Talk:Chilean rose tarantula

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sethclaymon (article contribs).

Handling

I just added a Lancet and Physorg--free summary reference to the Urticating hair page, in which some fellow apparently got his Rose irritated enough to kick hair in his eyes. They advise eye protection. Has anyone else ever been haired by a rose? Is it rare enough that we don't need that remark on this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnp (talk • contribs) 09:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I have seen my Chilean Rose Spider kick hairs but my hands were always out of the way. But I can say from experience that she lays utricating hairs down when she lays down silk for feeding or simply laying out new silk lines. I've learned the hard way to wear gloves when I clean her vivarium because itching hands are extremely annoying and not even calamine lotion or hydro-cortisone helped. Hair-kicking is a common defense mechanism in New World tarantulas, and it's a pretty common behavior.--75.72.13.105 (talk) 07:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I was able to handle my Chilean Rose in a limited fashion without irritating her to that point, but once when I almost tripped she kicked hairs into my hand. The irritation lasted quite a few hours, even after washing my hands several times. I don't believe rubbing or scratching the affected skin has any positive benefits. If anything, it may exacerbate the problem by driving them deeper into the skin. Zeke64 (talk) 04:06, 10 December 2011 (UTC)Zeke64

Also, after kicking off the urticating hairs the spider has a "bald patch" on the posterior dorsal side of the abdomen. I believe the hairs are replenished at the next molt, but I haven't observed it myself. Zeke64 (talk) 04:06, 10 December 2011 (UTC)Zeke64

This happened to me in 2005 when I was trying to coax my girl to eat. The hairs took almost 10 years to dissolve in my eye. I had so many steroid shots, they had to quit because I would have lost my vision. It was quite a lengthy time of doctors and healing. My Babe just passed yesterday at the age of 20. I touched her multiple times hoping she was asleep…I must have touched my face and have broken out into a rash. I know the feeling well of these hairs. RIP Babe. Karenfitch (talk) 03:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Colour forms

NCF is now g. porteri (I think, check spelling), RCF is still rosea, Blue? come across blue grammys but not blue g. rosea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.98.99 (talk) 16:35, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Humidity

Hmm...I think I disagree with the statement about disliking humidity. It is in fact necessary for these animals, being tropical as well as needing to molt, that they live in a high humidity environment, anywhere from 55%-90%.

Me too. They sure need humidity of 55-90% ... --Goliathus 09:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

It's important to look closely at locality data to determine humidity requirements for this species. They are from the northern area of chile (see: http://www.eightlegs.org/rose/rose.html), which is the area of the Atacama desert (see: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ci.html). The tropical region of chile is in the south, which is not where G. rosea is from. Therefore, this is a species that requireds LOW HUMIDTY. In addition, "The Tarantula Keeper's Guide" by Schultz & Schultz, the most widely regarded book on tarantula keeping, recommends low humidity for G. rosea.

^ though that may be true, how long have they been in the US? Several generations; so perhaps they adapted to humidity in the US. I side with the other two on this one.

Just an observation, but it seems that my rosea strongly dislikes anything over 70% and will actively try to get to higher grounds whenever this happens. I've read that other people has experienced the same, so I think we can safely assume it's not a fan of high humidity. --Debolaz 03:12, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

They may have been in the US for several generations but there will be relatively few captive bred ones when they are so cheap and plentiful wild caught. They are extremly unlikely to have adapted to different humidity over just a few generations anyway. Roy

All tarantulas need a moderate-to-high amount of humidity in captivity, but keep in mind that G. rosea lives in the Atacama Desert, the driest in the world and thus its humidity doesn't need to be over 50%.--Origamikid (talk) 03:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

If it helps this discussion, I had a Chilean Rose and it was very comfortable in the dry climate where I live in Southern Utah, with no humidifiers or anything. Zeke64 (talk) 22:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Zeke64

It is well known by most experienced T keepers G. rosea likes it dry it is in fact from 1 of the driest places on earth far from a "tropical" enviroment70.119.14.181 (talk) 00:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

describers

F.O. Pickard-Cambridge (not O. Pickard-Cambridge, his uncle) described G. rosea in 1897 as Eurypelma spatulatum. Why include him in the taxobox? I deleted him for now. --Sarefo 21:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

BTW, it is Walckenaer who described Grammostola rosea in 1837 as "Mygale rosea"

reference: Walckenaer, C. A. (1837): Histoire naturelle des insectes. Aptères. Paris, 1: 1-682.

