New Papilio described today

[JVCalhoun]

I don't even bother with ID labels on most specimens these days. That's what they have graduate students for, generating soon-to-be-outdated specimen labels.

I agree. I haven't attempted to affix ID labels to specimens in many years -- things change much too quickly! Instead, I place a "drawer label" at the head of each series, as in the photo below. They are easy to generate and can be changed out as needed. Even museums don't use specimen ID labels anymore, as labeled unit trays serve that purpose. Due to space constraints, I don't personally use unit trays, but I manage to keep each series separated, so there is no confusion about what specimens go with each label. I just hope that whomever processes my collection at a museum down the road will keep the IDs straight, but I have no control over that. That being said, a lack of staff at many museums often means that incoming collections are often kept in their original drawers, which are inserted into empty spaces in their compactors. It sometimes takes many years to integrate those specimens into their collections, if that happens at all.

John

download/file.php?mode=view&id=4166

[Chuck]

@john it would be interesting to make a list of suspect taxa. I’ve meant to go through Clark and Clark and start there, some has been debunked, but some have never been mentioned again.

Pavulaans recent paper.

My apparent different flights

There’s a population of summer wide-abdominal stripe in HNF, there’s an odd group in coastal Texas.

Whether taxa, races, or populations, there’s a bunch of them that might be interesting to investigate

[adamcotton]

Sorry for my ignorance, but where is 'HNF'?

Adam.

[Chuck]

Sorry for my ignorance, but where is 'HNF'?

Adam.

My apologies. Hoosier National Forest, in the state Indiana. I’ll try to not do that again.

[JVCalhoun]

Yes, Chuck, I think that would be a worthy study, that's for sure. But I personally don't want to wade into those tall weeds. I have some other projects in the pipeline, which will keep me busy for the foreseeable future.

I was also wondering about "HNF!"

[Chuck]

I'm being inundated with "identify this!" requests. There are some interesting groups of Tigers out there for sure; of course, some of the images are virtually useless.

It just shows how little we know about Tiger Swallowtails. I hope it motivates people to start investigating and keeping records (oh, and sharing them.)

[JVCalhoun]

I was afraid that would happen. I referred one to you on iNat from the Ithaca area, sorry about that. This always happens when something new is described, as people attempt to get a "feel" for the species. In this case, it will be tough, but the observation/collection date should help quite a bit. I've looked at the records from Maine, but many photos are poor and don't show enough detail. The date is most helpful, and the fact that "true" glaucus is extremely rare there certainly helps. Anything fresh in late June and July in the southern half of the state is almost surely solstitius. Things get more complicated after that, as stray glaucus and bizarre hybrids can turn up. Farther north, canadensis can still be around into August, though they are extremely worn females. I caught such a female in central Maine on 20 August 2020, which is consistent with canadensis. It was a surprising find.

[Chuck]

John, don't be sorry some interesting things have popped up which muddy the water even more. It's very interesting, and something to keep on my radar.

Handheld COI analysis machines already exist, but they're $4000. Maybe in ten years we will be able to buy pocket sized full-DNA analysis machines for $50 at Walmart. That would make life a lot simpler.

I suspect the eastern Tiger taxonomy is going to look a lot like European humans but more complex. There are more Papilio in my county than there were combined H neanderthal and H sapiens combined, so mobility and quantity points to more complexity. We could find oddball "MST"-like races in odd places, like the Basque. And of course various tribes that have great mobility, and (as with both Europeans and Tigers) range changes due to a variety of factors. And all this plus hybridization. "I'm French!" means nothing more than "I'm a citizen of France"; taxonomically it doesn't mean much anymore, if it ever did. There may be more pure Tigers of sorts, like Tyroleans and Hugonauts, but they too may be just less mixed.

[JVCalhoun]

These taxa likely diverged relatively recently and are still in the process of speciation, making it very difficult to segregate them. Unfortunately, COI analysis is often insufficient. Genomic profiles are more thorough, but expensive, and there are few reputable labs capable of conducting and analyzing such tests. I hope this changes as improved methods emerge.

[Chuck]

These taxa likely diverged relatively recently and are still in the process of speciation,

What I'm trying to wrap my head around is that 200,000+ years of "relatively recently." During that period (ice ages, specifically) these taxa (and I'll defer to only canadensis and glaucus to keep it simple) during which they were repeated pushed south, then crawled back north. I'd think the hybridization would have been very high. And, perhaps reflecting on bjorkae, solstitius and others, that's why we have potentially so many different taxa in microclimates.

