[SoWestLep] Checkered Skippers

[paul opler]

Hi Mike et al,

The specimen of communis from Tahquitz Canyon, Riverside Co. dissected by 
Burns and mentioned by Wanda is one example that negates the universal 
southern California assumption.  Based on the idea that no communis occur 
in southern California, this individual would have been passed off as a 
White Checkered-Skipper.  It is even possible that small populations of 
communis occur high in the southern California Mountains.

We have two records of albescens from Colorado and I examine every 
individual very carefully.  Without the benefit of a dissected male (or 
confirmation of the wing fringe chaaracter in my western guide) I'm afraid 
that any male individual of this group seen but not collected and dissected 
cannot be identified to species.  Females cannot presently be identified to 
species,  even in the hand!

Also recall that both species of "common" checkered-skippers have the 
potential of being invasive.  It was with great surprise that it was found 
that the White Checkered-Skipper had replaced the Common Checkered-Skipper 
in most of Florida without anyone being aware of it until a few specimens 
were sent to John Burns.  Possibly,  a male of the communis group could be 
identified in the field by carefully brushing off the scales from the tip 
of the abdomen, seeing the valval configuration, then releasing it!  I 
haven't done this, but someone who wanted to be conclusive of their 
identification and not kill the insect could do that. One of the portable 
field scopes available from BioQuip or a strong hand lens would be needed.

With regard to Euphilotes--
I used to be confident in the identification of my Euphilotes photos, but 
after spending several months dissecting specimens in the Colorado State 
University collection, I am not so sure any more.  I would defer to Gordon 
Pratt on the identification.  I do know that typical enoptes enoptes and 
enoptes tildeni is found almost entirely on Eriogonum nudum.

I have found at least two different species of Euphilotes at the same 
locality (e.g. Donner Pass) and date nectaring on the same buckwheat and 
looking very similar in phenotype.  Be very careful of your sight i.d.'s!!

There are several groups of California butterflies where every taxon cannot 
be safely identified in the field--some because of their difficult 
identification and some because their taxonomy has not been well 
investiagted.  Euphilotes are a good example of the former (it is 
especially inaccurate to use only battoides vs enoptes to refer to these 
animals, better to use the Pratt classification and use subspecies names as 
well) and the acmon group a good example of the latter.

As the author of several field guides, I am humble enough to say that one 
should not believe everything one finds in print.  Question everything and 
investigate things for yourself!

Happy New Year,

Paul



At 09:13 AM 1/10/2003 -0700, paul opler wrote:
>Hi Michael,
>
>Well, the probabilities are certainly in the favor of any member of the
>complex being an albescens in those counties.  BUT it still is N-O-T a
>diagnostic identification!  How have the wing fringe characters turned out
>that are listed in my book for albescens vs. communis??
>
>Let's see if I can come up with a bird example.  Let's say you see an
>Empidonax with a yellowish belly and you identify it automatically as a
>Pacific Slope Flycatcher without trying to hear its calls or other fine
>details because it is the species most likely to be found in southern
>California.  The same would be true if you automatically identified all
>California Myriarchus as Ash-throated without looking closer (of course now
>other species are expected since some people did look more closely). I
>don't think modern California birding would have gotten where it is with
>bird i.d.'s like that!
>
>Happy New Year!
>
>Paul
>
>At 07:19 AM 1/10/2003 -0800, Michael Klein wrote:
> >Dr. Pratt has said the same thing to me.  Yet when I read Burns' paper, I
> >get the impression he also sampled the elevation issue and still came up
> >with albescens which would then override Tilden's and Austin's papers since
> >his paper is more current.  I agree with Fred on this that I am siding with
> >albescens in Riverside, Imperial, Orange, Los Angels and San Diego Counties.
> >I am not real clear on San Bernardino County and am not sure if there is
> >potential overlap there or not.  I do not have a lot of specimens but am
> >willing to take a much closer look  (other than genitalia) to see If there
> >is variation with elevation or even seasonal variation.
> >
> >Michael Klein
> >San Diego
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/private/leps-l/attachments/20030111/757232ea/attachment.html