|
|
Post by jamesd on Jul 9, 2011 0:41:32 GMT -8
Hey there,
I've been inactive for the past few months... It's winter here and I guess this sort of topic isn't usually on my mind.
I don't expect anyone to be able to answer this, but it's worth a shot: Does anybody know how common the dark/ pale form of Papilio aegues (Orchard Swallowtail) is? I've seen at least 10 wild females before and all of them were in the regular form. I just thought it would be nice to attempt to get one (assuming they're not too uncommon).
Also does anybody know how to do resin preservation? (insect stuck in a mould of dry resin), I've seen it done with beetles etc., but how/ can it be done with leps?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by downundermoths on Jul 9, 2011 3:10:44 GMT -8
I have not seen one in my Queensland yard during the 16 years that I have been here.
I do have one which I bred from larva (lemon tree) in Lae, Papua New Guinea, in 1981....It is a female Papilio aegeus ormenus form polydorina...
Barry
|
|
|
|
Post by bichos on Jul 10, 2011 0:34:38 GMT -8
Papilio aegeus form beatrix is what I'm guessing you wish to know about  There are three forms of this species in the female the dark, normal and light forms. The pale form which you ask about is very variable and is found on Moa, Thursday and Prince of Wales Islands and at Cape york and Iron range and there is an old record from Ingham which is said to be erroneous, Barry's observations support this. Taenaris has a similar distribution and the pale beatrix form is said to mimic this genus  which justifies its northernmost distribution. P.aegeus polydorina like that of Barry's from PNG also has the dark and light forms. For more info check: Braby, 2000. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jul 10, 2011 8:23:32 GMT -8
P.aegeus polydorina like that of Barry's from PNG also has the dark and light forms. For more info check: Braby, 2000. P. aegeus from New Guinea is called ssp. ormenus, polydorina is the form name for the Pachliopta polydorus mimic. Adam. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesd on Jul 11, 2011 1:13:38 GMT -8
downundermoths, it's strange that you have not seen any Papilio aegues in your area, yet I have here in VIC (where distribution is only temporary). In QLD they seem to live around costal areas, so if you live inland, that may be why.
bichos, I am assuming that form beatrix is a fancy way of saying 'pale form'? Is polydorina the dark form/Atrophaneura polydorus mimic? Thanks anyway for that information. So disappointingly, I cannot see form beatrix, but what about the dark form? I do have Braby's field guide (2004).
Adam Cotton, Yeah and I think Pachliopta is now a subgenus of Atrophaneura, so its Atrophaneura polydorus.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jul 12, 2011 0:47:18 GMT -8
Adam Cotton, Yeah and I think Pachliopta is now a subgenus of Atrophaneura, so its Atrophaneura polydorus. No way, Atrophaneura is a totally separate phylogenetic entity to Pachliopta. Pachliopta is the sister genus to Losaria (coon, rhodifer, neptunus and palu). Oh and the avatar you use is Byasa dasarada, NOT Atrophaneura either. Atrophaneura should only be used for the priapus and nox groups of Troidini containing the following species: priapus group priapus (luchti is really just a red bodied ssp), hageni, sycorax, aidoneus nox group horishanus, semperi, kuehni, varuna, nox, matsudai, dixoni. Adam. |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesd on Jul 12, 2011 4:52:09 GMT -8
Oh... really? This is interesting/ conflicting. The reason I said what I said, was because that is the way Wikipedia puts is. Of course, it wouldn't surprise me if Wikipedia is in this case, outdated or just wrong. I'll mention it to the guys and see whats going on here and how it can be fixed.
Regardless of that, I think the Atrophaneura (Byasa/Pachliopta/Losaria) are quite elegant looking.
James
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jul 12, 2011 9:43:13 GMT -8
Wikipedia is often "outdated or just wrong", at least until an expert bothers to spend his valuable time correcting pages. I certainly don't have time to edit Wikipedia. One problem with Wikipedia is that unless you are "in" there is a good chance that your edits will be reverted. I know of top taxonomists who have been banned from making changes to Wikipedia because the "in crowd" editors don't know enough about the subject. Try reading Racheli, T. & Cotton, A. M. 2010. Papilionidae part II. – In: Bozano, G. C. (ed.), Guide to the Butterflies of the Palearctic Region. — Omnes Artes, Milano, 86 pp As well as the first full revision of genus Byasa since Jordan (1928) this book contains a section covering the classification of Troidini from past to present. It is available from entomological booksellers, or direct from the publisher at www.omnesartes.com. Adam. PS. I wasn't paid anything for writing it, and don't get anything from sales, before you or anyone else asks. |
|
|
|
Post by downundermoths on Jul 12, 2011 14:38:06 GMT -8
downundermoths, it's strange that you have not seen any Papilio aegues in your area, yet I have here in VIC (where distribution is only temporary). In QLD they seem to live around costal areas, so if you live inland, that may be why. You either did not mean what you said or i misconstrued you completely. I thought you were asking on the occurrence of the very dark form of Papilio aegeus, and I answered you correctly. If you meant the female form beatrix then my answer is the same...i have not seen any during my 16 years in S E Queensland. Now you are saying how you think it's strange that I have not seen any Papilio aegeus in my area!!! Of course I have seen them. Many hundreds in fact...every year, but not the specific dark/light forms that you specified in your heading post... Can you perhaps tell me exactly what you mean  Barry |
|
|
|
Post by bichos on Jul 12, 2011 16:44:57 GMT -8
Ok so this is the dark form, from Braby, (2000). Hancock (1983) refers to it as form 'tullia'. You are unlikely to encounter this form However, as the only Australian record comes from Moa Is. Qld (one specimen). Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by bichos on Jul 12, 2011 16:50:32 GMT -8
Another image from Braby, (2000). The pale form 'beatrix'. Now regarding, resin preservation, Australian Entomological supplies used to sell the kits with an instructional booklet, its quite easy, I did a few some years ago. Perhaps you can contact them and ask if they still have it. www.entosupplies.com.au/contact-us Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesd on Jul 12, 2011 19:32:50 GMT -8
Adam, I know what you mean about the 'in crowd'. Because the site is so big, its inevitable that sub-communities form and then leads to users with unequal authority. Looks like there's some merit to your view. downundermoths, ohh oops . For some reason, I assumed you were talking about the regular form, probably because you referred to them as "ones" - (I thought you meant any P. aegeus). But yes, I was asking about the occurrence of dark and pale forms. Ok, got it. bichos, I think I've got the same images in my field guide. So if that is the only dark form found in Australia - was there any others ever found anywhere else? (If no, then wouldn't it be an aberration and not a form?) Regarding resin preservation, ok thanks. As well as that, there is also a place 2hrs drive from here. I might give it a shot.
|
|
|
|
Post by bichos on Jul 21, 2011 0:39:32 GMT -8
bichos, I think I've got the same images in my field guide. So if that is the only dark form found in Australia - was there any others ever found anywhere else? (If no, then wouldn't it be an aberration and not a form?) Jamesd I think not an aberration, how often is Moa Island collected??? How many aegeus specimens do we know of from Moa? my gut feeling tells me that it is not an aberration, however, there is every posibility that it could be  No good beetles I'm aware of, so I'll probable never go. It has been recognised as form "tullia" I thing mostly as it is common further north well into the solomons. |
|
which justifies its northernmost distribution. 
No good beetles I'm aware of, so I'll probable never go. It has been recognised as form "tullia" I thing mostly as it is common further north well into the solomons.