14 de abril de 2024

My Expertise

I am studying Arachnology currently and I have varying degrees of knowledge about Herpetology, Entomology, and Ornithology. I have some degree of knowledge about mammals, but most of it includes Rabbits - more specifically Marsh Rabbits. Although as of right now I have no profession with animals I have spent a lot of time researching spiders; especially widows and Long-Jawed Jumping/Orbweaver spiders. I have also spent a lot of time researching the herps, birds, fish, and rabbits of North America so when I go out to identify something i'm not guessing and I only make an id if I know what the species is. When I first joined iNaturalist I knew almost nothing about spiders, but it has kick started my love and for them and it hasn't stopped! I can identify (almost) any Freshwater/Saltwater fish larger than 5 inches in the Southern United States. Tracks and signs have been a part of my daily field research for a while now, but I only started identifying them on iNat on 2.10.23. Herons, Deer, Egrets, and Game Birds are my primary focus.

Publicado el abril 14, 2024 04:51 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

08 de abril de 2024

Important Note About iNat:

Please be extra careful when pressing "agree" on identifications, especially the Computer Vision / Auto-ID ones. It is extremely important that you are careful with this because when an observation is research grade it becomes available to researchers and it can be frustrating and extra work for them if it is incorrect data. Also, when an observation becomes research grade it goes towards helping train iNaturalist's Computer Vision, so incorrectly-identified RG can mess up iNaturalist's map data and the Computer Vision for users who will use it later. Research grade isn't a badge or something that you should even necessarily strive for. If it can't be RG then it can't be RG. When you click the Agree button, you are indicating that you believe it to be that species, based on your personal knowledge or research. It is important to remember that quite often most insects and spiders cannot be identified without microscopy. (The use of a microscope) That kind of independent identification is way, way more valuable than quickly clicking “Agree”, because it can be used to correct errors. I must admit that some of my oldest identifications were just carelessly agreeing without me actually knowing what was right or wrong, and this led me to quite a few misidentifications. I also often wanted everything to be brought down to species. I am more conservative. Don't become my old self. I know animals and especially spiders can be really difficult to identify, and often specific, generic, or even familial identifications just can't be made without examining the genitalia, a process which can be difficult and one which almost always involves killing the animal. A lot of the time, minor details must be located to confidently identify a particular spider, and some families can include members which can appear identical to another family and with other members appearing identical to a totally different family.

When pinging people based on the amount of identifications they are a few things are important to remember:

  1. Are they active? Be sure to check when the last time they were on inat was.
  2. Are they frequent identifiers who have shown trustworthiness or do they just press agree?
  3. If they just add what they think it is with little to no description don't press agree! Unless you are certain of what the specimen in picture is don't press agree.
Publicado el abril 8, 2024 09:09 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 1 comentario | Deja un comentario

16 de febrero de 2024

What to include (or not include) when adding observations solely of Tracks or Signs of animals.

When adding observations of tracks are signs of animals always include measurements of the tracks.

Once you've added a photo of the track (hind and front if possible) with a measurement is their anything else left you should add? Yes, measurements of the stride and the particular gait that the animal was using (a photo of multiple strides). Next, a description of the habitat and what you think the animal was doing is always helpful. Lastly, with tracks sometimes you need to resort to guesswork or perhaps a better way to put would be a description of what the animal was likely doing based on the evidence present (and a little bit of filling in the gaps). Anyone can do this, beginner or experienced. For example, if you saw some smaller bird tracks and they were spaced, but it didn't look like they were walking, they were probably hopping, then you look at the surroundings and you see the ground was picked apart with bill impressions you would come to the conclusion that a smaller bird came looking for food within the ground. Now, you might ask why is that important? Well, behavior is a major part in differentiating tracks as some species can have almost identical tracks, but completely different behaviors. One somewhat common bird that is important to include behavior for is a Tri-colored Heron. Their "jog" is a dead give-away.

I have added an observation with the most basic things you should include.

You can always add more!

