|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Jun 24, 2015 6:20:08 GMT
For many of us living in the Northern hemisphere colias butterflies are among our first and most endearing impressions to the hobby at a young age. During the warm summer months their multiple broods delight us from May through to October. Their hearty nature enables them to survive many a cool summer night or even a late fall frost. As a group they are plentiful in numbers, quite varied in shades of bright colors, and are right at home living in both wild places or man's disturbed ramparts. Overall, they are resilient, adaptive, and a delight to see in numbers wherever they are found. For all these reasons and more, I've always had an appreciation and certain admiration for these most commonly encountered butterflies. There have been times in my life when money was tight. Nothing to buy specimens, books, or scarcely supplies with. But, I always knew that as long as colias were out and about I could still manage to enjoy my hobby even at the most basic (modest) level; much like when I was a kid. And while many other butterflies require a certain amount of savy or luck to find; our colias are just out there under the open sky dancing among the flowers and water puddles. So if you ever have the opportunity to sight a field or meadow full of yellow and white fellows like these --- take a moment or maybe a few minutes to marvel at the spectacle before you. And maybe you too will then view them as the quintessential butterfly....  |
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Jun 24, 2015 14:22:32 GMT
I fully agree. Colias is a very special genus with an incredible beauty and variation. It is also a huge genus that's why it is a fascinating group to study/collect. There are MANY Colias collectors around the World and if Colias were harder to find, they would reach a very high prices (like some Delias). When I was a kid, they were my favorite butterflies. I remember having run after Colias crocea in Brittany, finding my first form helice female in the Oberthur parc in Rennes and being very excited by my first Colias phicomone from the Parmelan in Savoie (French Alpes). When I was a student, I was very excited to catch my first Colias palaeno europomene in the Alpes and to receive some "exotic" jewels, Colias sagartia from Iran, tiny alpine Colias from Ecuador (from phalaecus), Colias balcanica form rebelli and so on... I remember also collecting common Colias in Canada, but they were all new to me. I had built an interesting collection of Colias (and still have it) So yes, it is still a very special genus for me, even if I don't collect them anymore as I specialised myself in other mythic Pieridae : Delias. There was a great website about Colias in the past, I don't know if it is still online. If anyone has the link, I would be happy to visit it again. Verhuslt monograph of Colias is also an excellent book that I highly recommend ! |
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jun 24, 2015 17:00:53 GMT
Colias butterflies are indeed superb, but they were not something that I was lucky enough to see alive myself. We didn't have them where I lived in the UK (Birmingham area) when I was a kid, and I have never actually seen one here in Thailand (there is one species C. fieldii found at high altitude in the far north of the country).
Adam.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Jun 24, 2015 17:05:04 GMT
As many of you know, I specialise in Colias so my views are probably somewhat biased. When I was a kid I remember chasing C. croceus in late summer and they were always one of my favourite butterflies even though their powerful flight made them hard to catch. They seemed to be more common here in southern England then than they have been of late as I seemed to see them every year. However, I didn't start collecting them seriously until the early 90s and have built up a huge collection since. I've collected many species in many countries since then and they still give me a huge thrill; whenever I go on a collecting trip I always plan to collect representatives of everything I find but when I see the first Colias I forget about all other species. I'm off to the Canadian Rockies to try to find some more next month.
Only a few ubiquitous species fit trehopr's description; C. philodice and C. eurytheme in North America, C. lesbia in South America, C. croceus, erate and alfacariensis in Europe and C. poliographus and fieldii in Asia. Most of the rest are single-brooded and only found at high altitudes or arctic regions.
Olivier - I believe that Juha Laiho used to run the website you mention but I don't think it's up and running anymore.
Verhulst's monograph has wonderful plates, unfortunately there are too many errors in the text.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Jun 24, 2015 17:15:57 GMT
Yes, it was Juha website. Too bad, he closed it, it was a great tool.
Canadian Rockies must be a fantastic place, I hope to visit them one day !
