Euthalia anosa balina
A female & two males from Bali Indonesia

I've done it, I can't recall why, but the pin probably needs removed, and for that, I had to soften the area around the pin and use pliers to hold the pin,
and tweezers to push the body off, It worked 99% of the time without a problem.

Nice looking example. Looking more closely at your photograph it looks to be about 245mm. Your right forewing doesn't exactly line up underneath the zero (0).

This is a phenomenal species of moth which is probably most notable for its sheer wing expanse. Males typically fall (within the size range) of somewhere between 8 (1/2) and 10 inches wingspan when the trailing edge of the forewings are perpendicular to the body.

Females (start) at about the 10-in wingspan on up to 11 1/2 +. Their bodies tend to be heftier in build and because they carry the eggs their wingspan is naturally bigger for more lift.

The species seems to be fairly available. Specimens with an honest wingspan of 10 inches or more can get (very pricey) because of course, everyone wants the biggest example they can find. I have seen at least a dozen present in private collections here in the US but, most were (males).

The largest example that I have ever seen (personally) was a very impressive female measuring just over 11 (1/4) inches in the collection of Hermann Strecker.

If anyone does own a larger example than the specimen measured by Guinness; then I doubt that they would advertise it.

Some people are very reserved about the things that they own and simply don't feel the need to advertise (or bring attention to themselves) over any outstanding things they have acquired.

When putting a pinned lep into a riker mount are there any tips or suggestions that I should be aware of? Any help will be greatly appreciated...thanks.

I wonder if anyone has a larger one?
I bought this one once in the 70's at an insect fair for relatively little money. I think the butterfly is not rare.
https://e1.pcloud.link/publink/show?cod ... EDbB711axX

Joachim

kevinkk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 04, 2023 4:39 pm ..., seemed a little obsessive, ... collector had what must have been
thousands of Colias, ...

I'm struggling to think of something significant that was accomplished by anyone who was NOT obsessive.

As for a series of thousands...

The North American Lycaenid guys did some genetic analysis, and turned the field guides upside down. Now they're scrambling to find fairly common blues from fairly common locations; nobody had bothered to collect them because they were, for a century, just common blues.

I've caught, and raised, thousands of Callosamia promethea. So many would come to the lights that I'd take them around the dark side of the house and toss them into the forest, hoping they'd go away. I retained only a few that stood out as brilliant or different. Then one day I pulled out my Callosamia drawer- which held only a half dozen pair- and stopped: THAT is not promethea, that's angulifera. And I looked at the others- that wasn't the only angulifera specimen! So a month ago this came back to me, along with the fact that Saturnids have disappeared, so I dug out my papered specimens and sure enough, those I had from 1980s are ALL promethea. Unfortunately in a way, the papered specimens I pulled out were those that had been forgotten when I'd given away thousands of specimens to Cornell only three months ago. And in what I donated, I know for a fact that there were promethea...but I don't know if there were angulifera. Besides which I also have specimens I can't tell if they are promethea or angulifera, and all date within the past decade or so; the older ones are all promethea. So now I have to wait for Cornell grad students to set all those to figure out what the heck happened to promethea & angulifera in my area.

My research on Tiger Swallowtails in NY has well demonstrated the need for series. In examining three private collections from 1970s-1980s with 14,000 and 6,000 and 3,000 specimens respectively, each collection held but a dozen Tiger Swallowtails. Why? Because they were just Papilio glaucus, they were common. And not just private collections- institutional collections suffer the same hole. And the geneticists also were missing test specimens from NY/ PA/ CT, but had plenty from VA and MI. That's now taken care of.

My field work in 2022 yielded 84 local specimens. Half were frozen and went to the geneticists. The other half were set for morphological analysis. And what that revealed caused me to take my 2021 unpublished paper and throw it away. A series demonstrates consistency, but also outliers; add in the specimens I got in KY and PA and it becomes clear that oft-published morphological identifiers are not at all reliable.

So yes, there are a number of reasons to have a series. I never bought into keeping series, but I am a firm believer now.

A long read Eurytides- interesting article. Clearly virtually every collector knows National Parks are off limits, as are state parks.
Interesting individuals as well, seemed a little obsessive, I recall seeing a program where a collector had what must have been
thousands of Colias, a single species, just case after case and on, of course, that was done legally, the point of interest was the
amount of animals . Seemed a bit pointless to me, having thousands of the same butterfly, and that's all he collected, there was
nothing else, at least they didn't show so on the interview.

https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-a ... s-passion/

You are thinking of Mr. R. Skalski.

Papilio_indra wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 1:35 am P. indra kaibabensis is protected within the boundaries of Grand Canyon National Park, along with all of the other species of Lepidoptera within the park. I believe that outside of the park it is not protected.