Publicado el febrero 16, 2024 05:30 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 1 observación | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

02 de febrero de 2024

A Description of the Identification Factors of the Genus *Latrodectus* in the field for North America: A multi part series created for the description of the Genus *Latrodectus*

North America has six known species in the Genus Latrodectus. Five of them are present in the continental United States. Most of them are complex and tricky to identify, but others are pronounced. The four most common species are named as shown: Southern Black Widow (Latrodectus Mactans), Northern Black Widow (Latrodectus Variolus), Western Black Widow (Latrodectus Hesperus), and the Mexican species Latrodectus Occidentalis; Latrodectus breaks down taxonomically into approximately 31 recognized species, five of which are found in the United States; four species are native, one species (L. geometricus) was introduced.

Latrodectus hesperus - hourglass primarily complete, but it can vary a lot, from complete hourglass to broken to only one triangle to no hourglass at all, but it is likely that hesperus is actually more than one species (we will see where that lands once the revision of the genus is published). Anterior and posterior halves often proportional, posterior half (next to spinnerets) equal to but never wider than anterior half when hourglass complete; the top of the hourglass is equal to the middle never bigger when the hourglass is complete.

Latrodectus mactans - Hourglass primarily complete. Some papers and sites may mention that the hourglass can be complete, split, partial, or absent, but this is possibly because of the tricky Taxonomic time when North American widows were lumped together in L. mactans and period after where no one was completely sure what they wee looking at. Posterior half (next to spinnerets) always wider than anterior half when complete; top of the hourglass is always larger than the middle never equal or smaller.

Latrodectus variolus - Hourglass often split in middle, with both halves or one half prominent to reduced, or hourglass is partial (anterior or posterior half absent) with either posterior or anterior half prominent or reduced, or hourglass is completely absent. Same problem as mentioned with L. mactans, still unsure to whether they can have complete hourglasses. Adult males show same hourglass variations as adult females.

The rest of the species can be somewhat easily identified

Latrodectus geometricus - Hourglass variation in females, with the exception of color, ranging from red to orange. Male hourglasses do show variation in color and shape, but hourglass unnecessary for aid with ID. Egg sacks are "spikey" unlike all other Latrodectus species. May have variations of the color orange on the abdomen, but never dark red on the longitudinal stripe.

Latrodectus bishopi - Hourglass primarily partial or absent, sometimes split*, rarely complete. Adult males show same hourglass variations as adult females. As the common name suggests (red widow) the legs and head are light red.

Latrodectus Occidentalis - Hourglass primarily complete, but can be split. May be partial or non-present as well, but the certainty on that is unknown. Sides of abdomen have red stripes bordered with white, characteristic of this species.


Factors of identification are pretty much uncertain with varying degrees of reliability. I have compiled a guide with all of the known methods and possible methods of identification located here: https://www.inaturalist.org/guides/18700?view=card

Important Reminder: Even professionals are unsure about what actually are marks for identification as contradicting information is constantly brought in. If multiple marks coincide than it is probably that species, but if you only have one mark and it seems off it could easily be wrong. Use each and every mark in a mind-set of uncertainty until a large amount of the marks lead towards one species.

Important Reminder No. 2: This guide is not an infallible resource. Please remember to check the sources cited and do other background research about Widow spiders!

Sources Cited:

Kaston, B. J. (1970). Comparative biology of American black widow spiders. Transactions of the San Diego Society of Natural History

Genus Latrodectus - Widow Spiders, BugGuide.net

Publicado el febrero 2, 2024 09:10 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi

21 de enero de 2024

Help Track These Spiders in Florida!

The following spider species are being tracked by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory and, as of now, we have no records or a low amount of them on iNaturalist. Let's see if we can find them and help conserve these species:

Centromerus latidens A Sheetweb Spider
http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Centromerus+latidens
Help! This spider has still not been found.

Cesonia irvingi Keys Gnaphosid Spider
http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Cesonia+irvingi
Help! This spider has still not been found.