I will use this subject for a taxonomical question : which name is the correct one between Colias crocea and Colias croceus ?
|
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Jun 24, 2015 18:55:15 GMT
Hi bobw, I knew when I was cobbling up this thread their was someone on the forum who said they specialized in colias. I just could not recall who it was. So it's a pleasure we got your attention, insights, and expertise on this subject. And my apologies for perhaps over- simplifying the common status of colias in general. C.philodice and eurytheme are the ones my thoughts were of as these are generally all that we are really exposed to in the Eastern half of the U.S.
Now, you go out towards the Western states in the U.S. and things get a lot more diverse and interesting. I'm happy the topic has generated interest (which is my express purpose anytime I create a thread). Hope that maybe you could post us a few pic's from your (I'm sure) fabulous personal collection !
I know that my somewhat anecdotal threads have probably got some minor flaws somewhere. But, since I'm not much of a specialist at anything my purpose is just for the enjoyment of bringing up different topics, kicking up a little interest, and just enjoying talk about this wonderful hobby.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Jun 24, 2015 23:27:06 GMT
Yes, it was Juha website. Too bad, he closed it, it was a great tool. Canadian Rockies must be a fantastic place, I hope to visit them one day ! I will use this subject for a taxonomical question : which name is the correct one between Colias crocea and Colias croceus ? The correct name is Colias croceus, this is the spelling in the original description. I believe that Linnaeus's original intention was the gender of specific names should match the gender of the genus; back in the day some people took this to pedantic extremes and started "correcting" all the names that did not match - Colias is feminine, hence "crocea". Eventually the consensus became that this did not matter and this is now enshrined in The Code. Off the top of my head I can't remember the people involved in this at the time and as it's getting late at night here I'm not currently inclined to look it up.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by deliasfanatic on Jun 25, 2015 0:56:56 GMT
I'm glad that the horrendous notion of changing spelling to match the gender of the genus in which a species is currently placed (which, of course, can often be changed) has mostly died away. I'm of the very strong opinion that a name can never be altered from its original spelling, even if the latter is incorrect, and gender-switching is a poor idea at best. I remember one publication whose ill-informed author created unintended amusement by altering Heliconius vesta to "vestus", thereby giving Vesta (of Vestal Virgin fame) an unwanted sex change.  |
|
|
|
Post by Paul K on Jun 25, 2015 3:34:03 GMT
Bob I just came back from southern Alberta near Banff I have collected 3 specimens of Colias species . I will post photos when I identify and spread them. I wasn't lucky, the weather was cold and rainy all week accept one sunny day when there were many butterflies flying around on the mountain's meadows. July is the best month to go there. PS Don't forget to bring beside the net for Colias also the bear spray ! There are many Grizzly bears ! I have not seen one myself but my brother who leaves in Calgary has seen many of them on the hiking trails and even on the main roads. Paul  Beautiful Canadian Rocky Mountains |
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Jun 25, 2015 6:06:04 GMT
Wow, that's an AWESOME looking place that you got to go on vacation Paul K. Just incredible serene beauty !
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jun 25, 2015 8:51:15 GMT
In fact gender agreement is still enshrined in the ICZN Code. It was going to be removed in the current edition, but the changes were pulled late on in the drafting process.
Most zoologists still adhere to gender agreement, changing the gender of the species group names to match the gender of the genus they are in. There is one large exception to compliance, which is the Lepidopterists, who mostly agree that gender agreement is a waste of scientific time and a historical anachronism. Most Lepidopterists use the original spelling of a species group name as the correct name, although prevailing usage is also taken into consideration.
Interestingly most Japanese Lepidopterists and publishers still insist on gender agreement, so even within the Lepidopterists' world there is not unanimous agreement.
Of course the Chinese are well known for spurious gender agreement, producing such classics as Lamproptera curia and Pazala euroa - the names curius and eurous are nouns, not adjectives, and as such never change endings to agree with the gender of the genus.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Jun 25, 2015 9:49:40 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Jun 25, 2015 11:06:06 GMT
The history of the name "croceus" is quite interesting. See the following note from our book:
"Petiver (1703, pl. 14, fig. 11) had already called the species by the vernacular name “croceus”, which Ray (1710) emended to “crocea”. But such an emendation is no longer considered a necessity, so the name has reverted to the original croceus of Geoffroy (1785). The species has had a long and somewhat confusing history, briefly outlined by Adkin (1914) and Bretherton & Emmet (1990). Nomenclatural confusion ensued from the misidentification of C. croceus as C. hyale (particularly by Kirby 1871, 1899, see hyale). This is the reason why the species frequently appeared under the name edusa in older literature; conservative British authors continued to apply that invalid name until the 1930s (Perceval 2000) as did some German authors.
