|
|
Post by panzerman on Jan 22, 2011 6:30:07 GMT -8
rinaca kitchingi M+F john  Attachments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by saturniidave on Jan 22, 2011 10:20:44 GMT -8
Nice ones John! I actually know Ian Kitching!
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by panzerman on Jan 22, 2011 15:45:01 GMT -8
Wow! Dave, why are the names "rinaca" and "caligula" used for the same species like zuleika, thibeta, anna etc? Never know which one to use for data label.... John  |
|
|
|
Post by saturniidave on Jan 22, 2011 17:40:16 GMT -8
John, it is very confusing and depends which book you read! The latest as far as I can work out is that they are genus Saturnia, subgenus Rinaca. When I first started in Saturniidae they were all Dictyoploca!
It seems that the Genus Saturnia now includes Rinaca, Callosaturnia, Eriogyna and Neoris as subgenera. Not sure I entirely agree with this but it has been decreed by greater minds than mine!
It is just as confusing as the African Emperors, I can never work out which are Imbrasia, Gonimbrasia or Nudaurelia.
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by africaone on Jan 23, 2011 0:53:19 GMT -8
You are right Dave.
it is normal that you never understood the African you cited. It is a paraphyletic group.
To those that criticise the barcode, i can assure you that it gave the first credible answer (all the previous authors were wrong) to classify the "Imbrasia/Nudaurelia" complex. There are a lot of surprises.
Very strange but the general color that was completeley passed over is a very important character.
Thierry
|
|
|
|
Post by saturniidave on Jan 23, 2011 9:07:37 GMT -8
Thierry I am sure Barcoding is helping sort out taxonomy, but when you look at the BOLD website and see how many species represented there are synonyms of others, how some pages show obvious cases of more than one species, and some species, such as jamesoni and alcestris, are listed under Gonimbrasia AND Nudaurelia it just confuses the matter even more.
I would have thought that the barcoding would show where species are different or the same, so why are these cases still displayed on the BOLD pages?
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by africaone on Jan 23, 2011 14:29:05 GMT -8
yes Dave this problem is not small. You must know that those that are working with the datas do not use the "public pages" and work only the barcode itself.
Because of no time (and mean ? ... and some more problems !) the public pages are not update or not well managed properly.
Many of the datas, despite available for researchers, are not yet public and then not yet available for the public sites.
Not easy to manage for the responsible. the time (and I think some decision that must taken at high level !) will solve the problem. Youth desease, no more !! One must recognised that the site is in constant progress despite not yet "perfect". It exists and this is important.
Thierry
|
|
|
|
Post by saturniidave on Jan 24, 2011 10:55:04 GMT -8
I see Thierry. But if it is leading to such confusion as I mentioned would it not be better to not show the 'public pages' of photos at all until all is sorted?
I have used the BOLD pages myself for a few species but others are so confused it is impossible. I have also sent material there.
I look forward to one day being able to identify such genera as Bunaeopsis, Pseudobunaea and others to identify the many unidentified ones I have in my collection, I don't think D'Abrera is ever going to finish the Saturniidae Mundi series so what are we to do meantime?
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by africaone on Jan 25, 2011 2:31:54 GMT -8
Dave, keep cool  I am fortunetely (or unfortunetely, it depends the POV) not responsable in the barcode organisation and I am not allowed to answer to your question. I think the error of the barcode is to have linked research on DNA and a public window for a kind of an online catalogue. Too ambicious regarding their means ! I am very much more interested in the CATE project that seems very much more mature and adapted for such work you cited. It is more general, holistic and "tought". Other private project such as those on Acraea seems to take the right way ! We are at the beginning of a new era of communication espacially in entomology and all must be created, thought and tested. Thierry ps : You hope of having a clear answer for your Buneaopsis and Pseudabunaea risk to be dipapointed  |
|
|
|
Post by oehlkew on Jan 25, 2011 6:46:30 GMT -8
As more information becomes available and analytic techniques become more refined, there are bound to be revisions in classifications. Over the years the number of genera recognized for the Saturniidae family has grown and will likely continue to grow. The same will be true for the number of species within those genera or subgenera.
I recently purchased a copy of Rudolph Lampe's Saturniidae of the World, and agree with Thierry that it is a very nice resource. It is largely a picture library, usually depicting the adult moths and all stages of the larvae. Having looked at the species depicted as Imbrasia and Gonimbrasia in this recent publication, I see larvae that are quite hairy in final instar: epimethea and ertli, quite different from the relatively smooth skinned larva of Imbrasia longicaudata and truncata.
I see larvae primarily with black skin (without speckling), and elongated spinage: affinis, wahlberghi, dione; with green skin (without speckling), and elongated spinage: macrothyris;
extensively speckled skin, some hairy: forda, tyrrhea; extensively speckled skin: not hairy: belina, conradsi, hecate, occidentalis, zambesina, gueinzii, carnegiei, cytherea;
without spinage but very hairy: alcestris;
very long dorsal horns, almost resembling regalis:
eblis; and jamesoni which seems distinctive.
I would not be surprised to see the Imbrasia/Gonimbrasia group further subdivided into at least six groups, based on larval morphology. I do not know if DNA analysis is also being done on larvae. That might provide some very interesting results. Not all larvae have been observed yet.
Keep in mind that "family", "genus" and "species" and other classification divisions are man-made devices. Divisions/distinctions that might seem very trivial to some, might mean much more to others.
I believe funding for many of these proects is from government grants. if so, I think some time in the near future, the results wil lbe public. I could be wrong on both counts.
Bill Oehlke
|
|