See also: PLATNICK, N. I. (2006): The world spider catalog, version 7.0. American Museum of Natural History, online at http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog/index.html.

--Martin Huber 07:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Water

I am the owner of a Chilean Rose Tarantula. I'm wondering what the purpose of the dish of water is for. I have put in a dish of water with a sponge in it, and he avoided it unil it was dryed out. Wondering about this,I researched it and found out that they get water from their food (which is semi-plentiful in the desert) and not from a source of liquid water.Spacecase610 03:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)Spacecase610 March 10, 2007

I know this response is quite late, but I'd just like to say that you shouldn't give tarantulas a sponge as a water source. Sponges grow nasty stuff too easily, and they aren't easy to drink from anyway. Also, while they do get some moisture from their food, it's best for them to have a water source they can dip their fangs into (and that isn't so large they can drown.) RacieB (talk) 03:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

the water dish helps to maintain a minimum humidity, and they do sometimes require one to drink out of... 24.17.40.9 (talk) 06:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Do i take the sponge out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.92.74.50 (talk) 16:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes! Take the sponge out. Sponges are breeding grounds for bacteria and mold. Mold can kill your spider. As for water dishes: I caught my female G.Rosea drinking deeply from the water dish at the pet store I bought her from. She climbed all the way into it, dipped her fangs, and did a little pumping motion. They had the temperature pretty high there though (95 degrees) so maybe she was drying out. 70.114.133.225 (talk) 04:44, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Feeding video

May be offensive to some viewers. Posted here rather than on the main page.

• Video of a Chilean rose tarantula eating a mouse

-- 131.225.22.189 19:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Oooh that's pretty heavy lol. That was an unpleasant watch, I'll be honest. But I gueess it's gotta eat. I'm thinking about buying one of these myself to be honest, but I think I'll stick to feeding it Locusts if I can. I (wrongly) feel as though that will hurt my Karma less lol --94.171.184.82 (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Atacama?

Chilean Rose Tarantula = Grammostola rosea appears to be an ambiguous definition. I have seen lovely hairy reddish tarantulas in the Southern (Valdivian) rainforest, living and raising family in relatively sunny forest spots. It seems unlikely to me that this inhabitant of the temperate rainforest is of the same species as the one reported to be from the Atacama. --Lupo Manaro 21:34, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

But anything hairy reddish isn't automatically a Chilean rose? Debolaz 10:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

A tarantula that has reddish brown hair may not be a Chilean Rose tarantula. Mine and another I've seen had light brown hair, but they have an iridescent sheen on the cuticle. Their name is likely derived from this coloration feature, not their rather dull hair color. Zeke64 (talk) 04:14, 10 December 2011 (UTC)Zeke64

Lifespan

As far as I know, the lifespan of these creatures aren't known and when numbers like 15 or 20 years are given, it's just because that's how long they've been available in the pet industy and nobody really knows. I'm changing the wording in the article to indicate this, but if anyone feels this is wrong, please show references before reverting. And I don't mean some random website giving a number without any justification behind i. Debolaz 22:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

molting

My spider has a bare spot on his back. And i was needing to know what would cause it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.92.74.50 (talk) 16:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Those are her/his urticating hairs most likely. They flick them off at threats. Probably nothing to worry about. 70.114.133.225 (talk) 04:45, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

This is caused when your spider kicks off urticating hairs. There will be a bald patch until your spider molts. Zeke64 (talk) 23:14, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Zeke64

i have a chilean rose but it still has the bald spot. i thought only american tarantulas had those urticating hairs. little help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.202.225.49 (talk) 17:37, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

need advice

i need to know if loud noises bother tarantulas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.102.110.74 (talk) 01:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Spelling

Goliathus created a whole mess of articles in which he misspelled "Grammastola" as "Grammostola." A *LOT* of articles. Check any reference on tarantulas and you'll find that this spelling is incorrect. 76.205.124.65 (talk) 19:36, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