Chinattus parvulus Little Mountain Jumping Spider
https://bugguide.net/node/view/350475/bgimage
Awesome! This spider has been found and has 59 observations!
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/172476-Chinattus-parvulus

Cyclocosmia torreya Torreya Trap-door Spider
https://bugguide.net/node/view/1373428
We have done it! This spider has been found and now has two observations!
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/98834-Cyclocosmia-torreya

Eustala eleuthera Eleuthera Orb Weaver
https://bugguide.net/node/view/35272
Help! This spider has still not been found.

Geolycosa escambiensis Escambia Wolf Spider
https://bugguide.net/node/view/173319/bgpage
Help! This spider has still not been found.

Geolycosa xera McCrone's Burrowing Wolf Spider
https://bugguide.net/node/view/123073/bgpage
Found! 13 Observations!
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/220348-Geolycosa-xera

Hogna ericeticola Rosemary Wolf Spider
https://www.naturepl.com/stock-photo-rosemary-wolf-spider-lycosa-ericeticola--florida-usa-image01399979.html
Not been found! This one is quite rare and endemic to Florida! Be on the look out.

Islandiana sp. 2 Marianna Cave Sheetweb Weaver Spider
https://blog.pensoft.net/2018/06/28/out-of-the-darkness-a-new-spider-found-deep-within-an-indiana-cave/
Not been found!

Myremekiaphila torreya A Trapdoor Spider
https://bugguide.net/node/view/1466342
Found! One observation
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/208089-Myrmekiaphila-torreya

Phiddipus workmani Workman's Jumping Spider
https://bugguide.net/node/view/105018/bgimage
Not a registered species on inat 🤔

Sphodros rufipes Red-legged Purse-web Spider
https://bugguide.net/node/view/116698/bgimage
Found! 406 observations. (wow)
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/122955-Sphodros-rufipes

Publicado el enero 21, 2024 06:41 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 1 comentario | Deja un comentario

21 de diciembre de 2023

Identification of Latrodectus mactans - Southern Black Widow

TaxonomyBrowseInfoImagesLinksBooksData
Home » Guide » Arthropods (Arthropoda) » Chelicerates (Chelicerata) » Arachnids (Arachnida) » Spiders (Araneae) » True Spiders (Araneomorphae) » Entelegynae » Cobweb Spiders (Theridiidae) » Widow Spiders (Latrodectus) » Southern Black Widow (Latrodectus mactans)
Species Latrodectus mactans - Southern Black Widow
Classification · Other Common Names · Pronunciation · Synonyms and other taxonomic changes · Explanation of Names · Size · Identification · Range · Habitat · Food · Life Cycle · Remarks · See Also · Internet References · Works Cited
Female with egg sac - Latrodectus mactans - female black widow spiderlings - Latrodectus mactans Cool small spider - Latrodectus mactans Southern Black Widow - Latrodectus mactans Pair of black widows - Latrodectus mactans - male - female Spider ID - Latrodectus mactans Southern Black Widow - Latrodectus mactans - female Latrodectus mactans - female
Classification
Kingdom Animalia (Animals)
Phylum Arthropoda (Arthropods)
Subphylum Chelicerata (Chelicerates)
Class Arachnida (Arachnids)
Order Araneae (Spiders)
Infraorder Araneomorphae (True Spiders)
No Taxon (Entelegynae)
Family Theridiidae (Cobweb Spiders)
Genus Latrodectus (Widow Spiders)
Species mactans (Southern Black Widow)
Other Common Names
Black Widow - The L. mactans is often considered the original "Black Widow".
“The Hourglass Spider” because of the red hourglass shaped mark on the female’s abdomen.
“The Shoe Button Spider” due to the form of the spider’s jet-black abdomen.
Pronunciation
lat"ro-dek't[schwa]s mac'·tans
Synonyms and other taxonomic changes
See the World Spider Catalog.
Explanation of Names
See the Latrodectus guide page for the etymology of Latrodectus.
Size
Adult Female:
Approximately 8-13 mm (~1/2 inch) in body length.
With legs extended, the female measures about 25-35 mm (1 inch - 1 1/2 inches).

