Jaundice (Colias)

"Valik-jan, I'll tell you one smart thing, but just don't be offended" (c)
Based on all the above and unwritten, in my opinion, the issue of large-scale research from many points of view is crooked: genetic material, along with genitals, caterpillars and morphology. Throughout the entire range. I think we need to get a grant for this case and work on it.

This post was edited by Bad Den - 01.12.2012 01: 55

I didn't specifically deal with egg yolks

For example, I have worked with quite large series (not hundreds like you, but dozens) of hiale and alfakariensis from Kazakhstan, the Southern Urals and the Saratov region.

IMHO, your words don't really agree...

The dispute becomes simply indecent.
I've seen alfacariensis from Taganrog, and they're even cooler than the Volgograd ones.
I must say again that the description of Alferaki does not refer to alfacariensis, it describes a DIFFERENT species.
You are quite satisfied with this description, and even looking at the lectotype indicated by Grieshuber (and this is undoubtedly alfacariensis), you say that the description is quite suitable for the lectotype.
From all this, we can conclude that you did not work with alfacariensis.
We could stop there.
But one more thing. Hundreds of caught hyale in the vicinity of Volgograd in search of a "wide edge border". That was all there was to it.
When I actually caught alfacariensis, these butterflies were very different from hyale.
About Crimea. Despite the fact that in the absence of hyale, alfacariensis blurred very much, but the recognition remained, and I already wrote about it.
One can only regret that nature did not draw the Latin letter "A" on the wings of alfacariensis, and "H" on the wings of hyale, especially for the "experts"of jaundice.

I'm sorry, but I didn't write anywhere that the Grieshuber lectotype exactly fits Alferaka's description. Grieshuber chose alfakariensis as the lectotype from the Alferaki butterflies, and although it does not match the description, the signs are quantitative (wider-already...), and the commission is unlikely to abandon its decision.
The external distinguishing features you have described also work for Kazakhstan, the Southern Urals, and Saratov, but some of the butterflies are "undefined".
As for what follows, we'll see. In your (typical) area, the external contrast between the species is unmistakable. In Romania, where their difference is proven by bar code, external differences are minimal. Please check your friends on mtDNA - it is very interesting to see what happens, what will be the distance.

IMHO, your words don't really agree...

I did not deal with the genus Colias. But I had to work with alfakariensis/hialeah once.

Because apart from the guk, no one provides facts - but only shows their knowledge in theory.

I provided all the facts a year ago, and with repeated repetitions. Now there is a continuation of the soap opera.
http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...dpost&p=1290103. And look who was in the opponent's team-mates (above from the message in the link).
Bus drove the trolls to the second round...

This post was edited by Wild Yuri - 01.12.2012 16: 13

I provided all the facts a year ago, and with repeated repetitions. Now there is a continuation of the soap opera.
http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...dpost&p=1290103. And look who was in the opponent's team-mates (above from the message in the link).
Bus drove the trolls to the second round...

Yes, there was a beautiful green caterpillar! According to information from the Crimea, the local alfakariensis also has "chial" caterpillars. I am not an enemy of alfakariensis, but, on the contrary, a great lover of him. I just thought that in the discussion someone would give a system of facts. Kuznetsov brought it-honor and praise to him, but this is a local system (however topotypic!). Unsubstantiated contrasting 2 species are reported from Voronezh and Lipetsk. The facts in the literature (including the most recent) are contradictory - the" blurring " of the habitus of alfakariensis and even the caterpillars in the Crimea (although okay, there he is alone and does not need a contrast). In recent Romania, butterflies were successfully divided by mtDNA (approx. 2.5%), but the correlation between bar codes and habit was minimal. For some reason, no one checked the tracks using the bar code. According to some sources, the alpha monophage is found on vyazel, and according to others, it is also found on a couple of legume species. Slovakia has both taxa (with minor external differences), but they are similar in biotopes. Kazakhstan and the Southern Urals seem to have both, but the difference in habit is not as contrasting as in Volgograd, and there is a "zone of uncertainty".

Yes, there was a beautiful green caterpillar!

What a beautiful caterpillar? Attach a photo.
And a comma after yes - why? You remind me of someone...

