Smerinthus and all, who are in Moscow?

S. caecus also lives in the Moscow region. Its difference from S. ocellatus is in the ocular pattern.
In S. ocellatus, a" CLOSED RING "is formed in the" eye " in blue
. In S. caecus, on the contrary, TWO ARCHES are formed in blue, the ends facing each other.
In other words, S. ocellatus has a SOLID blue ring, while S. caecus has a DISCONTINUOUS ring.

In general, if you have any difficulties, take a picture and post a photo. These two types are easily distinguishable.

Thanks! I already looked at it - I have a caecus.

We continue the topic:
Who knows how to distinguish alcon and rebeli Maculineas? The question is old, but there is still no answer, and it is very necessary to learn how to distinguish them There is any clear sign - a speck of some kind or something else..?

And one more question: what approximately Polyommatus species can live near Moldova - along the edges of Ukraine, Romania, in general, so as not to be too far away. Species similar to icarus. There is just a suspicion that one of the caught specimens is not Icarus at all, because it is strange - slightly larger and lighter. But the instance is good.

dear RippeR, I have to correct you - read not" caecus", but "caecus"
In Latin, the reading rules are as follows:
The diphthong " ae "is read as "e"
, before a, u, o is read as "K", and before e, y, i and the diphthong "ae" - as "C"

M. rebeli has a grey underwing, while M. alcon has a slightly darker brown underwing.

It is difficult to say unequivocally about Polyommatus, Firstly, whether it is really a butterfly of this genus.
Although, if this is the case, then do not forget about P. amandus, which is just larger and quite common.
In addition to these species, P. (eroides) boisduvalii, P. dorylas, and P. thersites (Tuzov et al., 2000) can be found in your localities. The types are distinguishable from each other. It would be necessary to look at the top and bottom view of the photo.

This post was edited by Morozzz - 05.11.2006 10: 59

the difference between the colors of alkon and rebel is big or happy similar? Just if it is strong, then there is nothing to distinguish, and if it is weak, then difficulties may still arise.

Poliommatus is most likely icarus.. With others similar, especially with eroides from below, but at the top of mine there is no border, only a couple of very small spots near the border of the lower wings. There is an option-terzites, but that one seems to have more orange spots on the bottom. Generally postponed until better times. Maybe in 10 years I'll learn how to pull out my genitals, maybe what happens
By the way, are there any keys to determine terzites? To determine without a doubt. I think that one of the keys is 2 black spots in the basal part of the bottom of the front fenders. in all the photos viewed, Icarus has these spots, and terzites does not, but how reliable are these photos?.

Now a little bit about a long-standing topic-idas and argyrognomon. Korshunov's latest book says this: for idas, there are black round or triangular spots on the hind wings in the anal half along the edge. Prominent black veins.
for argyrognomon , there are no black spots on the hind wings in the anal half.
So if the spots are present, then this is idas? And then there are a lot of different photos on the Internet, but in my opinion most of them are wrong. Yes, and black veins - a good sign for determining idas?

This post was edited by RippeR - 05.11.2006 14: 18

P. idas and P. argyrognomon differ as follows:
P. argyrognomon: slightly larger, the black "brackets" above the red eyes rounded.
P. idas: black "brackets" pointed, swept.

In P. thersites, indeed, there are no spots in the basal part of the forewing from below. This is a fairly reliable sign.

Well, M. alcon and M. rebeli would be nice to have a series. In the series, everything is clearly visible.

We should:
For Aricia, what are the signs? I.e., first of all, what species can be found in Moldova and how can they be easily distinguished?

Idas and argyrognomon. I reviewed a bunch of instances, found the determinant in the net, but ambiguities still appear. 1) Many argyroids have questionable roundness or pointiness of the spots above the red ones - sometimes almost all are rounded, and a couple of slightly pointed, or some have strongly pointed and elongated spots, and some have narrow spots, but converge in a corner. Which are idas, which are argyrognomones? There is also a sign - a white stripe after those very black spots, but sometimes the expected idas have a white poslosa not quite a stripe, but white arrows after the black spots.. Is this attribute reliable?

