Jaundice (Colias)

I will add only about the "specialist"
I don't understand what planetary-scale advice has to do with it , but there is such a thing as doubt. Everyone has the right to doubt, and doubt usually arises from ignorance or insufficient knowledge.
And when I express my doubt here, I mean exactly this, that is, that I do not have enough knowledge to accept the statement "as true"- that is, that I do not fully understand why and how. This is not the case to take on faith, and it seems to me that a person who is interested in details, and does not agree with every word, should be more interesting for a specialist, although people are different, someone needs assent, and someone needs interest.

And if two species produce fertile hybrids, which in turn can interbreed both with each other and with primary descendants - then these are very strange species. At least.
But this happens, I also know such examples among reptiles, for example, there are places where hybrids of steppe and common viper are found.
Such species should have good stabilizing mechanisms that prevent mixing, which I don't fully understand. I would like to hear something about this, at least on the example of the mentioned bellargus and Corydon?

I will add only about the "specialist"
I don't understand what planetary-scale advice has to do with it , but there is such a thing as doubt. Everyone has the right to doubt, and doubt usually arises from ignorance or insufficient knowledge.
And when I express my doubt here, I mean exactly this, that is, that I do not have enough knowledge to accept the statement "as true"- that is, that I do not fully understand why and how. This is not the case to take on faith, and it seems to me that a person who is interested in details, and does not agree with every word, should be more interesting for a specialist, although people are different, someone needs assent, and someone needs interest.

And if two species produce fertile hybrids, which in turn can interbreed both with each other and with primary descendants - then these are very strange species. At least.
But this happens, I also know such examples among reptiles, for example, there are places where hybrids of steppe and common viper are found.
Such species should have good stabilizing mechanisms that prevent mixing, which I don't fully understand. I would like to hear something about this, at least on the example of the mentioned bellargus and Corydon?

I do not know about other insects, but among the daytime butterflies of the Palearctic, such cases are incidents. The crocea / erate case is already well understood, and the researchers are divided into 2 camps. Probably the truth is in the middle. I didn't find anything about the genetics of bellargus/corydon hybrids - who knows, give me a link!!! A good analysis of European "bad species" with a rich bibliography herehttp://www.ucl.ac.uk/taxome/jim/pap/descimon&mallet09.pdf

This post was edited by sergenicko - 06.02.2012 20: 29

I didn't find anything about the genetics of bellargus/corydon hybrids - who knows, give me a link!!! A good review of European "bad views" here http://www.ucl.ac.uk/taxome/jim/pap/descimon&mallet09.pdf

Only I was going to give this link, and it's already here. Very entertaining reading indeed. By the way, there are also a few words about the bellargus and coridon hybrids. Arguments in favor of sterility of hybrids are given.

While a cursory review of this article was surprised by the absence of erate and crocea in the bad species, but I then specifically tried to search for hyale and alfakariensis - erate is mentioned only in the links and the table of hybrids.

   Only I was going to give this link, and it's already here. Very entertaining reading indeed. By the way, there are also a few words about the bellargus and coridon hybrids. Arguments in favor of sterility of hybrids are given.

I spent three days looking for this article in the depths of a computer, because I forgot the authors to search on the Internet, and finally found it at home (and then on the Internet, of course). I needed it (or rather, the bibliography in it) in connection with reali / sinapis in the Novosibirsk region. And in the app for morons, the Tools for taxonomic practice at species level in butterflies tutorial.

This post was edited by sergenicko - 06.02.2012 20: 52

I needed it (or rather, the bibliography in it) in connection with reali / sinapis in the Novosibirsk region.

juvernica/sinapis...

In fact, the cases discussed in the main text of the article will add that after its appearance

1) L. reali split into two halves (see above),

2) Zerinthia from the Appennine Peninsula (Z. cassandra) became considered a species. There are differences in the genitals.

juvernica/sinapis...

In fact, the cases discussed in the main text of the article will add that after its appearance

1) L. reali split into two halves (see above),

2) Zerinthia from the Appennine Peninsula (Z. cassandra) became considered a species. There are differences in the genitals.

Then it was still reali

While a cursory review of this article was surprised by the absence of erate and crocea in the bad species, but I then specifically tried to search for hyale and alfakariensis - erate is mentioned only in the links and the table of hybrids.

Like this, p. 63, table. Partly sympatric species. That is, they do not consider them particularly bad, except that they often or rarely hybridize. Here is an article by Gere about the impact of erate on nearby species, download or readhttp://opuscula.elte.hu/Opuscula27-28.htm

This post was edited by sergenicko - 06.02.2012 21: 04

Well, I looked at the tables,
but there are no references in the text, but in theory there should be a detailed analysis...

