|
Post by cabintom on Dec 19, 2014 15:12:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Dec 19, 2014 15:13:08 GMT
nomad < I read "Pomeroy" which sounds French. Maybe a Belgian collector from Congo.
Tom > your Papilio antizox photoshopensis is splendid !
|
|
|
Post by mygos on Dec 19, 2014 15:16:35 GMT
The hand writing on the text from d'Abrera mentions a specimen of antizox caught by Pomezoy? in 1913 but was lost on his journey. Who was he. Peter, it is Pomeroy and not Pomezoy (sorry for low definition scan), and I can find trace of an entomologist named A.W.J. Pomeroy around that period ... A+, Michel
|
|
|
Post by mygos on Dec 19, 2014 15:18:17 GMT
I did not know you where breeding them already Tom !
A+, Michel
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Dec 19, 2014 15:18:40 GMT
nomad < I read "Pomeroy" who sounds French. Maybe a Belgian collector from Congo. Tom > your Papilio antizox photoshopensis is splendid ! Well Barns was not the only one who seems to have seen one Another collector states he caught one six years earlier.
|
|
|
Post by cabintom on Dec 19, 2014 15:22:18 GMT
Man, can't fool you guys!
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Dec 19, 2014 15:29:34 GMT
Man, can't fool you guys! Well if you capture one of those when your back in the Congo Tom, you will be able to name your price.
|
|
|
Post by mygos on Dec 19, 2014 15:39:38 GMT
While we were discussing this topic, I questionned Torben Larsen, and here is his answer which he authorize me to reproduce here : Torben B. Larsen wrote: "I was first presented with the picture of this "species" by John Riley and Mike Cornes during my first visit to Nigeria in 1967. None of us had ever seen Papilio antimachus or P. zalmoxis in nature. My view then was that it was a case of "too much tropical sun". Much later I learnt that its observer, T.A. Barns was actually a very astute and reliable man, who collected many new species during his amazing trip by car up the Albertine Rift Valley from Congo to Uganda. However, I ruled out in my mind that it could be a hybrid between the two giant species, though Papilio hybrids are not all that unusual. However, a pattern on forewings of one species [zalmoxis] and hindwings of another [antimachus] does not seem to occur in butterfly hybrids. The blue colour in P. zalmoxis is based on very special "Tyndall scales" colour refraction" and such scale structures would hardly be inherited on one set of wings, but not the other, in a hybrid. It would therefore have to a genuine unknown species. Though both species may be difficult catch, they do hill-top and visit damp patches. It seems difficult to believe that by now such a butterfly has not yet been collected again – even local commercial collectors would know that such a butterfly would bring in even more money than the two others. I have never met with P. antimachus in nature, but in 1997 I did see quite a few P. zalmoxis during a butterfly survey in the Oban Hills National Park in Nigeria. When looking for suitable drinking spots they circled, swooped up and down, and often made sudden abrupt turns. In these circumstances it was often possible to see the brown undersides of the hindwing and the blue of the forewings, or parts of them, at the same time. I wonder if it was not this type of view that led to Barns' drawing." Thank you Torben Michel
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Dec 19, 2014 15:52:25 GMT
I like Torben's theory.
And Torben, you are most welcome here. It would be a pleasure if you'd join us on the forum.
|
|
|
Post by deliasfanatic on Dec 19, 2014 16:16:00 GMT
Torben's theory sounds very plausible. I really doubt that such a species exists.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Dec 19, 2014 16:41:36 GMT
Michel. Many many thanks for contacting Torben - I loved his Hazards of Butterfly Collecting book, it has become a firm favorite of mine and many others I believe. Very interesting to hear his views, it would be a real honour if he did indeed participate here.
|
|
|
Post by mygos on Dec 19, 2014 16:43:45 GMT
I would love too !
A+, Michel
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 19, 2014 17:41:01 GMT
The venerable Torben Larsen was quoted by Michel: "In these circumstances it was often possible to [see] the brown undersides of the hindwing and the blue of the forewings, or parts of them, at the same time. I wonder if it was not this type of view that led to Barns' drawing."
This is exactly what I had in mind when I commented on page 2 of the thread "I do think though that he really did see something, maybe an aberration, a hybrid or an unknown species. My only major doubt is that if he was in a canoe on the river how much of the upperside of the butterfly did he actually see. Maybe much of the pattern is actually based on the underside."
Peter, I actually pointed out the "hand written note on the report about the drawing stating that Pomeroy actually caught one in 1913 at Ossidinga, Congo, but the collection was lost in transit" in my 3rd reply on page 1 of this thread. I guess you may have missed it in all the excitement. This has been a really interesting thread, and thank you very much for all the work you put into the original report on Barns' travels.
Adam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 18:25:35 GMT
"Torben's theory sounds very plausible. I really doubt that such a species exists".
I agree.
|
|
|
Post by cabintom on Dec 19, 2014 18:53:14 GMT
Well, although I'll admit that this theory seems more likely to be fact, I'll also state that I don't like it! Nomad's comment of: "Well if you capture one of those when your back in the Congo Tom, you will be able to name your price." had me seeing dollar signs... seems as though my bank account will remain rather closer to empty instead.
|
|