I'd like to know any hearsay, conjecture, or published data on the topic.

There is another issue: I have two authorities, one says glaucus is NOT univoltine, and another that says it is. Both refer to published research. Interesting, and highly significant which is correct.

[adamcotton]

There is another issue: I have two authorities, one says glaucus is NOT univoltine, and another that says it is. Both refer to published research. Interesting, and highly significant which is correct.

I am not sure which 'authorities' you are talking about since you didn't say, but perhaps P. glaucus is univoltine in northern areas and bi- or multivoltine in the south.

Adam.

[Chuck]

I am not sure which 'authorities' you are talking about since you didn't say, but perhaps P. glaucus is univoltine in northern areas and bi- or multivoltine in the south.

Adam.

That's been the long-claimed situation. And one expert says that is indeed the case, and one says no, no glaucus are univoltine (e.g., if it's univoltine it's not glaucus.)

[eurytides]

For obligate univoltine organisms, they diapause no matter what and only develop into adults after exposure to cold as pupae.

For organisms with facultative voltinism (which glaucus is, and I don’t think this is disputed), whether a pupa hibernates or develops directly into an adult depends on daylight experienced as late instar larvae. At the northern range limit of glaucus, some larvae will experience enough daylight hours to trigger diapause and some will not. That seems logical to me. I think past claims that all glaucus had to be at least bivoltine was due to lack of careful study. If glaucus in the north were always bivoltine, how can it be that pupae from the summer generation know that short days means they should diapause but pupae from the spring generation don’t? They don’t have a calendar. All they have is physiology, and that physiologic response to day length should be the same no matter what generation the individual is from. So if a summer generation pupa can be triggered to diapause, so can a spring generation pupa (i.e. univoltine).

[eurytides]

So for example, let’s say you have a bunch of glaucus eggs laid between June 1 and June 30 and they take 6 weeks to finish the larval stage. Eggs laid early will be pupating middle of July, and they might get enough day light to decide to develop into a second generation.

Eggs laid later from that same flight, they will be pupating middle of August. If they develop into adults, that’s a genetic dead end because none of their offspring will have enough time to finish growing and pupating. Indeed, that’s probably the case sometimes. But some of those larvae will probably experience short enough days that they will diapause rather in develop into adults. I.e. they not are obligated to be bivoltine. The pupae from the eggs laid by tigers in this single flight is just as the cusp of 1 vs 2 generations and some will only have enough time for one generation before experiencing the environmental triggers that steer them toward diapause.

[Chuck]

ow can it be that pupae from the summer generation know that short days means they should diapause but pupae from the spring generation don’t? They don’t have a calendar. All they have is physiology,

To be heretical, I'd say- they don't have a clock but know enough that the spring flight looks more like canadensis, and the summer flight doesn't. So what's the difference between that and whatever physiological element that controls dipause? Further, that it has been demonstrated that in some cases dipause is linked to daylight hours, but it hasn't been demonstrated in all cases (you'll never prove ALL cases).

If glaucus in the north were always bivoltine, how can it be that pupae from the summer generation know that short days means they should diapause but pupae from the spring generation don’t?

Without much arguing "north", isn't that what glaucus does (virtually?) everywhere? Summer generation knows it needs to dipause, spring generation doesn't dipause.

In the "far north" if glaucus is univoltine, somehow it knows to be so.

In the "far north" if there is one generation of glaucus, first I'd segue and ask well is that the Spring Form or the summer flight?

If it's Spring Form in NY, it sure does have enough time for a second generation; where is it? And yet, in nearby Toronto area, there is no Spring Form, just the summer flight. Kinda odd that if both are glaucus, and both univoltine, one emerges in Spring and one emerges in Summer (though not unpresedented, Anax junius does it.)

[jhyatt]

This discussion bringns to mind E. marcellus. Here in the southern Appalachians it is triple brooded: A short tailed spring brood, a longer-tailed summer brood, and a scarce, very long tailed and darker late summer/fall brood. Are the late season specimens a genetic dead end, or do their ova overwinter? If so, which form (or forms) result from these eggs? And do some of the spring variety's offspring emerge the next spring, and some the next summer or fall, looking quite different from their parents? Do the summer ones' offspring emerge as spring, summer, fall (or both, or all 3), varieties? Has this situation been studied? I've always wondered..

jh

[eurytides]

ow can it be that pupae from the summer generation know that short days means they should diapause but pupae from the spring generation don’t? They don’t have a calendar. All they have is physiology,

To be heretical, I'd say- they don't have a clock but know enough that the spring flight looks more like canadensis, and the summer flight doesn't. So what's the difference between that and whatever physiological element that controls dipause? Further, that it has been demonstrated that in some cases dipause is linked to daylight hours, but it hasn't been demonstrated in all cases (you'll never prove ALL cases).