Heh, nyght sprechen nyght ferstein ))) And someone else made a PDF from the scan-the email translator is also nyght ferstein

But at least there is a picture)

Heh, nyght sprechen nyght ferstein ))) And someone else made a PDF from the scan-the email translator is also nyght ferstein

But at least there is a picture)

Erate is a genetic vampire. The text says that C. erate appeared in Hungary recently, before the author's eyes. I translate the conclusion with abbreviations:

1. C. erate crosses so to speak indefinitely with all related species. ... It seems proven that hybrids are capable of reproduction, since such a wide range of morphological variability could not have occurred in the same F1 generation...
2. Typical C. erate females ... almost completely extinct, and the species maintains its genotype by relying on related species. The form of such a condition of the species, otherwise formulated as "gene parasitism", is unique in living nature.
3. Apparently, different Colias in Hungary were able to hybridize after the appearance of C. erate. For example, I observed a male C. crocea copulating with a female C. hyale. I've never seen this happen before...

This post was edited by sergenicko - 06.02.2012 22: 59

Well, there is only a general one, I was most surprised that it says that this era was supposedly first registered in Hungary in 1988, and two years later it became common throughout the country, did I understand correctly? Is it that she has spread out so quickly, and in general, it turns out that she was an expansive species then, so recently?

Well, there is only a general one, I was most surprised that it says that this era was supposedly first registered in Hungary in 1988, and two years later it became common throughout the country, did I understand correctly? Is it that she has spread out so quickly, and in general, it turns out that she was an expansive species then, so recently?

The author claims. I'll look up what the Serbs-Croats-Slovenes write right now.

Recently launched in Slovenia http://web.bf.uni-lj.si/bi/NATURA-SLOVENIA...atSlo_6_2_3.pdf. In Bulgaria, erate is not known from what time, but there she did not settle the mountains, although in Southern Siberia and Central Asia she rises very high, where there are steep slopes, and therefore, perhaps, she is a migrant in Bulgaria. According to the website, Erate Bulgaria is "Mostly in the lowlands, but occasionally strays or migrants can be seen even at high altitudes." In contrast, crocea (and I confirm this with my observations) "Not associated with particular habitat, can be encountered anywhere in open places." http://www.butterfliesofbulgaria.com/
What is being done with erate in Serbia and Croatia is unknown.

This post was edited by sergenicko - 06.02.2012 22: 09

Well, in this article it is given as a faunal find, so it is probably more correct to say not appeared recently but found recently
We have, for example, a lot of species not officially marked, which I found, this does not mean that they appeared here at this very moment

And in the article Hera directly says that it appeared and began to settle.
In general, if you start to doubt - then did they all have erate along with the appearance of the authors ' knowledge about the criteria for distinguishing erate from crocea
In general, the case is clear that the case is dark)))

Well, in this article it is given as a faunal find, so it is probably more correct to say not appeared recently but found recently
We have, for example, a lot of species not officially marked, which I found, this does not mean that they appeared here at this very moment

And in the article Hera directly says that it appeared and began to settle.
In general, if you start to doubt - then did they all have erate along with the appearance of the authors ' knowledge about the criteria for distinguishing erate from crocea
In general, the case is clear that the case is dark)))

1) They have been lovingly and constantly watching their butterflies since the time of Denis and Schiffermuller, so if it wasn't, it wasn't. They also know their Crocea perfectly well - at least the one that was before the invasion. And the invasion is described as an offensive with a broad front - this is not an accidental find, now erate in Hungary is a mass species.
2) The Bulgarian distribution is suspicious - it seems that erate has not yet settled in and settled the mountains. You can see right away - there are a lot of crocea on the lawns at the height, there are also a lot of them at the bottom, but a lot of erate is added. These are background views. On the eye, they differ, of course, in the color of males - there are no yellow ones at the height (alfakariensis does not count).
3) I can't find anything sensible about Turkey. There is no place to download Ahmet Baitash.

This post was edited by sergenicko - 06.02.2012 23: 02

You can also discuss the following topics: whether parnussius jacmonti is a subspecies of tienshanicus, Bremeri is a subspecies of Phoebus, bryonia is a subspecies of napi, argyrognomon is a subspecies of idas, etc., etc. Based on a specific material. From a specific area. Everything else is called Trollism.