That's my understanding of the situation as well. I seem to recall reading a news story some years ago about someone being prosecuted for selling P. indra kaibabensis specimens, but don't know if it was ever proven that they were actually collected in GCNP. It seems that the logic was that, because the majority of this subspecies' range is apparently within the park's boundaries, the authorities assumed that the specimens were collected there. Obviously though, this wouldn't necessarily have been the case, as undoubtedly, this ssp. ranges outside the park's borders to some extent. Also - surely someone has captive-bred kaibabensis by now? If anyone can elaborate on the above comments, I'd be interested to hear. I'm not very knowledgeable about kaibabensis, or any of the other ssp. of indra, for that matter.

As far as butterflies flying over water, I've never forgotten the monarch I saw out whale watching in Monterey, the butterfly was flying low, hit the water, and I figured- that butterfly is finished- but it pulled itself out of the water and continued on...west

adamcotton wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:41 pm

Indeed, even a few kilometres can isolate species or subspecies, even for normally relatively strong fliers. I suppose they don't generally want to fly out to sea. Having said that, I seem to remember there are old records of 'migrations' over water for some species.

Adam.

Throughout the Pacific it's very common to see Euploea flying around far out to sea. One million Danaus plexippus fly over 100km of Lake Ontario every year from Ontario CA to NY during the migration. And I've heard of various species, including Sphingidae, that sometimes can be found in Britain, so they must fly over some distance of water.

Papilio though don't seem to be regular distance flyers. Ornithoptera priamus urvilleanus hasn't been discovered to make the jump from Guadalcanal to Makira, and they are pretty strong fliers with great ability to sail on the winds.

Ultimately, it probably is mis-labeling. I wonder who wants to go to Bougainville and do a survey.

P. indra kaibabensis is protected within the boundaries of Grand Canyon National Park, along with all of the other species of Lepidoptera within the park. I believe that outside of the park it is not protected.

Perhaps, if these were old IFTA specimens, they got straatmani from a dealer in the Solomons and put PNG data on them, it wouldn't surprise me, but that's pure speculation.

Chuck wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:15 pm That said, I did find a new ssp of Satyrid in Solomon Islands, separated by only a few KM from a larger island.

Indeed, even a few kilometres can isolate species or subspecies, even for normally relatively strong fliers. I suppose they don't generally want to fly out to sea. Having said that, I seem to remember there are old records of 'migrations' over water for some species.

Adam.

eurytides wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:27 pm Papilio ponceana is the new name.

I was going to point out the same name change. This has been removed from CITES appendix I because it is officially considered as extinct in the USA, which asked for it to be listed.

eurytides wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:27 pm Also, is P. indra kaibabensis protected?

I seem to remember it is, someone here can confirm. I suppose it is State rather than Federal protection?

Adam.

Papilio ponceana is the new name. Also, is P. indra kaibabensis protected?

adamcotton wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 9:49 pm Sadly, I suspect that the data is erroneous, for any one of many reasons.

Adam.

Occam's Razor would suggest that.

That said, I did find a new ssp of Satyrid in Solomon Islands, separated by only a few KM from a larger island.

And Bougainville's shoreline is nice low jungle, while the mountains rise to 13,000 ft. So there would be several plausible scenarios.

The more I learn the more I realize that nothing is concrete, and the more ignorant I feel.

Sadly, I suspect that the data is erroneous, for any one of many reasons.

Adam.

Chuck wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:01 pm The only way I can see C hercules measuring that span is if the wingtip-to-wingtip span was maximized by FW angles way down.

Yes, it is quite likely that Gardiner's measurement was in a natural position, since his book is about rearing live silkmoths.

Chuck wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:01 pm I suppose that's why the more serious papers now measure FW along the leading edge.

The generally accepted measurement is from the joint at the base of the forewing to the farthest point at the apex in a straight line, not along the costal edge of the wing.

Adam.

chrisw wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:54 pm Chuck this is what is on the data labels for each.

P. t. straatmani Kieta, North Solomon Province, PNG

P. t. toboroi Burka Island, North Solomon Province, PNG

That's interesting! Very!

It's "Buka" Island. "North Solomon Province" is the old name for Bougainville, Buka, and other small islands.

Kieta is on the east coast of Bougainville Island, about 1/3 of the way up the island from Solomon Islands. If you specimen label is correct, and certainly it looks like ssp straatmani, I'm shocked that the ssp would be on Bougainville at all.

Buka Island is off the NW tip of Bougainville. You can almost throw a stone from Buka to Bougainville. So if the labels are correct, it's also surprising that little Buka Passage could separate the two ssp. Or, that both ssp occur on Bougainville.