Adult Male:
Approximately half the size of the female, around 4-6 mm (1/4 inch) in body length.
With legs extended, the male measures 12-18 mm (1/2 inch - 2/3 inch).
See this picture for side-by-side view:
Identification
The southern black widow is one of the most common of the native widow spiders. It is the epitome of the classic widow spider, occurring in all the normal widow spider habitats.

Female: The adult female black widow spider has a glossy jet black color all over, including body and legs. The only red marks are the bright red hourglass mark on the underside of the abdomen, and a red spot just behind and above the spinnerets. The hourglass marking consists of two connected red triangles on the underside. Note, however, that the hourglass color may range from yellowish to various shades of orange or red. If the hourglass marking is not connected (e.g. - two distinct, non-touching triangles), it is most likely the northern cousin (L. variolus) of the southern black widow (L. mactans)

Males: Adult males are harmless, is 3-5 mm long with an elongated abdomen. The male’s legs are larger than the female’s and each leg segment is orange brown in the middle and black on the ends. On the sides of the male’s abdomen there are four pairs of red and white stripes. (Net Ref (3))

Immatures: Newly hatched spiderlings are predominately white or yellowish-white, gradually acquiring more black and varying amounts of red and white with each molt. Juveniles of both sexes resemble the male and are harmless. (Net Ref (1))

(Id info from bugguide.net)

Publicado el diciembre 21, 2023 07:21 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

15 de diciembre de 2023

A little about myself:

All my life I've been interested in and loving animals, but if it weren't for the cold creeks of NY I don't think I would be. As a young kid perhaps three I would grab toads and laugh when they would pee all over me or I would jump in the small pond in my backyard hoping to finally catch a frog. As I grew up by the age of eight I had caught snakes larger than myself and returned thousands of times with my Grandmother (and occasionally going alone) to my backyard creek to catch salamanders and crawfish. Soon after, my life completely changed and my family and I moved from place to place over the course of a years before I moved into Northeast Florida where I am now and have been for the past four-ish years. (Joined back 10/15/23 with only three observations and no ids) (All of what I said is backed up by photos & stories told by family)

Now, I'm a budding birder taking place in different clubs all over the state and help out with the World Spider Catalog. I'm soon going to undergo verification with the CyperTracker evaluation and will become one of the youngest certified and trusted trackers ever. (Track and Sign knowledge and identification for verified research purposes)

On iNaturalist I've only identified a small amount for my activity, but those 20k identifications actually all took place from the time since late 2023. My knowledge of iNaturalist has expanded and instead of simply reading observations and the comments on them (which I did for most of the time my account has existed) I've now decided to take a place in iNaturalist as a site and add identifications and help out in every way I can!

Publicado el diciembre 15, 2023 05:03 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

13 de diciembre de 2023

An important note about identifying spiders from photos:

When we try to place an ID on an observation, we are making a best guess based on what we know about the external characteristics of different spiders. In science, specific identifications are almost always made by looking at the shape/structure of the genitalia under a microscope, along with other characteristics that are usually not visible even in high quality macro photos - things like eye spacing, number/location of hairs on the legs, etc. In many cases there are several similar-looking species or even genera that are difficult to separate even with sharp photos. Many species have significant variation in color/size, and many species have never been photographed outside of preserved museum specimens. There are also many undescribed species that look similar to the ones we know about. iNaturalist encourages us to try and figure out exactly what kind of life form we have observed (which is good! curiosity is good!) - but when it comes to small arthropods like spiders, making a confident ID from only photos is often just not possible. This can be frustrating to people who follow popular taxa like birds and butterflies, but it's just a fact of life with many diverse groups of arthropods. So, please accept that it is often not reasonable to place a specific name on a spider just from photographs, and resist the temptation to try and "choose" a species.

Thanks to Justin Williams for the concept and most of the writing on this.

Publicado el diciembre 13, 2023 03:18 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

12 de diciembre de 2023

A prolonged message from my profile.

Please take care when clicking the "Agree" button on someone else's ID (especially the Computer Vision / Auto-ID)

When you click agree and an observation becomes research grade it becomes available to researchers and false data can be extremely frustrating to them. "Research Grade" observations are also used to train iNaturalist's Computer Vision, so incorrectly-identified RG can mess up iNaturalist's map data and the Computer Vision for users who will use it later.

