A parade of Catocala moths

[Chuck]

The Catocala olivia are stunning.

Vernon, I didn't realize you were the source of Catocala atocala...I always smile when I read that. Tennent tried Polyura thane; the stuffed shirt British reviewers couldn't figure out what he was up to (kinda obvious, to me) but knew he was up to something with that name, so rebuffed his naming and it never became.

[vabrou]

Chuck,
Reminds me when in 2003 I submitted a manuscript, a generic revision of the moth genus Baileya, which included describing two new species of moths. One of those proposed names was Baileya coonassi. That name was chosen because the new species was most common in an area across southern Louisiana in which the human population of Canadian acadians emigrated to and settled long ago in Louisiana. That local population proudly refer to themselves as coonasses, but not any coonass, but Registered Coon Asses These RCAs can be found working throughout the oil, gas, heavy construction, fishng industry and numerous areas of the workforce. You may find this attached emblem and similar ones on hardhats, tool boxes and vehicle bumpers, etc. These peoples are proud to be known and referred to as RCAs.

But alas, the ignorant elitist good old boy network from the New England area not knowing any better assumed it was a derogatory term and rejected it. So I changed it to the Baileya acadiana Brou, which still referred to the same population of humans. The other new species name I proposed was Baileya ellessyoo Brou. That name was derived from a rhyme of the acronym of my Alma Mater, Louisiana State University Medical Center, the acronym (LSU).

That 2003 freely accessible generic revision (pdf) is available at this link: https://www.academia.edu/20406808/TWO_N ... TATES?sm=b

Vernon

[Chuck]

I proposed to name a species "tennentisapennis" but it didn't even make it to the elitist New Englanders, I was threatened with death.

I wonder if "berniewasaloonis" would have gone over better.

I also proposed "xiwangrex" in honor of a Canadian colleague researcher, but that got nixed.

Hmmm..."gypsymothus" would be a good try. Catocala gypsymothus.

Nobody has a sense of humor anymore.

[vabrou]

Here is another one I described Catocala charlottae Brou, 1988, male & female illustrated here. The species name I chose was charlottae after my wife Charlotte Dozar Brou. The good quality 1988 TYPE series consisted of 100 males and 64 females. This small yellow hindwing species has genitalia similar in appearance and structure to numerous other smaller Catocala species.

Later in 2003 I published a brief one page species account. In that account I remarked "Catocala charlottae also has a very similar resemblance to Catocala praeclara Grt & Rob. except that charlottae lacks the black basal dash found in C. praeclara. Some lepidopterist have questioned it's species status because of the similarity in appearance of charlottae and praeclara. It is possible that charlottae could be a geographically consistent variation of praeclara, perhaps as a result of the 'founder effect', though charlottae occurs eastwardly through the states of Mississippi, Alabama, and into Florida to the Atlantic coastline, also without basal dashes. The forewing color of praeclara can vary over it's considerable eastern USA range from a pastel green sheen to violet tinted in appearance. Here in Louisiana at the TYPE locality, the forewing ground color of charlottae is consistently silver-gray in appearance, never once green or purple, and the basal dash attribute occurs in only 3 adults in a total sample size of n = 1,054 adults (that is statistically insignificant to base a subspecies upon).

The current group of 'experts' have created two subspecies under C. praeclara, one (which is from Canada), the other is C. p. charlottae. But, there is no justification that either of these two subspecies are indeed subspecies of anything. The reason this happened is that the current-day batch of authors don't have a better place to put these two related species names. After-all, taxonomy 'waxes and wane's according to whomever is the current day batch of book authors. I have no doubt, that in the future this subspecies designation will revert back to full species status. Why not, over time most every thing else has?

[Trehopr1]

Thank you very much Vernon for showing us the parade of smaller species which you have been able to get (in some numbers) in Louisiana. Living in a rural region with plenty of "natural" tracts of native trees and vegetation certainly produces a pallete of species which are not to be seen at least in the upper Midwest where I live (Illinois). Some of these could be native to only the Gulf States region....

Your specimens certainly look very "minty" so the en-masse collecting that you do combined with the ULTIMATE knockdown agent has provided you with some incredible personal series of otherwise hard to find species.

[vabrou]

what is pair on right and pair on left? I don't know

[vabrou]

Here are Catocala muliercula and two very different looking aberrants, all captured at the very same location, my home St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana

[bobw]

what is pair on right and pair on left? I don't know

What are the wingspans? I assume they were all collected at your home...

[58chevy]

Here are a few Catocalas that need ID. My guesses are (top to bottom):
epione
coccinata
illecta
All were collected in Wood Co. (NE Texas).
Wingspans are all roughly 58mm.

[Trehopr1]

Hello 58chevy,

I concur with your identifications.

C epione
C. illecta
C. coccinata

[58chevy]

Thanks, Trehopr

[Trehopr1]

I have been having a measure of luck as of late. In my
immediate area there seems to be a good hatch going
on of the Joined Underwing (Catocala junctura).