If you are interested , what types of pyrgus are possible in Moldova? Known - alveus, serratula and malve. I assume that they may turn out to be - armoricanus, cinerae, maps?? Who else could there be? And are there any signs by which they can be easily distinguished? And then on different sakyty looked up, so it's not clear if they distinguish well themselves

By the way, if anyone has a disk-butterflies of Europe, Ivy, please write what data for Moldova is given there, any data is very necessary. Maybe someone came by himself, caught what.. Especially if someone was in the north of the country catching Lopinga achine (VERY IMPORTANT!) .

I remembered! What types of plebeians can be found in Moldova? Just for a year of fishing, a certain number of plebeians have accumulated, which, it seems, are arguses, but their front wing length is longer than indicated (Kites).. It says 11-15, and those arguses have an average of 15-19, and the color below is more white than some (difficult to describe).. The border is wide like an argus.. In general, should I regard him as Argus or as someone else? And also this year I found argus malyutka - mutant-it has a length of a farthest wing-9mm, and some spots are fused..

This season I caught the same idas (male) - the length of the forewing is about 7 mm.

idasa?! Well, this is generally cool!!!

So I was pleased And you did not look at the genitals of those arguses? By the way, I recently bought Stradomsky's book "Pigeons of the subfamily Polyommatinae of European Russia, Western and Central Caucasus" - so there Plebejus is written
"Plebeius"throughout the book. This is hardly a typo. Is this author's freedom acceptable?

Linnaeus used both of these names for the same genus:
Plebeius Linnaeus, 1858 and Plebejus Linnaeus, 1767.
Priority, essno, for Plebeius.

Linnaeus used both of these names for the same genus:
Plebeius Linnaeus, 1858 and Plebejus Linnaeus, 1767.
Priority, essno, for Plebeius.

Is the difference between the dates 91 years
old A typo?

A typo?

Yes. This refers to Plebeius Linnaeus, 1758.

P.S. Karl Linnaeus is not Koshchei the Immortal.

This post was edited by Shoffer - 11/21/2006 21: 36

    Is the difference between the dates 91 years
old A typo?

I believe Linnaeus is alive! I know for sure that he learned how to make a life-prolonging serum based on plebeideivogo extract

Another mystery question:
There are two Arices (supposed to be ajestiss, since we have no other ones recorded..). The 1st one was caught on May 19 and it is gray below, the wings are narrower, and there is a distinct red stripe on the upper side. 2nd caught on July 8, also has a distinct red edge, but brown below (the difference is clearly visible), the wings are more rounded. I assume that these are different types of reactions, but I can also be mistaken.. What species can they be or what species are they, and by what characteristics can they be accurately distinguished?

There can be A. agestis (agestis!) and A. allous.
Agestis has a row of red marginal spots on top of all the wings. In allous - only on the rear fenders. Sort of.

Gray underside, pointed wings - A. allous. Brown underside, widely rounded wings-A. agestis.

By the way, gentlemen, there is a Genus Plebeius Kluk, 1780, and a Genus Plebejus Kluk, 1802. The concept of Plebeius Kluk, 1780, as older in age, is VALID, i.e. its application corresponds to the nomenclature rules. Read about this in Yu. P. Nekrutenko's "Bulavous lepidoptera of the Crimea".

[/quote]I don't know how to pull out my genitals, and I haven't even tried it yet.. It's scary to take the first step to such a difficult task[quote]

There is nothing terrible or complicated about this

[quote]By the way, what does Stradomsky say about various pigeon houses, closer to western Ukraine? What types?[/quote]

To the West-nothing, a book on European Russia! But I think Moldova doesn't have something from Polyommatinae that is absent in the west of Russia. And what types are you interested in?