Research grade isn't a special reward for your observations. If you can't id something further thats perfectly fine.

When you click the "Agree" button, you are indicating that you believe it to be that species, based on your personal knowledge or research. It is important to remember that quite often most insects and spiders cannot be identified without microscopy. (The use of a microscope)

Furthermore, Some people’s identifications are more reliably correct in some taxa, so it seems like an easy shortcut to check how reliable the person seems and choose to agree or not agree based on that. Nobody is 100% reliable in any taxa. If you instead check the direct evidence (the photos, location, date/time, etc.) and arrive at an identification based solely on that, then the reliability (or unreliability) of the previous identifiers won’t, and can’t, have any effect on your answer.

That kind of independent identification is way, way more valuable than quickly clicking “Agree”, because it can be used to correct errors. It’s kind of like doing a long math homework question, writing down the answer, then throwing out your previous work and redoing the whole thing from the beginning. If you arrive at different answers, then you know you must have made a mistake somewhere, and if you arrive at the same answer then you can be more confident that you did not make a mistake. But if the person at the desk next to you thinks to himself “XYZ is reliable, so I’ll just copy down his answer” then having two identical answers cannot increase your confidence that the answer is correct. Please do not agree nor disagree with my identifications unless you know how to, i.e., you know what makes it what. Just withdraw the identification if you're wrong, or don't agree in the first place. Just carelessly agreeing can cause headaches for the iNaturalist identifiers. I must admit that some of my oldest identifications were just carelessly agreeing without me actually knowing what was right or wrong, and this led me to quite a few misidentifications. I also often wanted everything to be brought down to species. I am more conservative. Don't become my old self (he is really annoying at times...). I know spiders can be really difficult to identify, and often specific, generic, or even familial identifications just can't be made without examining the genitalia, a process which can be difficult and one which almost always involves killing the animal. A lot of the time, minor details must be located to confidently identify a particular spider, and some families can include members which can appear identical to another family and with other members appearing identical to a totally different family.

Publicado el diciembre 12, 2023 10:04 TARDE por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

18 de noviembre de 2023

Getting over arachnophobia.

So, I understand spiders are extremely understudied and are feared by thousands of people worldwide. Are you one of those people, but want to get over your fear? Regardless of if you got over it or maybe even never experienced it, it is important to know how to help people get over their fear.

First things first, why do you think you are afraid of them? Is it because you think they will bite you and you will get seriously injured? They just totally creep you out?

If you are only scared of them because of the message that all spiders are dangerous that has been ingrained in your mind you have no reason to be scared of them. That is false and almost none of them bite let alone injure you with their bite. If you see a spider your first thought should be what spider is this and can it hurt me not oh gosh I am going to die if I don't get away it is a spider. Most of the time you can pick up a spider without being worried.

Almost all spiders are venomous, i.e. possessing venom (except for Uloboridae, a Family of cribellate orb weavers, who have no venom).

But spider venom is highly specialised to target their insect prey, and so it is very rare, and an unintended effect, for spider venom to be particularly harmful to humans. Hence why there are remarkably few medically significant spiders in the world.

Do not pick up a spider unless you know what it is and you are sure it is not venomous.

If the spider in front of you is not one of these, then it's venom is not considered a danger to humans:

-Six-eyed sand spider (Sicariidae)

-Recluse (Loxosceles)

-Widow (Latrodectus)

-Brazilian wandering spider (Phoneutria)

-Funnel Web (Atracidae)

-Mouse spider (Missulena)


You afraid of them because they creep you out? Take some time and actually look at the spiders that are around you. Look at orbweavers and jumping spiders. Just take some time to see the amazing spider species and you appreciation will not only grow it will sky-rocket. Yes, spiders do have a few large and creepy species, but like all things that's expected, but they are not the most common whatsoever.

Publicado el noviembre 18, 2023 12:14 MAÑANA por cs16-levi cs16-levi | 1 observación | 2 comentarios | Deja un comentario