|
Post by beetlehorn on Oct 6, 2011 18:32:39 GMT -8
Sorry for not including the identifications with the previous photo. Hopefully I can redeem myself with photos of several series of these Nymphalid species. This one is Asterocampa celtis, all net captured by myself here in Tennessee. Oh, and to answer your question in regards to their behavior, yes their flight pattern is identical, very fast with the same flap-glide-flap pattern. Also they love strong smelling substances like decomposing animals, fish carrion and fermenting fruit. The males are also quite territorial, dashing out and confronting nearly any moving object, much like the Apatura's behavior. Their larval stages are very similar as well, both in appearance and habits. Here in America they feed on Hackberry trees, in Europe and Asia the Apatura species feed mostly on Salix and Poplar. All 50 or so species are listed in the subfamily as Apaturinae, which include the Genus Doxocopa. Tom Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Oct 5, 2011 19:27:44 GMT -8
I wanted to draw a bit of attention towards the North American Emperor butterflies for a change. Although the Eurasian Emperors (Apatura) are very charismatic due to their purple and blue iridescense, of which I have been quite enamored since childhood, I must say that I also find a special appeal to the American species. Here in Tennessee we have two species, Asterocampa celtis, and Asterocampa clyton, and although they lack the fantastic purple sheen of the Apatura and Doxocopa group, they are of special interest to many Nymphalid collectors. I have also always wanted to collect the western US species, namely Asterocampa leilia, and Asterocampa celtis antonia. So I made a trip to Arizona to do some collecting and photographing. I spent almost four hours one morning in the Sonoran desert and collected Asterocampa leilia. I was delighted to find a good population of them amongst the mesquite and cacti. Most people see the desert as a desolate place, but I found it to be somewhat magical. I obtained a few A. celtis antonia from a friend that collects in Arizona, and since I have them mounted alongside the A. celtis I encounter here in the east, I think they deserve species recognition, namely Asterocampa antonia.> Period! They actually look more like A. leilia than A. celtis, or perhaps even a cross between the two. So in my collection they will be named separately, if nothing more than to keep some better sense of order for myself. Tom Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Sept 18, 2011 20:14:35 GMT -8
That is absolutely hilarious Dunc, when I read your post I actually had to laugh out loud!! I have had the very same thoughts as you do, I sometimes wonder if there is really a pre-neanderthal gene floating around. Thanks for the correction Adam, for some reason I typed in Heraclides when I actually meant to type Pterourus. You see....I would like to use the excuse that we have both so called genuses flying around here in the Southeastern US (H. cresphontes, and P. glaucus) rather commonly, but in reality it is the effects of my age. Just imagine someone like me trying to keep all the taxonomic butterfly names straight! Hell, I can't even remember what I had for lunch yesterday, and Im' supposed to be able to remember names in an ever-changing classification system?!? Tom
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Sept 18, 2011 20:14:05 GMT -8
That is absolutely hilarious Dunc, when I read your post I actually had to laugh out loud!! I have had the very same thoughts as you do, I sometimes wonder if there is really a pre-neanderthal gene floating around. Thanks for the correction Adam, for some reason I typed in Heraclides when I actually meant to type Pterourus. You see....I would like to use the excuse that we have both so called genuses flying around here in the Southeastern US (H. cresphontes, and P. glaucus) rather commonly, but in reality it is the effects of my age. Just imagine someone like me trying to keep all the taxonomic butterfly names straight! Hell, I can't even remember what I had for lunch yesterday, and Im' supposed to be able to remember names in an ever-changing classification system?!? Tom
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Sept 17, 2011 6:21:31 GMT -8
In order to help in this matter I will address both of you here. First of all I would like to compliment you Reverend on your beginning collection, and newfound hobby. Let me warn you though....once the collecting bug has bitten you, the effects are long lasting. You will find yourself longing for more and new specimens, thereby feeding your desire to discover and learn more about this activity, and all of this will result in an ever growing collection. Also to you starlight criminal (interesting name!), you are quite correct in assuming you should find more Dynastes tityus in the same locations. I can tell you from experience that I always seem to find them within the same general area, year after year. There must be some large old trees with hardwood substrate in and around them, in order for the beetles to grow through their larval stages, and develop into adults. I go out hunting for them at dusk, because as you stated, you have to beat the possibility of them being squashed by cars. Go on moonless nights, during hot humid weather, and don't pass up other possible locations. You might want to try blacklighting for them in suitable habitat, I use a combination of flourescent black and white light. If you want