Talk:Sydney funnel-web spider

This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Australia: New South Wales / Sydney / Biota Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Sydney funnel-web spider is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New South Wales (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sydney (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of New South Wales.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Spiders B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spiders, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spiders on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpidersWikipedia:WikiProject SpidersTemplate:WikiProject SpidersSpiders articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Venom

Is there anyone who knows enough to make this section not look so much like a warning label? 75.135.77.154 (talk) 04:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sightings in North Eastern Victoria

I can't find a lot of internet information about it but there have been reports of these arachnoids being found as far south as Wodonga. If this phenomenon is not on the web then such valuable information faces exclusion from Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.74.131.197 (talk) 13:13, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney Funnel Webs and Peter Jackson

It's rumored that Peter Jackson has a particular loathing for these spiders, and based his design for Shelob around them. Frankly, I'm not surprised.

According to Shelob, "In a DVD commentary, Jackson says Shelob's appearance is mostly based on the funnel-web spiders of Australia, which he hates." People often use the terms "funnel-web" and "Sydney funnel-web" interchangeably, although it is only one member of the subfamily Atracinae.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 04:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about some more life-cycle content?

Most of this article is about how dangerous the spider is. How about some more content about what it eats, what its enemies are, where it lays its eggs, whether it broods its young or lets them fend their own way, things like that? The Sanity Inspector (talk) 21:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-Because none have lived to tell the tale..

Virus ridden link removed

I removed http://www DOT aroundglobe DOT net/2010/08/has-one-of-worlds-deadliest-spiders.html as when I visited that page it tried to download malware on to my PC. This was the story about the funnel-web found in Gloucester.

The link mentioned above has an annoying pop up ad, but it is a blog article and the information in the Daily Mail here is better anyway.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:50, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re this edit: The spider shown here is probably not a Sydney funnel-web, and some comments on the story suggest that it is a Segestria florentina. There is a tendency to assume that all large and threatening looking spiders are funnel-webs, although the newspaper story does not state that it is a funnel-web. This is why hospitals will ask if the creature that bit a person was caught, otherwise it can be hard to know what the best antivenom would be.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

conflicting with main 'spider' entry on wikipedia

The main entry for spiders on wikipedia under spider bites says the funnel web spider does not deliver much venom when it bites. This page says it often delivers a full dose. Is their a reason the two seem to conflict? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.133.183 (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

World's deadliest spider?

Re this edit. There is a well sourced look at this question here. It admits that experts find the world's deadliest spider hard to pin down. The Guinness Book of World Records chooses the Brazilian wandering spider, but the Black widow and Brown recluse spider are also contenders in terms of risk of serious injury. The main point with the Sydney funnel-web spider is that humans are advised not to approach it because of the likelihood of an aggressive response, but in terms of the likelihood of dying from a bite, it may not be the world's deadliest spider.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, to put this in perspective, around 40 people a year in the USA die from bee stings.[1] There have been no reported deaths from Sydney funnel-web spider bites in Australia since 1981.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:05, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S reread the facts my friend if you got to the treatment section, paragraph 1 its says "The most vials used to treat a bite is 12. The patient was a 10-year-old boy who was bitten in February 2017 by a male Sydney funnel-web that was hiding in a shoe" Read the facts man (talk) 02:44, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What about the red back or is it consider a mid level threat 131.242.7.49 (talk) 02:13, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne, Victoria sightings

My old house just north of Preston was infested with these horrid things. Can somebody capable please investigate this for the purpose of the page and my own comfort? Alterior motive: I found this an interesting tidbit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.180.203.63 (talk) 21:35, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not conduct original research. It would be unusual to find a Sydney funnel-web in Victoria, and one possibility is confusing it with the similar looking Hadronyche modesta (Victorian funnel-web). Without catching one and giving it to an expert, a firm identification would be difficult.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:12, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See User_talk:Ianmacm#Spiders_in_Victoria.2C_Australia for more detail.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:13, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney funnel webs invade India?

