[leps-talk] Deciduphagus augustinus

Thu Jan 2 13:58:49 EST 2003

thank you Kurt. Yes, there is much more than objective science at play in
these matters and no matter how much or what kind of data is painstakingly
accumulated, there will always be those who dismiss the work by saying that
'more data' is needed because they don't like the author or because they
have a different species concept or just because they hate change or because
they have not examined the data that does exist or they are reluctant
decision makers or a host of other reasons that are really easy to come up
with in any given situation :-) - as far as Mitoura barryi and Mitoura
rosneri are concerned, I note with interest again that the lumping
fraternity has apparently not published anything by way of data or anything
else to refute that taxonomic arrangement. I think more and more people are
understanding how feeble the lumpers interpretation really is in many, many
cases.

-----Original Message-----
From: Johnson, Kurt [mailto:johnsok at coudert.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 10:30 AM
To: Charles Bordelon; lepstalk (E-mail); lepsl (E-mail); altabugs
(E-mail); Kondla, Norbert SRM:EX
Subject: RE: [leps-talk] Deciduphagus augustinus

When I did my doctoral dissertation I made the effort to dissect widely
across geographic areas all members of what was then the forb-feeding
Incisalia (Deciduphagus), esp. those that were known to feed on
different foodplants (as in the henrici bunch etc.).  Often I was able
to used reared material on some of these foodplant segregations etc.  I
was looking for morphological data that would support any changes in
status from subspecies to species (given what I had done in elevating
some of the western Mitoura [Thuja feeders, etc.] based on corroborative
morphological data etc.).  I must admit, given the hew and cry against
what I did with Mitoura (tho' time has made it much more palatable to
many) there was significant pressure among the peer group at that time
to lump.  I "felt" that I did not find any morphological data in
Deciduphagus that would have supported elevations of any "suspecies" to
species rank etc. BUT I must admit I know I was also bowing to pressure
as I made my judgments.  So, its hard to say, except IF I would have
seen something glaring in the morphology I certainly would have flagged
it, as one can do in some Mitoura (even "sweadneri"), with Lycaena
ferrisi for instance, or for another example, in Europe, of
Corsican/Tuscan Coast C. rubi (which, oddly has a bizarre morphology
compared to the remainder of European rubi although such would be
consistent with the island arc continental drift of Corsica from the
Tuscan coast etc.).  So, I apparently didn't see anything startling in
Deciduphagus.  This may not mean anything however, since, when I bowed
to pressure to lump Strymon eurytulus, argona, tucumani etc. etc. (which
the lumpers still prefer) [I think it was a "peace" gesture at the
time], I later studied these taxa in the field (with  Argentine workers
at my side) and saw how totally different the altitudes/biomes etc. were
for these taxa, even their behaviors.  Yet, they are all still lumped by
the recent lumped "peer reviewed" work on Strymon.  It all seems like
such a joke at times that I lose interest.  But, anyway, I don't
remember seeing anything startling in the morphology of various
Deciduphagus or I would have at least flagged it.  However, as with
Strymon, its possible the morphologies might not be as strong an
indicator etc.  As I have often said, in primitive morphologies
outstanding difference are harder to find than in highly derived
morphologies.  Deciduphagus (on the Calloprhine ladder) are somewhere in
the middle, not horrendously primitive and not horrendously derived
either.  But, as you know it is basically politics that drives these
things more than objective data; but, perhaps we are entering an era
where so-called "splitters" will be at enough prestigioius institutions
to move the bell curve back toward more palatable support for elevating
certain segregations to species rank.  One would think that life
history/behavior data etc. would do it (as in "Strymon bicolor") but
nothing seems to change the minds of people who want to see these things
as broad entities thus easily "identifiable" in museum trays.   

Hope this helps.
KURt
Dr. Kurt Johnson   

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Bordelon [mailto:legitintellexit at earthlink.net] 
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 1:16 PM
To: lepstalk (E-mail); lepsl (E-mail); altabugs (E-mail); Kondla,
Norbert SRM:EX
Subject: Re: [leps-talk] Deciduphagus augustinus

We don't want anyone coughing up lumps, for sure.  cb
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kondla, Norbert SRM:EX" <Norbert.Kondla at gems3.gov.bc.ca>
To: "lepstalk (E-mail)" <TILS-leps-talk at yahoogroups.com>; "lepsl
(E-mail)" <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>; "altabugs (E-mail)"
<albertabugs at majordomo.srv.ualberta.ca>
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 11:56 AM
Subject: [leps-talk] Deciduphagus augustinus

Recent authors suggest that D.. augustinus and D. iroides are separate
species (Kondla 1999, Guppy & Shepard 2001).  This is equally as
plausible if not more plausible than the lumped interpretation that has
been fashionable for some time and for which there is zero published
support. Dos Passos (1943) addressed this issue briefly but retained
them as distinct species as did dos Passos (1964).  Dos Passos (1970)
subsequently synonymized the taxa on the basis of what Clench had to say
in a _field guide_  (Ehrlich and Ehrlich 1961).  But the problem is that
Clench said absolutely nothing as a reason for lumping these taxa.  Read
my lips, Clench gave ZERO reason for his lumping of these taxa.  Somehow
this completely (to my knowledge) undocumented and unsupported lump has
been accepted as the taxonomic wisdom of the day. A shocking situation.
The fact that other authors have used the lumped interpretation most
certainly does not make it a scientific fact or even a reasonable
interpretation.  The lumpers, to my knowledge, have never published
anything to support the lumped interpretation, which could be right. I
want to see some convincing data before I will believe what the lumpers
have to say about this or any other issue. See -- we can all
legitimately use the 'convincing data' argument :-) Lets see if the
lumpers can take what they dish out :-) PS. Hope nobody takes offence,
this is a good-natured jibe to get folks to cough up some data rather
than continuing to cough up lumping as some kind of good science
-- meanwhile we must all continue to make our own decisions about what
names and taxonomic constructs to use when we write something.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Norbert Kondla  P.Biol., RPBio.
Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management
845 Columbia Avenue, Castlegar, British Columbia V1N 1H3
Phone 250-365-8610
Mailto:Norbert.Kondla at gems3.gov.bc.ca

TILS Motto: "We can not protect that which we do not know" (c) 1999

Subscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
Post message: TILS-leps-talk at yahoogroups.com
Archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TILS-leps-talk/messages
Unsubscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
For more information: http://www.tils-ttr.org

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

TILS Motto: "We can not protect that which we do not know" (c) 1999 

Subscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-subscribe at yahoogroups.com 
Post message: TILS-leps-talk at yahoogroups.com 
Archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TILS-leps-talk/messages
Unsubscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com 
For more information: http://www.tils-ttr.org 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
DVD Rentals with No Late Fees - Try Netflix for FREE!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/.ZSp6B/dlOFAA/46VHAA/CCYolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

TILS Motto: "We can not protect that which we do not know" © 1999 

Subscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-subscribe at yahoogroups.com 
Post message: TILS-leps-talk at yahoogroups.com 
Archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TILS-leps-talk/messages
Unsubscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com 
For more information: http://www.tils-ttr.org 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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