The Cellar - February 8, 2007: Thousands of daddy-long-leggers

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Image of the Day (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=10)

- - February 8, 2007: Thousands of daddy-long-leggers (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=13280)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheldonrs (Post 314030)

"Friends" don't usually crawl between my toes when I am sleeping and bite me. :D

You need more imaginative friends ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by todd_brannigan (Post 313909)

Looks like a patch of pubes....

A live merkin. Adds that extra something.....

This image got me to join. A looong time ago I was a scout. Daddy long legs were constant tent mates during summer camp. You would sweep them out at night but by the end of the next day they would return. One year I had an especially large colony in my tent. My sister came for family night and sat on my bed. A stick fell and dislodged most of the colony. Aahh GOOD Times. I promise I didn't toss the stick. ;) hehehehe

Here is a link to the University of California that explains in more detail what I tried to say earlier - they are wrong about the venom of the "spider" DLL not being poisonous. I'll have to do more searching, but it was fairly recently discovered that the spider is extremely venomous, while it is true that the real DLL is harmless.

Further investigation seems to indicate that the spider (Pholcidae), is venomous to other spiders but not to humans. I was sure that I read somewhere that research had been done on the venom, and that it is toxic to humans (if it could be injected), but I cannot locate this research paper, so I must be wrong. :(

Daddy Long Legs eat by running down all the little bugs. They can book over stuff like leaves and grass where their puny prey has to go the long way around stuff. Its gotta be a real nightmare to their victims to see one in their rear view mirror. (Think Alien) I love them but haven't seen one in years around here... hmmmm

I do see puking cellar spiders too much. Yesterday I was standing in my back hallway, (has the washer and dryer in it). I was brushing my teeth and reading a propped up sailing magazine. The magazine slowly became blurry... A really large cellar spider with a leg span about the size of a tea cup opening had just lowered itself down so close to my face that I couldn't even focus on it!! It was totally rude! I promptly threw him out the back door after severely admonishing him.

From here.

Quote:

In the animal class Arachnida, there are several lower level divisions called Orders. Scorpions are in the Order Scorpiones, spiders are in the Order Araneae, ticks and mites are in the Order Acari.

The creatures most correctly called daddy-longlegs are in their own separate Order which is Opiliones. Common names for this Order are 1) daddy-longlegs, 2) harvestmen and 3) opilionids. They are characterized by having one basic body segment which shows segmentation on the posterior portion, at most 2 eyes and all 8 legs attach to the pill-like body segment.

Another creature often called daddy-longlegs are actually spiders. These long-legged spiders are in the family Pholcidae. Previously the common name of this family was the cellar spiders but arachnologists have also given them the moniker of "daddy-longlegs spiders" because of the confusion generated by the general public. Because these arachnids are spiders, they have 2 body basic body parts (cephalothorax and abdomen), have 8 eyes most often clumped together in the front of the body, the abdomen shows no evidence of segmentation, have 8 legs all attached to the front most body part (the cephalothorax) and make webs out of silk. This is most probably the animal to which people refer when they tell the tale because these spiders are plentiful especially in cellars (hence their common name) and are commonly seen by the general public.

Possible envenomation

Is there any truth to this oft-repeated tale?

Daddy-longlegs (Opiliones) - these arachnids make their living by eating decomposing vegetative and animal matter although are opportunist predators if they can get away with it. They do not have venom glands, fangs or any other mechanism for chemically subduing their food. Therefore, they do not have poison and, by the powers of logic, cannot be poisonous from venom. Some have defensive secretions that might be poisonous to small animals if ingested. So, for these daddy-long-legs, the tale is clearly false.

Daddy-longlegs spiders (Pholcidae) - Here, the myth is incorrect at least in making claims that have no basis in known facts. There is no reference to any pholcid spider biting a human and causing any detrimental reaction. If these spiders were indeed deadly poisonous but couldn't bite humans, then the only way we would know that they are poisonous is by milking them and injecting the venom into humans. For a variety of reasons including Amnesty International and a humanitarian code of ethics, this research has never been done. Furthermore, there are no toxicological studies testing the lethality of pholcid venom on any mammalian system (this is usually done with mice). Therefore, no information is available on the likely toxic effects of their venom in humans, so the part of the myth about their being especially poisonous is just that: a myth. There is no scientific basis for the supposition that they are deadly poisonous and there is no reason to assume that it is true.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orca (Post 314182)

This image got me to join.

See, that didn't feel nearly as perverted as you thought it would, did it? Welcome to the Cellar, Orca. :D

:shock: :eek: I feel them crawling on me
AGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

I suddenly want a flame thrower.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigV (Post 314303)

From here.

That is the first link I posted, and I did not see the need to copy/paste the text when I had already acknowledged the link. My second link also makes reference to the first link in its text.

I wish I could find that damned research, because I clearly remember it talking about the "myth", and that when they analysed the venom they were surprised to find that it was so strong (they thought that they would be confirming the myth) - and yes, it does mean killing the spiders in order to obtain the venom, as Pholcidae cannot be "milked" as many spiders can be.

I love Mythbusters too Bruce, but they are not scientists, as much as they like to use the word science. As for Wikipedia, I have used it several times as a convenient "source" for quoting in forums, but it has absolutely no academic standing, and in fact the chief of Wikipedia was on NPR (All Things Considered), just today, being questioned about his site's credibility, and he basically admitted that it had none. We (in my old project), often joked with one another regarding Wikipedia, and were constantly amazed at how often people take what they find on the web as gospel (no disrespect intended).

Anyway, I have already conceded defeat given that I cannot locate the research I wanted. I must have become confused in my old age.

Quote:

We (in my old project), often joked with one another regarding Wikipedia, and were constantly amazed at how often people take what they find on the web as gospel (no disrespect intended).

Anyway, I have already conceded defeat given that I cannot locate the research I wanted.

As a Wikipedia advocate I take this combination of statements to be highly ironic.

If you find something inaccurate in Wikipedia, don't laugh at it, correct it. It's thought to be as accurate as Brittanica, but continuously self-updating and free. I laugh (and cry) at the scientific journals that don't publish on the web. What are they afraid of? Wikipedia is what happens when money is less important than getting information out.

C'mon Dave, I believe ya. I'm just trying to help you out here, by linking pertinent articles.

Mythbusters is not a reference. Even a dummy like me can see holes in their methodology and sometimes downright illogical conclusions. That said, you have to admit the show has gotten better since the added the "research scientists" with the hip huggers and tight tops. :blush:

If I Google something I know little or nothing about, it's hard to decide which of the seventy eleven links might be productive. Wiki is a great place to start with the "big picture". It gives me the general schools of thought and major points of contention. If I want to dig deeper, the external links gives me a place to start digging.

I saw a chart one time that showed the entire history of Wiki's most "active" subjects. How often, how, and by whom, they were changed. Quite often the item would repeatedly change in minutes for particularly contentious subjects. Unless you have solid evidence to the contrary, for a given subject, collective wisdom is the way to go.