Yes, there was a beautiful green caterpillar! According to information from the Crimea, the local alfakariensis also has "chial" caterpillars. I am not an enemy of alfakariensis, but, on the contrary, a great lover of him. I just thought that in the discussion someone would give a system of facts. Kuznetsov brought it-honor and praise to him, but this is a local system (however topotypic!). Unsubstantiated contrasting 2 species are reported from Voronezh and Lipetsk. The facts in the literature (including the most recent) are contradictory - the" blurring " of the habitus of alfakariensis and even the caterpillars in the Crimea (although okay, there he is alone and does not need a contrast). In recent Romania, butterflies were successfully divided by mtDNA (approx. 2.5%), but the correlation between bar codes and habit was minimal. Generally speaking, if their butterflies are sorted according to the bar code, then hyale and hyale "f. pseudoalfacariensis" are found in one pile, and alfacariensis and alfacariensis "f. pseudohyale"are found in the other.
For some reason, no one checked the tracks using the bar code. According to some sources, the alpha monophage is found on vyazel, and according to others, it is also found on a couple of legume species. Slovakia has both taxa (with minor external differences), but they are similar in biotopes. Kazakhstan and the Southern Urals seem to have both, but the difference in habit is not as contrasting as in Volgograd, and there is a "zone of uncertainty". I don't know how Korshunov and Kumakov distinguished the Saratovs. He defined Kites, and according to him, two species (hyale and saretensis sensu Korshunov, the latter in Kumakov-Kites is called australis calida) differ only in caterpillars, and in the definition table in Kites 2002 saretensis is not included.

What a beautiful caterpillar? Attach a photo.
And a comma after yes - why? You remind me of someone...

I like you too. But where are your "all the facts"?

I like you too. But where are your "all the facts"?

Well, attach the caterpillar. Maybe enough trolling?

Well, attach the caterpillar. Maybe enough trolling?

http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...dpost&p=1290103
however, why do you always suspect me of trolling? I have a very serious task-to understand the aggregate mat-le. So I dealt with Kumakov-Korshunov. They have identified australis calida for the Saratov region and Kites, but it is not clear by what characteristics, since although Korshunov equated sareptensis with australis (i.e., alfacariensis), he believed that it differs from hyale only in its caterpillars. And in the forum all the time Kumakov-Korshunov is quoted allegedly with the material. I have seen Saratov butterflies sent by Kumakov from the IIEJ, identified by Korshunov as australis - some kind of mud there, as far as I remember. I'll be at the museum on Tuesday, checking and reporting the facts, so as not to mislead the public.

This post was edited by sergenicko - 01.12.2012 19: 01

Vladimir Savchuk does not have a single caterpillar on the site that even remotely resembles the caterpillars of hyale. This question is clear to me.
A few general comments.
From time to time on the forum with a tenacity worthy of better application, similar disputes arise. As soon as the types are poorly distinguished, and off we go. Hybrids, mixed up, subspecies, but Romania, and if Vikramu sage to eat to force, maybe Bavius will turn out, lectotypes, not according to the code.
But in fact, it turns out that no one really worked, and each other's links are rewritten.
"That is why we are witnessing this bitter cataclysm."
Just recently, I had exactly the same nonsense with one view. Word for word. And it took a very long time to pull apart the rubble. And the delirium on this issue continues, and it is not known when it will end.

The caterpillar is available at the link. As for the rest, you are right, and who is going to grow bavius from vikrama,. Talk about series, habits, and definitions. You quote Kumakov-Korshunov without making sure what Korshunov meant by australis callida. Korshunov did not recognize the external differences between these species, although for some reason he equated Australis with sareptensis. It seems that forage plants in Kumakov-Korshunov are listed "according to the literature". Korshunov just asked me to deal with these species in the IIEJ collection, where there are a lot of Kumakov collections, but there is some rubbish in the series that does not meet the definition. There are reliable alfacariensis (with the definition of "hyale"), there are hiale (with the label "australis"), and there are unclear ones, I'll try to figure it out again.

I didn't find the link on the caterpillar.
And Kumakov-Korshunov quoted only in relation to the Krulikovsky meridionalis, which he wrote about when he posted the quote.
The fact that Korshunov did not separate these two species, I wrote about it, and I was almost burned at the stake. It is much more convenient to refer to authority.
In all Russian works over the past twenty years, where alfacariensis is mentioned, there must be a reference either to Staudinger or to Alferaki. This fact alone is enough for me to question the rest.
Museums don't deal with such views. We need to come, see, fish.
If you really wanted to figure it out, you wouldn't be so persistent. It's just that I've been through this before.
Here is a young man from Southern Ukraine. And he has no authority, and he does not want to understand himself, and requires ironclad evidence.

You misunderstand me. I do not persist in denying alfakariensis. As for Volgograd, I have no doubt that your data is unambiguous (and it would be nice to confirm it with a bar code - send the legs to Lukhtanov, he is now actively engaged in this and probably will be interested). As for Kumakov's fees , this is for the information of those who refer to their book without understanding it, and even wonder why there are 2 forage plants? Korshunov never explained to me how he had distinguished the two species in Saratov, and Kumakov didn't seem to know about the Australis at all.

