Preparation of genitals

  
Glycerol and sugar have their drawbacks. If the box gets rotted or falls or is turned over, etc., the glycerin may fly out with the drug. On the one hand, it's dangerous, because then it can be difficult to figure out where whose ones are.

Duc therefore need to be sealed!

NB! About the convenience of working with alcohol materials. Some time ago, a cat perched on top of my orchids that were hanging over my desk... He's a curious bastard... When I saw this, orchids with a substrate avalanche passed over the desktop and mixed with the "scientific property" picturesquely scattered on the floor... It is a great blessing that there was no dry material on the table, otherwise I do not want to think. And so, after a whole day of separating the seeds from the chaff, I realized that there was practically no real damage. Plastic eppendorfs don't break!
Sorry about off top!

I saw about gluing when I threw my post-apparently they wrote at the same time )) This is of course an option.

Who can advise you on how to store your genitals? In the museum, under the leaf wrappers, I saw something like plastic dies with pits (depressions). They have some kind of liquid in them, and there, as I understand it, the genitals themselves. With staffs, a different picture, next to them cones with a diameter of 3 mm and a height of 2-3 cm. But I don't like it so much, and secondly, I can't get so many cones. I need the genitals to be in working order and at the same time in good condition. Who can advise what from the best available pharmacy material. I did this with butterflies. Below the copy, I took a die on it a drop of sugar syrup, and on them genitals (in which case you can immediately soak), but sugar syrup = happiness for kozheedov. So I want to know what can be used.
Advised glycerin - but I don't know where to get it.
Clove oil - but I don't know how it can be used for this purpose or not. In general, write who does what.

The only modern way to store the genitals of butterflies is to fill them with euparal and cover them with a cover glass. This requires certain expenses and development of appropriate techniques, but there are no other ways.

Pictures:
  DSC00081.JPG — (712.27к) 18.02.2009 — 04.03.2009
  DSC00082.JPG — (773.05к) 18.02.2009 — 04.03.2009

The only modern way to store the genitals of butterflies is to fill them with euparal and cover them with a cover glass. This requires certain expenses and development of appropriate techniques, but there are no other ways.

What about the enlightening effect? I had to compare the drug in a Canadian balsam aged ~ 30-40 years and "freshly cured" genitals (one standard series) - on the old drug, fine structures are almost indistinguishable. In addition, it is almost impossible to study the delicate structure of complex three-dimensional structures "drenched to death" in the drug.

In my group, I try to deal with constant medications: "According to the author, the conclusion of genital structures in permanent preparations is highly undesirable because of the inevitable deformities and the inability to study them from different directions. Especially undesirable is the use of Canadian balsam, whose enlightening effect over time makes subtle sclerotized structures indistinguishable" (quote from my article, in print).

Preparations of the structures of the genital complex are stored in test tubes with glycerin or alcohol. There are also disadvantages, but you can work with this material later.

I'm not a lepidopterist, but I think the patterns are pretty much the same.

I need the genitals to be in working order and at the same time in good condition.

Then permanent medications are probably not suitable for you.

I use 1.5 and 0.5 cm cubic eppendofs as micro-tubes.

I saw (and even tried to use) this method: in transparent plastic, depressions are squeezed out using a slightly heated matrix (in this case, test tubes). The resulting bowls were teased by insects. I heard (but didn't see!) - the plastic rod from the fountain pen was washed out of ink and cut into cylinders of the desired length. The resulting cylinders were sealed on one or both sides and pinned through the sealing section.

to barko: Why the only one? Please explain, In my opinion, it is much more convenient to use drugs that are pinned directly under the instance (rather than first looking for the right butterfly, and then looking for the right drug among hundreds of slides at the moment...). In addition, with this method of storage, it will be impossible to diagnose signs that are not visible in the unraveled state - for example, the folds of the valva (which can usually be bent back), etc. Also, the deformation of three-dimensional structures is inevitable, which can significantly distort the habitus of the genitals.

