Lycaenidae

Community and Forum → Insects images → Lycaenidae

Pages: 1 ...16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24... 34

Likes: 5

Likes: 6

30.11.2012 19:23, Valentinus

In continuation of the Plebeius-Plebejus theme
, here is the opinion of Vladimir Lukhtanov:
"It seems to me that Hesselbarth G., Van Oorschot H., Wagener S. (1995), according to the code, are not the first auditors, since they cited two names published at different times (and indicated the priority of the older one). The Code also requires that nomenclature acts published on the same date or different original spellings of the same name be given. All this is not found in Tutt, nor in Hesselbarth G., Van Oorschot H., Wagener S.

That is, most likely, the first auditor is Balint.... But there is such a nuance (ambiguity)here: We don't know if Kluk's two writings were actually published at the same time. This is probably why Balint does not consider his opinion as final (taking into account the right of the first auditor), but rather as a recommendation to submit this issue to the commission for consideration. Unfortunately, he didn't finish it."

Another new article on the Aricia genus, maybe someone needs it.

2012_Aricia.pdf

size: 1.94 mb
number of downloads: 2912

Likes: 4

01.12.2012 20:14, rhopalocera.com

In continuation of the Plebeius-Plebejus theme
, here is the opinion of Vladimir Lukhtanov:
"It seems to me that Hesselbarth G., Van Oorschot H., Wagener S. (1995), according to the code, are not the first auditors, since they cited two names published at different times (and indicated the priority of the older one). The Code also requires that nomenclature acts published on the same date or different original spellings of the same name be given. All this is not found in Tutt, nor in Hesselbarth G., Van Oorschot H., Wagener S.

That is, most likely, the first auditor is Balint.... But there is such a nuance (ambiguity)here: We don't know if Kluk's two writings were actually published at the same time. This is probably why Balint does not consider his opinion as final (taking into account the right of the first auditor), but rather as a recommendation to submit this issue to the commission for consideration. Unfortunately, he didn't finish it."

Another new article on the Aricia genus, maybe someone needs it.

2012_Aricia.pdf

size: 1.94 mb
number of downloads: 2912

All this is exactly what Hesselbart and his co-authors have. And for Tutta, it was not required - there were slightly different rules until 1961. Tutt is the first auditor in this case, just like in others - Skudder, Evans, etc. The family system was reviewed, this is in the title and text. This falls under the term "audit", hence Tutt is the first auditor.

The Code should not only be quoted and read. It is also useful to read primary sources. Moreover, they even seem to have been posted here.

Rejecting the nomenclature acts of the first auditors from old works just because they are not designed in the way we are used to now is nonsense.

To understand the situation, the usual childish logic is enough.

Plebeius Kluk, 1780-name assigned by the first
auditor Plebejus Kluk, 1802-spelling assigned by the Commission

The principle of priority has not been canceled, so the name of 1780 has priority. There is no decision of the Commission that priority is assigned to the name of 1802. That's all. And don't reinvent the wheel.

Likes: 5

10.12.2012 10:52, Penzyak

Interesting information:

Scientists may have found Nabokov's butterflies.

In the 1940s, ten years before the author of "Lolita" became world famous, Vladimir Nabokov secured a solid reputation for himself by proposing a new classification of butterflies of the genus Lycaeides-pigeons.
Nabokov divided pigeons into two main subspecies – Lycaeides Melissa and Lycaeides idas. He also hypothesized that the pigeons he found in the Teton Mountains and Colorado Mountains were a hybrid of these two subspecies, but he did not have sufficient tools to prove this.

Now, a team of scientists from Texas State University, the University of California at Davis, the University of Nevada at Reno, and the University of Tennessee has suggested that the" unnamed " population of mountain pigeons in the Sierra Nevada Mountains is a hybrid formed as a result of an ancient merger of the species Lycaeides melissa and Lycaeides idas.

These pigeons inhabited a treeless mountain area at a higher altitude than that at which their ancestral habitat was located, says Zachariah Gompert, a graduate student in biology at Texas State University and the main author of the work published in the online version of the journal Science. Lycaeides melissa inhabit the Great Basin area on the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, while Lycaeides idas are found in moist grasslands extending to the mid-western slope.

Combined with other behavioral and physical changes, the shift in habitat has isolated mountain pigeons from their progenitors in a reproductive sense, which is a prerequisite for granting them separate species status, Gompert says.

Mountain pigeons prefer to choose partners with the same pattern on their wings, says Gompert.

The genome of mountain pigeons is a mosaic mixture of the genomes of their progenitors, he adds, and also contains information in the chromosomes indicating that the age of mountain pigeons as a species – 440 thousand years-is significantly less than that of Lycaeides melissa or Lycaeides idas, which appeared 1.9 million and 1.26 million years ago, respectively.