The species is one of our salmon colored ones and
it typically measures at the outspread wings between
76 and 81mm. Females are usually the "somewhat"
larger examples visually. The species was first described
by Francis Walker in 1858.

This is a species which is said to be typically found near
water (riverine areas especially) where its larval foodplants
willow and cottonwood grow plentifully.

Catocala juctura (female / 81mm)


Whereas, most catocala are captured by use of Merc.Vap.
lighting or sugaring/baiting methods; I occasionally hunt
for these gorgeous moths in the daytime. It is a challenge
of a kind which sharpens the senses. One must approach
trees stealthily and look for a disruptive pattern on the bark.
Sometimes, its just a funny-looking piece of bark but, if
luck is with you then it will instead be one of natures "fair
damsels of the night".

Here I am posting 4 of my latest removals from the spreading
boards. So far, another 10 await removal. Fresh captures like
these require about a month of proper "drying" time before
removal.

Catocala junctura (male / 77mm)


I do my very best to present my specimens in a full-flight
"startled" posture ---- as if just taking-off from the shaded
side of some tree trunk or overhanging eave.

Subtleties in preparation such as thrust-out forelegs, symmetrical
attentive antennae, and hindlegs hanging-back in the "rush of the
breeze" lend an sense of life ----at the moment of takeoff.

Catocala junctura (female / 79mm)


Catocala junctura (male / 77mm)


Hope that you have enjoyed my discussion on yet another chapter
in the realm of Catocala moths.

[lamprima2]

Trehopr1,
Excellent specimens, excellent spreading technique!
Sometimes, I also spread the front legs in Sphingidae and Saturnidae.
I spread the wings first, then take the front legs with the hook
made of a bent pin, pull them out with the forceps,
and pin them to the board. After that, I spread antennae.
How do you manage to spread the hind legs of a moth?
Do you pin them after spreading the wings or before?
Please advise

[Trehopr1]

Hello lamprima2,

When I prepare my fresh captures like this I first "gingerly" position the forewings and then the hindwings using a pair of "spade-tip" (stamp) forceps. I NEVER place pins (in the wings) of my specimens to manipulate or hold them !

I always look to see that the long hind legs are free and clear near the abdomen and NOT somehow laying under the hindwings.

I then proceed with "teasing" out the forelegs and brace pin them. Next, I proceed with the antennae. I look for something symmetrical though, they don't always have to be in the same (style). Usually, one antenna or the other has a nice bend (or two) to it or is in a nice straight line so, I just try to get the other antenna to do the same thing.

Once I have accomplished that I prop up the abdomen using pins (or cotton with females) and then I brace pin the hind legs alongside the abdomen; whilst, tucking the mid-legs close against the body.

I feel that my passionate approach to spreading my specimens lends them a bit more "life" in their appearance or perhaps a touch more "flair" then what one more typically sees in collections.

I usually get one of these done in about 30 minutes. I try my best not to over-collect and I practice capture and release (if necessary) when the specimen in the jar appears chipped, wing-marred, or (bald) on the thorax.

A measure of practice, care, and passion in your method can have anyone turning out the same fine results !

[lamprima2]

Trehopr1,
Thank you for your informative reply.
I'll try to spread the hind legs of a moth next time,
following your "protocol."
Best regards

[kevinkk]

usually get one of these done in about 30 minutes. I try my best not to over-collect and I practice capture and release (if necessary) when the specimen in the jar appears chipped, wing-marred, or (bald) on the thorax.

Nice approach. As far as the legs go, you do a great job, me- not so much, I usually try tucking them out of sight. Perhaps I'll give the next one
a different look.
What about dispatching? I think, maybe mistakenly, that solvent based dispatching fluids tend to dry out smaller specimens, it seems like when I've brought home small moths from an overnight trip, if they stay too long in the jar, it's more difficult to work with them.

[Trehopr1]

Hello kevinkk,

Indeed, dispatching agents of any kind definitely "seize-up" smaller lepidoptera and I think insects in general if left for too many hours.

I don't really collect much in the way of small moths but, the ones that I have taken were only left in the kill bottle maybe 20 minutes or half an hour and then I went to work trying to spread them. They were all still nicely flexible at that point. It's the same with small butterflies (which I do collect) where possible. I pretty much try to spread them the same evening that I have collected them

[mothman55]

For butterflies, I just pinch on capture, put in an envelope, when I get a few I take them back to the car and into a cooler. When I get home, into the freezer. Depending on size, the small stuff still spreads well after a month, the larger stuff is still spreadable right out of the freezer for many months. For most larger moths, saturniids, sphingids, tiger moths, etc, a bit of rye injected into the thorax with a diabetic needle does the trick in the field, then into the freezer. Difficulty of course is with catocala, net is useless as all the powder would come off the head, but collecting at bait or MV, pop into a jar and in my case, I am very close to home or cottage, just pop the jar into the freezer. I have not used a killing jar for decades. In fact just trying to get an efficient killing agent in Canada is near impossible. Used to get ethyl alcohol in tiny plastic bottles from Bioquip, but can't find an alternate source. And the Bioquip stuff I had left over evaporated long ago.