Papilio joanae

[Cris Guppy or Aud Fischer]

I agree entirely with Felix, unpublished data is the same as non-existant
data. I follow him in encouraging those who have access to his data to
publish it.
 
Cris.
 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Felix Sperling" <Felix.Sperling at ualberta.ca>
To: <Leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 3:56 PM
Subject: Re: Papilio joanae
 
 
> With all this good discussion about the rigorous methods and
> excellent observations of Richard Heitzman, it is a real pity that
> these data are not fully published. I know there is some early
> information in the original description of P. joanae, but I keep
> seeing indications of considerable subsequent work. It isn't really
> science unless it has been made open to public scrutiny (=published).
> Nor is it nearly as valuable for informed conservation efforts. One
> of the people who knew Richard Heitzman personally, or even better
> has worked with him on P. joanae, should consider working to get
> these rearing studies published (perhaps in TILS?). It would be a
> really nice legacy for Heitzman and could only help joanae's survival.
>
> Felix Sperling
>
>
> >Hey Felix and Listers,
> >
> > I agree with the approach that both Doug and Felix suggest
> >about subspecies.  I'm not entirely against their use, however, you
> >better have a damn good reason to use a subspecific name.  You
> >who have been on this list for a while know how opinionated I am
> >on this topic.
> >
> > As for P. joannae.  I grew up in the Kansas City area, and John
> >Richard Heitzman was my lep mentor.  He took a very methodical
> >approach in naming P. joannae.  He reared it several times, and
> >discovered larval morphs (just *some* mind you) that were always
> >assignable as P. joannae and never show up in P. polyxenes.  He
> >found different larval *preferences* (different growth
> >rates/survivorship on different foodplants), though he could usually
> >get some of each "species" through on acceptable plants.  He also
> >did crosses and backcrosses from offspring.  Although most F1's
> >were apparently completely fertile, some significant hybrid
> >breakdown occurred in both F2's and backcrosses, and he was
> >never able to get beyond an F3.  So he *didn't* name this species
> >haphazardly.  Habitat choice is also a bit different, though you can
> >find both species feeding at flowers on a roadside in the woods.
> >Having had personal experience with this "species", you can tell
> >virtually all individuals apart solely on appearance, so at least
> >"subspecific status" would seem reasonable -- certainly this falls
> >withing Felix's criteria for subspecies.  Full specific status is
> >certainly not out of the question, as Felix suggests.
> >
> > My two cents.
> >
> > James
> >
> >Dr. James K. Adams
> >Dept. of Natural Science and Math
> >Dalton State College
> >213 N. College Drive
> >Dalton, GA  30720
> >Phone: (706)272-4427; fax: (706)272-2533
> >U of Michigan's President James Angell's
> >   Secret of Success: "Grow antennae, not horns"
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> >
> >    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> >
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>
>
>
 
 
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------
 
   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
 
   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl