|
Post by Adam Cotton on Nov 20, 2018 16:06:07 GMT
OK, so let's try to duplicate it. I have A2 male urvilleanus to use.
What do you suggest to try? UV? how strong? how long? In my experience natural light (UV) fades specimens, not darkens them.
Chemicals too? Throw some ideas out here, when we agree on a method (since I don't have a lot of time for experimentation) I'll give it a try. Chuck I seem to remember in an early thread about UV treated birdwings in the Trading Reports section on Insectnet that the person who was duped into buying one (I think it was a blue O. victoriae) relaxed it on receipt to re-spread and the humidity permanently turned it black. It seems likely that if this was correct, then the current specimen was made that way. The discoloured abdomen certainly suggests UV exposure. Adam.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Nov 20, 2018 17:26:44 GMT
One has to admit, these russo abs are the result of some intense experimentation I guess. Have they come a long way since the British made the black swallowtail Papilio machaon aberration inki. Form ramzess is so rare the seller sold one for $17.50 on ebay . The same seller has this starting price $2.99 which is listed as a strange form !! perhaps its O. priamus urvillianus ab. experimenti or the closely related paintii. Perhaps this specimen will give more clues how they are made. The way they are selling I think you will get more for a typical specimen.
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 21, 2018 12:59:28 GMT
I searched the threads on insectnet, best I could find is "strong UV". Unfortunately where I live there is no natural "strong UV" this time of year. Even then, in my observation it takes at least a year on the wall in daily, though restricted, direct sunlight exposure to get a faded specimen.
What type of lamp could I use? Hate to burn out a MV running it for days (or weeks?)
I do have a spare OV rubianus, maybe I should try to make form niclasi too?
Any more thoughts on how to make this butterfly? The accusations have been made, now let's prove it.
Chuck
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Nov 21, 2018 14:36:38 GMT
I searched the threads on insectnet, best I could find is "strong UV". Unfortunately where I live there is no natural "strong UV" this time of year. Even then, in my observation it takes at least a year on the wall in daily, though restricted, direct sunlight exposure to get a faded specimen. What type of lamp could I use? Hate to burn out a MV running it for days (or weeks?) I do have a spare OV rubianus, maybe I should try to make form niclasi too? Any more thoughts on how to make this butterfly? The accusations have been made, now let's prove it. Chuck I think you can just use a straight UV light that is used in water purification or in resin setting.they may be pricey but they are very powerful and are less likely to fade the specimen as sunlight.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Nov 21, 2018 16:36:20 GMT
I searched the threads on insectnet, best I could find is "strong UV". Unfortunately where I live there is no natural "strong UV" this time of year. Even then, in my observation it takes at least a year on the wall in daily, though restricted, direct sunlight exposure to get a faded specimen. What type of lamp could I use? Hate to burn out a MV running it for days (or weeks?) I do have a spare OV rubianus, maybe I should try to make form niclasi too? Any more thoughts on how to make this butterfly? The accusations have been made, now let's prove it. Chuck What do you need to prove, do you think the last Ornithoptera I posted is from this seller is real and not a fake, it is certainly not produced by UV light or is the made up name of RAMZESS, you can even see he has removed the scales on the sex bands in the last image. It has been known for years that UV has made many blue ebay Ornithoptera. I thought everybody realized that. How many pure blue Ornithoptera victoriae f. niclasi have you seen in the wild? I don't need to make them to know that these blue Ornithoptera are fakes. For a start some of the recent ebay descriptions I believe have stated they have been made by UV light. Perhaps f. niclasi has occurred very rarely in the wild but certainly not the amount that have appeared on ebay. Perhaps people buy them because they like works of art, pretty things to adorn there walls, blue instead of all the green.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Nov 21, 2018 17:06:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 22, 2018 14:22:59 GMT
Thanks, I hadn't found that thread, it was very useful. I found a 405NM replacement bulb on Amazon, so I assume I can find the base. Leroy on insectnet though has been critical of LED and he seems to understand the technology, so I'm suspect that LED may not be the way to go.
As to a couple other points:
1. I'm not saying that the RAMZESS and others aren't frauds, I simply want to reproduce it. Why not? We can call out all the suspicious elements of a specimen, but I think there's nothing like saying "here's one I made". And, like I said- I just want to do it.
2. Peter asked "how many f. nicalsi have you seen in the wild?" The answer is about a half dozen. OV rubianus is fairly common in Western Province; the locals can go grab pupae at will, and they can discern between OV and OPU pupae. Of interest, all the niclasi I've seen were on, or came from, Ranongga. I have not seen niclasi elsewhere, though that doesn't mean they don't exist elsewhere. And, those specimens I did not see alive but had obtained were all from Ranongga. Of course, Ranongga is where most OVR originate, not because they're more common there, simply because the locals have a cottage industry of ranching there.
It has been proposed in the past that the locals are fabricating niclasi, which I can historically assure has not been the case. They would have to use natural light, since there has not been, until recently, any electricity on the island, and even today electricity is a rare commodity. And, with the "me first" attitude, if they could reproduce niclasi for financial gain, everyone would do it and every specimen coming out of Ranongga would be niclasi- there is neither sufficient foresight nor restraint to throttle niclasi production. I supposed niclasi could be fabricated in Ghizo, but that is more work than the culture finds acceptable. It is my opinion that fraudulently fabricated "niclasi" are being created outside Solomon Islands.