It IS NOT spelt "Grammastola". A quick google scholar search even revealed a peer-reviewed paper with the name correctly spelled in the title:

Rodrigo Postiglioni & Fernando G. Costa. (2006). Reproductive isolation among three populations of the genus Grammostola from Uruguay (Araneae, Theraphosidae). Iheringia, Sér. Zool., Porto Alegre, 96(1):71-74, 30 GRB UK (talk) 20:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

too skewed towards pet ownership, not enough on the animal's natural behaviour/environment

Just like most articles on wikipedia on animals commonly kept as pets, this article has far too much information on the way the animal is kept in captivity and not nearly enough about its actual wild state - someone with knowledge in this area should amend it and relegate the pet care information to a subsection or to a wikibooks manual on tarantula care. --86.163.124.59 (talk) 23:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Sadly this still seems to be the case 2 years later. Im going through a bunch of tarantula articles and will be (hopefully) updating them soon to correct this. Sadly it seems many of them are written in this care sheet style manner, probably because of the lack of easly accesible references The Taste of Monkeys (talk) 12:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Wrong image in taxobox

According to extremely new User:Shadowshador, the taxobox image was actually of the wrong species. So he deleted that image and I moved the other image up into the taxobox. I hope this seems OK to those who know these beasties well. Invertzoo (talk) 01:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Chilean rose tarantula/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Speling errorz abound...

Last edited at 14:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 11:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Content Comment

Overall, I think this article is well written and on its way towards being classified as a good article. The writing is clear, concise, and not opinionated. The content is also entertaining and educational. That being said, it is clear that there is still some work to do. For example, this article is not comprehensive enough on specific aspects of the Chilean rose tarantula. Including a section about hunting and life in its natural habitat would help readers understand that this spider has its origin in nature - not a cage. I believe that including more content will help push this article towards 'good article' status. Overall, I did enjoy reading this and most definitely felt like I learned a great deal about the Chilean rose tarantula. - Harriszw777

WP:NOTGUIDE - "As Pets" section edit

According to the principles of wp:notguide I have removed some uncited information about feeding frequency and care instructions, including recommendcations on container sizes etc. While it may seem a bit brutal to remove this fascinating info from the article, it is better to keep the section descriptive and brief, especially on instructional information. I've added two links to non commercial sites (the websites of Zoos and other educational sources seem to be a good source for these). The section can easily be expanded if necessary using these and similar references. I hope this helps. I've removed the notguide tag as the paragraph seems more encyclopedic now. Edaham (talk) 04:01, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

The most interesting thing in the Pets section is the British man who ended up in hospital after a tarantula flicked leg hairs into his eye. Many people do not know that tarantulas can do this, and I've seen videos where people let tarantulas crawl over their faces, thinking that this is a huge joke. Tarantulas are generally docile, but it is recommended to wear eye protection when handling them.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:47, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

yes, I left that part in. It's more of a description of their behavioral interaction with humans when kept as pets and does not have the tone of a manual. It's also very interesting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edaham (talk • contribs) 07:45, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

To do list: tasks for this article

-Expansion

• Naming and etymology section
• Description: general appearance; differentiation from similar species; sexual dimorphism
• taxonomy and evolution section; fossil records if any, etc.

-Clean up

• Grammar and style. (I've been contributing to the article now, so it is probably full of style hiccups)
• Expansion of current sections

-Photography

• anterior view - eyes in particular are useful for identification
• inferior view (belly up) - as I understand the "rose" name comes from features on the underside of this creature around the mouth parts

Strikeout when done

- Edaham (talk) 07:56, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

A fundamental problem remains, however, which is whether the "Chilean rose tarantula" in the pet trade and so described in pet-related literature and pet-derived photos is the same species as Grammostola rosea described and imaged in the scientific literature. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

I think that's not so much a problem as a decision which needs to be made by us as editors when deciding on the most reliable sources available. If they are already classified as two separate species then this article cannot be about both of them. I would respect the decision of the most qualified arachnologist currently contributing to this article as I am not a specialist in the field. I see two options here 1)If RS suggests that they are two different species then there should be two articles. 2)If the matter is controversial and undecided then there should be one article and the controversy should be noted in a section about the spider. What's your opinion on this? Is there a third option? Edaham (talk) 02:11, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

There is a photo of the actual tarantula that flicked hairs into the man's eye here. It was described in news reports as a Chilean rose tarantula, but spider species can sometimes be hard to tell apart, particularly in photographs. The spider in the BBC News story doesn't have any pink or red tinting on its body or legs, so I'd welcome comments about whether this actually is a Grammostola rosea. Here's another photo showing the characteristic tinting of Grammostola rosea. Grammostola rosea (this article's subject) and Grammostola porteri are both commonly found in Chile, and this has led to some dispute about which species the spider actually is when it is sold in pet shops. Sometimes only a DNA test can sort out this kind of dispute. This article (in Spanish) notes that Grammostola porteri are commonly sold as Grammostola rosea although they are considered to be two different species. See also this news story.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:53, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind, I took the liberty of editing your comment with links to check the existence of articles on those two distinct species. We do have separate articles for them and I suggest we keep it that way. We should carefully check both articles for info which might be incorrectly placed, note confusion (if any if it is noted that there is confusion in sources) and expand both articles using a more established spider article as a template. Edaham (talk) 08:33, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

The problem shows up at exotic-pets.co.uk. They have described Grammostola porteri as "Chile Rose Tarantula" although it is considered to be a separate species from Grammostola rosea. It is common for pet shops and pet websites to do this. Spiders have been known to set off the species problem, but since the 1930s Grammostola porteri has been considered a separate species.[1] It is named in honour of Carlos E. Porter, a noted Chilean naturalist (in Spanish).--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:05, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Exactly. Yes, there are two species known to science, Grammostola porteri and Grammostola rosea, and so there should be two articles. However, "Chilean rose tarantula" is quite clearly not the name of one of these species, but is used for both, with the result that any information in popular and pet-related sources can't be trusted, since either or both species might be meant. The article needs to be moved to the scientific name, and then each species article can explain that the English name may refer to either of them. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:48, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Although I would like to find a source, which says that the confusion is common. It's a matter of avoiding original research. Even if the mix up is easily inferred from the sources, Wikipedia advises that we don't make this kind of inference and instead find a source which clarifies what we are trying to say.Edaham (talk) 16:25, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I agree that if we want to say that the confusion is "common", there needs to be a source. On the other hand, to say something like "Grammostola porteri and Grammostola rosea are both called the Chilean rose tarantula" needs just two sources, one for each name. And we already have them, since a pet trade site is, by definition, a reliable source for what English name is given to a species in the pet trade. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:38, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

As long as we are not producing original reporting that the pet shops have it wrong. For example if the pet trading company has a sign up that says "Chilean Rose tarantula (Grammostola porteri)", we can flat out simply say that they have it wrong based on a more scholarly naming and taxonomy source. If however they just say "Chilean Rose tarantula" next to a picture which could be wrong, with no indication of the Latin name it would border on O.R. for us to make a call and say they have it wrong. In any case it seems like we are on track with a plan. Let's list all sources for both spiders here and start editing the articles. This one is still a bit "pet shoppy" and the other is just a stub, so it would be better just to get writing and wp:brd if any issues arise while doing so. Edaham (talk) 23:53, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

This article says in English "This tarantula [G. porteri ] is sometimes identified as Grammostola rosea, and is sold under that name in many countries. According to up to date research, G. porteri and G. rosea are two different species." This is the hub of the problem, and Wikipedia should be made of sterner stuff and not conflate the two species like many pet websites.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 04:47, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

That's dead on! perfect! I'm just about able to read that, but thanks for the translation. Let's start by including that in a description section and mention the sentence you translated in the lede. Thanks very much! Edaham (talk) 05:15, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chilean rose tarantula. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090626061312/http://www.care-sheet.com/index/Grammostola_rosea to http://www.care-sheet.com/index/Grammostola_rosea

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:59, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

No longer being exported from Chile

This species, once more common and cheap due to imports from Chile, is now more expensive and hard to come by with this being ceased. Hobbyists are currently breeding this species more proactively in the US to avoid them disappearing completely from the US pet trade. 99.6.67.129 (talk) 06:48, 12 November 2023 (UTC)