If glaucus in the north were always bivoltine, how can it be that pupae from the summer generation know that short days means they should diapause but pupae from the spring generation don’t?

Without much arguing "north", isn't that what glaucus does (virtually?) everywhere? Summer generation knows it needs to dipause, spring generation doesn't dipause.

In the "far north" if glaucus is univoltine, somehow it knows to be so.

In the "far north" if there is one generation of glaucus, first I'd segue and ask well is that the Spring Form or the summer flight?

If it's Spring Form in NY, it sure does have enough time for a second generation; where is it? And yet, in nearby Toronto area, there is no Spring Form, just the summer flight. Kinda odd that if both are glaucus, and both univoltine, one emerges in Spring and one emerges in Summer (though not unpresedented, Anax junius does it.)

The spring flight looks like canadensis and the summer flight doesn't. But this isn't because the insects "know" or make a conscious decision. The reason they look different is because one came out of a pupa after 10-14 days while the other stayed in a pupa and was exposed to cold temperatures for several months. It's a well known phenomenon that temperature exposure for diapausing pupae can alter their phenotype. Think about the shocked pupae that produce "fletcheri."

I'm not saying in the far north there is ONLY one generation. I'm saying that it's on the cusp of 1 vs 2 generations, so both might occur. Some eggs are laid earlier or develop faster due to genetic variation and can squeeze in two broods. Others cannot, and just have 1 brood. You are right, I have no idea if this is the same spring from you are seeing in your neck of the woods. But recall that Julian/Chris did genetic work on tigers from Essex Co. in Ontario and they came out glaucus (and different from MST and canadensis). It's possible that these are actually something else but just so close to glaucus genetically that they can't be teased out with the particular genetic tools that were used.

I have no experience collecting in Toronto, but in Hamilton which is about an our west and just south, we have glaucus that comes out in May and June and a second brood of tigers that can be seen in August. I have caught wild fresh specimens from August as well as raised them on tuliptree (from eggs in the spring that lead to a second generation the same year). Having said that, the August specimens are not numerous. So, I think that's why Chris suggested that they can occasionally fit two broods in, but a fair number of the tigers that emerge in spring just diapause and come out next spring. The ones that fly in August, I've never raised them so I have no idea if they are a genetic dead end or if their progeny have time to finish eating and pupate. It could be the case that they just always occur in steady-state small numbers due to selection pressure.

[Chuck]

JHyatt IIRC Adam said in the Marcellus thread that any flight can become any of the three flights the following year. Where cecropia has two flights it is the same situation.

Late flying individuals of most any species that overwinters as pupae have a loss of survival. The late August and early September P solstitius lay eggs that cannot possibly reach the pupation stage. Bad luck.

Even those females that eclose August 1st- and it’s a high number- what of their offspring? And sometimes we have a mass emergence of Tigers (I presume solstitius) in mid August. What of their offspring? They’re all pupating at the end of September, when the trees are well turning and likely not very nutritious. Makes no sense.

[adamcotton]

Are the late season specimens a genetic dead end, or do their ova overwinter?

I very much doubt that the ova will overwinter. They will hatch and either go through to produce small size pupae or die as larvae.

Adam.

[bobw]

I reared glaucus here in the UK for a few years many years ago, which I reeared on Ash, although I don't know which form they were. I always got a spring brood which produced a summer brood in August. A small number of these went into diapause which produced the following year's spring brood, but about 80% of them emerged and produced eggs which were only half grown larvae by the time there were no leaves left in October.

On the subject of daylength, we have a species Polygonia c-album which has a summer form called f. hutchinsoni which produces a second generation and looks quite different from the typical form which will hibernate as an adult. I once collected some larvae from a f. hutchinsoni and reared them indoors under a long daylength, these produced further f. hutchinsoni individuals in September. I think this proves that in this species at least, daylenth is the only factor affecting diapause. Maybe your C. interrogationis behaves the same.