to try to rear them, then go to the old forum section of this website, under the topic list {Coleoptera} on page three about 3/4 of the page down, there is an article I wrote a few years ago called "Rearing Dynastes tityus, my method". I think it will give anyone interested in this activity a good idea of what is involved. I have reared these beetles on several occasions, and they are relatively easy to maintain. Whats more, you can get some really nice large specimens in A1 condition if you use the right substrate and keep them in a warm environment. You will be amazed at how fast the larvae grow, and the rewards are definately worth the effort. Below is a nice large specimen I reared three years ago, it has an unusual rich golden coloration that is somewhat different from the army green background color common to most of these beetles. Tom Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Sept 16, 2011 1:39:18 GMT -8
I suppose I went a bit too far in saying that taxonomists are constantly changing scientific nomenclature in order to continue recieving money. I wonder though why do they change it on so many levels (family, genus, species)? Just because they find a bit of genetic "evidence" that seems to point them in another direction, they suddenly change the nomenclature even on the family level? Then a few years later something else comes along, another opinion, someone else's findings, or perhaps something overlooked, and all of a sudden a species or genus is renamed or it is reverted to it's original standing. Why is our scientific community so eager to reclassify something before all the facts about a given family, genus, species..... are in? It just seems to me that this tends to cunfuse things unneccessarily. For example...decades ago it was called Papilio marcellus, then it was called Graphium marcellus, now it is known as Eurytides marcellus, what will it be next,..... Iphiclides marcellus? I understand that scientific research is a process of elimination in order to get at the final result of a collection of findings. I have to wonder then,with all due respect, if it's not about money, then what else could motivate people to be so eager in this regard? Perhaps the recognition of their research will earn them some other reward, which I am sure many of them deserve. Also at times a certain scientist will find something so staggeringly different, that the facts beg us to completely reconsider our previous understanding, even to the point of reclassifying an entire group of organisms. This brings us back to the first discussion. Where do we draw the line in what actually constitutes a separate species? How far do the scales have to tip in order to give something species designation, and how much evidence does it take to change the classification of something? Is Papilio appalachiensis far enough along in the evolutionary process to actually constitute it as a separate species, or is it merely a subspecies of Papilio glaucus, or should I call it Heraclides glaucus? Lets get all the facts in, or at least as many as we can realistically gather before we start to rename it. So far we are down to the mitochondrial level to distinguish it from the parent species. For a collector, or just the casual entomologist I think it will hold up as a separate species. Many of the physical characteristics are so similar that an untrained eye would consider them the same species. But whenever I pull open a drawer with the two side by side the differences are obvious to me. That plus the differences in flight times, elevation preferences, and localization of populations, are more than enough for this collector to consider the Appalachian Tiger Swallowtail a separate species with it's own designation. Tom
|
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Sept 15, 2011 2:36:05 GMT -8
I agree with you on this matter. I find it somewhat disturbing that taxonomists have lumped all these large families into one. I have to wonder what they'll do next?!? To place such families as Morphidae, Amathusidae, Danaidae, Satyridae, etc. under the same classification and name them Nymphalidae, is in my opinion rather ridiculous. A satyrid the same as a nymphalid????Come on give me a break!! Even as a child when I started collecting the difference between a Pararge aegeria and an Apatura ilia was so obvious I just knew they had to be classified into separate families. Their habitats were within the same area, but everything else was different, behavior, flight pattern, physical appearance, etc. I realize the issue between P. glaucus, and P. appalachiensis is on a species/subspecies level, but it is to me just another example of how diverse life on this planet is. As for my personal collection I too keep not only the families of Nymphalidae, Satyridae, Morphidae, and others separate, but I also regard the few P. appalachiensis I have and P. glaucus specimens as distinct. Lets not forget, these swallowtails were or possibly still are listed under the genus "Heraclides", as for my collection I have them all listed as "Papilio". I guess what I am trying to say is that we all know them as what they are traditionally classified, why try to confuse things by constantly changing the taxonomy. Perhaps the war between the "lumpers" and "splitters" is on-going because they know that if they keep things stirred up they will continue recieving a paycheck. Tom
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Sept 13, 2011 10:24:56 GMT -8
