Is faunology an important aspect of entomology?

I didn't mean literally finished or not. I mean that some often form new species, they are very variable, while others are more ancient and much less variable.

kotbegemot:
I read about it today..

Yu.Tchaikovsky - "Evolution".
The conclusions at the end of the book are very interesting.

Sheldrake - "The New Science of Life".

Sub-view of education in action

http://gazeta.ru/science/2009/12/05_a_3294779.shtml

http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstra...9822(09)01925-3

This post was edited by amara - 05.12.2009 10: 05

Bad Den: about the youth of the species is clear.. But the question is still different. After reading Plavilshchikov (Barbels of the USSR), I realized that old beetles - such as prionins, are not particularly variable, and young ones, such as cortoders, which have not yet completed their evolutionary path-are very variable, as they still continue to develop new forms and types of subspecies, etc. And that's the real question, how much is required in the genus, let's say a Cortoder, to get a new species, and how much is in the genus Prionus. If there are appropriate conditions. This also gives a lot of information to think about - why some types are more variable, how this or that form is fixed, why the "old" ones vary slightly. And in general, in fact, how is the species formed!? Fornax and I were chatting recently, thinking about how random mutations are a pretty weak point in theory, and what else might be behind it.. After all, there is some Agapanthia violacea, which is distributed almost all over the continent, and in which the variability is extremely weak - the color is slightly darker and lighter, the size is slightly larger and smaller. And there is some morphocarbus with all the colors of the rainbow within one population. In this case, shouldn't violacea, which lives in a wide variety of biotopes, vary more than any morphocarabus, and why exactly? In general, there are still a lot of questions. and there are few answers, except for guesses and assumptions.

About the downs.
I'm not talking about natural selection.. Under conditions of natural selection, there are no conditions for obtaining a flock of white crows, although white does not have significant disadvantages, only color.
When someone uses the word pathology, it seems to imply that this should not be the case.. But there is nothing in nature. what should or should not be, there is a tolko what turns out.. Therefore, the word pathology, I think, is not very appropriate in our conversation. Yes, this is a deviation from the norm, but the norm is only our analysis of statistical data. I would like to point out that this mutation is innate, that it is not so rare, that it appears more often, that it has a certain character, etc.
The thing is. what if we assume that the downs will be able to organize societies, connect, etc. as now )) Then can you end up with some new, stable form..? It doesn't matter if the conditions are artificial or natural, it's important whether it turns out..? After all, in fact, if such conditions exist - they are created by society or natural conditions, then in any case, they give a result.. But which one? Will they then be a different species, or will they just be a different form of our species?.

I put it wrong. Pathology is a science. Down syndrome is a medical condition. All.

I wouldn't say that. Still, taxonomy looks for signs that are responsible for the position in evolution, who is related to whom - this is more like creating a family tree.
Taxonomy is nothing without knowing who lives on what, how it develops, what it eats, and so on.. Well, I don't know about butterflies, but it plays an important role in many beetles)

Hmm, a very interesting topic, exactly the question in the first message.
In my opinion, faunalism is very serious and relevant, ka kraz precisely because there are always migrations, waves of life, climate change, and it would not be bad to register it.
But that would only make sense if an armada of amateurs were contributing. Since one or two people who visit one or two points, once or twice a year - this is just not serious.
Amateur fees, as already mentioned, can often contain errors in the definition, so in theory there should be a chain like " armada of amateurs-carries their fees to a specialist - the specialist analyzes the fees - creates a database of the dynamics of the number of species, finds, increase and decrease in numbers.

