|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 8, 2018 18:10:32 GMT
I just received a copy of a new paper from Russia:
S.K. Korb, A.A. Shaposhnikov, A.G. Belik. New taxa of Lepidoptera from Kyrgyzstan (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae, Pieridae, Noctuidae). Eversmannia, 55-56: 7-11.
Here's a copy of the English version of the abstract:
SUMMARY. Following new taxa of Lepidoptera are described in the present paper: Koramius davydovi risto
Korb, Belik et Shaposhnikov, ssp.n. (type locality: Kyrgyzstan, Moldo-Too Mts, Baun gorge, Chetindi Pass,
1900–2100 m), Koramius jacobsoni dvar Korb, ssp.n. (type locality: Kyrgyzstan, Alai Mts., Taldyk Pass, 3800 –
4000 m), Colias baryshevi Belik et Korb, sp.n. (type locality: Kyrgyzstan, Alai Mts., Taldyk Pass, 3300 m) and
Mythimna clarior alatariel Korb, ssp.n. (type locality: Kyrgyzstan, south shore of Issyk-Kul lake, 10 km E of
Kara-Talaa, 42°15'58.49"N, 76°34'51.56"E, 1620 m). The lectotype of Colias nebulosa Oberthür, 1894 is
designated from the collection of Senckenberg Natural Hstory Museum, Görlitz, Germany.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:48E48B62-7BEF-4FFD-9523-3C72860F1E10
The paper is in Russian with a translation of the differential diagnosis for each new taxon in English, but the actual descriptions and type designations are in Russian. I can't post copies of the plates here as it may breach copyright.
Adam.
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Dec 11, 2018 14:33:43 GMT
I see that the new Parnassius davydovy risto is already on the market : www.ebay.com/str/dpotanin?_sop=16&rt=ncI haven't read the paper so I won't pronouce myself on the validity of ssp risto. Adam, what do you think ?
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 11, 2018 15:41:05 GMT
I haven't read the paper so I won't pronouce myself on the validity of ssp risto. Adam, what do you think ? bobw and I discussed this on e-mail and we are both of the opinion that it can only be a synonym of davydovi. bobw summed it up very well: Certainly the new davydovi subspecies looks like complete nonsense, it comes from the type locality but a few hundred metres lower down the mountain in a different habitat, so it can’t have been genetically separated for very long. Surprise surprise – it looks slightly different, the very definition of an ecological form! Adam.
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Dec 11, 2018 15:48:45 GMT
The new davydovi sp. was found a few hundred metres lower down the mountain from the type locality of davydovi in a different habitat, and surprise surprise it looks a little different. This is the very definition of an ecological form and so is merely a synonym of davydovi, an act which somebody will no doubt do soon. Sergei Churkin, who described davydovi agrees with this.
In the same paper Korb designates a lectotype of Colias nebulosa, this is clearly nonsense as it was described by Oberthür from “A very fresh male collected in 1892”, hence a holotype by monotypy. We found the holotype in ZFMK (Bonn) although we also found several spuriously labelled “co-types”. If I read it correctly, the specimen Korb has selected was collected in 1887 and is in Görlitz. The designation is therefore invalid as the specimen was never part of the type series.
P.S. Sorry Adam, I posted this before I saw your comment above.
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 11, 2018 15:49:30 GMT
It is worth noting that one of the main differences stated in the text is on the hindwing underside, but there is no photo of the underside of the holotype in the paper, only a photo of a live specimen sitting with wings closed. It is difficult to be certain due to pixellation but that specimen appears to be a female, whereas the holotype is a male.
Adam.
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Dec 12, 2018 14:48:17 GMT
interesting find is P. jacobsoni in Taldyk Pass, Kyrgyzstan, but certainly not a new ssp. This species is extremaly variable, one can not cleary set stable characters. Basicly all the newly described ssp. of jacobsoni (ilolovi, morgomir, iventjevi now dvar) are all synonymes of the nominotypical ssp. Bob, What is your oppinion about the new Colias taxon? Radovan The new Colias taxon is a tricky one and I wouldn't like to comment too much until I have seen a translation of the whole description and not just the differential diagnosis. I have been aware of these three specimens for a long time, indeed I was given the opportunity to describe them myself back in 2011 by Alexei Belik. There is no doubt that they do look different from cocandica but I declined because I did not think the series was big enough to be absolutely sure that they were not just aberrant cocandica, and the locality - Taldyk Pass - is a very heavily collected area (in fact I've collected there myself several times) and no other specimens like them seem to have been found there or anywhere else. As you said about P. jacobsoni, cocandica is an extremely variable species so it's impossible to be sure on such a small type series, however I do have much better quality photos than the ones in the description and they do seem consistent. Also, although the specimens look as though they are "washed out", in my photos they appear to be fairly fresh. Once I have a translation I can see if Korb's followed The Code properly and whether it's validly described; if so I fear we may have to provisionally accept it as a new species. I do fail to understand why the paper was published mainly in Russian, limiting the number of people who can understand it, especially when Korb has published several other papers in English.
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Dec 12, 2018 17:03:56 GMT
Yes, it was a surprise to me that it came from such a frequently collected place and no other specimens seem to have turned up. I think it's unlikely that it's a hybrid as the two males and one female known have a pretty consistent pattern and it's not intermediate with anything else; the only possibility might be christophi.
Some people have more money than sense!
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 15, 2018 9:45:08 GMT
There seems to be a reply to this thread strangely posted on the Insectnet forum by homard here: insectnet.proboards.com/thread/5081/australian-png-thai-moths?page=1&scrollTo=60125It says: Dear all! I feel I should clarify a situation. 1. A TL for a new ssp. is not "on the same mountain". It is some tens km apart. 2. It was not my intention to describe a new ssp, and till the last moment I struggled against. 3. After a long persuasions of Korb I gave up to add me as a co-author. I am dear of my reputation. 4. Yes, and that was my main agenda to earn money. I am the independent researcher, and I have no other way to get money besides sell a part of my specimens. So this opportunity. 5. It was not a male PARATYPE for $ 1.500 - in was a pair, male 500 female 1000 5. On Colias baryshevi - Bob, I contacted you on this years before. Your fault. 6. On Dvar - Radovan, before to critisize, let's travel there and try to collect anything. I, personally, did not find anything alike there. 7. To all: Taldyk is a very well known place. But nobody stayed there for long for thorougly collecting. Everyone will go further, whether to Aram-Kungei or else. This could explain why Taldyk stil is surprising us. Remember when Serg Gundorov discovered there Simonius taldykus? And the story still continues...
|
|