Arctiidae-dippers

Centrarctia mongolica (Alpheraky, 1888). 04.07.2004 Western Mongolia, 50 km west of Khovd, h 1485 m, Doroshkin V. V.

Pictures:

P1110589.JPG — (251.03к)

Kazakhstan, Astana reg., 13 km E from Zhaksy settlement, 382 m, 30.07.2011
Help with the definition

Pictures:

1..jpg — (190.2к)


2..jpg — (197.21 k)

Dippers ?
Moscow region, Ramenskiy district, Khripan
Date in the file name

Pictures:

03.06.2011_DSC06993.jpg — (170.82к)


24.06.2011_DSC09400.jpg — (203.81к)

Dodia sazonovi Dubatolov, 1990
Altai, Mount Aktash, h~2500. 26.06.2010

For NicoSander:
the first butterfly-Manulea complana (Linnaeus, 1758)
second butterfly-Manulea palliatella (Scopoli, 1763)

FOR gumenuk:
Spilosoma lubricipedum

Dear forumchane, I offer you some photos of bears, made by me in Kyrgyzstan in 2003.
Carcinopyga proserpina lindti-southern shore of Issyk-Kul, 10 km In Kaji-Saya, August 2 (that is, the species is found not only in autumn!)
Arctia rueckbeili-south-eastern part of the Alai, Archalsu Gorge, July 21
Palearctia erschoffii-Saryjaz, Enelchek River, August 9

Pictures:

Arctia_rueckbeili_650dpi.jpg — (65.61к)


Carcinopyga_proserpina_lindti_650dpi.JPG — (428.44к)


Palearctia_erschoffii_sarydzhasica_650dpi.jpg — (55.91к)

For vicgrr:

Judging by the wing pattern, the average specimen belongs to Palearctia glaphyra (no one understood the subspecies that lives on the Kirghiz Ridge; I saw males only in the Tsvetaevskaya collection and in Kiev; taking material from the Tsvetaevskaya collection for study is a problem for yourself, the curator lives there too unfriendly, and in Kiev - when there is a curator living there). I didn't understand that this was necessary; it can't be ruled out that the subspecies is new, but for this you need to look at the vesica in the genitals). The other two are Palearctia gratiosa caroli.

For vicgrr:

Judging by the wing pattern, the average specimen belongs to Palearctia glaphyra (no one understood the subspecies that lives on the Kirghiz Ridge; I saw males only in the Tsvetaevskaya collection and in Kiev; taking material from the Tsvetaevskaya collection for study is a problem for yourself, the curator lives there too unfriendly, and in Kiev - when there is a curator living there). I didn't understand that this was necessary; it can't be ruled out that the subspecies is new, but for this you need to look at the vesica in the genitals). The other two are Palearctia gratiosa caroli.

I hope this will help you draw some preliminary conclusions.

17.07.2009 Kyrgyzstan, Kirghiz region, national park "Ala-Archa", 3200 m, leg. A. Shaposhnikov.

I can send photos in their original resolution to your email address.

[attachmentid()=124443]

[attachmentid()=124449]

[attachmentid()=124445]

[attachmentid()=124446]

[attachmentid()=124447]

[attachmentid()=124448]

The message was edited rhopalocera.com - 22.10.2011 08: 50

Thank you so much for the photos! However, unfortunately, the shape of the INVERTED vesica is needed... According to the photos taken, you can only say that it belongs to the Palearctia glaphyra species. And in appearance-that specimens from the Kirghiz ridge do not leave the variability of P. g. aksuensis. But in this form, there is a noticeable geographical variability in the form of an inverted vesica. Having discovered this variability, Ferguson in 1984 concluded that there were two species: Palearctia glaphyra (he studied only the East Tianshan subspecies manni) and P. naryna. After that, I digested a significant part of the material I had (I even went with Oleg Kosterin to the Dzungarian Alatau in 1994 to catch nominative glaphira), and as a result, I came to the conclusion that all subspecies of P. glaphyra differ in their inverted vesicles: glaphyra s. str. (Dzungarian Alatau), dublitzkyi (Trans-Ili Alatau), aksuensis (=naryna) (Central and Inner Tien Shan), manni (Eastern Tien Shan and Ketmen). However, you probably know all this from my revision of Rod... But I did not cook any copies from the Kyrgyz ridge... I would be very grateful for a photo of a fully turned out and straightened vesica.