The caterpillar is available at the link.

For what reason exactly. Mr. Troll, look for another site for" food " on the Internet. They are better fed there.

For what reason exactly. Mr. Troll, look for another site for" food " on the Internet. The food is better there.

I followed your link and saw a cute green caterpillar. Perhaps there was an error in the link, and you don't have such a caterpillar - although it is quite relevant for the discussion. I do not troll anyone, but find out "from the literature "(in this case, on the Internet), whose information about the difference between A and X is true, and whose is false. Moreover, completely serious authors make mistakes when referring to Alferaki or Staudinger's description as a description of alfacariensis - and then there is a doubt whether they distinguish. Then he looked at Korshunov, who couldn't tell the difference between these yellow eggs at all. And when I see just the cry of the soul "we are different!" Without a dock-in system, I'm trying to figure out exactly how. The Romanians divided the species according to habit - it turned out that it does not correlate with habit/genitalia. There is an alfacariensis in Crimea, which I would call "f. pseudohyale". Please send me a valid link to your site.

Holivar is straight .

I say wait until mid-January. Tickets have already been purchased, and the place for living is marked. I'll look for a real type of sareptensis in Berlin. Then everything will fall into place. And Alferaki copies are a completely different material, which has nothing to do with the standard one. And the Commission will not have to prove anything - just poke at the Code. Where and how to distinguish lectotypes is clearly written there.

I followed your link and saw a cute green caterpillar. Perhaps there was an error in the link, and you don't have such a caterpillar - although it is quite relevant for the discussion... Please send me a valid link to your site.

Don't mislead the site's members again - this is a crocea caterpillar. Here is the link: http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...dpost&p=1290103. You still didn't want to specify it, despite my double request. Under the photo is written the name of the species, plus the comment Okoem-a above.
And which my site should I link to? Are you trolling again?

This post was edited by Wild Yuri - 01.12.2012 20: 30

Don't mislead the site's members again - this is a crocea caterpillar. Here is the link: http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...dpost&p=1290103. You still didn't want to specify it, despite my double request. Under the photo is written the name of the species, plus the comment Okoem-a above.
And which my site should I link to? Are you trolling again?

Thank you.
I gave you the caterpillar as a copy-copy of your own link. And, of course, he didn't write that she was Hiale or alfakariensis. The discussion moved in a new circle, not because of my doubts, but because of sareptensis, which Korshunov equated with alfakariensis in the following way: since Alferaki in Sarepta flew "hiala, erate and Y", then Y = Australis, besides they write (Higgins, for example) that Australis is yellower than hiale, sareptensis by Alferaki also, such is the chain of arguments. The problem with the Grieshuber lectotype is a separate one. It became interesting to me, especially about those who respect Korshunov's opinion - what do they mean by their alfacariensis and what are the distinguishing features? One Kuznetsov listed them and showed the series to the forum, and they are convincing.

PS By the way, a photo of the caterpillar under discussion is posted on http://babochki-kryma.narod.ru/1_Pieridae/...facariensis.htm (where is your reference), there it is defined as the caterpillar of alfakariensis.
[/quote]

This post was edited by sergenicko - 01.12.2012 21: 13

The scale is saved. Unfortunately, female A "lost" the bursa appendage...
Both butterflies - August 28, 2010, north-eastern outskirts of Kharkiv.

Vladimir, are you sure about the bottom butterfly? My IMHO-the bottom one is hyale. Can I take a look at the imago photo?

Vladimir, are you sure about the bottom butterfly? My IMHO-the bottom one is hyale. Can I take a look at the imago photo?

I'm sure, since I determined it from the tracks.
I can take a photo tomorrow, if necessary.

I'm sure, since I determined it from the tracks.
I can take a photo tomorrow, if necessary.

Yes, please take a photo.

Can I take a look at the imago photo?

Here is the imago.

Colias ?erate, the offspring of a female collected in September.
Above are females, below are males.


Colias ?erate, the offspring of a female collected in October.
Above are females, below are males.

I'm sure, since I determined it from the tracks.
I can take a photo tomorrow, if necessary.

Here's the imago.

Thank you, I figured it out.

Colias erschoffi ALPHERAKY, 1881
C. Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau region, h=2400m, 29.06.2012

Pictures:

Colias_erschoffi.jpg — (278.61к)

On the question of Colias alfacariensis-saretensis

As promised, the photo types.

The genitals will be there later, as soon as I can cook them.

[attachmentid()=163580]

[attachmentid()=163582]

If the second is sareptensis, then it is the phenotype of erate hyaloides.
You can not cook, but just look through a magnifying glass.