I can't say whether niclasi is restricted to Ranongga or not. Perhaps somebody close to the BRITISH Museum of Natural History can survey the collection for niclasi and report. Even then, I would be suspect of data for specimens from Ghizo (and maybe other locales) since Ghizo is the transit point in Western Province, and "data" can and does get defaulted to "Ghizo" (or "Gizo").
Fraud aside, freaks do exist. As I'd documented some years ago, I caught a blue Ornithoptera on Magnetic Island, AUS some years ago; not being able to place in my mind why it was different, I released it, only to realize some minutes later that I was in AUS, not Solomons, and the specimen was supposed to be green.
Back on topic, yes, I want to fabricate a RAMZESS. Any more insights are greatly appreciated as I'd rather not spend too much time and money on the project.
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Nov 22, 2018 15:04:43 GMT
[quote author=" exoticimports" source="/post/22401/thread" timestamp=" [/div]
It has been proposed in the past that the locals are fabricating niclasi, which I can historically assure has not been the case. They would have to use natural light, since there has not been, until recently, any electricity on the island, and even today electricity is a rare commodity. And, with the "me first" attitude, if they could reproduce niclasi for financial gain, everyone would do it and every specimen coming out of Ranongga would be niclasi- there is neither sufficient foresight nor restraint to throttle niclasi production. I supposed niclasi could be fabricated in Ghizo, but that is more work than the culture finds acceptable. It is my opinion that fraudulently fabricated "niclasi" are being created outside Solomon Islands.
I thought we were blaming the few eBay sellers for fabricating these, I don’t recall anyone saying that the ranchers are making these. And if every specimen coming from the ranchers was niclasi eventually the normal would be pricier than the niclasi!
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 23, 2018 13:09:37 GMT
How timely. The Russian eghey seller has OV ssp VICTORIA form niclasi right now.
The color is totally wrong. At least it would be for rubianus.
OVV niclasi is one rare bird. I’ve had hundreds of OVV and never seen niclasi, whereas OV rubianus f niclasi runs about 5% or 10% of the population and/ or locally available specimens
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 23, 2018 13:20:22 GMT
And!!! Just notice he has two of them! How could I miss this form with so much time on Guadalcanal?
But wait theres more! Right now he has the same color in OPU and O Goliath and OP! Amazing!
Does anyone know this seller? I’d like to see Croesus with the same treatment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2018 13:30:59 GMT
He must be the luckiest collector in the world to have all these superb natural forms, surely just a question of right place right time? I mean, every 2nd specimen he comes across is an abb.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Nov 23, 2018 18:58:48 GMT
I have a question here for those in the know. Is it proper to have ever named a "very rarely" occurring but, natural "blue-ish" aberration of O. Victoria a proper form? Seems to me any that are encountered in the wild should be rightly considered aberrations within that species or respective subspecies and nothing more. Is there some sort of justification for this form name in the first place which is eluding me? I understand the concept of seasonal forms of butterflies occurring as well as consistent reoccurring forms occurring within a species; (such as Catocala forms). But, this seems all too rare a beast to be called a "form". Our member exoticimports has extensive experiences in that region and yet has only seem 6 naturally occurring examples out of several hundred which passed thru his hands. So please elaborate on this quandary I have. I feel right now it is only proper to call these rarities aberrations.
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 23, 2018 20:24:31 GMT
Species and subspecies is an imperfect classification to help fit nature into a structure so we can discuss it. Forms are likewise- a “short cut” if you will to describe a set of features with one word. AFAIK there is no minimum number of representative specimens to name a form- and thus why we get so many supposed new forms.
OV is extremely variable so I’m surprised we aren’t introduced to more BS forms. OPU is the exact opposite- almost no variation. With OV one can be 90% likely to be right on location. With OVU it’s effectively impossible to determine origin
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Nov 24, 2018 9:51:32 GMT
I feel right now it is only proper to call these rarities aberrations. An Aberration is something that very rarely occurs in a population. I doubt very much if niclasi is a form as it very rarely occurs and is certainly an aberration (those few that are supposed real and not made), I have yet to see a live photograph of one, which would be of much interest. The trouble is it seems nowadays specialists who study infraspecific groups seems to have difficulty in assigning them to a group, in the recent book Outstanding Birdwings which certainly is an amazing visual treat, the authors label everything as forms, local populations are f. local, aberrations (which include some really strange mutants) are forms as well. An example of a good form is the white female helice of Colias croesus which is a regular occurrence, they are as you say seasonal forms, which are an interesting study in themselves.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2018 10:18:20 GMT
I think honestly that this may have started out with one guy, after making a quick buck, who found an easy way of making these freaks that sold for high sums initially, word got around how easy it was and hey presto they are all over the place, serious collectors who found out about the trickery quite rightly shunned them and saw them for what they are but there are still hobbyists who will buy them. It must be sickening to see for a collector who bought a genuine specimen back in the day for a high price to see all these trinkets on the market but I would venture to say that all collectors in the hobby for the right reasons would not go near them.
|
|