|
|
Post by dertodesking on Apr 21, 2011 4:25:16 GMT -8
Hello All, One for the Ornithoptera specialists here...  One of my favourite Ornithoptera species is victoriae and I have a reasonable collection of these (ssp. epiphanes, isabellae, maramasikensis, reginae, regis, rubianus and victoriae) but am missing ssp. archeri. Why is archeri so difficult to obtain? Tony Nagypal's website indicates it comes from North Choiseul and a quick web search on the island seems to indicate that it (Choiseul) is reasonably close to other well known islands (Bourgainville etc) from where specimens are available. Why is archeri not available? (or do they all follow the money to Japan!!!). Any information greatly appreciated. Simon |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by simosg on Apr 21, 2011 6:32:48 GMT -8
Probably because it doesn't really exist? I can't see a real difference to regis.
Hannes
|
|
|
|
Post by dertodesking on Apr 21, 2011 6:53:18 GMT -8
Probably because it doesn't really exist? I can't see a real difference to regis. Hannes LOL - that would be one reason Hannes! ;D ;D ;D ...but why do I never see it on dealers lists? Is the island really thyat remote? If you accept archeri as a valid ssp. is it really that rare in nature? Why is it not ranched on its home island? You'd think the locals would see that there would be a market for it... Simon |
|
|
|
Post by simosg on Apr 21, 2011 7:07:59 GMT -8
Gilles Deslise in "Lambillionea, Revision of the Genus Ornithoptera":
"Species victoriae seems to be abundant on all those islands, except on Choiseul, where the habitat appears to be less suitable."
But due to this, regis should be rare on the market too. So I don't know, if this is the reason.
Hannes
|
|
|
|
Post by simosg on Apr 21, 2011 10:50:00 GMT -8
Another quote from Deslisles book:
"Mr. Archer brought back four males and three females, which form the basic of the description."
Not very much for such a variable species as victoriae.
Hannes
|
|
|
|
Post by dertodesking on Apr 21, 2011 11:05:09 GMT -8
Another quote from Deslisles book: "Mr. Archer brought back four males and three females, which form the basic of the description." Not very much for such a variable species as victoriae. Hannes Hi Hannes, Agreed...BUT, most authors (the ones I have read anyway) DO seem to accept it as a valid ssp. so I have mixed thoughts... Simon |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by thanos on Apr 21, 2011 11:35:16 GMT -8
And do you consider also maramasikensis and reginae from Malaita as different subspecies? I can't see a real difference to justify it.
Thanos
|
|
|
|
Post by simosg on Apr 21, 2011 11:44:21 GMT -8
Me too. I didn't buy archeri and maramasikensis due to this.
Hannes
|
|
|
|
Post by dertodesking on Apr 21, 2011 14:14:28 GMT -8
And do you consider also maramasikensis and reginae from Malaita as different subspecies? I can't see a real difference to justify it. Thanos Hi Thanos, A friend gave me a copy of Morita's description of ssp. maramasikensis and reading that...yes, I consider/considered it valid. I thought ssp. maramasikensis flew on Mara Masike Island (= "Small Malaita Island" according to Tony Nagypal) while ssp. reginae flew on Malaita Island. A search on Google Earth showed this to be different Islands...although admittedly only seperated by a narrow stretch of water. I don't know to be honest...all views welcome Best Wishes, Simon |
|
|
|
Post by dertodesking on Apr 21, 2011 15:20:39 GMT -8
And do you consider also maramasikensis and reginae from Malaita as different subspecies? I can't see a real difference to justify it. Thanos Hi Thanos, I just checked Oliver Schaffler's Ornithoptera (2001) from the Bauer and Frankenback "Butterflies of the World" series. He has this to say on the differences between ssp. maramasikensis and reginae... "Orn. victoriae maramasikensis differs from victoriae reginae by the bright yellow subapical zone of the forewings and by the identically coloured submarginal band of the hindwings. The subapical patch is somewhat larger than in victoriae reginae. The black overdusting of the hindwings is compared to reginae reduced. The ground colouration of the females is black, in reginae is dark-brown. The yellow subcostal spot of the hindwing is alongside the coast and towards the base extended. This can be observed in victoriae reginae only very rarely or not at all." Simon |
|
|
|
Post by panzerman on Apr 23, 2011 6:19:27 GMT -8
here is a male v. maramasikensis... John Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by dertodesking on Apr 24, 2011 13:56:06 GMT -8
here is a male v. maramasikensis... John Very nice indeed John (as always!). Mine (four pairs) are currently in a tupperware box waiting to be relaxed and set...which I will eventually get around to! I take it you accept ssp. maramasikensis as valid? Simon |
|
|
|
Post by panzerman on Apr 25, 2011 19:28:50 GMT -8
Yes, its way different from reginae...
John
|
|
|
|
Post by simosg on Apr 26, 2011 11:05:25 GMT -8
Why?
Hannes
|
|
|
|
Post by dertodesking on Apr 26, 2011 12:46:28 GMT -8
Hi Hannes, See my reply to Thanos (#9) above (the quote from Oliver Schaffler, 2001). I'm waiting until I set my pairs to compare for myself but Schaffler's description (based on the original type description) certainly seems to me to imply validity. Out of interest...what makes you think that they are the same? Simon |
|
