Lycaenidae

And if you also look at Transcaucasia. Butterflies from Talysh and S-In Turkey are very different.

Who's that?"

And if you also look at Transcaucasia. Butterflies from Talysh and S-In Turkey are very different.

And how did the viewwriters miss this

Who's that?"

Apparently the same thing. As an option, another alcon, but you need genitals.

Or maybe it's what used to be called a bastard?

Or maybe it's what used to be called a bastard?

That is, the result of incest? Maybe so. There is a nuance here, the caterpillars of alcon and arion are very different in forage plants, and in the type of food in the anthill-too. Mixed nutrition is supposed to be very difficult. But, in general, everything is in the hands of God.

And what can prevent it? "Flew" alconikha-put on gentian," flew " arionikha - on oregano or thyme, and then according to the established scheme. Or do you think that your dad's genes might interfere with your metabolism?

Of course, I can't say anything, but metabolism is a very complex thing. Many of the forage plants of these species have strong essential oils, and this is not for cosmetics, of course, but as a chemical protection against freeloaders. The hybrid may lose some of its protective mechanisms. Further. The alkon develops up to a certain age inside the stem, and at the older age, the caterpillar is fed by ants. Arion develops on flowers, and in the older one he eats ant larvae. Very different way of eating. How to combine all this?

Interspecific hybrids are generally a very weakened thing. These are not intersort hybrids, where the genes are quite complementary. I had an interesting case. I caught a strange female bellargus (or corydon, from which side, in general, to look). I don't know who she mated with, but it's probably Bellargus. She laid only a few eggs. Only females came out of them - this was found out, of course, later. The caterpillars were very painful, with abnormalities in development and structure. I thought they'd die. But still brought to the butterflies (then it turned out that all the females). I took them for genetic analysis, and just left one to live, and then she started laying eggs for me, unfortunately, pacifiers. And genanalysis showed that for COI-it was, of course, bellargus, for ITS2 - too, but for Ef-1a - a heterozygote of bellargus with corydon. I.e.-female children were hybrids in the second generation, and painful.

. that is, in nature, they probably would definitely "throw away their paws" without leaving any descendants?

In the region, I have repeatedly seen how males of corydon (in some years this species is very numerous) harassed females of Agrodiaetus damon D. et S., but I did not observe mating, and the females were so "zatyukany" attacks of these loving covaliers that when planting on the plant they tried to hide in the foliage.... A couple of times, I repent I did a little "genocide" on these maniacs. Boris Vitalievich is it possible for these two species to mate and will it be productive?

Without geography, it is difficult, but I would assume this (from top to bottom):
1-2-chalybeitincta
3-4-rubi
5-8-similar genitalia in rubi fervida
9-strongly deformed, but probably also r. fervida
10-suaveola or danchenkoi

.. m-yes, and I did not know that in the Penza region there are still so many unknown pigeons...

.. that is, in nature, they probably would definitely "throw away their paws" without leaving any descendants?

Boris Vitalievich is it possible for these two species to mate and will it be productive?

In nature, the probability of their survival is very small, but still exists. Otherwise, hybrids would not be caught.
But Damon Henson - the probability of hybridization is very small, and the productivity of hybrids generally tends to 0.

I searched for hybrids in books and on the web from the genus Phengaris (Maculinea) - I didn't find them. Well, with the exception of the notorious alcon rebels.
On lepiforume there's a picture of the aberrant. The type is different, but the general line of variability can be traced.

Genitalia of the subfamily Polyommatinae and some of the outer group.

Pictures:

Polyommatinae.jpg — (288.16к)

So different!
Are there any common features in the structure of the genitals of the subfamily?

So different!
Are there any common features in the structure of the genitals of the subfamily?

That's the thing I couldn't find. For example, the basal genus Cupidesthes (tribe Lycaenesthini) has genitalia similar to Theclinae (Satyrium), while Anthene (also Lycaenesthini) has genitalia closer to Lycaena. The tribe Candalidina and the genus Cupidopsis generally fall out of the Polyommatinae, which is also confirmed by molgen. by analysis. In Polyommatini proper, the structure of the genitals is very different, but it has a common characteristic structure for individual subtribes. For example, even Nabokov identified a general plan of the structure for the now designated subtribe Polyommatina. The same can be noted for a couple of dozen other subtribes. I.e., there is not a sequential, but a fan evolution in the subfamily

I present a cladogram of the phylogeny of the subfamily Polyommatinae (with a small external group), created on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of mitochondrial and nuclear (protein-coding and protein-non-coding) DNA sequences. The reliability of the cladogram was confirmed by guys from the Barcelona-Harvard school, who made other genes of other species, but the result was similar.

Now a question for the gentlemen morphologists. Please show me, a blind man, where the proverbial pattern of evolution of the wing pattern is located. I've been looking at it for years, but I couldn't see this pattern.

This post was edited by bora - 07.03.2016 08: 52

Pictures:

1.jpg — (295.43к)

I present a cladogram of the phylogeny of the subfamily Polyommatinae (with a small external group), created on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of mitochondrial and nuclear (protein-coding and protein-non-coding) DNA sequences. The reliability of the cladogram was confirmed by guys from the Barcelona-Harvard school, who made other genes of other species, but the result was similar.

As far as we know from the Caucasian site, the yurinekrutenko taxon is a recent subspecies of P cyaneus. On your cladogram, this is the view. Please tell me what the current interpretation is.

