidae) Zootaxa 1814: 21–36
 
Top