Subject: Phyciodes tharos vs. morpheus

From: [email-masked] (Doug Yanega)
Date: 14 Jul 1995 22:50:14 GMT

Having just acquired my own copy of Scott's tome, I find myself very
distressed at the prospect of teasing apart which of our hundreds of
pinned tharos specimens are actually morpheus. Even more distressed by
Scott's postscript indicating that they may be subspecies in the "west"
and valid species in the "east". I, on the other hand, am smack dab in
between, as well as close to the north/south dividing line indicated in
his book (so I can't rely on antennal color). So here I sit trying to make
an accurate inventory of butterflies from a protected prairie remnant, and
I can't even give a concrete answer for which Phyciodes we have. Does
*anyone* know of any invariant features of both sexes that can be used to
distinguish these, or should I just make believe Scott (and the studies on
which his conclusions were based) never existed, and call everything
tharos (or "tharos complex")?? Of course, the possibility of having some
batesii mixed in just adds another fun dimension to the problem. Sigh.
When you can no longer reliably ID species without doing genetic analyses,
it's time to kiss our microscopes, keys, and field guides good bye.
Unless, of course, someone invents something like a tricorder which can
give a genetic sequence from several hundred yards away.
-- 
Doug Yanega
Illinois Natural History Survey, Center for Biodiversity
607 E. Peabody Dr. Champaign, IL 61820  USA
"There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness is
    the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick

---

From: Hank Brodkin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 20:25:24 -0700

On Fri, 14 Jul 1995, Doug Yanega wrote:
(portion deleted)

> So here I sit trying to make

Doug-
While I am certainly not a certified biologist - taxonomy has always
intrigued me.  How do you not know that your location is in the midst of
"hybrid swarm" area.  You would indeed probably have to either do a
genetic analys on each specimen - or just let them as go as Phycoides
tharon X batesii which should be perfectly acceptable because that is what
most of them probably are unless they sort out by mating time or food
plant preference.
It is not the bugs that are confused - it is just that our method of
figuring out what they are - and probably our method of classifying them
that is imperfect.
Witness the raging battle among ornithologists over the biological
species concept versus the phylogenetic species concept.
Relax and let them go as hybrids - as, all other things being equal,
most of them probably contain the genes of both "species" in your area -
even though some of them might resemble one or the other.
Please don't flame me - I don't know enough to vigorously defend my
position - note all the "probably's".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Hank Brodkin <[email-masked]> Marina Del Rey, CA
                        33.58'24"N 118.27'39"W
 finger <[email-masked]> for information about the Calbird-L Mail List