However, due to the human factor, this is not possible. This is my opinion.
Grumbling, as in the text of the message, and often even the bitterness of specialists, the ambitions of amateurs - all this is intertwined in the cycle of everyday problems, the workload of specialists with the same work with students and writing, in which it is simply difficult to process the volume from amateurs, and the output of this "vortex" turns out to be some kind of garbage, which is discussed.
So I decided a long time ago not to try to publish anything, no matter what I find there. I have already satisfied my "ambitions" with what I saw. Moreover, my approach is not socially-oriented, but nature-oriented, that is, I am "for nature" and not for "creating a name for myself", and therefore I would rather keep silent. It's calmer for everyone, for me, for the animals I've found, and for those who haven't found them yet. And this topic only strengthened my decision.

there is a magazine Ukrainian entomofaunistics, please publish it, what are the problems?
http://sites.google.com/site/ukrentfau/contents

So I wrote above what the problem is - I'm in favor of, how should I put it, a "specialist audit" so that the novelty, taxonomy, and adequacy of the find can be checked. But when contacting specialists, I met something similar to the one described in the first message, but not just a "chill" but something more chilling.
And in general, about "what problems", the problem is not with me in fact, but with specialists. It is they who are deprived of the opportunity to study the material of amateurs. Since I am not the only one like this even within my habitat, there are fans who have much more significant finds than mine, and where are these publications? They do not exist and most likely will not, since they also have experience in communicating with specialists And judging by the content of the published issues, there are also not many amateur finds.

It's funny, I didn't even find a category that I would like to vote for!?? As the one-sided question posed.
Without faunistics, there is no entomology at all !!!
The statement itself is similar to modern problems in botany - there is a taxonomy (floristics) of plants and there is a cabinet physiology of plants... We now have two taxonomists (florists) left at the university and the rest are all plant physiologists (as their chief), well, when the physiologist goes to the field on plant taxonomy, you understand what happens-also here.

In my opinion, floristics and faunistics are a step for deeper research. And when everything is found, opened, etc. what should a faunalist do? Go to taxonomy. And when new species/subspecies are described or they simply do not exist in such and such a place, where to go next? Herpetologists are a good example for me in this regard. They are engaged, for example, in Vipera berus and its subspecies, thermobology, physiology, microbiotopes, etc. Ecology of species in specific environmental conditions is a promising area of research both in Russia and abroad.

"And when new species/subspecies are described or they simply do not exist" - this is from the field of fiction, a good taxonomist will always find

This post was edited by Hierophis - 06.10.2011 18: 44

views may not describe everything in a row

In my opinion, floristics and faunistics are a step for deeper research.
- the statement of the fact that this species "lives" in this territory is not faunistic...
A striking example is the recent catalog of lepidoptera of Russia... Its main disadvantage is that there are united (geopolitically and economically administrative) such different zoogeographic and simply physical-geographical areas that you simply marvel at the intricacy of southern and northern species...logically, they are mutually exclusive for a specific subject of the Russian Federation. The authors publish two volumes: The European part of Russia and the Urals, Siberia and the Far East. Give SPECIFIC regions and republics, + literature. This would be a USEFUL example of competent faunal work - based on which many people on the ground would be able to make a CONCRETE CONTRIBUTION to the study of the lepidopteran FAUNA of the Russian Federation.

And when everything is found, opened, etc. what should a faunalist do?
- to study its biology and ecology, which is practically not studied in a SIGNIFICANT number of species - we copy all preimaginal data from foreign entomologists.

Go to taxonomy.
- to be engaged in TAXONOMY, you need a HUGE amount of factual material, extensive experience and a good reputation among fellow entomologists.

And when new species/subspecies are described or they simply do not exist in such and such a place, where to go next?
"it's just PHYSICALLY impossible...

Herpetologists are a good example for me in this regard. They are engaged, for example, in Vipera berus and its subspecies, thermobology, physiology, microbiotopes, etc. Ecology of species in specific environmental conditions is a promising area of research both in Russia and abroad.
- it's funny, you still need to remember the steppe viper, Nikolsky's viper, etc.....

- it's funny, you still need to remember the steppe viper, Nikolsky's viper, etc.....

their hybrids have already been found in Tatarstan (caught, seen). I am particularly pleased that these viper specimens, which are interesting from the point of view of species hybridization and sampatry, were found during the expedition when I first managed to get to the Spassky Nature Reserve. From the point of view of insects, the place also turned out to be productive. There is a wonderful book " Snakes of the Volga-Kama Region "(Bakiev, Garanin, Litvinov, Pavlov, Ratnikov, 2004), everything is described in detail, including Vipera

Hybrids of the steppe viper and Nikolsky ?