Sorry for the delay, I would have responded sooner had I read the previous thread. Anyhow to answer your question, I would have to agree with arrowhead and say at the peak of their flight expecially, you can expect these beetles to come to your lights all night. That being said, I have noticed more individuals coming in between dusk and approx. 11:30pm. I believe there are areas where this species is more prevalent than other places within their range. Also I have found areas a few years ago where they occurred, then the following two or three years almost nothing, and all of a sudden I will go to an old area where I used to find them and they are back in good numbers. So you just have to go hunting for them, sooner or later you will find them for several nights in a row. Tom
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Sept 10, 2011 20:25:53 GMT -8
In reply to your question regarding the collecting method. Yes I use flourescent blacklight, and white light to attract them. I have never actually found one in the woods or on treestumps, although I know they must be in the area somewhere. Perhaps they spend their time in the treetops after they emerge, or possibly hiding under dead trees during the day. Im' not sure, but one thing that remains consistent is I always find them around old growth timber that consists of a mixture of hardwoods, especially oak and poplar. The largest male I have ever collected was an honest 63mm. In the wild they rarely exceed 60mm. Im' somewhat confident that an expert beetle breeder can exceed that size with captive reared examples. Below is an example of a 60mm male. Tom Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Sept 10, 2011 17:52:04 GMT -8
In regards to this species, (Lucanus elaphus) I would look for them to occur in areas where the deciduous trees have been allowed to grow old. In some of the areas I collect them there are oak, poplar and hickory trees with bases exceeding 48 inches diameter. It is in old growth forests from the New England area to the southern states of Georgia, Alabama, westward to Oklahoma, and Missouri that these large beetles occur, sometimes in good numbers. They can be found from the end of May to mid July, with the best times around the end of June according to the lunar phase. There are good years and bad, so they are cyclical just like everything else. This past summer was rather good, and I collected a good number that hovered around the 55mm to 60mm size range, which I can tell you from experience a true 60mm male is exceptionally nice to find. Tom Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Jul 18, 2011 20:25:42 GMT -8
Here is the photo I wanted to share. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Jul 18, 2011 20:22:49 GMT -8
Rearing anything is a learning process, and sometimes lessons are hard learned, but so being they are also not easily forgotten. I would have to agree with the last reply, and say even though you had them in the shade, they overheated due to lack of free flowing air. I use a cage I specially constructed for Saturnidae. It is screened at all sides even the door. This allows the cocoons to be in the shade yet have proper ventilation, and I can leave them outside so as to be exposed to natural elements. This does several things in favor of your rearing stock. First it protects the cocoons from wasps, mice and birds. Secondly it ensures your stock to eclose at the time that is natural for them (females can call in wild males), thus coinciding with wild moths. Thirdly it is much more convenient than having them in the house. I have included a photo of one of my cages. I hope this can be of some use to you in the future. Tom
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Jun 25, 2011 12:32:44 GMT -8
For several years now I have reared a number of different local Lepidoptera, and a few beetles as well. This year I had the fortune of getting some eggs from a female Citheronia regalis (Royal Walnut Moth). I currently have them sleeved on hickory and can see evidence of active feeding. From what I have gathered in terms of advice from my friends, is that they are easy to bring into the final instar. However, they just don't seem to make it through the pupation phase. Do they require a special form of substrate to pupate? Is it best to let them pupate outdoors? Any additional help would be greatly appreciated. Tom Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Jun 12, 2011 2:01:37 GMT -8
Well.....you know us southerners. We just love to fry anything. I remember seeing a news clip regarding chocolate covered cicadas, looking at this further they were actually almonds advertised as cicadas. Then again there are those that will eat them (cicadas), I guess they have a more adventurous spirit than I do. Interestingly the native indians, particularly the Iriquois considered them a delicacy. Here is an article with recipes in case there is anyone out there interested. www2.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=7478
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Jun 9, 2011 18:59:51 GMT -8
I too absolutely adore Papilio ulysses! I can remember seeing a photo of one as a child, and daydreaming of collecting safaris in far away tropical places. I suppose it is also my favorite (non-pricey) papilio, although at times I find myself torn between this species and Papilio blumei. It is also a readily available papilio, and I sometimes wonder how much it would be worth if it were a rare butterfly like some of the ones mentioned earlier!?! Tom Attachments:
|
|