InsectNet forum

jhyatt · by jhyatt » Tue Nov 21, 2023 3:07 pm

Paul K wrote: ↑Tue Nov 21, 2023 1:36 am In some of my drawers I haven’t change them since I started using these in 2015-16. They are pale yellow but so far no pests, I’m not sure if they still do work or I have no pest in my room.

Of course the usable lifetime may vary from drawer to drawer, depending on the rate of air exchange inside the particular drawer. I renewed all of mine about 1 year ago; I guess I'll let them go at least another year, or 2 or 3, unless I find an infestation... and I'll replace it in any drawers where I notice an unusually pale chunk of dichlorvos strip. I suspect there's no valid general answer to my original question.

jh

Jshuey · by Jshuey » Tue Nov 21, 2023 2:02 pm

I put little squares of dichlorvos in about three years ago. And I just saw a dermestid last month. So - about 2+ years? Or less - I assume that you get some time after the strips quit working - right? I use smaller squares than you do - more like 1/4th inch.

I'll be renewing it all over the long weekend this week.

John

teinopalpus · by teinopalpus » Tue Nov 21, 2023 9:26 am

Interesting topic. And not easy one .... abberants catched in nature and "created" by chemical injections or gene manipulation are far ends of whole spectrum. I personally never tried doing aberrants by use of chemicals ( although know process ), but several times "created" abberants "old way" by use of changed humidity or temperature. For some species it is easier way than chemical because some species are very negatively responsive to chemical agents. On other side some species are almost impossible to change without chemicals. But .... artifical use of natural factors is something in between far ends. Then we have also simple rearing specimens in different conditions. In my case usually valid for mountain species reared in my home at 400m atitude. Some species did not change, but some species are more plastic and little changes are visible.
And then .. sorry I cant skip that ... climatic change. Species are moving to new places , also on same place weather is changing and dramatic weather anomalies are present frequently and surely phenotype will react to changed conditions.

So as for me - as long as specimen has correct label information with all relevant data, it is OK. And it is only decision of collector if he find value of such specimen for his study/collection.

Jan

Paul K · by Paul K » Tue Nov 21, 2023 1:36 am

In some of my drawers I haven’t change them since I started using these in 2015-16. They are pale yellow but so far no pests, I’m not sure if they still do work or I have no pest in my room.

jhyatt · by jhyatt » Mon Nov 20, 2023 8:53 pm

I use dichlorvos strips ("No-pest strips") in my lep collection. I cut the large yellow slabs one can purchase into roughly 1/2" squares and pin one in each Cornell drawer. This seems to work well - I've had no infestations since I started using this material years and years ago.

But I wonder how one can tell when the fumigant is exhausted and should be replaced. I've been doing this when the originally deep yellow squares fade to a very pale yellow color. This takes about 3-4 years in a drawer of average tightness, in my experience.

Am I being risky and should be replacing them more often? Or am I leaving money on the table by replacing them too frequently? Does anyone have any actual data on the useful lifetime of dichlorvos strips?

Cheers,
jh

adamcotton · by adamcotton » Mon Nov 20, 2023 8:34 pm

There is some discussion whether a new taxon based purely on COI sequence constitutes 'description in words' under the ICZN Code or not when naming it. Some argue that the letters are abbreviations of words, whereas others say these alone should not count as a description 'in words'.

I think it is desirable to find morphological as well as sequence differences when naming something.

Adam.

livingplanet3 · by livingplanet3 » Mon Nov 20, 2023 6:53 pm

Twotails wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2023 6:48 pm Hi, Anyone know what this is. Realise image is a bit blurry and hopefully I have attached it to this message....

It's the caterpillar of a geometrid moth, commonly called an "inchworm" -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometer_moth

https://bugguide.net/node/view/188

These caterpillars usually mimic twigs of the plants they feed on, to conceal themselves from predators such as birds.

Twotails · by Twotails » Mon Nov 20, 2023 6:48 pm

Hi, Anyone know what this is. Realise image is a bit blurry and hopefully I have attached it to this message.

Chuck · by Chuck » Mon Nov 20, 2023 6:42 pm

Cabintom wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2023 1:57 pm If you consistently see a, say, 1.2 or 1.3% difference between the barcodes of specimens from two populations (or forms, or what-have-you) and there are no barcodes "filling the gap", you likely have two separate species on your hands.

Given that one could well argue that COI is better at differentiation than morphological comparisions it seems this gap is more reliable. Given that, I've read several papers lately that show COI for broad-ranging taxa that are broken into clades (or some such) and so long as it exceeds 1.2% (or pick a number) then Joe Anybody could jump and describe dozens of new species based on the gap alone.

58chevy · by 58chevy » Mon Nov 20, 2023 5:54 pm

More...

58chevy · by 58chevy » Mon Nov 20, 2023 5:51 pm

These are not recent captures, but I thought I'd throw in a few more cerambycids after seeing Mike H's call for more beetles. All are from USA, mostly TX, AZ, FL. If you're interested in IDs, let me know & I'll post them after Thanksgiving.

Cabintom · by Cabintom » Mon Nov 20, 2023 1:57 pm

With COI, I like the concept of "barcode gap". If you consistently see a, say, 1.2 or 1.3% difference between the barcodes of specimens from two populations (or forms, or what-have-you) and there are no barcodes "filling the gap", you likely have two separate species on your hands. Personally, I'd also want to support the barcode hypothesis with concrete morphological and/or biogeographical evidence.

I also like Klee Diagrams, but that may be because I'm not so interested in proposed evolutionary lineages (and as Adam has pointed out, sometimes the different trees conflict with each other) and more interested in evidence supporting the existence of separate species.