The media is currently in a tizzy over this incident, which it has been suggested might be the work of Sydney funnel webs. The problem is that this is pure media speculation at the moment, and Sydney funnel webs are not reliably known to live outside Australia, despite numerous claims in the past. This is a puzzle, it will be interesting to see what species of spider has caused this media coverage.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are two images of the alleged spider here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No Brasil

Olá eu estou curioso sobre essa especie de aracnídeo, visto que capturei um exemplar, na minha opinião idêntico ao descrito nas imagens que vi na internet teria a possibilidade de esse aracnídeo viver no Brasil também estou preocupado com isso pois como sou amante de animais e insetos acabei por libertar a aranha perto da minha vizinhança a mais ou menos 1 ano, encontrei-a em minhas dependências o que me deixou mais assustado ao pesquisar sobre ela tenho algumas características acabei por observar nessa aranha que capturei. Ela vive em buracos no chão, tocas, onde o terreno é arenoso e um pouco úmido e ataca os que entram em seus domínios com muita velocidade e ferocidade, tem as patas e o cefalotórax como uma carapaça, com uma tonalidade marrom, quelíceras e garras muito avantajadas com tonalidade mais escura, as garras sendo pretas, somente o abdome não era protegido pela carapaça e tinha tom acinzentado escuro e ela apresentava poucos pelos pelo corpo exceto no abdome onde a quantidade era levemente maior, quando não estava para atacar algo mantinha seus movimentos geralmente lentos e calmo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.70.76.63 (talk) 04:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is in Portuguese, and asks whether a similar looking spider that the writer found in Brazil might be a Sydney funnel-web. The short answer is probably not. As the article points out, there have been numerous claims to have seen these spiders outside New South Wales, but they have never been reliably recorded outside this area. See also User_talk:Ianmacm/Archive_8#Spider_in_Gloucestershire_-_possible_identification, where a man took a video of a spider in England and believed that it might be a Sydney funnel-web..--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:48, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sex of spider image may be wrong

The photo on the right is in the article and both the caption and the original upload [2] say that the spider is male. I'm fairly sure that this is wrong, based on the photo on the left, as the male has a much smaller body. Only the female has a large plum shaped body. This can also be seen in this BBC News story. "Big Boy" is a male, while the spider being milked in the video is female.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:37, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I sent an email to the Australian Reptile Park asking about this and they have most kindly replied and said that the photo on the right is a female Sydney funnel-web. So The article has been changed.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:34, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Sydney funnel-web spider/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.

Too many exclamation marks, all of them unnecessary. The article seems to be the projection of a deep desire to convince the reader of the spider's danger to humans, by using disproportionate alarm signals. I doubt the creature is as significant a danger to human beings as is alleged in the article.

Last edited at 08:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 07:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The immune

If it is true that other mammals are immune to the spider's venom, which ones? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.186.6.124 (talk) 22:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, according to the Australian Museum here, "The venom of the male Sydney Funnel-web Spider is very toxic. This is because male spider venom contains a unique component called Robustoxin (d-Atracotoxin-Ar1) that severely and similarly affects the nervous systems of humans and monkeys, but not of other mammals." The antivenom is made from rabbit Immunoglobulin G so rabbits don't seem to be affected in the same way as humans. The article mentions this and cites the Australian Museum article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 04:51, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Australian horses "more deadly than spiders"

This is in the news today, and reports "Horses killed more people in Australia in recent years than all venomous animals combined." During the period 2000 to 2013, horses caused 74 deaths, while 25 humans died from bee stings. There were zero deaths from spider bites, and there haven't been any at all since an effective antivenom for funnel-web bites was introduced in 1981. I wasn't sure if this was suitable for the article, but it shows that the "world's deadliest spider" tag often attached to the Sydney funnel-web spider is now a myth.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:45, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

While it is true that it is now proven to have an affective antivenom you also have to take in affect of allergic reactions, I also suspect that your going to say that there haven't been any allergic reaction deaths, but there could have been times where people have been bitten but where to far in a forest in order to reach a hospital in time. Read the facts man (talk) 02:22, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

P.S there was a case in 2016 of a 10 year old boy. Read the facts man (talk) 02:31, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Most venomous" again

Re this edit: Guinness World Records gives the most venomous spider title to the male Sydney funnel-web spider here, but it has also given the title to the Brazilian wandering spider.[3] It is hard to give a Median lethal dose, but this source says that 0.2 mg/kg is a lethal dose for monkeys. It isn't in dispute that people have died from funnel-web bites, but terms like most deadly and most venomous are harder to pin down.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:53, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - but it's really common for sources to discuss things like most venomous 'x' too....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:22, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

True, but (a) the sources need to be reliable (b) it needs to be clear what is being measured and used to define the degree to which "venomous" is applied. One problem with all such claims is the well documented problem of the frequent lack of expert identification of the spider involved. The danger to an individual who has been bitten depends on the effects of the venom compounds in humans (not mice or monkeys), and the volume of venom injected. The danger to populations from a particular species of spider additionally depends on the frequency with which bites occur. In terms of the threat to populations, Loxosceles species in tropical South America probably hold the record, because although the proportion of severe effects is lower than with some other spiders, the number of bites is very high. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:52, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The figure of 0.2 mg/kg seems to be based on a Crab-eating macaque (Macaca fascicularis) and the Guinness source says "Most experimental animals, being relatively resistant to the venom, are inadequate models of human toxicity. For experimental purposes two groups of animals appear useful, having susceptibility to the venom of male A. robustus, sufficient for comparative clinical studies (monkeys) or for toxicity assay (new born mice). (Sutherland 1983, Wiener 1956, 1957)" so the Guinness source isn't quite correct when it says that 0.2 mg/kg is a lethal dose for a human; it appears that a luckless crab-eating macaque provided this data and it was extrapolated to humans.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:13, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

doi:10.1016/0742-8413(84)90048-3 gives the LD50 of male A. robustus whole venom as 3.3 mg/kg for mice, which supports the idea that commonly used experimental animals are "relatively resistant to the venom". Whether crab-eating macaques are a more accurate model is another issue. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:13, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The best thing I can think of is this, where we reflect what the sources say. We can't ignore the fact that it has been considered the most venomous, but use sources to clarify where it stands and highlight the disputes and limitations of research. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:47, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The "most deadly/venomous" title depends on who you are listening to at the time, and the research makes it hard to compare the Sydney funnel-web and the Brazilian wandering spider directly. It isn't quite as easy as saying that Usain Bolt is the world's fastest man, which is uncontroversial.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:32, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let's be upfront about the definition, and also the fact that another spider has been given the same designation. Guinness World Records is not right when it says "just 0.2 mg/kg of the male's venom is a lethal dose for primates (including humans)" – there seems to be no evidence of the lethal dose in humans, and the evidence is limited to one primate species. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:17, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Symptoms?

The "Symptoms" section gives no real information about symptoms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.37.99.86 (talk) 10:47, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, some more detail could be added. St John Ambulance Australia has this fact sheet which is intended for a non-technical reader. This source is more technical. Also a good news story here. A special mention goes to this source which describes funnel-webs as a class of insects [facepalm].--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:12, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also known as

