Buckeye photo/ Goose Island SP

[Grkovich, Alex]

Andy, Chris, and all:

The Buckeyes are a great source of mystery and fascination for me as well. 

I have a (rather short, unfortunately) series of Buckeyes from near San
Antonio, TX. I do not know exactly what to make of these. They appear to be
hybrids(s) of coenia and something else. But as Chris has previously written
to me: "Of what?" 

Northern (eastern) coenia are quite distinctive: Smaller, white in FW light
patch, larger HW upper spot, small HW lower spot etc.etc. But these have
orange inside the large FW spot, are noticeably bright, and have
exceptionally large HW spots, both of them. In this regard they resemble a
female evarete that I have from southern Florida. The two spots almost
appear "goggle-eyed". Other specimens (males) are quite small, but still
possess the red inside the FW large spot etc. Specimens that I have from
near New Orleans tend toward this also (but not as markedly).

I also have a curious specimen from near Dayton, Ohio (July, 1986) that
bears a strange resemblance to "nigrosuffusa".

I do not, unfortunately, have a specimen of nigrosuffusa from anywhere. I
clumsily missed a sitting shot on a specimen in San Antonio about 12 years
ago (I have never forgiven myself).  Perhaps I will see it in western
Arizona late next month.

I collected both genoveva and evarete at St. Thomas, USVI last week. They
are distinctive, no identification problems. The flight patterns are very
distinctive, as has been described by Smith/Miller/Miller. The evarete are
far more difficult to approach and net.

Andy, I'm going to write you when I get a chance about the Pyrgus oileus
from St. Thomas; something I'm confused about.

Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Chris J. Durden [SMTP:drdn at mail.utexas.edu]
> Sent:	Thursday, January 24, 2002 5:12 PM
> To:	tx-BUTTERFLY at LISTSERV.UH.EDU
> Cc:	leps-l at lists.yale.edu
> Subject:	Re: Buckeye photo/ Goose Island SP
> 
> Andy,
>     Thanks for the input. I did not mention those wonderful dark red 
> buckeyes from lowland Chiapas, Veracruz and Oaxaca. I have seen nothing 
> like those in Rondonia, Madre de Dios or Loreto. The only buckeyes I have 
> seen that are easy are those east of the Rocky Mountains and north of the 
> southeastern evergreen forest - typical *coenia* as we suppose. This never
> 
> produces the dark form or the rusty/red form, but does produce the
> pink/red 
> winter/wet-season form rosa.
>     In Central Texas our spring Buckeyes all seem to be "eastern
> *coenia*". 
> In a summer without severe drought we have apparent strays of "Texas 
> *nigrosuffusa*" in late summer and fall. In dry years with fall moisture
> we 
> have both "eastern *coenia*" and "western *coenia*" easily distinguished
> by 
> antennal color (dark or light), but there are underside hindwing pattern 
> differences as well. The "western *coenia*" are most frequent in upland 
> plateau grassland and oak-savanna sites on the Edwards Plateau. In
> addition 
> there are occasional light complexion  with small anterior eyespot dhw
> that 
> with or without the emarginate hindwing or apical cream fadeout one 
> associates with Florida/Gulf *zonalis*, those without looking like fairly 
> ordinary *evarete*. I have only found *genoveva* at the Texas Coast from 
> Ingleside southward but very local, and never inland. Other than the Black
> 
> Mangrove-feeding-*genoveva*, I cannot tell if we have 1, 2, or several 
> species although it is possible to match number and distribution of apical
> 
> teeth on the male valva with pattern phenotype as noted by Thorne some 
> years ago in J. Res. Lep.
> ....................Chris Durden
> 
> At 05:24 PM 1/23/2002 -0800, you wrote:
> >What a mess- those Junonia.  I have never known how to treat these.  From
> >what I have seen, nigrosuffusa and coenia appear to be conspecific.  I
> >have a nice series from Greenlee Co. AZ (S side of the White Mtns) that
> >contains individuals that can be called pure nigrosuffusa, to pure coenia
> >(AZ type anyway) with all intermediates.  Throughout Mexico, I see
> >"coenia" at elevations above about 1600m., generally get nigrosuffusa
> >types (which vary all over the place, some with blue on the dorsal
> >hindwing as is occasionally seen in TX) from 1600 down to about
> >500-1000m., and then get "genoveva" or "evatete" types (these names are
> >hopelessly confused outside of the Caribbean Islands, I believe), from
> 500
> >m down to sea level.  Sporadic nigrosuffusa types, or individuals showing
> >some nigrosuffusa traits, can be found from sea level all the way up to
> >about 2000m. (never seen dark Junonia above this altitude in MEX).
> >However, these altitudinal "belts" are very approximate and extensive
> >blending between the forms is seen in as you pass from one belt to the
> >other.  In Sinaloa, on the W coast, a light genoveva type is found at sea
> >level up to about 200 m. or so.  From about 200 m. to about 1000m (as you
> >head up Hwy. 40 from the coast), a blend of the light coastal traits and
> >montane nigrosuffusa is seen (making for some dramatically colored
> >specimens), then "pure" nigrosuffusa occur above about 1000m.  In central
> >Durango, above about 1600m., the "coenia" take over, but continue to show
> >traces of nigrosuffusa traits to about 2000m.  Even more variation is
> seen
> >in southern and eastern Mexico, where very orangish phenotypes occur at
> >low elevations.  I have seen this type of altitudinal variation also in
> >Michoacan and Jalisco, although more and more orange phenotypes occur as
> >you head farther south.  The greatest diversity of Mexican Junonia
> >phenotypes apparently occurs in eastern Oaxaca (based on the large series
> >of Junonia in the collections in Mexico City).  I once sat down to try to
> >sort these Mexican specimens into three species and failed miserably (had
> >to move specimens from one series to the other each time I took another
> >look at them)- much to the amusement of my Mexican colleagues who are
> >also baffled beyond explanation by the variation seen in these bugs in
> >Mexico.
> >
> >Rearing studies are BADLY needed to further elucidate the relationships
> >between these forms.  As far as Mexico is concerned, I sleep best at
> night
> >when I consider only a single species of Junonia, with various forms.  I
> >am convinced there are two Caribbean species (a widespread, weedy-habitat
> >bug and a mangrove bug).  There is NOT a mangrove obligate in western
> >Mexico.  I don't know about E Mexico, but I suspect that there is no
> >Junonia restricted to mangroves but that the bizarre variation seen is
> due
> >to blending between lowland "genoveva or evarete" orangish and pale
> >phenotypes with nigrosuffusa stock just above it.
> >
> >Or from another view, perhaps nigrosuffusa is a hybrid form between the
> >high elevation coenia and the lowland bugs.  But I don't know if I could
> >define a typical "nigrosuffusa" (AZ and TX types tend to differ), or for
> >that matter a typical coenia (CA differ from AZ from E USA, as Durden has
> >noted).
> >
> >For now, I think of continental Junonia as a mongrul population
> consisting
> >of a single species, since no other explanation seems to account for the
> >variation seen when a large enough series is accumulated from any single
> >locality...  But again, some good rearing studies on the right stock
> could
> >answer all of these questions.
> >
> >still baffled but lumping for now...
> >
> >Andy Warren
> >
> >
> >On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, parides wrote:
> >
> > > Nick writes:
> > >
> > > >Charlie, I am sure you had the most extensive experience with this
> > > >difficult group. Have you done some rearing?
> > > >To avoid possible confusions, I would like to state clearly that the
> > > >specimen on Matt's photo IS a form *nigrosuffusa*. What species
> > > >this is, is another question. I am not sure than anyone can answer
> that.
> > >
> > >
> > > Unfortunately I have not done any rearing of Junonia mainly because I
> am
> > > not properly configured to rear specimens, I lack the patience, and I
> spend
> > > entirely too much of my life couped up in a lab.  Furthermore the
> > > difficulty of getting into and out of the nigrosuffusa habitats in one
> > > piece is another obstacle.  Thats correct, Nick.  Matts photo is
> > > unquestionably a form of nigrosuffusa.  And yes all we can do right
> now is
> > > speculate about its true genetic identity.  My preferred approach to
> > > sorting out this group would be by chemistry/genitalia examination.
> > >
> > >
> >http://nitro.biosci.arizona.edu/zeeb/butterflies/figs/Butterflies/Nymphal
> i
> > > dae/Nymphalinae/J_nigrosuffusa.jpg
> > >
> >http://nitro.biosci.arizona.edu/zeeb/butterflies/figs/Butterflies/Nymphal
> i
> > > dae/Nymphalinae/J_coenia.jpg
> > >
> > > >Charlie, does this hold for your specimens? I am not sure how to
> > > >appreciate cream/orange difference, I've seen typical coenia without
> > > >cream.
> > >
> > > Yes I agree with your forewing ID tips, Nick.  My described cream and
> > > orange differences are very evident in these clear cut photos.  I wish
> they
> > > were all this clear cut and easy.  For nigrosuffusa - No orange
> evident in
> > > the hindwings, no cream surrounding the eyespots, and reduced eyespots
> in
> > > the forewing are very typical of nigrosuffusa.  For coenia - Orange
> bands
> > > in the hindwings and the creamy area on the forewings that enclose the
> > > eyespots are textbook coenia in my book.  Coenia also have HUGE
> eyespots.
> > > If theres no cream in your coenia forewing but orange in the forewing
> > > around the eyespot its probably J. evarete.
> > >
> > >
> > > Youre welcome,
> > >
> > > Charlie
> > >
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  ------------------------------------------------------------ 
> 
>    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