I quote from the abstract of I. V. Petrova.
"The uniqueness of the V. renardi population living on the territory of the Spassky Archipelago consists not only in living in uncharacteristic habitats and remoteness of the point from the main distribution area of the entire ursinii complex, but also in co-habitation with V. berus. Two females (a female steppe viper and a female with mixed characteristics) removed from the sympatric habitat of the common and steppe viper gave offspring, some of which had signs of V. renardi, some-signs of V. berus. Multivariate analysis for a number of traits showed an intermediate character of the traits of females and their offspring.

"The values of individual folidosis traits (sample averages) in berus-like females with offspring, steppe viper females with offspring, and the Spassky population of V. renardi are intermediate between the berus and renardi forms. Based on the revealed facts and analysis, the presence of hybridization of V. berus and V. renardi within the sympatric habitat zone of both species is shown. Parallel studies on genetic and biochemical traits have confirmed the fact of hybridization (Pavlov et al., 2011). Based on this, the form V. r. bashkirovi may have a hybrid origin."

And then it is given in the conclusions of the candidate's dissertation by I. Petrova (in fact, this is brief and significant):

"The sympatric zone of cohabitation of Vipera renardi and Vipera berus on the territory of the Spassky State Farm exists due to the penetration of the common viper into the open biotopes of the steppe viper. According to the complex of morphological features, the fact of hybridization of species was established, confirmed by genetic and biochemical features. "

Well, yes, only here they write about the usual viper, I've heard about it. I thought that we are talking about the Nikolsky viper, that is, about the black "subspecies/species" of the ordinary one.

Well, yes, only here they write about the usual viper, I've heard about it. I thought that we are talking about the Nikolsky viper, that is, about the black "subspecies/species" of the ordinary one.

Well, the question came up casually about the viper.
In short, where I live: Moscow region, Zheleznodorozhny meet in the same place (quite a lot) two variations of color. Traditional (gray with brown pattern) V. berus and absolutely black. It's like: melanism or another subspecies? Interestingly simple.

It is believed that the taxon "Nikolsky's viper "is confined to the more southern edge of the middle zone, it is a" heat - loving " viper, so it is not in the MO, where black individuals are melanists of the common viper.
Another question is that the Nikolsky viper is a very controversial taxon in terms of whether it is a species, subspecies, or rather a separate form of the common viper.

Well, personally, I can't tell from the picture who it is, but I doubt that someone will confidently say what kind of viper it is - Nikolsky, or the melanist is even worse than with giale and alfakariensis

Based on the results of reading many articles on the Nikolsky viper, I can say that in order to determine that this is the population of the Nikolsky viper, you need to make comprehensive measurements of several dozen different-sex individuals. And then, the results overlap with the common viper.

If in those parts where it is photographed "officially" there is a Nikolsky viper, then it is probably

Nikolsky's viper is quite a good species, which is confirmed by genetics and biochemistry. The fact that it can produce hybrids in areas where areas come into contact with similar species is well known for many species.

Dear colleagues!
Still interested in any information on the bulbous lepidoptera of Kalmykia.
And also, label data of your collections on bulavous lepidoptera of the Volgograd region.

It was quite strange for me to read all this, to be honest. I turned to Kirill Vladimirovich many times - both when preparing my dissertation, and later when I brought material from the reserve where I worked. And then I started working with food companies to identify the detected pests - and this, I will tell you, is still a pleasure when they send a photo of an insect on the floor, taken from the height of their own growth... or the aggrieved client sends a " bug " cooked in porridge. Or a photo of a spoon with baby food, brewed with boiling water, from which something worm-like hangs (it turned out to be the legs of a flycatcher)) In all cases, Kirill, despite all his busy schedule, responded very quickly, on the same day. It would seem that his aunt from the provinces, and even with such uninteresting material for a luminary, never felt either snobbery or arrogance - neither from him nor from his colleagues.