If the second is sareptensis, then it is the phenotype of erate hyaloides.
You can not cook, but just look through a magnifying glass.

I think so too . but for scientific accuracy I will cook both

Oh, and it's hard to take pictures of these yolks - they are very timid. And they don't want to open their wings at all.
However, in September 2012, I managed to see two people and get close, and even with a tripod. Basic instinct dulled their vigilance.

09.09.2012, Kazatskoe village, Dnieper peninsula, near the ruins of Prince Trubetskoy's castle. All the same butterflies. They flew from place to place.







As I understand it, this is alfacariensis?

Colias hyale (Linnaeus, 1758)
first generation
Ivanovo region, Ivanovo, Mitrofanovo microdistrict
12.06.2010


31.05.2008


second generation
Ivanovo region, Shuisky district, near the village of Polki, sukhodolny meadow
14.08.2012


23.07.2012


third generation
22.09.2012 Ivanovo region, Shuisky district, vicinity of the village of Krasnoarmeyskoye, sukhodolny meadow


23.09.2012 Ivanovo region, Shuisky district, Sergeyevo village neighborhood, dirt road shoulder


Colias erate (Esper, 1805)
Ivanovo region, Shuisky district, near the village of Klochkovo, sukhodolny meadow

18.08.2011


20.08.2011


24.08.2011

Colias palaeno (Linnaeus, 1761)
Ivanovo region, Shuisky district, near the village of Petrilovo, forest meadow, near the upper swamp
13.06.2010


30.06.2011


Colias myrmidone (Esper, 1781)
first generation
10.06.2012 Ivanovo region, Yuzhsky district, near the village of Mosta, the outskirts of sosnovy bor




second generation
30.07.2012 Ivanovo region, Yuzhsky district, the vicinity of the village of Glushitsy (roadside South-Glushitsy), the outskirts of the dry pine forest







This post was edited by TEMPUS - 26.03.2013 15: 38

Colias erate.Krasnodar Territory, Kanevskaya village, alfalfa field near the village.August 2012.

Pictures:

DSC_0299.JPG — (155.92к)

I then remembered that I have a yellow egg, I caught it as a child, in the Kherson region outside the city near one of the forest belts in the summer at the beginning of the 21st century.



The edge of the front wing is cut to a straight line, the border on the hind wings is pronounced.

In my opinion, very similar to hyale, not?

I am not a specialist in egg yolks, but in my opinion, it does not look like hyale, rather a female erate

this is the classic female Colias erate...

Dear friends, Colias is a genus that is easy to identify in Western Europe. But in Ukraine, I collected a species that hopes to be among the species. Maybe Colias Erate is mixed with Croseus, Myrmydone? I remember that DNA studies find out that Croseus and Erate may be the same thing. But in Western Europe, you won't find Erate. (Not in my country, Holland). That's why we call it the eastern Luzerne butterfly. In the snapshot of Colias species I have questions about.
1. is Colias Croseus Helice (collected in Holland), so I'm sure.
2. Colias Croseus Helice collected in Ukraine. ?
3. Colias Erate with very dark lower wings, Ukraine. ?
4. Colias Erate Ukraine, normal
5. Colias?? with a black blood-lined shoulder blade, Kroatia?
Am I right? and what is the number 5?

I do not know how to put photos to add a link to the picture here.
http://www.henny-van-veenendaal.nl/images/DSC00558.JPG

 

IMHO, 1-4: (what is traditionally called ) C. crocea,
5: (possibly) C. myrmidone.
BTW, two butterflies above number 5 labelled as myrmidone are actually crocea.

5 - erate

Well, it seems that myrmidone is absent from Croatia - my fault. I am also not sure that (what is traditionally called) erate is known from Croatia as well.

Erate seems to have many forms. All other species are similar to each other. I wonder if it's all 100% Erate?

Even small series of 40-50 copies from each point provide answers to many questions.
http://babochki-kavkaza.ru/index.php/pieri...ias-crocea.html
http://babochki-kavkaza.ru/index.php/pieri...lias-erate.html

I don't understand everything here, how I use the online translation service, but the eggs were from 1 plant, 1 or a woman? And all CME imagos are from the same source / parent? If this is the case, then it would be proof that there really are so many forms for Erate.

Ryk, thanks for your reply. A Question to get the info more precise: Did you put a standard colored Colias Erate male and female together in a breedingplace ?

I ask this, because i want to know if the variation in the species Erate is caused by intermixing with other species like Myrmydone, Hyale etc, or really just is a veriation in the species? Or are we looking at more (new) species ?

oh and Ryk, must be fantastic to see them hatch from the Puppa right?