There are definitely a lot of things that don't exist in Moldova, as well as in the west of Russia, in many parts of Ukraine, Romania, and so on.. Although maybe we'll find something interesting in the coming year
In general, I am interested in polyommatus s, plebeius s, aricia, lycaena. There are just a lot of questions with them - what other types we may have, how to determine more reliably what is already available.. In just half a month, we managed to find a couple of new species of diurnal butterflies for Moldova-Thymelicus lineola, Polyommatus thersites. More likely to be added-Pyrgus armoricanus, Aricia agestis. At the end of August, Lassiommata megera was found for the first time in Moldova, and Hipparchia fagi was found in the past, although they determined that it was phages only this year, previously they thought that it was an alcyon.
All because of a lack of resources, otherwise, perhaps many more species would have been..
Over the past 3 years, the list of diaries has expanded by about 14 types.

By the way, I noticed interesting notes in the Intranet, there were questions about some types:
I found Pyrgus malvoides. Some have it as a subspecies, others as a separate species.. Who knows what it really is and how to distinguish it from malve, if possible..
I also saw Leptidea reali. Very similar to Morsay and synapis, but are there any signs by which you can distinguish these 3 species, not counting the genitals? And then it looks like we may have this species too..
Can I confidently add Pontia edusa to the list? It's just that everywhere they write that the species is not determined by its current characteristics, except for its areas. Or are there any, at least dubious-color, partially drawing or something else? And then on some sites with great confidence it is written-edusa, daplidice, but how they orpedelili is not clear. For the Crimea, for example, edusa is specified..

I also saw Leptidea reali. Very similar to Morsay and synapis, but are there any signs by which you can distinguish these 3 species, not counting the genitals? It looks like we might have that species, too."..

There don't seem to be any differences in appearance - in any case, no matter how I looked at the only specimen I found in the Moscow region, I didn't find any differences from sinapis other than the smaller size. It differs quite well in the genitals.

those genitals again
http://sungaya.narod.ru/rhop/pie011.htm there are such signs.. But how good are they, and if Morsay has the same symptoms?. Especially interesting is the sign with black veins.

Dear RippeR, Without studying genitals, entomology is reduced to just collecting beautiful icons to hang on the wall and admire the winter, because the habit of many species very often overlaps, and various "informative" points and darkened veins in some specimens are suddenly lost. It is good that there is such a conservative feature isolating species as the structure of the genitals. Moreover, it does not always work: Colias alfacariensis and Colyas hyale cannot be distinguished by genitals, but they overlap in habit. It is necessary to look at the preimaginal stages. The appearance of Agrodiaetus damone and A. damocles is also very similar, and their genitals are very similar (as, indeed, in the entire Agrodiaetus group). So when there are differences in genitalia between species, it is very convenient and simple. And when they publish articles with definitions without genital analysis, they are often horrified and taken aback.

Unfortunately so.. But learning to work with the genitals is not easy.. Here is my zankomy with cicadas on the genitals worked - I have seen enough and I will say that everything is not easy (for me). But since this is so - you need to try and learn, then I ask you to tell us a little how best to do it, especially with dry specimens (soak - how much time, how to pull out, what to wipe, etc.)
However, I can't leave the definition based on the pictures , and I still need to work with it. In addition, the pictures are not so bad - when there are clear signs, and not guesses or assumptions.. In general the topic is not closed

No, but what exactly is the problem?
Of course, you need to be able to cook these things, there, dissect them. Do not damage also need to be able to.
If we don't want to bother ourselves, then we should give it to someone who knows how. I gave the Eupithecia moth to Elena Antonova at the Pet Museum. I gladly accepted, dissected and identified all of them. In which I am very grateful to Her.
If there is such a possibility, then I do not consider it shameful to give someone butterflies for genital dissection.

Of course, this is not shameful, BUT we do not have a single butterfly specialist at the institute, there is only 1 serious collector, but he does not deal with genitals. In general, there is no one to learn from, ask for advice and see how it is done.. I'll try it myself.
Genitals are a separate topic. Can we continue and solve the existing issues based on external signs?

Yes, indeed, it is true, they say, if you want the job to be done well, do it yourself.