Photo #39079: Papilio iswara

19.04.2015 11:05, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Well, of course :) It is simply an analogy, I spent (about swallowtail).

19.04.2015 10:56, Alexandr Zhakov

Basil, you are partly right, but to be honest, I do not know what subspecies in the Moscow region, and I'm not interested. But if you're interested you can specify the subtype. Only I beg you do not have to give instructions to put down there all subspecies. Who wants to clarify the systematic position, he will clarify who is not his right.

19.04.2015 10:44, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Well I will add ssp. :))) Just rationality in it do not see, why duplicate the specific name of ...
Then it is necessary and suburban Swallowtail as a sign of Papilio machaon machaon Linnaeus, 1758))))

19.04.2015 10:42, Alexandr Zhakov

Basil, that is, you now write that you think clarify the systematic position superfluous, since you (personally), you know that there is nominative (in your collection there). Basil and who you such rubbish said the nominative is not written? Not written, in case if there is only a kind of nominative subspecies.And in the case where the determination to subspecies, is not essential. When subspecies is already remove it, I think is not appropriate. But I repeat if it was a species, then yes why duplicate. If you know that there is nominative, it was necessary to simply add ssp. :))

19.04.2015 10:29, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Nominate subspecies (the name of the type described above), and there is no neobzhodimosti. It looks like Papilio iswara iswara White, 1842 because the name of the species Papilio iswara White, 1842 Especially for the underside was not written anything on this line.
There nominative, as far as I know. Near the site is from there and I can put a couple more and sign on the top line. But why is this?

19.04.2015 10:11, Alexandr Zhakov

Basil, you put the name of the species or subspecies (nominative subspecies)?

19.04.2015 9:25, Vasiliy Feoktistov Corrected data.

Please, create an account or log in to add comments.