Wild Yuri, heh, in this topic, where is it, here? In this topic, some research is already being conducted, for example, research on publications.
And it's called a discussion.
You just have trollephobia. You still under the bed before going to bed check for trolls

Wild Yuri, heh, in this topic, where is it, here? In this topic, some research is already being conducted, for example, research on publications.
And it's called a discussion.
You just have trollephobia. Do you still check under the bed before going to bed to see if there are any trolls there

I will give a specific discussion "in the field". Under the Ceiling are found as if bryoniae (or euorientis, damn them to make out) - in appearance. They live in shady ravines on the slopes of the South and West, fly out much later than napi, have 1 generation, seem to differ in genitals. There was a question whether to include the monster in the faunal article [Ivonin, Kosterin, Nikolaev]. Ivonin and I climbed these ravines, watched and corresponded with Kosterin, who eventually also climbed there and wrote to me:

"To be honest, I don't believe in your bryonia at all. Ravines containing exactly one and a half females cannot support a viable population, and even resist the flow of genes from above (no matter how rarely males fly in from there – at least one per season - with imperfect barriers – and they are imperfect even in the most typical bryony-it will erase all specificity), and in a vast similar biotope, In the study I examined, I found continuous variability in external signs. Most likely, this is environmental variability – in the shade, development slows down, so that the first generation leaves later, and the second does not have time at all, the butterflies become darker. The only thing that makes any sense is your statement about the correlation between the spot and the shape of the valva in males. But on how many individuals is this correlation. What will males with rudimentary spots do with it? I would rather believe that when the pupae develop in the shade and coolness, the valvae are rounded off due to some physiological reasons."

Ivonin remained loyal to bryonia, and I agreed with Kosterin that the article should not include curiosities (as a separate taxon) yet. But the problem remained. Kosterin's counterarguments are also quite suitable for Western Europe, where "The hierarchical analysis indicates that 23 ≤0020M≤ 88 among the taxa napi, bryoniae and meridionalis that meet in hybrid zones; no effective gene flow barrier exists among them" http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111...1041.x/abstract.

This post was edited by sergenicko - 07.02.2012 12: 02

Pictures:

bryo_fup1.jpg — (113.25к)


bryo_fun1.jpg — (118.54к)

And in general, there should be a provocation in the discussion, so that the violent ones will yell, and the normal ones will remember about the "marginals". Extravagant theories have their own charm - erate's gene parasitism is more fun than gene drift in arbitrary areas of a clear field.

professional verbiage

Vo, the wild one yelled!

no this is a real and calm assessment of the gushing nonsense

the discussion here is more like a monologue. messages on a couple of pages, just have time to read. In general, you can do without just stating your opinion about the status and hybridization of these pairs of colias in a few messages.
Especially since the topic is in a thread called "Insect Images" ...

sergenicko, you should have registered here for 5 or 7 years earlier, so there were discussions about everything and nothing, topics of cosmic proportions, and no one asked belches, eeeh
Now it's not the same, the reasons are not clear - most of the participants have become more inert, many have simply disappeared, either this is a personality transformation under the influence of a temporary factor, or the life has become so difficult - there are a lot of irritated and dissatisfied people

sergenicko, you should have registered here for 5 or 7 years earlier, so there were discussions about everything and nothing, topics of cosmic proportions, and no one asked belches, eeeh
Now it's not the same, the reasons are not clear - most of the participants have become more inert, many have simply disappeared, either this is a personal transformation under the influence of a temporary factor, or the life has become so difficult - there are a lot of irritated and dissatisfied people

By the way, the forum showed only a piece from the Romanian Rhopalocera divergence by COI, and no good species were seen. Here is the full cladogram. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/con...101089supp2.pdf. They did an interesting job with euryale-ligea. Apparently, they did not take into account the" half-species " of E. adyte, the twin of euryale, which was sometimes defined as ligea, then as euryale. There are practically no hybrids between euryale and ligea proper, at least in the Ukrainian Carpathians - I saw one that looks ugly.
As for erate / colias without banter and provocation, it seems to me that erate "ate" crocea due to introgression (although it is theoretically very rare in butterflies) - M. B., the last crocea remained with native mithondria high in the mountains, we need to check. What is considered a crocea in lowland western Europe, the southern steppes, and the Crimea is a polymorphic erate-if we formally proceed from mtDNA, which definitely belongs to the erate throughout its eastern range. The diversity of erate forms in Europe is a consequence of hybridization with the" absorbed " crocea. It is unlikely that crocea and erate are such young species that their mitochondria did not have time to distinguish.

from the newly obtained

Pictures:

rank.jpg — (165.21к)


nast2.jpg — (181.37к)


nast.jpg — (174.23к)


cocan3.jpg — (170.94к)


cocan2.jpg — (168.52к)


cocan.jpg — (172.76к)

Well, if it's not the post-Soviet post-space....
Then I'll add a non-local one.
Male Colias electo (Linnaeus, 1763)
Africa, Ethiopia October 2011.

Pictures:

col.jpg — (204.09к)


col1.jpg — (207.13к)

maybe Alferaka's collections contain eks that he identified as saretensis?

maybe Alferaka's collections contain eks that he identified as saretensis?