During the onset of the glacier, the scientist argues, small groups in which two species of the progenitors of these butterflies were represented were isolated in a kind of pocket, crossing took place, and their hybrid offspring survived.

The research team plans to search for hybrid pigeon populations in other mountainous areas, says Dr. Chris Nice, a professor of biology at Texas State University and the project's scientific supervisor.

The standard view of biologists has always been that a new species splits off from the existing parent species. This is considered to be the case if the individual is isolated reproductively due to geographical, genetic, or behavioral changes.

Mating between different species, presumably, leads to the appearance of individuals that are not capable of reproduction (mules) or require continuous backcrossing with individuals of the parent species.

However, with the development of the molecular biology toolkit, scientists have been able to demonstrate that genetic drift between species, subspecies, and populations is much more common than previously thought. Scientists are identifying more and more hybrid plant and animal species.

"There aren't many pure species," says Dr. Lauren Riesberg, a plant crossing expert at the University of British Columbia.

The most widely discussed hybrid species is the red wolf, which, according to genetic data, is the result of a cross between an ordinary wolf and a coyote. However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as some scientists, insist that this wolf is native to the southeastern United States, which, when the population began to decline, began to mate with coyotes, which were in abundance. To prevent the red wolf from being "swallowed up" by coyotes, this service in 1980 began a program to breed and preserve the "pure" red wolf.

Dr. John Melnick, director of the Center for Environmental Studies at Columbia University, says: "We are really learning that evolution is a more complex and dynamic process than many of us previously thought."

Mark Derr
The New York Times
Source: InoPressa. ru

10.12.2012 10:59, Penzyak

Nabokov's Great Theorem

15/02/2011, Science and Time

The great Russian, and later non-Russian, writer Vladimir Nabokov, as you know, was very fond of butterflies. So much so that to define this love by the word "hobby" seems sacrilegious. If you think about it, then all his work was imbued with the same beauty, the same sophistication, the same inimitable as his butterflies, while he, like them, perfectly avoided even a hint of glamorous kitsch, because he really was great. And Nabokov, as it now turns out, was just as big in his passion for butterflies as he was in literature.
Vladimir Pokrovsky

Vladimir Nabokov considered himself a specialist in lepidoptera, and only then-a writer.

From the very beginning of his childhood, he dreamed of becoming not a writer, but a lepidopterist, a specialist in lepidoptera, that is, in butterflies. He had learned this passion from his father. While in the United States, he and his wife went to the mountains every year in search of new species. And the six years he spent as a curator of lepidoptera at the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University, he later called the happiest years of his life.

A self-taught scientist – what could be more hopeless for a scientific career? In fact, during his lifetime, he did the impossible – he managed, and quickly, to be recognized. Acknowledged, but with a shrug of the shoulders-they say, yes, diligent, can describe and classify the leadopter well, but they are positively not capable of new ideas in this area.

But he kept discovering new butterflies, writing scientific articles that sometimes looked more like traveler's notes than a formal scientific product, and considered his most important achievement to be the hypothesis of the origin of pigeons in North America – a surprisingly delicate color of butterflies of the genus Polyommatus. After studying their structure and comparing them with other butterflies, he said that pigeons are migrants. He was convinced that they had come to the North American continent from Southeast Asia, through the Bering Strait, and not immediately, but in five waves. Nabokov was very enthusiastic about this idea and wrote about it not only in scientific publications.

The real interest in Nabokov as a scientist began after his death in 1977, although the first public interest in him as a scientist studying butterflies began in 1958, after the release of Lolita, which made him famous. In the 90's, a review of his scientific articles was made, and then scientists were first struck by the power of his classifications. At the very end of the last century, when it was time to celebrate the anniversary of the great writer (1999 – this date was not really noticed in Russia), scientists finally paid attention to his hypothesis about the origin of pigeons.

Naomi Pierce, who holds the same position at Harvard as Nabokov himself-a leadopter expert at the Museum of Comparative Zoology - was fascinated by Nabokov's idea and even then announced her intention to test it with modern means. This test took her 10 years. This is not so easy to do even with modern means.

It was necessary to recreate the entire pedigree (and the pigeon family is extensive – more than 400 species!), the entire evolutionary tree of pigeons, and study all possible intersections of its branches. Dr. Pierce sometimes felt that Nabokov was fundamentally incapable of doing all this work on his own, even if one did not take into account that in the 1940s genetic research methods were still out of the question, and the bridge that once connected Siberia and Alaska was still unknown at that time (it was talked about presumably, but Nabokov dismissed such talk – he was not interested in bridges between continents). Based only on a comparative analysis of pigeon anatomy, Pearce believed, Nabokov simply did not have the opportunity to build a hypothesis of this kind in evidence and detail.

It was something like Fermat's Great Theorem-Nabokov's Great Theorem, which he obviously couldn't prove with the methods he had, but still claimed to have proved it.