OK, I'll try to do it tomorrow.

Here is the latest butterfly from this series. Kirgizstan,Chatkai, mts, Chanach , 2000m, 24.06.2008. Wingspan-4 cm

Pictures:

DSC01161.JPG — (187.46к)

This is Chelis ferghana-a characteristic species of the Western Tien Shan, which begins to meet from the Chichkan Gorge. To the east, starting from the Susamyr Valley, a completely different species lives - Chelis strigulosa (Boettcher, 1905), a classic for the Northern Tien Shan.

I have similar butterflies from Dzungara. We should straighten it out...

Chelis strigulosa (Boettcher, 1905) lives in the Dzungarian Alatau!

Thank you so much for the photos! However, unfortunately, the shape of the INVERTED vesica is needed... According to the photos taken, you can only say that it belongs to the Palearctia glaphyra species. And in appearance-that specimens from the Kirghiz ridge do not leave the variability of P. g. aksuensis. But in this form, there is a noticeable geographical variability in the form of an inverted vesica. Having discovered this variability, Ferguson in 1984 concluded that there were two species: Palearctia glaphyra (he studied only the East Tianshan subspecies manni) and P. naryna. After that, I digested a significant part of the material I had (I even went with Oleg Kosterin to the Dzungarian Alatau in 1994 to catch nominative glaphira), and as a result, I came to the conclusion that all subspecies of P. glaphyra differ in their inverted vesicles: glaphyra s. str. (Dzungarian Alatau), dublitzkyi (Trans-Ili Alatau), aksuensis (=naryna) (Central and Inner Tien Shan), manni (Eastern Tien Shan and Ketmen). However, you probably know all this from my revision of Rod... But I did not cook any copies from the Kyrgyz ridge... I would be very grateful for a photo of a fully turned out and straightened vesica.

I haven't been able to do it yet. I'll do it this week for sure. but I think it's still closer to the weekend.

Please identify/confirm. Primorye, Anuchinsky district, July 2011
First I don't know, 2nd luteum?, 3-4-lubricipedum?

Pictures:

iphone_002.jpg — (123.96к)

Upper-lichen Barsine striata (Bremer et Grey, 1852)
middle-Spilarctia lutea Hfn.
the second one from below is Spilosoma lubricipedum L.
To accurately determine the lower one (S. lubricipepum/urticae), you need to better examine the whiskers (preferably in front).

So?

Pictures:

DSC01412.JPG — (130.73к)

But this is Spilosoma urticae Esp., the color form of mandli Schawerda (with a large number of black dots on the forewings). In this species, the scallops on the antennae are short, and the forewings are somewhat narrower, in contrast to S. lubricipedum.

Alphaea melanostigma

[attachmentid()=124901]

Alphaea melanostigma

The same one was found this year in 60 km from Ishkashim.

I reviewed the entire topic, did not find the photo of a butterfly that I have. Who can say what kind of view.

Pictures:

111_Arctiidae_sp.__m._Tsaghkunyatc__2011.07.14.jpg — (189.43к)

I reviewed the entire topic, did not find the photo of a butterfly that I have. Who can say what kind of view.

Parasemia plantaginis, a subspecies of caucasica in Transcaucasia (Menetries, 1832)
http://www-sbras.nsc.ru/win/elbib/atlas/Arctiidae/75.html

Thank you more

This lichen is not amenable. Very small - 20 mm in span. Ukraine, Zaporizhia region, Priazovsky district, coast of the Sea of Azov and Molochny Estuary, 28.08.2011.

I think pygmaeolum, we have about a dozen and a half arrived in Aleshkovsky sands on 25.08, Dubatolov said that they are the size of lutarellum, but in fact much less, in addition, several obtusa and muscerda specimens arrived at the same time, the latter for the south of Ukraine is not indicated in Dubatolov.

Pygmaeolum is not common in the region, but it is everywhere and stable. They are indeed smaller than lutarellum, but this one (bottom right) is quite small. Top right is pygmaeolum, caught there on the same night. I didn't catch it, Djon with Egorus, there was not one such small and monochrome ones, I took one (which is a pity ).

but this one (bottom right) is quite small. I did not catch Djon with Egorus, there was not one such small and monochrome one, I took one (which is a pity ).