Chuck · by Chuck » Mon Nov 20, 2023 12:41 pm

wollastoni wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2023 10:47 am Trehopr1 < the "strange" Agrias you see on the market are not aberrations or man-made aberration. They are man-made hybrids from the Peruvian Agrias farms.

I highly recommend the new book of Philippe Floquet who illustrates all Agrias natural forms and all know Agrias hybrids : https://marketplace.insectnet.com/item/ ... embre-2023

Interesting. With so many potential crosses, the possibilities are almost endless.

I wonder if it will go the way of freshwater Amazon Anglelfish (Scalare)- so much crossing and thousands of generations later, the standard fish is a sad comparison to the wild fish; oddball morphs have come and gone, some because the resulting crosses produced fish that had too many problems. Now, the real enthusiasts are after what was imported 50 years ago- wild caught fish. I see this too in Papilio ulysses and other flashy species that have been bred on farms now for 30 years: generic, look-alike specimens that don't have the size nor variation of the wild butterflies.

wollastoni · by wollastoni » Mon Nov 20, 2023 10:47 am

Trehopr1 < the "strange" Agrias you see on the market are not aberrations or man-made aberration. They are man-made hybrids from the Peruvian Agrias farms.

I highly recommend the new book of Philippe Floquet who illustrates all Agrias natural forms and all known Agrias hybrids : https://marketplace.insectnet.com/item/ ... embre-2023

Trehopr1 · by Trehopr1 » Sat Nov 18, 2023 10:33 pm

I personally MARVEL at the one-of-a-kind aberrations produced by the very few capable sellers out there. The swallowtails that I have seen are absolutely "out of this world" and REALLY cannot be mistaken for anything natural occurring.

With the lone exception of the genus Agrias most singular species produced of Nymphalidae are also pretty incredible and yet, are readily discernible from anything natural occurring.

All of these "specialty pieces" still tend to sell on the high side of pricing because they are a one-of-a-kind's and only a niche market of collectors out there can afford them.

However, I humbly believe that Agrias aberrations are the one subject group that is truly oversaturated in this regard....
The lines have truly become blurred between what is a hybridization of two species and what has been produced via chemical alteration. One now finds that even amongst some of the standard hybridized stock there are (singular) individuals which will stand out from all the others.

Are these singular one-off variations of a hybridized species (just that) or are a few select pupae pulled and treated chemically so as to produce a small assortment to garner higher pricing ?

It's really become challenging with Agrias to know what it is you're getting with these altered specimens but, under MOST circumstances they are obviously not natural occurring.

So, I don't necessarily see the harm in anyone producing these incredible creatures because I do believe that most of us who are informed and intelligent about this hobby would never mistake 98% of these butterflies as anything from the NATURAL world.

As with any other hobby or passion one must stay informed, be wise, be questioning, and above all else NEVER allow yourself to be gullible about something which just doesn't seem right.

Natural occurring aberrations will always be held in high regard because of what they are and by way of those who collected them. If you make such a unique discovery yourself try to tell some fellow collectors about it and if nothing else at least place a special note of data alongside it or with it to indicate pertinent information.

Chuck · by Chuck » Sat Nov 18, 2023 9:24 pm

Fraud is probably the second oldest profession. It is not going away. And, so long as the offered specimens are not described as natural aberrations the ad is not fraudulent. "Let the buyer beware."

Some pretty amazing aberrations have been made by scientists with gene editing CRISPR. How long until that's available on Amazon for under $100? Then wait to see what happens.

If you must have a collectible which is at risk for fraud, the only things you can do are (1) become an expert or (2) have a reliable source. If it's too cheap to be true, it probably is.

MikeH · by MikeH » Sat Nov 18, 2023 8:47 pm

Molorchus longicollis from Siskiyou Co. CA

Grammoptera molybdica from Siskiyou Co. CA

Pseudastylopsis nebulosus from Siskiyou Co. CA

Toxoleptura vexatrix from Siskiyou Co. CA

MikeH · by MikeH » Sat Nov 18, 2023 8:37 pm

Xestoleptura tibialis from Granite Co. MT

Pogonocherus mixtus from Jefferson Co. CO

Acanthocinus spectabilis from Jefferson Co. CO

MikeH · by MikeH » Sat Nov 18, 2023 8:29 pm

Stenosphenus sobrius from Pima Co. AZ

Dectus tetanus from Pima Co. AZ

Stenelaphus alienus from Pima Co. AZ

Aneflomorpha cazieri from Santa Cruz Co. AZ

Muscidora tumacacorii from Santa Cruz Co. AZ

Dylobolus rotundicollis from Santa Cruz Co. AZ

MikeH · by MikeH » Sat Nov 18, 2023 8:09 pm

Aneflomorpha sp. from Gila Co. AZ

InsectNet forum

InsectNet forum

Re: Fumigant Lifetime

Re: Fumigant Lifetime

Re: Enough already, with the fake aberrations

Re: Fumigant Lifetime

Fumigant Lifetime

Re: How Genetic studies reveal new relationships, species

Re: U known

U known

Re: How Genetic studies reveal new relationships, species

USA Cerambycidae2

USA Cerambycidae

Re: How Genetic studies reveal new relationships, species

Re: Enough already, with the fake aberrations

Re: Enough already, with the fake aberrations

Re: Enough already, with the fake aberrations

Re: Enough already, with the fake aberrations

Re: New Cerambycidae

Re: New Cerambycidae

Re: New Cerambycidae

Re: New Cerambycidae