Map errors in Glassberg book

[Harry LeGrand]

I have noticed two obvious errors on the range maps in the Glassberg book on
Butterflies through Binoculars: The East. These aren't the nit-picky things like
"it occurs in my state but the map says it doesn't". Certainly, there are plenty
of maps where the boundaries one can quibble with, at least where the butterfly
fauna is poorly known.

1. Julia's Skipper, Plate 55.  This is a Texas species and is not found in
Florida.  The blue shading covers only FL but not TX; it should be the reverse,
perhaps somewhat like the map on Plate 54 for Mazans Scallopwing.

2.  Little Glassywing, Plate 62.  This species has two broods in the South and
one in the north, as the text correctly indicates. The map has blue (3 or more
broods) in the South and olive (2 broods) in the north.  Instead, it should be
olive in the South and yellow in the North, quite like that of the Northern
Broken-Dash mapped right above the Little Glassywing.


As for the photos -- the female Dusky Azure on Plate 23, Figure 12 is really a
Silvery Blue. The text seems not to have picked up this error. In reality,
female Dusky is whitish above with wide blackish margins on both FW and HW. The
Ohio and West Virginia books have specimens of female azures (I believe), and
Scott's book probably does also.  Harry Pavulaan first pointed this out to me,
but I noticed this also. He also believes another azure/blue is misidentified,
but as I am not an expert on these groups, I would prefer that he or another
expert come forth on this.

As for identifying Hickory Hairstreak and Confused Cloudywing in the field, I
think the former can be done readily, and the latter with great care!  In fact,
an expert lepidopterist just relayed info to us at the NC Natural Heritage
Program that two specimens he had in his collection from coastal NC and
identified by him as Confused, are actually Northern upon his further
examination. However, I feel very strongly that Glassberg's photos of Hickory
Hairstreak and Confused Cloudywing (at least the dorsal shot on Plate 49, Figure
6) are correctly identified. I'm not sure anyone could positively ID Figure 5 as
a Confused, though I could rule out Northern by the white-looking face. If all
the cloudywings looked like those in figure 2, 4, and 6, it wouldn't be all that
hard. Problem is -- 1/2 the ones you see are somewhat intermediate! At least
Glassberg does a good job of presenting typical or characteristic individuals in
Figures 2, 4, and 6.

                Harry LeGrand
                Raleigh, NC
                harry_legrand at mail.enr.state.nc.us