|
Post by wollastoni on Mar 26, 2013 13:03:07 GMT -8
nomad < very interesting, thank you !
nomihoudai < I am afraid you're right.
|
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Mar 26, 2013 13:03:22 GMT -8
Yes there always one, easy to modify. Nice specimens John.
|
|
|
Post by hewi on Mar 26, 2013 14:12:49 GMT -8
John,
P. ulysses karkarensis SCHÄFFLER & SCHMIDBAUER, 2004 is a synonym of P. ulysses melanotica HAGEN, 1897.
The authors had overlooked that the island of Karkar and Dampier (the type locality of melanotica) is the same. Dampier is the old name of the island that is now known as Karkar.
I met Oliver this month at the Munich fair and talked to him about this fact. He had also noticed already and wants it to rectify in a future publication.
Manfred
|
|
mokky
Full Member
The Butterfly Society of Japan
Posts: 155
|
Post by mokky on Mar 26, 2013 15:24:19 GMT -8
Dear Adam Thank you for your interesting information. I think all the type specimens of Bhutanitis ludlowi are safely housed in BMNH now. You can see all the types from the following link. ifoundbutterflies.org/54-bhutanitis/bhutanitis-ludlowiIf there is another specimen of B. ludlowi it should be collected by Ludlow and Sherriff in 1933-1934 in eastern Bhutan. I have checked the diary written by Ludlow. No specific number of the specimens was mentioned. So there is some possibility that there are another specimens except types. As far as I know, now all the specimen of B. ludlowi are as follows; 3 males and 2 females [Types]; BMNH, England 1 male and 2 females (but only one female is good in condition); Bhutan 2 males*; One in University Museum, University of Tokyo and the other in Research Institute of Evolutionary Biology, both in Tokyo, Japan * not including a female, only two males Recently this species has been discovered also from Arunachal Pradesh in India but it should be very difficult to get new specimens because of the protection. Cheers, Mokky Yes, Bernard Turlin has one of the original series (but not a type as it was not listed by the author of ludlowi) collected back in 1933-34. It seems that one of the male specimens that were originally taken was sent elsewhere by the collectors, Ludlow and Sherriff. In the original description Gabriel stated that 3 males and two females were caught, but only two pairs are listed as types. The specimen currently in the Turlin collection must be the only other originally collected specimen. Recently a couple of new specimens were given to Japan by the King of Bhutan, but otherwise it seems unlikely that specimens will become available on the trade market. Adam.
|
|
|
Post by panzerman on Mar 26, 2013 16:40:45 GMT -8
Manfred:
Thanks for info about ulysses karkarensis, I have a present day M+F from Karkar named "karkarensis". Also have a beautifull female from old collection with label p. ulysses melanotica/Dampier Is. (I have too confess I was not able to find Dampier Is., nowI know why! Another mystery solved... I have even some specimens labelled "Neu Pommern" New Pomerania, back when these Islands were part of the German Empire.
John
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Mar 27, 2013 1:31:07 GMT -8
Dear Adam Thank you for your interesting information. I think all the type specimens of Bhutanitis ludlowi are safely housed in BMNH now. You can see all the types from the following link. ifoundbutterflies.org/54-bhutanitis/bhutanitis-ludlowiIf there is another specimen of B. ludlowi it should be collected by Ludlow and Sherriff in 1933-1934 in eastern Bhutan. I have checked the diary written by Ludlow. No specific number of the specimens was mentioned. So there is some possibility that there are another specimens except types. As far as I know, now all the specimen of B. ludlowi are as follows; 3 males and 2 females [Types]; BMNH, England 1 male and 2 females (but only one female is good in condition); Bhutan 2 males*; One in University Museum, University of Tokyo and the other in Research Institute of Evolutionary Biology, both in Tokyo, Japan * not including a female, only two males Recently this species has been discovered also from Arunachal Pradesh in India but it should be very difficult to get new specimens because of the protection. Cheers, Mokky Mokky, Thank you for your explanation and link to Krushnamegh's photos of the types of ludlowi. Interestingly when I was in the NHM in 2006 there were only 4 specimens in the draw, and it seems the 5th had been removed for photography by Harish Gaonkar. Indeed there are 5 types listed in the original description. I erroneously miscounted the number of types, because 2 male paratypes are listed together by sequential BM numbers, rather than separately: "N.E. Bhutan, Trashiyangsi Valley, 7500-8000 ft., Aug. 1933 and 1934 (F. Ludlow and G. Sheriff). B.M. Holotype [m], No. Rh.15054; B.M. Allotype [f], No. Rh.15055; B.M. Paratype [m], No. Rh.15056-7; B.M. Paratype [f], No. Rh.15058." Thus in fact the specimen in the Turlin collection must be an additional specimen taken on the same expedition but not presented to the BM(NH) as it was then known. I wonder if there are maybe also a few more specimens from the original collection in other collections or museums? Indeed ludlowi has been discovered in Arunachal Pradesh recently, but this locality is in fact just across the border with Bhutan from the type locality. I agree that it is highly unlikely that any specimens will 'escape' from there onto the commercial market. Adam.
|
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2013 5:13:06 GMT -8
so there is no chance of seeing ludlowi for sale ever?
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Mar 27, 2013 6:16:16 GMT -8
Somehow I very much doubt it.
Adam.
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Mar 27, 2013 7:37:04 GMT -8
Ludlowi worths more than 1000 euros on the black market... I am pretty sure some locals will try to export eggs or papered butterflies soon, the Japanese videos show that they now know the hostplant and where to find eggs. They can earn a lot of money with them and Bhutan is very poor.
I think there will be some ludlowi for sale in the next 10 years. If Bhutanese don't do it, Chinese poachers will.
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Mar 27, 2013 7:40:33 GMT -8
Olivier,
You are probably right. Perhaps I should have qualified my answer to Dunc's question to say that I doubt that 'legal' specimens will ever become available.
Adam.
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Mar 27, 2013 8:48:55 GMT -8
Thank you for your explanation and link to Krushnamegh's photos of the types of ludlowi. Interestingly when I was in the NHM in 2006 there were only 4 specimens in the draw, and it seems the 5th had been removed for photography by Harish Gaonkar. Adam All the specimens that Harish removed were housed in about 15 drawers labelled with his name. He showed me where they were because I had to check them for types. Phil or Campbell could have shown you where they were. After the move to Wandsworth then back to the Darwin centre, and since Harish's disappearance, I don't know if they've been incorporated back into the main collection - I'll check next time I'm there. Bob
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Mar 27, 2013 9:15:30 GMT -8
Thank you for your explanation and link to Krushnamegh's photos of the types of ludlowi. Interestingly when I was in the NHM in 2006 there were only 4 specimens in the draw, and it seems the 5th had been removed for photography by Harish Gaonkar. Adam All the specimens that Harish removed were housed in about 15 drawers labelled with his name. He showed me where they were because I had to check them for types. Phil or Campbell could have shown you where they were. After the move to Wandsworth then back to the Darwin centre, and since Harish's disappearance, I don't know if they've been incorporated back into the main collection - I'll check next time I'm there. Bob Phil Ackery showed me the cabinets where Harish had assembled a series of draws of specimens which were to form the plates for his book (they were on the next floor up at Wandsworth in 2006, where the supplementaries were housed), but 2 draws were actually missing from the cabinets. One must have contained the ludlowi type and maybe the same draw or the other (I don't know) must have housed the type of himalaicus Rothschild which was also missing from its draw in the Rothschild collection. I was also unable to find the type of bianor ganesa which was stated to be in the BM collection, but there wasn't even a single specimen old enough in any of the draws in the Main Collection. I informed Phil at the time, and he said that those 2 Gaonkar draws had apparently gone missing when the collections had been moved from South Ken to Wandsworth. He told me that the movers had been asked to check everything in case the draws were still with them. He thought at the time that probably those 2 draws had been put in the wrong cabinets when moved, and indeed it seems they must have since been found, as Krushnamegh photographed all 5 types of ludlowi, whereas I could only find 4. Adam.
|
|
|
Post by papilio28570 on Mar 27, 2013 19:01:38 GMT -8
To me the rarest swallowtails are the ones I do not possess.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2013 5:14:23 GMT -8
"Ludlowi worths more than 1000 euros on the black market... I am pretty sure some locals will try to export eggs or papered butterflies soon, the Japanese videos show that they now know the hostplant and where to find eggs"
now there is a thought, ex pupae ludlowi.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Apr 7, 2013 12:12:43 GMT -8
I have recently seen 4 A1 specimens of Parides quadratus quadratus from a pretty amazing Papilionidae collection. The 2 males and 2 females were captured in the only know locality, the sandbanks of Rio Madeira in Central Brazil in 1937. I would be interested to know if other specimens are known after that date and if so do you know when. The collector who owns these has visited that remote locality but was unable to access the side of that mighty river where this species occurred. I believe subspecies spoliatus from the Western Amazon and Peru is quite scarce but is often advertised for sale. Peter.
|
|