As far as we know from the Caucasian site, the yurinekrutenko taxon is a recent subspecies of P cyaneus. On your cladogram, this is the view. Please tell me what the current interpretation is.

This act has not yet been fixed in the nomenclature. There is evidence, but there is no article yet. So for now yurinekrutenko.

The wing pattern should be presented in the form of diagrams.
Then your cladogram fits perfectly into the traditional ideas about the evolution of the wing pattern in individual groups.
By the way, the evolution of the pattern should not correlate with the evolution of individual genes ).

This act has not yet been fixed in the nomenclature. There is evidence, but there is no article yet. So for now, yurinekrutenko.

Eckweiler and Bozano (2016) generally do not consider it necessary to establish a substitute name for ciscaucasica Forster, 1956, since ciscaucasica Jahontov, 1914 and ciscaucasica Bollow, 1931 belong to the genus Lysandra, not Polyommatus.

How to be here, since Lysandra was treated as part of Polyommatus for some time, and now it's a good genus again - a question for experts of the ICZN.

Eckweiler and Bozano (2016) generally do not consider it necessary to establish a substitute name for ciscaucasica Forster, 1956, since ciscaucasica Jahontov, 1914 and ciscaucasica Bollow, 1931 belong to the genus Lysandra, not Polyommatus.

What to do here, since Lysandra was treated as part of Polyommatus for some time, and now it is again a good genus - a question for experts of the ICZN.

This is where the question comes in. Do they just "think so", or have they fixed it nomenclatedly?

According to the latest version of the Code, if two taxa are identified in the same genus but are currently located in different ones, their names do not need to be changed. in this vein, almost all of Kochak's substitutions (and mine) are invalid. However, in situations where the application of this rule is not obvious (the same Lysandra-Polyommatus - who interprets how, there is no single interpretation), the Code does not regulate anything.

Please help me with a few more pigeons

1. Uzbekistan, Kuraminsky hr., per. Kamchik. 16.06.1996




2. Kazakhstan, West Tien-Shan, zap. Aksu-Jabagly, h=2000m, 20.07.1985 I
assume Agrodiaetus phyllides (Staudinger, 1886)?




3. NW Kazakhstan, roc. Atyrau, 05.06.1998




4. ibid.




5. ibid.

Last year I was lucky enough to deal with a forage plant Tomares romanovi

Caterpillar food plant-Astragalus macrocephalus

 

And what does Riodinidae have to do with it?

Final development of Kretania eurypilus zamotajlovi Shchurov, Lukhtanov, 2001
2-6. 05. 2016

This post was edited by bora - 08.05.2016 18: 47

Pictures:

Biotop.jpg — (282.39к)


larva_4.jpg — (60.7к)


pupa.jpg — (106.22к)

Vikrama from the north of the Chelyabinsk region, the northernmost population in the region.

Snezhinsk, Chelyabinsk region, 20.05.2016

Pictures:

DSC08905.JPG — (292.69к)


DSC08906.JPG — (319.88к)

Plebejus pyrenaica ergane Higgins, 1981
28.V.2016 Kharkov reg., Volchansk distr., Efremovka

Pictures:

IMGP4636.JPG — (299к)


IMGP4633.JPG — (300.65к)


IMGP4631.JPG — (295.64к)


IMGP4615.JPG — (293.47к)


IMGP4548.JPG — (284.5к)


IMGP4538.JPG — (298.49к)


IMGP4535.JPG — (296.57к)


IMGP4534.JPG — (293.27к)


IMGP4427.JPG — (290.99к)


IMGP4421.JPG — (289.97к)


IMGP4426.JPG — (293.9к)


IMGP4457.JPG — (291.94к)

Why Plebejus?

Why Plebejus?

Among the Poles:
http://www.lepidoptera.eu/show.php?ID=5100&country=RU

And what does Riodinidae have to do with it?

Apparently, because the caterpillars of the snapper are similar to those of the pigeon snapper .

This post was edited by Nick444444 - 06/23/2016 00: 07

Apparently, because the caterpillars of the snapper are similar to those of the pigeon snapper .

Well, they are very similar. You can't tell the difference.

Pictures:

lucina_eumedon.jpg — (179.37к)

Among the Poles:
http://www.lepidoptera.eu/show.php?ID=5100&country=RU

For scientists:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111...908115D7.f03t01

About the subfamily Polyommatinae

File/s:



 A_molecular_phylogeny_of_the_subfamily_Polyommatinae.pdf

size: 1.86 mb
number of downloads: 669

Doctoral level! Respect!

Good article. It is a pity that the status of such taxa as Actisia, Admetusia, Dagmara, Antidolus, Damaia, Glabroculus, Grumiana, Inderskia, Juldus, Mestore, Polytheclus, Borisinia, Lamasemia, etc. is not clarified. In general, according to my rough estimates, about half of the currently existing names of the generic group were not included in the analysis.

Good article. It is a pity that the status of such taxa as Actisia, Admetusia, Dagmara, Antidolus, Damaia, Glabroculus, Grumiana, Inderskia, Juldus, Mestore, Polytheclus, Borisinia, Lamasemia, etc. is not clarified. In general, according to my rough estimates, about half of the currently existing names of the generic group were not included in the analysis.

The purpose of the work was different - to understand the adequacy of the Eliot system. And special cases are considered in private articles.

The purpose of the work was different - to understand the adequacy of the Eliot system. And special cases are considered in private articles.

Well, there can't be two opinions. At the time of publication, Eliot's system was the most adequate. With the advent of new methods of data processing, its adequacy naturally began to decrease.