jedgar
Junior Aurelian
Posts: 73
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jedgar on Sept 10, 2016 21:32:47 GMT
Jim, you need to use the picture icon (not the link one) to display several pictures in your post See the FAQ for more detail Thanks very much. I'll follow the instructions. Jim
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Sept 11, 2016 11:14:42 GMT
I would Say that O. alexandrae looks very similar to one of A.S. Meek's bred specimens, has it the collector's name on the pin. He set the males like that. Meek discovered this birdwing. However, if it is Meeks, it would have been collected around 1906 not the 1930s.
|
|
jedgar
Junior Aurelian
Posts: 73
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jedgar on Sept 11, 2016 14:33:23 GMT
I would Say that O. alexandrae looks very similar to one of A.S. Meek's bred specimens, has it the collector's name on the pin. He set the males like that. Meek discovered this birdwing. However, if it is Meeks, it would have been collected around 1906 not the 1930s. Thanks for your feedback nomad. No collector's name is shown. Date collected, April 1, 1930, Location: New Guinea. A lot of the specimens have the collector's name, exact location collected, altitude etc., but not the O. alexandrae.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Sept 11, 2016 15:28:12 GMT
Certainly such a male of O. alexandrae in that condition must be considered by the museum to a valuable acquisition especially because it is such a rare butterfly now, limited to tiny fragments of forest due to the logging, burning and oil plantations in Papua.
|
|
jedgar
Junior Aurelian
Posts: 73
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jedgar on Sept 11, 2016 17:48:15 GMT
Certainly such a male of O. alexandrae in that condition must be considered by the museum to a valuable acquisition especially because it is such a rare butterfly now, limited to tiny fragments of forest due to the logging, burning and oil plantations in Papua. Quite right nomad. They have a female O. alexandrae as well. More on this later. In the meantime here's a photo.
|
|
|
Post by deliasfanatic on Sept 11, 2016 18:01:05 GMT
Very nice indeed. I notice that the locality data on your last photo can't be correct for any of the specimens; O. alexandrae is from the Popondetta area at the far eastern end of New Guinea, while O. croesus is endemic to the northern Moluccas (Bacan, Halmahera, etc) and not in New Guinea at all. I agree with Nomad that the setting style of the male alexandrae certainly looks like that of Meek.
|
|
jedgar
Junior Aurelian
Posts: 73
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jedgar on Sept 11, 2016 18:50:59 GMT
Very nice indeed. I notice that the locality data on your last photo can't be correct for any of the specimens; O. alexandrae is from the Popondetta area at the far eastern end of New Guinea, while O. croesus is endemic to the northern Moluccas (Bacan, Halmahera, etc) and not in New Guinea at all. I agree with Nomad that the setting style of the male alexandrae certainly looks like that of Meek. Yep. I was just copying the info from the tags in the case back in 2012 on a visit to the museum. Now that I'm working at the museum it is at the top of my list to correct all tags. This is not at the top of my boss' list though. This means it will most likely be some time before I can make much needed corrections. Tags with incorrect locations are irritating, but insects with the wrong name really drive me nuts. Most of the specimens in the museum were collected so long ago that the taxonomists have changed the names. Scientific names are also often mis-spelled or entirely lacking in some cases. For instance, the oldest specimen I've yet found in the collection is a Sphinx moth collected in Lombardy, Italy in 1888. It is tagged Chaezocampa elpenor. It is now Deilephila elpenor, Elephant Hawk-moth. I've sure got my work cut out for me here. Here's another photo using data from existing tags for y`all to pick apart. All my reference books are modern, but are at home in Florida. The museum's reference books are about 100 years old. I find my computer to be of minimal help.
|
|
|
Post by deliasfanatic on Sept 11, 2016 19:00:05 GMT
Indeed, a huge amount of work to be done! That photo is OK, BTW, except that O. aesacus is from Obi and not "Obira"
|
|
jedgar
Junior Aurelian
Posts: 73
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jedgar on Sept 11, 2016 19:05:58 GMT
The tag on this specimen I ran across in the May Natural History Museum collection really perplexed me. It is labeled Papilio bachanensis from the Indonesian Island of Bachan. Modern nomenclature places it in the genus Graphium and it looks to me like Graphium stresemanni. Feedback?
|
|
jedgar
Junior Aurelian
Posts: 73
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jedgar on Sept 11, 2016 19:08:51 GMT
Indeed, a huge amount of work to be done! That photo is OK, BTW, except that O. aesacus is from Obi and not "Obira" Thanks deliasfanatic. Near as I can tell Obira is one of the Obi islands. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obira I hope the link works. I seem to be having a real dickens of a time getting links to work in this forum.