Dr. Pierce managed to gather a group of prominent American and European scientists. She organized four mountain expeditions to the Andes for them, collected a whole collection of different pigeons with them, and then at Harvard subjected them to genetic testing.

Scientists understood that the origin of pigeons can be explained not only by the exotic hypothesis of Nabokov's five-fold Asian invasion. Among them – a parish from ancient Gondwana, from the Amazon region and others. But the genes showed that Nabokov was right after all. And how right!

All members of the genus Polyommatus, as it turned out, had a common ancestor who lived in Asia about 11 million years ago. Moreover, the analysis showed that there were exactly five Asian invasions – 10.7, 9.3, 2.4, 1.1 and 1.0 million years ago. First, the pigeons crossed the Bering Bridge to Alaska, then, when the bridge collapsed, they flew across the Bering Strait. Over the course of these ten million years, temperatures in the Bering Strait region have steadily decreased, so every time a species of pigeon arrived in Alaska, it became more and more resistant to the cold.

"God, he was right about everything," Naomi Pierce exclaims today.

Undoubtedly, the world would have lost a lot if Nabokov had managed to focus only on a scientific career, but that was what he wanted. Perhaps he valued himself as a real scientist even more than a recognized writer. In the 1943 poem "On Discovering a Butterfly" (since 1937 he has not written a single novel in Russian, except for the autobiography "Other Shores" and the author's translation into Russian of the novel "Lolita"), he wrote:

I found it and I named it, being versed
In taxonomic Latin; thus became
Godfather to an insect and its first
Describer – and I want no other fame.

I found it, and I named it, singing
it in Taxonomic Latin; and so I became the
Godfather of the insect and its first
Describer – and I want no other glory.)

Now he had what he wanted.

Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta

MAKE SURE TO CHECK OUT THE LINKS:

http://www.d-e-zimmer.de/eGuide/Lep2.1-Pl.htm

http://raskol.livejournal.com/850059.html

This post was edited by Penzyak - 13.12.2012 13: 17

Pictures:
image: _______. jpg

_______.jpg — (8.01к)

picture: Nabokov.jpg

Nabokov.jpg — (25.29к)

Likes: 1

Likes: 2

Likes: 5

14.12.2012 14:21, Penzyak

I remember Nabokov in the USSR was a very odious person and all because of his Barchuk statements (of course, the rich man was ruined) to the SOVIETS... For this, they also tried to "ignore" him and did not quote/welcome his scientific works here.
It is a pity that Nabokov did not manage to publish his most famous Atlas of Butterflies at that time...

.."He reflects on the imperfection of the old Schmetterlingsbücher or butterfly atlases, among which, even in his father's magnificent library, he could not find adequate descriptions until the first volumes of Konstantin Kirillovich's work "Butterflies and Moths of the Russian Empire"were published in 1912. Describing this four-volume work in detail and enthusiastically, comparing it with other books that are sinful of shortcomings, Nabokov imagines an ideal lepidopteran reference book, anticipating the project that he himself would undertake in the 1960s - "Butterflies of Europe". Even the devoted publisher who created an international consortium to publish the handbook was dismayed to see that Nabokov was increasingly expanding its scope, trying to surpass all existing catalogues in terms of material and volume. In 1965, after two years of work, Nabokov had to abandon his project, because the probability of publishing the work was extremely low. As for Godunov-Cherdyntsev, money was no problem for him: the selection and presentation of material in his four magnificent volumes are characterized by such uncompromising, scientific completeness and richness of illustrations that Nabokov himself could not even dream of. The love with which Nabokov's hero recounts his father's writings is reminiscent of the stirring descriptions of imaginary books in Borges ' novella "Tlen, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius", with the only difference that Nabokov's world is a part of our world, but a part of it where nature, science and art merge together as never before."...

http://nabokovandko.narod.ru/Texts/dar2.htm

Likes: 1

Likes: 11

10.01.2013 4:44, bora

Russia, North. Kavkaz, Teberda, Jamagat Gorge, 2350 m, early August.
Especially for all lovers of Polyommatinae: P. icarus, P. thersites, P. (A.) damon, P. (L.) ciscaucasicus, P. (Pl.) pylaon, P. (Pl.) loewii, P. (M.) daphnis. Left out: P. (L.) amandus, P. (C.) semiargus, A. pyrenaicus, C. minimus, C. osiris. And all in the same puddle. Anyone who has been to the Caucasus has seen this outrage.

P. (L.) ciscaucasicus - no such species exists: http://babochki-kavkaza.ru/index.php/lycae...corydonius.html
P. (Pl.) pylaon is absent in the western Caucasus. Instead, here is sephirus: http://babochki-kavkaza.ru/index.php/lycae...-sephirus-.html
And P. (Pl.) loewii is not found in this photo.

This post was edited by bora - 10.01.2013 06: 13

Likes: 2