This post was edited by lepidopterolog - 19.02.2009 18: 20

What about the enlightening effect? I had to compare the drug in a Canadian balsam aged ~ 30-40 years and "freshly cured" genitals (one standard series) - on the old drug, fine structures are almost indistinguishable. In addition, it is almost impossible to study the delicate structure of complex three-dimensional structures "drenched to death" in the drug.

In my group, I try to deal with constant medications: "According to the author, the conclusion of genital structures in permanent preparations is highly undesirable because of the inevitable deformities and the inability to study them from different directions. Especially undesirable is the use of Canadian balsam, whose enlightening effect over time makes subtle sclerotized structures indistinguishable" (quote from my article, in print).

Preparations of the structures of the genital complex are stored in test tubes with glycerin or alcohol. There are also disadvantages, but you can work with this material later.

I'm not a lepidopterist, but I think the patterns are pretty much the same.

Canadian balm is not used. Euparal is used for the manufacture of drugs.

to barko: Why the only one? Please explain, In my opinion, it is much more convenient to use drugs that are pinned directly under the instance (rather than first looking for the right butterfly, and then looking for the right drug among hundreds of slides at the moment...). In addition, with this method of storage, it will be impossible to diagnose signs that are not visible in the unraveled state - for example, the folds of the valva (which can usually be bent back), etc. Also, the deformation of three-dimensional structures is inevitable, which can significantly distort the habitus of the genitals.

I put it a little inaccurately above. The only one is in my opinion (although not only in my opinion). I withdraw the word single, so that there is no dispute. Other entomologists may have a different opinion. Campaigning is certainly not worth it. I'll just answer your questions.

1 it is extremely inconvenient to use drugs pinned under the copy (wet). You need a microscope, the drug must be taken out and returned to its place. For comparison with another (wet) preparation, you need to place another one under a microscope, and so on ...

2 you have to search among thousands and thousands of ready-made drugs, but everything happens simply and quickly. Each prepared butterfly has a label with data about the drug (exactly the same label on the drug). It is easy to find the drug by its number, but you don't need to do this. The search is not for the drug itself, but only for the file with the image of genitals. The main work is not with the drug, but with the printed image. They return to the drug only if it is necessary to consider SOMETHING.

3 some deformation is possible, but it usually doesn't matter much.

4 all the details (well, almost everything ~99.9%) can be viewed under a microscope. At magnification of 50 or more times, you can see literally everything and through.

5 possible difficulties are not related to the method itself, but to errors or failures in the manufacture of the drug.

Based on my own (and not only my own) practice of preparing scoops and moths.

Canadian balm is not used. Euparal is used for the manufacture of drugs.

And what is the chemical product? the composition of euparal? He's so different from kan. balsam that it removes all my objections? I have seen similar drugs, but they do not differ" organoleptically".

If you are probably experienced in working with drugs, then I will be grateful for comments and possible discussion. I have not found and continue to search for the best way to store drugs.

If the post is from the category: "they want to show their literacy...", then...

to barko: I agree, in most cases it is enough to determine the contour of sclerites. Especially in the case of a well-known/studied fauna. But imagine if a morphologist comes along who wants to study some small folds, find new signs, and so on. It will turn out that it will not be able to work with your drug collection.

This is not idle ranting. I have come across a situation where even with a holotype preparation, I can't get the information I need. You just can't see it.

I don't impose my opinion, you know your material better and how to work with it. Ideally, of course, a part of the standard series should be left untouched for future generations. True, this is fraught with a situation where three paratypes of a male (the author extracted and described the genitals of only the holotype!) they turned out to be three different types.

to barko: I agree, in most cases it is enough to determine the contour of sclerites. Especially in the case of a well-known/studied fauna. But imagine if a morphologist comes along who wants to study some small folds, find new signs, and so on. It will turn out that it will not be able to work with your drug collection.

This is not idle ranting. I have come across a situation where even with a holotype preparation, I can't get the information I need. You just can't see it.

I don't impose my opinion, you know your material better and how to work with it. Ideally, of course, a part of the standard series should be left untouched for future generations. True, this is fraught with a situation where three paratypes of a male (the author extracted and described the genitals of only the holotype!) they turned out to be three different types.

I do my best to avoid agitation and discussions on general topics. If you don't mind, let's just look at the euparal drug (photo). What minor signs are not visible? What is inconvenient or inappropriate for you? What comments can you make based on your experience? I would really appreciate your comments.

I am willing to believe you, situations always arise, but this is not the problem of the method itself, but the inept actions of the preparator, apparently the drug was unsuccessfully manufactured. In extreme cases, even frozen euparal can be dissolved in alcohol without damage to the genitals and spread again.

I quite agree with you on the third point

The method in the euparal is the most correct method.
Pillboxes pinned under butterflies are scary.
Thomas Witt has 14,000 euparal drugs and they're all there. Everything is neat, on the windows.
It is a pity that this method is rarely used here, mainly due to conservatism and laziness.

Please tell me. Can bags be blown with a colorless varnish? When blown with air, the bags shrink slightly after an N-th time. And with the varnish it turns out to be quite good, but I'm afraid what will happen to them in a few years.

So I had a need to prepare my genitals (I've never done this before ), so I need an educational program on butterflies: is there any way to extract genitals that doesn't spoil the abdomen too much? And how to extract them from very small species (for example, in spring Cupido and similar ones)? Do you have to cook it?

to pull out without damage, you need to take it from fresh ones, and that is, there is a small chance to "bite off" a piece of the abdomen, but not noticeable.

It is not necessary to cook, but otherwise there is a lot of fat and other garbage that interfere with looking at the genitals.

And how much time to cook? And what about small species?

It is enough for pigeons to boil for 1-2 minutes.
In fresh male pigeons, the genitals can be pulled out with thin tweezers, the abdomen remains intact in appearance. I think that you can also do this with soaked ones, but I haven't tried it.

The method of boiling in a weak solution of alkali in a water bath is convenient. You can put up to 20 numbered test tubes in a saucepan and cook like this. The abdomen will certainly suffer a little.
Cook as much as possible-start with a large grain and gradually your hand will fill up. There are no special difficulties.

I will try to continue popularizing the euparal technique.
I'm currently working on flower moths.

Eupithecia dodoneata

the preparations look great!

Yes, very high-quality and beautiful work!

If possible, please explain what euparal is.

And does anyone have a high-quality picture or photo of the preparation of the genital apparatus of some butterfly (if both sexes are also super) with detailed designations of structures.

Here is a good drawing:

Here's a nice drawing:

Please indicate where this drawing was taken from.

Euparal is a specific epoxy resin. Sold in specialty stores. I think you can find it in the capital. You can buy it via Bioform by mail. The price of 250 ml is about 30 E. But this will last for a long time.
Well cleaned and passed through alcohols (dehydrated) genitals are laid out on a slide in a drop of euaparal, poured on top with a drop, and carefully (without bubbles) covered with air cover. The glass is ready at room temperature in a month, in the thermostat for a week and stored for a very long time without problems.
I believe that this is the most correct method of storage. Makeshift shelters, especially with pill plates pinned up like butterflies, are a horror. The temporary drug should be stored in separate test tubes or micro-tubes with a rubber stopper that pricks the butterfly.
But the euparal method captures space.

Good genitalia diagrams can be found in any classical work on butterflies, for example, in the Identification of insects of the Far East, the Identification of the European part, etc.

I believe that this is the most correct method of storage. Makeshift shelters, especially with pill plates pinned up like butterflies, are a horror. The temporary drug should be stored in separate test tubes or micro-tubes with a rubber stopper that pricks the butterfly.

But you won't be able to pin the glass under the copy, what about this?

This post was edited by Bad Den - 04/23/2009 16: 41

No glass is separately stored.
But beetles are a different matter there, Denis. I'm just talking about butterflies.
In beetles, the pisyulka is glued to the record and under the beetle, right?

Please indicate where this drawing was taken from.

Morgun, Lviv "Bulavous lepidoptera of Eastern Europe".

And if anyone has a high-quality picture or photo of the preparation of the genital apparatus of some butterfly (if both sexes are also super) with detailed designations of structures.

In English

No glass is separately stored.
But beetles are a different matter there, Denis. I'm just talking about butterflies.
In beetles, the pisyulka is glued to the record and under the beetle, right?

That's right, on the die, and under the beetle, on the same pin.
I was thinking that it probably makes sense to write a label on the drug and a definitive one, except for the copy number and the drug number....

Is it possible to make preparations of genitals from dry butterflies (for example, the collection was 5 years ago)? And is it even possible to dissect such butterflies?

This post was edited by Dr. Niko - 25.04.2009 18: 28

It is not just possible, but it is usually done by cutting off the abdomen - in a test tube-lye - in a water bath-boiling - removing excess - everything!;)
Preparation - what do you mean? By straightening?

Dissection - what do you mean? By straightening?

Well, I mean, just boil it and look through a microscope. But you have already answered my question.

In continuation of the topic. I've been blowing bags for years. Filler-air from the syringe-you just need to have a good syringe-up to 60-150 cubes and a set of needles, the thinnest ones are slightly curved. Dry land over gas at home. For 10-15 years, there was no wrinkling. Vyvarka I do only for formalin beetles and ancient material in weak organic acids, citric acid gives a good result. And so just from the moment of preparation of the beetle (in normal people), I throw the edeagus along with the genital segments into water for a day or more in test tubes for rotting and maceration – then it is easy to sulk, but there are nuances for each species and genus.
I send an example of blown bags, although then there was a disgusting photo.

I send you a picture of how the properly blown sac and other parts of the male genitals look – they are also important and carry a number of signs that many people have not used before or simply did not consider.
1 is the bag itself and the aedeagus
itself 2 are 2-plate paramers, they are from top to right.
3-genital segments ann. gen. (genital rigs) (segments VIII and IX)
4-right epipleuritis [epl.IXd]
According to this standard, I mount everyone, but then it's easy to find a lot of differences
, Especially in the right epipleurite [epl. IxD]. only correctly it should be oriented, and carefully cut out, even by sacrificing genital segments,
So when dissecting-it's all glued and not lost!!!!!!!!!!!!!!- this is an important point. On the example of (Morphocarabus) scheidleri ronay and (Morphocarabus) hampei

Pictures:

Obrazetz_Morphocarabus_schiedleri_ronayi_03.jpg — (101.7к)


edeagus_hampei_Vinogradov_7_18_07_2008_01_01_04.jpg — (243.67к)


edeagus_scheidleri_ronayi_Znjazevo_16_31_07_2008_01_01_04.jpg — (195.52к)

I missed the discussion about euparal. It is, of course, good, more convenient than Canadian balsam. but! Over time, at elevated temperatures, it darkens! The information is not mine, but it comes from a very reputable person who has been dealing with various fixers for a long time. Therefore, although I have a jar of euparal, but I pour the preparations into the balm.

I was thinking that it probably makes sense to write a label on the drug and a definitive one, except for the copy number and the drug number....

I do, for example.

In continuation of the topic. I've been blowing bags for years. Filler-air from the syringe-you just need to have a good syringe-up to 60-150 cubes and a set of needles, the thinnest ones are slightly curved. Dry land over gas at home. For 10-15 years, there was no wrinkling. Vyvarka I do only for formalin beetles and ancient material in weak organic acids, citric acid gives a good result. And so just from the moment of preparation of the beetle (in normal people), I throw the edeagus along with the genital segments into water for a day or more in test tubes for rotting and maceration – then it is easy to sulk, but there are nuances for each species and genus.

I've never been able to blow endophallus with air. How do you attach the base of the edeagus to the needle?

