Cynthia

[Niklas Wahlberg]

Hi all,
   For what it's worth, molecular data from three
genes (COI, EF-1alpha and wingless) say that Vanessa
(sensu Field) is the sister group to Cynthia (minus
anabella and presumably carye), while anabella is
sister to the two groups above. The most basal lineage
is Bassaris (with only two species V. gonerilla and V.
itea). Keep in mind that I am still missing specimens
of carye, terpsichore, altissima and tameamea. If you
believe this arrangement, either you make up a new
genus for anabella (and presumably carye), or you lump
all (except perhaps Bassaris) into Vanessa. I prefer
the latter.

Cheers,
Niklas

 --- "Chris J. Durden" <drdn at mail.utexas.edu> wrote: >
I >     It is possible that the type species *Vanessa
> atalanta* and *Cynthia 
> cardui* may belong to different genera, and that
> *annabella* should be 
> assigned to *Vanessa* because of the greater
> similarity of male genitalia, 
> rather than to *Cynthia* because of the similar
> color pattern. Perhaps 
> *Cynthia* should include only *C. cardui* and *C.
> kershawi*.  I know of no 
> wild or lab hybrids between *V. atalanta* and *C.
> cardui* and a test of *V. 
> indica* X *C. kershawi* would be most instructive
> because of their lack of 
> sympatry.
> .....................Chris Durden
> 
> 
> At 06:16 PM 11/6/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hi all.
> >    I think Chris brings up a good point: If two
> entities can hybridize in
> >the wild is that in itself sufficient to consider
> them congeneric?
> >   I'm not a taxonomist or an entomologist but I
> can't help but wonder if two
> >butterflies can mate and produce fertile offspring
> and you can still
> >consider them affiliated with different genera what
> exactly then does that
> >taxon (genus) mean?
> >
> >                                             Bill
> Yule
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Chris J. Durden" <drdn at mail.utexas.edu>
> >To: <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
> >Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:40 PM
> >Subject: Re: Cynthia
> >
> >
> > > To me the occurrence of occasional wild hybrids
> between *V. atalanta* and
> > > *C. annabella* suggests that they should be
> considered congeneric and that
> > > *Cynthia* should be ranked as a weak subgenus of
> *Vanessa*.
> > > ................Chris Durden
> > >
> > > At 11:57 AM 11/4/2002 -0800, you wrote:
> > > >Hi Bill et al.,
> > > >
> > > >Cynthia resurrected by W. D. Field (1971,
> Smithsonian Contrib. Zool. 84)
> > > >for
> > > >cardui, kershawi, virginiensis, altissima,
> braziliensis, terpsichore,
> > > >myrinna, annabella, carye
> > > >
> > > >Vanessa ss. is for atalanta, tameamea, samani,
> indica, dejeanii
> > > >
> > > >Bassaris ss. for itea and gonerilla
> > > >
> > > >Lately, the monophyly of Vanessa + Cynthia +
> Bassaris  has been
> > > >supported by molecular and morphological
> cladistic analysis by Nylin et
> > > >al (2001, Biol. J. Linn Soc. 132:441-468),
> although they do not have an
> > > >opinion on whether the clade should be one
> genus or three.
> > > >
> > > >Cheers,
> > > >
> > > >Andy Brower
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
>
------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >    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 
>  
>  

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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