Tarantulas (Araneae: Theraphosidae) in the pet trade in South Africa

Abstract

This is the final version of the article that is published ahead of the print and online issue Keeping wild animals as pets has become a popular hobby that has increased around the world (Kopecký et al. 2013;Mori et al. 2017). Many of these species are traded for entertainment (da Nóbrega Alves et al. 2010), profit (van Wilgen et al. 2008Mori et al. 2017) and ornamentation (Murray et al. 2012;Kopecký et al. 2013). The internet has increased the opportunity for trade in live animals (Mendiratta et al. 2017). A range of taxa including spiders (Yen and Ro 2013; Hauke and Herzig 2017), amphibians (Measey et al. 2017), birds (Mori et al. 2017), small mammals (Lankau et al. 2017) and reptiles (van Wilgen et al. 2010) are frequently traded in this way. The pet trade has become an important pathway for the introduction of non-native species to new regions (van Wilgen et al. 2008; Hulme 2015; Measey et al. 2017; Mori et al. 2017). These pets may accidentally escape from captivity (Mazzotti and Harvey 2012), but the deliberate release of pets by owners is recognised as a major problem (Hulme 2015; Stringham and Lockwood 2018; Maceda-Veiga et al. 2019). Introduced pet species are released into the wild for several reasons, including aggressiveness, fear of zoonotic diseases, unwanted gifts (Padilla and Williams 2004; Reaser and Meyers 2007) or because they become too large to keep (Holmberg et al. 2015). Many species that escape, or are released, may be unable to survive and establish self-sustaining populations (Zenni and Nuñez 2013). However, those species that successfully establish and become invasive can have severe environmental and economic impacts (Nelufule et al. 2020;Shivambu et al. 2020aShivambu et al. , 2020b. Some of the species damage ecosystems (Martin and Coetzee 2011), compete for resources with native species (Mori et al. 2017;Nunes et al. 2017) and carry pathogens that threaten public health (Travis et al. 2011) and agriculture (Witmer andHall 2011;Gibson and Yong 2017), and cause biodiversity loss (Engeman et al. 2007;Faulkes 2010).A recent review by Lockwood et al. (2019) highlights the urgent necessity to understand better how the exotic pet trade contributes to invasions in order to devise strategies to limit its harmful impacts. An important predictor of whether a species is likely to become invasive in a new region is its history of invasion elsewhere (Hulme 2012),

Searching the Web Builds Fuller Picture of Arachnid Trade.

“…Our analysis highlights that many groups are vulnerable to trade, yet a lack of regulation, as well as uid taxonomy and a lack of data on most species (30), form barriers to monitoring in the group. It is also notable that former research shows that species are normally named and advertised correctly, but that cryptic diversity within "species" may exist, and in some cases represent several species (19), which aligns with the collector value of novelty and diversity within the group. For instance, the very popular, jet-black Grammostola pulchra has many close relatives of similar coloration that cannot easily be distinguished, and there is a possibility that Grammostola quirogai is also traded under the name G. pulchra as the two are hard to distinguish without high levels of expertise (26).…”

“…These unusual or novel forms may be traded under a geographic label (e.g., Kaeng Krachan, South Mindanao) or a colour, with the colour appended to of up to 100 species in advertisements for tarantulas (Data S9). Former studies also highlight the trade in undescribed species (29), and the high undescribed diversity within groups like the tarantulas is also well established (19). Our analysis highlights that many groups are vulnerable to trade, yet a lack of regulation, as well as uid taxonomy and a lack of data on most species (30), form barriers to monitoring in the group.…”

“…For example, whilst we noted at least 15 amblypygids for sale and that high numbers within the group are imported via LEMIS, we did not undertake a comprehensive search due to high rates of species description, and high numbers of recently described species (18). While partially overcome in this assessment of arachnids, factors such as private social media trading, uid taxonomy (19), rapid rates of species description, and decentralised taxonomic species-lists (until very recently) combined may represent an insurmountable barrier to such assessments within other invertebrate groups.…”

“…Similarly, 33 new Amblypygi species were described in a group of only 95 species in a single recent paper (e.g., 18). Many newly described arachnid species are likely to be endangered and potentially traded before or immediately after description (19). Of those already described, only a fraction are assessed by IUCN 0.65% spiders and 0.11% scorpions (318/49170 spiders; scorpions 3/2763 (37 Data De cient in total)).…”

Survey of non‐native small mammals traded in South Africa

“…Non-native animals have been and continue to be introduced in South Africa through various pathways that include stowaways, biological control, scientific research, food, zoo and pet trade (Faulkner et al, 2020;Measey et al, 2020;Moshobane et al, 2020). The pet trade industry is growing in South Africa and includes several animal species from arthropods, amphibians, reptiles, fish, birds and mammals (Maligana et al, 2020;Moshobane et al, 2020;Nelufule et al, 2020;Shivambu et al, 2020aShivambu et al, , 2020bShivambu et al, , 2020cvan Wilgen et al, 2008). Some non-native species have established feral populations (i.e.…”