Photo of genetalia of a male, the same small, and the same series, it turns out rygmaeolum, but 4 cornotuses and all almost the same size.

I haven't been able to do it yet. I'll do it this week for sure. but I think it's still closer to the weekend.

I have to apologize - I still haven't been able to do it - I urgently left for Helsinki. On arrival (after 12 days), it is placed in red priority.

Dear forumchane!

The correct name is Spilarctia melanostigma Ersch. Alphaea, on the other hand, is a very different genus found in the Himalayas, Southwestern China, and northern Indochina. Revised in 2005 (see Tinea 18 (4): 241-252). The closest relative of S. melanostigma is the Himalayan species S. leopardina Koll. This species was assigned to the Spilosoma-Spilarctia group by Werner Thomas.

But the small lichen from Southern Ukraine is really interesting. But, in my opinion, this is one of the variations of Manulea pygmaeola. In this species, cornutuses often vary in size. Although, indeed, you need to understand more carefully. There will be a series - you need to see everyone yourself, and not by photo, but by drugs. I would be very grateful for this opportunity.

 

The correct name is Spilarctia melanostigma Ersch. Alphaea, on the other hand, is a very different genus found in the Himalayas, Southwestern China, and northern Indochina. Revised in 2005 (see Tinea 18 (4): 241-252). The closest relative of S. melanostigma is the Himalayan species S. leopardina Koll. This species was assigned to the Spilosoma-Spilarctia group by Werner Thomas.

The name was taken from your site. Fix it . I wanted to look in your catalog of Palearctic bears (which Ulf has released in NEN), but I couldn't find it. A huge omission and a huge inconvenience is the lack of an index. Perhaps you can make it (in the form of a PDF) and post it somewhere? After all, it is completely unrealistic to navigate in such a huge number of taxa without a pointer...

Here is pygmaeola from Kherson region (Aleshkovskie peski 25.08.11) for comparison with lyutarela


And from there the cribraria(10.09.10), the second generation (end of August-beginning of September) there is a mass view ( in any case, 10 and 11 years). For comparison, from near Kiev with a drawing and more In the sand, all are so light and smaller
.

Dear forumchane!

According to the taxonomy of bears, I am currently correcting Internet projects located on the site fen.nsu.ru Unfortunately, I can't correct old projects right now, and I don't have access to them. Especially sorry for the project szmn.sbras.ru which was forcibly taken away from me a couple of years ago by our then new manager, Sergey Chernyshev (to satisfy his bossy ambitions), and handed over to Alexander Pozdnyakov. After that, I lost the ability to edit the site myself, and work on the site completely stopped. I wrote various papers to my superiors, but nothing helped. After the dispersal of the Siberian Zoological Museum this fall (two laboratories were created on its basis - under the direction of Barkalov and Legalov), the former collections of the museum were divided into 4 parts, more precisely 3 parts with one new one (insects, invertebrates, vertebrates and living cultures), and are now listed as "collections of the Institute of Animal Systematics and Ecology". So now the situation has changed a lot, and the SPMN website (as well as our brand) will no longer exist. Everything has its pros and cons, but the brand "Siberian Zoological Museum" is frankly a pity.

So to summarize: for modern names of bears, see http://fen.nsu.ru/~vvdubat/Arctiidae/ There are lists of species there: 1) The Palearctic, 2) the Oriental and Australian regions, 3) the Afrotropic, and 4) the Nearctic. I did not manage to place these resources on the basis of our institute, although I tried.

This fall, I also started correcting Wikispecies and Wikipedia on Dipper, but I haven't had time to put it in its final form yet.

What prevents you from creating your own project? Register a domain, buy inexpensive hosting (because you don't need a lot of space) and do everything you want, fully controlling the process and absolutely confident that no one can take anything away from you?

Check out this hoster: www.agava.ru. They both register domains and offer hosting at fairly reasonable prices. And they work very well - my sites have been running on their site for more than 7 years, and I have absolutely no complaints about them.

And about the index for your big work in NEN-still a big request to make it. Having the source word file, this lesson is for 1 day (if there is no markup) or 2 minutes (if there is markup).

