delete button, skippers and hedylids

[Andrew Warren]

Hello,

In my first week on leps-l I have been surprised to see 
how the bad feelings are being thrown around.  I have 
had my own problems with Ron Gatrelle, and my own nasty 
on-line disputes with him.  I bring this up only to 
point out that very little of the discussion on leps-l 
that I have seen has anything to do with Lepidoptera.  
It seems that just about every one of Ron's messages 
generates some heated dispute.  And the resulting 
discussions, straying further away from Lepidoptera, 
continue to be offensive to some.  While I know it can 
be hard, almost impossible at times, I suggest that the 
best thing to do with unwanted Gatrelle messages is to 
delete them, unread.  I will try to take my own advice 
from now on and just HIT THE DELETE BUTTON.  Otherwise I 
fear this list will be of little use during winter 
months (when fewer reports of lepidoptera occur), other 
than to attack each other.  

A few comments on Lepidoptera-related topics brought up 
this week:

"The separation of butterflies, skippers and moths IMHO 
is arbitrary and
aesthetic in nature, rather than having any 
entomological validity. We
class skippers with butterflies because folks that like 
butterflies also
often like skippers, not because they are particularly 
butterfly-ish. 
Anne Kilmer
South Florida"

The latest detailed morphological study published 
dealing with the classification of butterflies vs. 
skippers vs. moths is by de Jong, R., R. I. Vane-Wright 
and P. R. Ackery in 1996.  The higher classification of 
butterflies (Lepidoptera): problems and prospects.  
Entomologiva Scandinavica.  27(1):65-101.  They studied 
103 morphological characters in 59 butterfly and 15 moth 
species (butterflies included 10 species of skippers).  
The results of this study, along with the elaboration of 
some of the useful morphological characters used were 
presented by Ackery, P. R., R. de Jong & R. I 
Vane-Wright in 1999.  The butterflies: hedyloidea, 
Hesperioidea and Papilionoidea.  Pp. 263-300, In: 
Kristensen, N. P. (ed.), Lepidoptera, Moths and 
Butterflies.  1.  Evolution, Systematics and 
Biogeography.  Handbook of Zoology.  4(35), Lepidoptera.  
Berlin: de Gruyter.  x + 491 pp.  These two studies, in 
my opinion, are considered to be the latest "word" on 
butterfly relationships (molecular studies have not yet 
directly addressed the relationships of skippers and 
butterflies).  

The 1999 paper discusses in detail the morphological 
characters that support the grouping of Papilionoidea 
and Hesperioidea (p. 267: six characters suggested).  
Anyone seriously interested should see the paper because 
it is a complex discussion of morphological characters.

This is to say that there is some validity of the 
grouping of skippers with butterflies as a monophyletic 
group (as opposed to recognizing them as their own group 
or with moths).  The 1999 paper lists at least five 
morphological characters that appear to be unique and 
universal (synapomorphies) among the Hesperioidea.  (for 
comparison, the authors of the 1999 paper present five 
synapomorphies supporting the monophyly of Papilionidae, 
so skippers are not apparently any more distinctive than 
other butterfly families like Papilionidae).  

Of course, these papers are FAR from the final word on 
this subject.  

These papers also relate to the Hedylid discussion:

"The superfamily Hedyloidea, containing the single 
family Hedylidae,
with 35 species in a single genus _Macrosoma_, was added 
to the Rhopalocera
by Scoble in 1986. The species are restricted to 
tropical America. The
antennae are not knobbed, and the adults have a 
moth-like appearance.
Taxonomy is a fuzzy discipline--things are often not 
what they look like.
							Ken Philip
fnkwp at uaf.edu"

"Older books place this family in its own superfamily 
near the geometrid moths. Newer works place the family 
as butterflies or butterfy-moths, close to the Pieridae. 
Do a web search on Scoble and you will find much of the 
definitive published work on these interesting insects.
 
..............Chris Durden"

Scoble first published the idea that Hedylids are 
butterflies in 1986 (see Scoble, M. J.  1986.  The 
structure and affinities of the Hedyloidea: a new 
concept of the butterflies.  Bull. Br. Mus. nat. Hist. 
(Ent.) 53:251-286.  The idea that hedylids are related 
to butterflies was quickly refuted in 1987 in a review 
by Weintraub and Miller (see Weintraub, J. D. & J. S. 
Miller.  1987.  [Review.]  The structure and affinities 
of the Hedyloidea: a new concept of the butterflies.  
Cladistics 3: 299-304.  I can say for the sake of 
simplicity that Weintraub and Miller are far less than 
convinced about Scoble's claims, and point out many 
errors and problems with Scoble's study.  Scoble has 
defended his study (in 1988, 1990 with A. Aiello and in 
1992, refs. available upon request), but no thorough 
response to all of Weintraub & Miller's points has been 
published, and no formal re-analysis of the data has 
been made.  

The 1996 de Jong et al. paper concludes that the most 
likely candidates for a sister group to butterflies are 
the Uraniidae or Hedyloidea.  The authors admit that 
their results are not particularly convincing and many 
more taxa should be studied to improve the robustness of 
their data.  They did not lend particulrly strong 
support to the idea that Hedylids should be considered 
to be butterflies.  

The 1999 paper does not mention the Uraniidae as a 
possible sister group to the Papilionidae + Hesperiidae, 
for unknown reasons.  They do tentatively consider 
Hedylids to be butterflies (obvious from the title), but 
admit that they do so only "following Scoble's 
suggestion," and not based on the results of the 1996 
study (upon which the 1999 chapter was based).  

So while there is a body of literature that says 
Hedylids are sister to butterflies and skippers, this 
has not been demonstrated by any rigorous study since 
Scoble (1986).  I am personally not convinced by 
Scoble's study (or subsequent defense), and do not 
tentatively consider Hedylids as butterflies.  I think 
the butterfly-like characters seen in Hedylids are most 
likely the result of homoplasy, and place my hopes in 
future molecular studies to shed some new light on the 
issue and potentially resolve the dispute.

Best,

Andy Warren


 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl