Jump to content
Keith

Pet roach id

Recommended Posts

Wish I knew for sure. It is definitely in the Blaberus genus. Possibly fusca? Many of the Blaberus look very similar to me. I'm planning on doing a photo essay of them all and comparing them side by side. I have six species of Blaberus and I'd like to get a couple more. All of mine are from reliable sources, so I'm as sure as I can be that they are pure.

Wish I knew more. Ask me again in two years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has more black than fusca, so thats why I thought it was craniifer, but the size doesnt match? Anyway it's 2 years old and came shipped with b. giganteus, must have gotten mixed up in the bunch, but it's a really nice looking roach! I've been trying to find it's id but it's hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blaberus craniifer "brown wings"/"european". There's a lot of stuff on how they may be a hybrid. It's a female, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blaberus craniifer "brown wings"/"european". There's a lot of stuff on how they may be a hybrid. It's a female, too.

No, if you’re going to use that term it would be Blaberus “craniifer brownwings/European” (vs. craniifer “brownwings/European”). Unless it has jet black wings, which this one doesn’t, then it’s not a B. craniifer… it would be (probably) B. fusca or a hybrid of it (possibly with real B. craniifer). It is female however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, craniifer should've had quotation marks. I said that because that's the most common name for these guys.

My B. craniifer had a slight light mark (much subtler than this girl), so I wouldn't totally ditch the possibility of it being a craniifer with an abnormally light stripe. Or were mine not fully pure either?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I stated on "another forum".... looks to me like a craniifer/fusca hybrid, which there have been quite a few around lately....

Many of you know me: Damn the Hybrids! ;)

rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble..... :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're right, craniifer should've had quotation marks. I said that because that's the most common name for these guys.

My B. craniifer had a slight light mark (much subtler than this girl), so I wouldn't totally ditch the possibility of it being a craniifer with an abnormally light stripe. Or were mine not fully pure either?

Unless your B. craniifer have FULL BLACK WINGS then it is not a B. craniifer... if it has light colored wings with whatever type of brown marks it's not a B. craniifer it's a B. fusca hybrid something or other.

The problem with these guys is people think that because the name written on the container they were shipped in then that's what they are. I agree with Matt K, Damn the hybrids! If people would not label the hybrids (and sell them) as pure strain or whatever strain then it wouldn't be a big deal.

Let’s put it this way: People would be pissed if I sold them a pure bred German short hair, and charged them for it as such, if the mother was a black lab. Then of course the new owner would take their new “dark strain” German short hair and breed it with their pure German short hair… thus every single offspring after that is tainted. No longer is it a German short hair, it’s a lab mix no matter how many generations go by! Having a mutt is fine, just don't sell it as a pure bred because then everyone else is going to get mutts eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×