(I, as a comp-teapot, gemoroino was looking for the topic "yolks", thank you for pulling out - and the problem is not only in them).
The opinion on them was expressed by Korshunov – the best Soviet and Russian ropalocerologist of our time (no matter how some people who are not very close to him try to belittle him). Since then, it has been found that the types of older taxa than alfacariensis have also been preserved. In addition to sareptensis, there is also meridionalis Krulikowsky, 1903. But the Commission, at the suggestion of Grieshuber, who saw these types, accepted the" seniority " of the taxon, which has as many as 2 valid senior names supported by types! This is the height of "legal" incompetence, outright flouting of the Code! All right, Grieshuber – as a poor "lawyer" (and a poor scholar of literature), it really seemed to him that it was advisable to keep the more common name alfacariensis (although-then why not australis?). But the Commission was obliged to check all the facts by contacting other specialists, but this was not done. As a result, this act of the Commission so blatantly violates the Code that it shows its complete failure - it can be appealed by any justice of the peace if desired (and initiated).
I think that the Commission, in view of its complete incompetence in the field of entomology, should focus on "lawmaking" and stop interfering in taxonomy, following the lead of some ambitious "experts". Taxon names should be directly affected by the Code. There is a senior taxon – and no "nails".

And after all, after the natural decline of the current composition of this unfortunate commission, this decision can probably be appealed. With the current senility-it is unlikely to succeed-these "fascists" are even worse than our bonzes do not like to admit their mistakes.

wait, I'm also not in the topic, but what is the lectotype indicated for? alfacariensis or sareptensis?

This post was edited by sergenicko - 22.11.2012 17: 25

because if alfacariensis, then sareptensis just "hangs". if there is no lectotype of sareptensis, then it is necessary to designate it and prove it (lectotype!) conspecificity of alfacariensis. then the species will be called sareptensis according to the Codex, despite Grieshuber's wishes

This post was edited by sergenicko - 22.11.2012 17: 29

There is a Code that we must follow. It is necessary to designate the lectotype of alfacariensis from the collections of Alferaki, if there are butterflies with a definition, or the neotype from its collections according to the description, and deal with them, whether it is "bastards" or an independent taxon. If it is a taxon separate from hyale and erate, which can be synonymized with alfacariensis, then sareptensis will be the specific name, and alf. it will go into synonyms.
If there are no butterflies with the definitions of Alferaka, and there are no butterflies in its collections that match the description, then the neotype is distinguished from the series of butterflies collected there by other collectors and corresponding to the original description.

This post was edited by sergenicko - 22.11.2012 19: 18

If there are butterflies identified by Alferaks as saretensis, then they should be designated as (pair)lectotype(s) and understand the taxonomy. If there is only a description, select (assign) the neotype according to the original description. And there is no other way. There is a subtlety: if, for example, Alferaki collections are clearly divided into three taxa (hyale, erate, and X), then even without a label, you can indicate the lectotype by description. If not , then neotype for any fees from this place. But still, without a lectotype/neotype, the dispute about who was right there, Korshunov or Grieshuber, has no basis.

This post was edited by sergenicko - 22.11.2012 19: 44

I saw it, of course. that's not the point, the dispute is "legal". take it yourself and label the lectotype of Colias saretensis Alph. and show that this is not alf., but a different species. after that, the discussion will stop, because sareptensis will be codified. and while there is no lectotype/neotype, all conversations are wasted.

This post was edited by sergenicko - 22.11.2012 20: 00

if this is very important, then you should contact the Commission to cancel the lectotype.

in the description of sareptensis, all the characters are quantitative ("wider", "narrower", "more intense"....), so if the lectotype is at least some designated (and you still haven't told me if it is), then it is unlikely to be possible to prove that it is not saretensis, but another taxon.

because if alfacariensis, then sareptensis just "hangs". if there is no lectotype of sareptensis, then it is necessary to designate it and prove it (lectotype!) conspecificity of alfacariensis. then the species will be called sareptensis according to the Codex, despite Grieshuber's wishes

It won't be any more. The commission is higher than the Code.

is there a commission decision? and in general-is the lectotype of sareptensis designated?

Yes, there are type series of both sareptensis and meridionalis; the latter, according to the latest monograph by Grieshuber et al., is in the ZIN, and in the first series (I don't remember where it is, I need to go to the scan of this work, I'll try it in the evening), along with this species, another one (I think, erate) was mixed in.
I don't know about the commission's decisions, but usually after they are published in its bulletin, everything is accepted in this way. Since everyone writes alfacariensis, there must have been a solution.
The decision of the commission can be reversed either by the commission itself (but it is unlikely that it will do so in the same composition), or by an external judicial body that will be able to show an error with the help of experts. In the west, they are very fond of suing for any reason due to fat management and idleness, but there is hardly anyone interested in initiating such a process.