|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 16, 2014 16:24:31 GMT
Chengdu in this case seems to be a misspelling of Chamdo, probably the region rather than town. Chang Enlei (Ryan) was selling podalirinus with this data a few years ago, but the price was ridiculous so I didn't buy any. I asked him about the data "Chengdu, Tibet", and he said there was no more detailed locality info. Yang also mentioned to me that the collectors were keeping the exact place secret.
Of course they don't come from anywhere near the city of Chengdu in Sichuan. The town of Chamdo is also known as Chengguan and Qamdo, and many Chinese and Tibetan places have several alternative names and spellings.
I agree that it is really frustrating at the poor and often erroneous data provided by many Chinese insect dealers, most of whom are just middlemen and have to rely on what data they are given. Another problem is that often specimens from different locations are mixed together and sold as coming from the same place.
Adam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2014 16:39:17 GMT
If I remember correctly the sellers name was BingMing, the service was first class and the quality was very good but after talking to Robert I dont trust the data at all, I have had this problem before with other rare stuff I have bought from other dealers from the same country.
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Dec 16, 2014 16:46:09 GMT
Yes, Bing Ming has a "personal" solution to export interesting leps from China. This is the address of her ebay shop, it is worth checking it from time to time
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 16, 2014 18:23:02 GMT
Bing Ming is an interesting seller, she often has good material and also offered me specimens at about the same time as Ryan. Both of these are of course middlemen (middlewoman in Bing Ming's case), and even Ryan told me that he obtained his specimens from other middlemen rather than directly from the catchers themselves, which is one reason data can be a problem.
In the case of podalirinus I am sure the vague and inaccurate data is absolutely the result of the local supplier who is buying from the catchers not wanting to let any rivals know where the specimens are being caught. I also seem to remember that the collecting date quoted was a month later than I expected, and it is possible that this is also deliberate on the part of the supplier in order that other catchers would look for them at the wrong time. Alternatively there could simply be a delay between the real date of capture and the quoted date when the supplier received them from the catchers.
Adam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2014 18:42:15 GMT
"In the case of podalirinus I am sure the vague and inaccurate data is absolutely the result of the local supplier who is buying from the catchers not wanting to let any rivals know where the specimens are being caught"
This has been going on for centuries, remember the story of Satyrium pruni, the dealer changing the location to Yorkshire to put fellow collectors off the scent to hold a financial monopoly, for those of us who treasure correct data as much as the specimen though it's not a good situation.
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 16, 2014 20:03:37 GMT
Indeed, in some ways the data is almost more important than the specimen itself. My two males of podalirinus were caught by a friend and have precise collecting data, so I feel very lucky to have those specimens.
Adam.
|
|
|
Post by xavm (Xavier) on Jan 8, 2015 12:20:14 GMT
Hello Adam,
I had this label for I. podalirinus : Tibet - Anggu - Lantsang River - National Road 317
I believe based your info, this is completely wrong ?
Cheers, Xavier
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jan 8, 2015 16:04:24 GMT
I would certainly NOT say that your specimen data is "completely wrong". I don't know where exactly Anggu is (maybe it refers to Nagqu Region?), but road 317 runs from Nagqu eastwards to Sangduozhen where it joins the 214 and eventually gets to Qamdo. It runs along the Lancang River (upper Mekong) some way to the northwest of Qamdo, but well outside of Nagqu Region. Do you know exactly where your data refers to?
It could well be that your data is absolutely correct, and indeed one problem with our knowledge of podalirinus is precisely lack of reliable data and information about the true distribution of the taxon.
Of course it would be useful if you can give some indication of the perceived reliability of the data on your specimen, as you probably know who you obtained it from. The more confirmed reliable localities that are known the better we can build a picture of the range of this butterfly.
Adam.
|
|
|
Post by xavm (Xavier) on Jan 9, 2015 7:24:44 GMT
I received them from a reliable person. I will try to get more detailled information.
Xavier
|
|