Pieris yreka

[Guy Van de Poel]

Eitschberger, [1984]  mentions Shapiro, 1977:

"... I [Shapiro] noticed that , in the same paper as he describes
_castoria_, Reakirt also describes _Pieris yreka_. Now, this is rather an
infamous description since it can only apply to _rapae_  - and the type, at
the Field Museum, _is_ a spring _rapae_ - thus implying that _rapae_ was in
California before 1867, which is inconsistent with the idea of a single
introduction in southern Canada about 1860 - ..."

Shapiro seems to have seen the type, but does not mention whether it is ssp
rapae or ?crucivora.
I would appreciate any extra information on this subject.

Guy.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris J. Durden <drdn at mail.utexas.edu>
To: leps-l at lists.yale.edu <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Date: zondag 15 oktober 2000 19:17
Subject: Re: Celebrity Death Match


>>Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:14:29 -0500
>>To: cguppy at quesnelbc.com
>>From: "Chris J. Durden" <drdn at mail.utexas.edu>
>>Subject: Re: Celebrity Death Match
>>In-Reply-To: <000001c03676$327a71a0$4cdcc2cf at nysven>
>>
>>Was *Pieris yreka* Reakirt, 1866, a San Francisco introduction of the
>Oriental sibling species of different chromosome number? Look at the
>holotype at the Field Museum.
>>.......Chris Durden
>>
>>At 08:43  14/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
>>>Bruce Walsh stated: "I have absolutely no problems with releasing Cabbage
>>>Butterflies in any of the lower 48 states.  All cabbages in the states
stem
>>>from a single introduction, and they are a pest in most areas.
Introducing
>>>a few more individuals by a release certainly will cause no harm to the
>>>local population (and are unlikely to significantly increase the local
>>>numbers of Cabbages)."
>>>
>>>Just a factual correction to the above - Cabbage Whites in North America
are
>>>derived from more than one introduction. The first was an accidental one
at
>>>Quebec about 1859, and then a deliberate importation followed by
accidental
>>>release at New York a few years later. There may have been additional
>>>introductions later, but they would not have been noticed against the
>>>existing background population of Cabbage Whites.
>>>
>>>I certainly agree there is no concern with releases of small numbers of
>>>Cabbage Whites.
>>>
>>>
>