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Sept 11, 2016 19:20:25 GMT
The tag on this specimen I ran across in the May Natural History Museum collection really perplexed me. It is labeled Papilio bachanensis from the Indonesian Island of Bachan. Modern nomenclature places it in the genus Graphium and it looks to me like Graphium stresemanni. Feedback? Yes, this is Graphium bachanensis, which is related to G. stresemanni from Ceram. G. bachanensis was named by Okano in 1984, which means that whoever wrote the label was using 'old' nomenclature rather recently. Adam. PS. With regard to ALL labels, either determination or locality labels, NEVER EVER throw them away if they are incorrect. You should add a new label at the bottom with the date and your name on it stating the currently correct information.
|
|
jhyatt
Aurelian
Posts: 224
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jhyatt on Sept 11, 2016 19:24:36 GMT
The tag on this specimen I ran across in the May Natural History Museum collection really perplexed me. It is labeled Papilio bachanensis from the Indonesian Island of Bachan. Modern nomenclature places it in the genus Graphium and it looks to me like Graphium stresemanni. Feedback? That's a stressemanni, I think. I almost thought from the great color at first glance that it was a G. kosii, but the hw isn't quite right for that rarity. But I always thought stressemanni was from Ceram -- Does anyone know whether it flies on Bachan (I still prefer Wallace's spelling "Bachian"). One of my fondest early memories was, at perhaps age 5 or 6 (ca. 1954) being taken to the local (Lee County, VA) county fair. This particular year at the fair there was on the midway a tent with a sign saying "What Is It?". I paid my dime, went in and there was on display, in big glass-topped cases, a sizable worldwide insect collection! No birdwings, but I remember seeing Morphos for the first time, and a truly gigantic Thysania agrippina. There were lots of beetles, mantids, etc. Also shells, as I recall. I've often wondered what ever happened to that collection. I believe that the fair exposition was James H. Drew Shows (they brought the midway to later fairs in the area), but the bug exhibit never returned to my county. This couldn't have been the collection you're working on (could it?), but it surely made an impression on me! Cheers, jh
|
|
jhyatt
Aurelian
Posts: 224
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jhyatt on Sept 11, 2016 19:26:43 GMT
I yield to Adam's opinion, which crossed mine in the aether. I've never even see bachanensis. Gosh, it's awful being ignorant...
Regards, jh
|
|
jedgar
Junior Aurelian
Posts: 73
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jedgar on Sept 11, 2016 19:29:49 GMT
The tag on this specimen I ran across in the May Natural History Museum collection really perplexed me. It is labeled Papilio bachanensis from the Indonesian Island of Bachan. Modern nomenclature places it in the genus Graphium and it looks to me like Graphium stresemanni. Feedback? Yes, this is Graphium bachanensis, which is related to G. stresemanni from Ceram. G. bachanensis was named by Okano in 1984, which means that whoever wrote the label was using 'old' nomenclature rather recently. Adam. PS. With regard to ALL labels, either determination or locality labels, NEVER EVER throw them away if they are incorrect. You should add a new label at the bottom with the date and your name on it stating the currently correct information. I appreciate your feedback Adam. nope, I never throw tags away. When I get to correct the tags I'll stack them as you suggest. A lot of the specimens have pieces of the original glassine envelope the specimen was sent in with date, collector's name, location collected and altitude on it all neatly folded and on the pin. I love it when I find those.
|
|
|
Post by deliasfanatic on Sept 11, 2016 19:40:28 GMT
But I always thought stressemanni was from Ceram -- Does anyone know whether it flies on Bachan (I still prefer Wallace's spelling "Bachian"). Cheers, jh Yes, stresemanni is from Ceram, with no known subspecies. G. batjanensis (nominate) is from Bacan; there are also two described (and little differentiated) subspecies: wayabulaensis Hanafusa 1998 (Morotai) bambai Yagishita 2007 (Halmahera).
|
|