Geoffroy’s name would presumably have remained overlooked had it not been introduced to a wider audience, and indeed used as the oldest available name for the species in the place of the homonymic edusa in the synonymic list by Kirby (1871). The reintroduction of long-forgotten names in scientific nomenclature by Kirby was severely criticised in general terms by Lewis (1871), who subscribed to ultraconservative views on such matters and strongly advocated nomenclatural stability (rather than priority); “the writers who bring out … forgotten names do science no service at all”. The reintroduction of the 86 year old overlooked name croceus by Kirby (1871) was subsequently ridiculed by Lewis (1872), who concluded “that the new-found croceus goes back into oblivion after its brief months of garish daylight; poor Mr. Fourcroy!” Time has proved that Kirby was perfectly correct in this particular disposition, but in 1871 he found hardly any followers.
The discussion of which name should rightfully be applied was briefly revived in Germany during the early decades of the last century, e.g. Hepp (1929a, 1929b), Poche (1929). The name Papilio edusa Fabricius, 1787 was still occasionally applied, even though it is plainly a junior homonym of Papilio edusa Fabricius, 1776, now Pontia edusa (Fabricius, 1776). O. Bang-Haas (1929) and Seitz (1929) put a temporary end to that futile discussion by declaring that the species name was neither C. edusa nor C. croceus, and the only correct combination was C. electo croceus! The discussion had indeed taken up so much page space in the Entomologische Zeitschrift, that following the two latter contributions the editor publicly declared the discussion concluded there and then as far as that journal was concerned.
Some ascribed the name croceus to Fourcroy rather than to Geoffroy, but the former only edited and published the work whilst the latter provided the diagnosis; Fourcroy’s contribution to croceus apparently consisted of little more than adding the size of the insect. There is an analogous case in the generic name Colias Fabricius, 1807 which was published by Illiger (1807), not by Fabricius. Under the provisions of the Code it is the person who actually wrote the diagnosis and provided the new names who is the author of those acts, irrespective of who published them. The erroneous attribution of the name to Fourcroy still makes occasional appearances in the literature, e.g. Verhulst (2000b, 2007b). Still others maintained that Geoffroy did not consistently apply binominal nomenclature in his works until much later, and accordingly suggested that his early works should be “blacklisted”, if not banned, for all purposes of nomenclatural application (Poche 1929). Indeed Lewis (1872) went to the length of claiming that the Fourcroy “pamphlet” was “only published in order to amuse the minds of tyros and children”, and that he did not even adopt the Linnaean genera! “Such a book has no scientific claim whatever”, he concluded. But the aptly coined croceus is now long-established as the valid name to apply."
Bob |
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Jun 25, 2015 11:13:25 GMT
Bob I just came back from southern Alberta near Banff I have collected 3 specimens of Colias species . I will post photos when I identify and spread them. I wasn't lucky, the weather was cold and rainy all week accept one sunny day when there were many butterflies flying around on the mountain's meadows. July is the best month to go there. PS Don't forget to bring beside the net for Colias also the bear spray ! There are many Grizzly bears ! I have not seen one myself but my brother who leaves in Calgary has seen many of them on the hiking trails and even on the main roads. Paul Great picture, can't wait to get there. I'm going from 21st July to 6th August which I'm told is the best time for most Colias, I hope to find 8 species. I would think it would be too early for the ones you collected to be anything other than philodice or eurytheme but you might be lucky. I still have some bear spray from a trip I made to the Yukon a few years back, be assured I'll be taking it with me. Are there many mosquitoes in the area? Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Paul K on Jun 25, 2015 12:41:51 GMT
Bob
There were no mosquitoes this time and you are most likely right that I have got most common species there.
I had only one good day to collect butterflies, but even though I have never seen so many different species in one spot anywhere else in Canada ( Ontario ) .
I was hoping to find Parnassius smintheus there, but I guess I would need more time to look for it.
Paul
|
|