The message was edited rhopalocera.com - 13.11.2011 16: 23

My native Alma Mater is still saving me - MANY THANKS to them! I'm already thinking of restoring at least the butterfly catalog of our former museum there. But I don't want to spoil relations with our management yet. I am not ready to buy a domain for my personal money, I spend all my free money on expeditions to the Amur region.

I'll try to add an index to my catalog as soon as I've dealt with some urgent work. I didn't have time to do it before. Ulf also didn't do it himself, I don't know why, but he could have done it. I had to hurry with this catalog (fortunately, I had a draft of the catalog ready for a very long time) - Gabor Ronkay was on his heels with his Witt Catalog, where he categorically refused to take me as a co-author. As a result, the case suffered - Gabor "shared" lectotypes in the British Museum, although I did this from the ZIN collection in revisions for a very long time. But in the taxonomy of bears, Gabor made interesting finds, but not yet published. It's good that he waited for my catalog to be released (this speaks in his favor), and temporarily "suspended" his own-in the end, it turned out not to make terrible blunders. Negotiations about my participation in Witt's Spilosomini/na Catalog were interrupted, Gabor decided to keep quiet, and I had no further contact with him. The Witt company is also silent.

Gabor "mastered" lectotypes in the British Museum, although I did this from the ZIN collection in revisions for a very long time

If possible, please explain this situation in more detail. Have you also identified lectotypes of the same species, but based on the ZINA collection? How can I do this if the old standard series was a in London?

If possible, please explain this situation in more detail. Have you also identified lectotypes of the same species, but based on the ZINA collection? How can I do this if the old standard series was a in London?

Standard series of a number of Russian authors are divided between St. Petersburg and London. These are Grumm-Grzhimailo, Afinov, Alferaki, and others. Previously, museums changed a lot among themselves, and did not make a big difference between "types" and non-types .

Almost all of my comments concerned Christof's fees. He traveled mainly for the Grand Duke's money, so the VAST MAJORITY of his fees were transferred to him, and are now kept in ZINA. Christopher kept one copy of many taxa for himself; this collection ended up in London (it is possible that after his death). The instances of the syntype series of these two collections are IDENTICAL, so lectotypes can be distinguished in either of these collections. But the most important thing here is who is the first, but not only designates in the collection, but also publishes it. I managed to do this much earlier in my articles in the 80s and 90s. Gabor didn't ask me for my articles (he ruined our relationship in 1991 and never contacted me), so he didn't have such literature. He seemed to think he was doing his job for the first time. He has never worked at ZINA, and he doesn't know this collection at all. That's why I hoped that London has everything. In the end, it turned out differently. Conclusion : if you are starting to work in a group for the first time (as Gabor did when he was an expert in scoops), please ask what other colleagues have done before. There is a minimum Zoological Record for this. But better yet, start contacting your colleagues who work in this field.

Grumm also traveled for the Grand Duke's money, but kept much more than Christoph. And during his lifetime, he sold his collection to Rothschild (through Elwes). Rothschild (wealth, it seems, obscures the mind...) in March 1910 began to publish a catalog of his collection of bears (an instance!), managed to produce a couple of issues (the second - in May), but in the fall of 1910 a terrible scandal broke out in Russia, and all his colleagues turned away from Grumm-lepidopterologists (he went for the same money of the Grand Duke, and the fees spent on this money were sold to England). As a result, the catalog of bears of the Rothschild collection stopped being published (I should have thought earlier and not declassified the suppliers!), and Grumm stopped working on butterflies, and was very perplexed why his colleagues turned away from him. A little bit about this story is written in the gallery of lepidopterologists, but there is no information that it was the bears who were "involved" here, and Rothschild is confused with Elves.

Avinov, it seems, was able to take part of the collection with him. But I haven't heard about Alferaki's training camp in London. His fees were being passed on (sold?) only to O. Staudinger. So these were not inter-museum exchanges...

What prevents you from creating your own project? Register a domain, buy inexpensive hosting (because you don't need a lot of space) and do everything you want, fully controlling the process and absolutely confident that no one can take anything away from you?

The fact that all professional entomologists in Russia are completely beggars.
Moreover, prosperity has nothing to do with this.
I do not know why this is so.