I fasten it tightly with a thread, they are of different diameters and some are unraveled to capture small protrusions, like in pterostichines, harpalin, or it turns out to blow out weevils. Several needles with different thread diameters. The thread is initially firmly attached to the base of the needle, so that it does not turn (it is glued for many turns), so that only the upper end of the blunted needle remains free for insertion into the base of the aedeagus. The free end of the thread is fixed with a finger on the needle. But this is already an experience of blowing and skill.

Right now I'm sitting right here and making preparations.

This post was edited by I. solod - 05/01/2009 23: 59

Thanks! This week I'll try to blow some carbuses like this.
Do you not impregnate the thread with PVA before wrapping it around the base of the edeagus?

I do not use any adhesives, if the thread is wet, i.e. there is enough moisture from the most recently removed aedeagus from the water , then the thread is wrapped tightly and the air does not penetrate outside. Since it is often necessary to push the bag from the inside, and this must again be quickly removed from the needle and again on it. It is often necessary to blow with water, then suck it back with the syringe, and replace the syringe with a dry one immediately for drying, this allows you to blow out complex or old bags. But this requires having 2 or 3 syringes. Sometimes the blowing itself goes with a syringe to 60 cubic meters., and drying to 150 cubic meters.

This post was edited by I. solod - 10.01.2010 18: 35

Pictures:

_______1.jpg — (221.73к)


_______2.jpg — (124.82 k)

I cooked a lot of genitals of different lepidoptera in KOH (different concentrations), now it's over. Usually I keep it in a cold solution, then, if necessary, I finish it in a water bath. It is possible to use NaOH. But the first experience somehow did not impress. Usually, dry bellies in the solution become soft, swell and are easy to dissect. In this case, for proper softening, they all had to be cooked, although the butterflies were not large. Of course, there are many factors that can affect this, but I still want to ask, does anyone have experience using NaOH for preparation in this group? And why do the manuals (green volume) indicate exactly KOH and a concentration of 10-15%?

The message is not about preparation, but about preservation. I propose for public consideration my own method of storing the genitals of butterflies. I like it very much and it seems the most convenient, however, it "rolls" only in the case of small species-Mottles, Pigeons, small Marigolds (Coenonympha spp.), etc. In the literature available to me, this method is not described, and I have never heard of it from entomologists either, although there is nothing tricky about it .
So, the source material is extremely simple and accessible:
1. a tube from a medical dropper (sold at any pharmacy, cheap, and enough for many copies).
2. glycerin.
3. a syringe with a needle (the best option is a 5 ml syringe).
4. scissors.
We take the tube from the dropper in one hand and cut it with scissors into pieces about 1.5 cm long (plus or minus a couple of mm). Areas of strong bends in the tube should be discarded – they will not look very aesthetically pleasing. After cutting the tube into pieces, we take a syringe and fill it with glycerin. Conventionally (visually) we divide the tube into three parts: in the first third we will introduce glycerin, the other (opposite) will be the place of stringing on a pin under the butterfly, and the middle third will be the very space that prevents contact between glycerin and the pin.
We take a small tube (from among those that we cut) and lower the needle into its cavity through one end to a depth of about 5 mm. Then we squeeze out a little glycerin from the syringe, so that it fills the lumen of the tube completely, but throughout the tube channel it occupies a section of no more than 3 mm, and it should not "reach" 2 mm to the end through which the glycerin was injected. We put the boiled genitals in a tube with glycerin and pin it under the insect.
IF EVERYTHING IS DONE CORRECTLY, the glycerin WILL NOT flow out of the tube, and WILL NOT come into contact with the pin. It is very convenient to get the genitals out of such a tube with an entomological pin with a curved end (like a poker or hook). I think you can ruin one pin for this.
Advantages of this method of storing genitals:
1. Cheap, affordable source material, fast and easy manufacturing.
2. Unlike holes – there is less risk of losing genitals and / or parts of them.
3. Unlike glasses – genitals are always with the "master".
4. Unlike micro tubes, the tubes are compact and easy to handle.
5. The transparency of the tubes allows you to sometimes view the genitals under binoculars without removing them from the tube.

Pictures:

P1100684.JPG — (47.59к)