The Sydney funnel-web spider is also know locally as just "funnel web", as demonstrated in the two ELs. What's the best way to mention this in the lead paragraph? Also, (nearly) all references have been recently changed to "funnel web spider" which is more cumbersome than is used in the reports. Will I change it back? peterl (talk) 12:33, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On the second point, yes, restore the original. Actually, all of 2600:1700:7E31:5710:2C89:9DBC:EE9F:2AC2's edits need to be reviewed, because they have also changed "-our" endings (e.g. "colour") to "-or" (e.g. "color") even though most of the articles about Australian spiders are clearly marked as in Australian English. See User talk:Casliber#Australian spelling question. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:15, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On the first point, the article should be at the species name of this funnel web, Atrax robustus, and emphasised that is known locally as the "funnel web". Sydney funnel web was probably made up, I doubt it is a common name. On the second point I spell colour however I find it, Fowler wasn't much bothered and nationalistic spelling conventions strike me as a broad and pointless territorial claim. cygnis insignis 13:31, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's misleading. Media reports or an average person may say "funnel web" when they mean "Sydney funnel-web spider" but there are various different types of funnel-web. The Australian Museum gives the name as "Sydney Funnel-web Spider" with the alternative names "Sydney Funnelweb Spider, Funnel Web Spider".[4] The main reason for distinguishing the Sydney funnel-web spider from other spiders is that its bite is very dangerous to humans if left untreated.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:46, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with clarity for that concern, and I think "commonly encountered" is a key point. I found funnel web spider bite redirects to spider bite, on that point. 14:01, 3 August 2019 (UTC) fix link to remove hyphen [!] cygnis insignis 14:03, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Made some updates today; still needs some further refinement. Thanks for the input. peterl (talk) 12:00, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Behavior?

I agree with many of the above comments that this page lacks some information on the life-cycle of the spider. I also noticed there was not much information on the behavior aspect of the spider. I'm curious about the life-span and lifecycle of the spider especially. How does the spider change over the course of its life? In context with the venomous quality of the spider, I wonder if the spiders are venomous for their entire life or only when they mature to a certain age? I'm also curious who their usual prey are- and again does it change over the course of its life? 17lchang (talk) 02:04, 6 October 2020 (UTC) 17lchang[reply]

New largest funnel-web?

I'm a bit confused by this news story: [5][6] It says that the female was 8cm from foot to foot, while the 2016 specimen was male and with a leg span of 10cm.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:01, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok this is gonna be 2 parts:

part 1:

is there any proof of the 10cm leg span of the male funnel web

part 2:

is there any proof of the female and its 8 cm leg span.

if there is no hard proof for both doesn't that make the 6 cm leg span still the biggest funnel web? Read the facts man (talk) 02:28, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

robustoxin

If one just reads the article (withoul looking up the links), one may think that δ-atracotoxin ist different from robustoxin.

Because of this there is need to tell the reader that these are synonyms.

On the other hand, there is no need for telling that δ-atracotoxin is the same as delta-atracotoxin as δ should be commonly known as delta.

User:lanman may consider this and restore this synonymy in any way he/she likes, but ist should be made clear anyway!

Kind regards --Ernsts (talk) 14:04, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article title is Delta atracotoxin, where the opening sentence says "Delta atracotoxin (δ-ACTX-Ar1, robustoxin, or robustotoxin) is a low-molecular-weight neurotoxic polypeptide found in the venom of the Sydney funnel-web spider (Atrax robustus)." This means that the other names given are synonyms for the same thing. For the sake of consistency, I think that the article should stick to using "delta atracotoxin" rather than giving a WP:PIPE to other versions of the name.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:16, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Start reading into the facts

ok so I've read the entire article and read all the chats (I don't know when the chats where done) but some of you are saying that they haven't had any cases. reread the article it says in the end of the first paragraph in treatment it says "The most vials used to treat a bite is 12. The patient was a 10-year-old boy who was bitten in February 2017 by a male Sydney funnel-web that was hiding in a shoe" emphasis on 2017 so please before saying that there haven't been any cases there have been. Read the facts man (talk) 02:38, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody has died since the antivenom was introduced.[7] There have been cases where a person was bitten, but nobody has died.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:19, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New largest spider?

This is in the news. Hercules is described as the largest specimen ever collected from the public, measuring 7.9 centimetres from foot to foot. This is a puzzle, because in 2016 the Australia Reptile Park said that Big Boy with a leg span of 10 centimetres was the largest specimen that they had seen. ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]