D. or C. or I. henrici

[Ron Gatrelle]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirks" <quirks at tds.net>
To: <LEPS-L at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 8:45 AM
Subject: D. or C. or I. henrici


Hello. I need information on Henry's elfin.   If you haven't already
received an email from me via other lists or agencies, let me introduce
myself.  I am a conservation biologist in the state of Wisconsin working on
a Conservation Assessment for Henry's Elfin for the Forest Service. In this
part of the range, Henry's is rarely encountered.  I'm interested in
hearing from folks who have any experience with the species, its habitat
and larval foodplants.

** Greetings, I have sent you may paper on this earlier today and decided
to address a couple things here (at least 50/50 for the sake of others on
the list serve).  Deciduphagus is the proper genus.  The use of Callophrys
is simply the opinion of those who are on the current historical wave of
mega lumping of taxa.  There are a number of good genera that have been
demoted to subgenera by a few prominent US workers.  What they call "genus"
Callophrys is actually a super-genus.  This is the trend today, 1) do not
recognize any or very few subspecies, then 2) call good species
super-species, and good genera subgenera, 3) follow through with lumping of
subfamilies and families.   This is all a conservationists nightmare as it
results in a dumbing down of the importance of many local and regional
population formerly consider valid _whole_ species or subspecies.  As you
know, all butterfly taxa listed on the ESA list are _subspecies_.   Good
thing this mentality wasn't around 25 years ago or several of these who not
be listed today as they would just be considered meaningless "local forms".
In actuality, this new trend is nothing but subjective opinion and much of
it without any detailed major published papers.  And some of the papers
that do exist are just considered crap by some of us.  Someone may say that
the use of Deciduphagus is subjective also.  And that would be accurate.
It is also the point.   However, in the case of the Elfins there are very
detailed papers on why Callophrys, Incisalia, Mitoura, Deciduphagus etc.
should be considered full genera and basically nothing on why to lump them.
**

Particularly, I haven't been able to glean any info on the species in the
Rio Grande Valley and
adjacent Mexican states. Is there more than one flight in the south?

**Many of the south Texas experts are on this leps-l list serve.  But I
know of two major ones who are not.  They are however subscribed to
TILS-leps-talk.   Thus, I have cross posted to that list.  You will likely
get more detailed information from those on that list.  Some of us lean
strongly to considering the western subspecies solatus as species D.
solatus.  The subspecies in Wisconsin is turneri.  The subspecies henrici
henrici occupies a relatively small area of the entire species range - the
northeastern US and Appalachian region.  It is the most recently evolved
subspecies.  In the southeast the widest ranging subspecies is yahwehus
with margaretae limited to central Florida.  Turneri has the widest range.
Viridissima has the smallest range but is a unique and very interesting
subspecies (it has both green and brown forms).   The types of some of
these can be found on the web at http://tils-ttr.org/library.html **

Also, in the northern portion on the range: Canada and Northeastern US,
what are the larvae using for foodplants?  Anyone know about mutualism with
ants for this species?  I need facts.

** The situation in the northeast is very interesting relative to hosts.
You will see this in the paper I sent.  I know of no mutualism with ants.**

Ron Gatrelle
TILS president
Charleston, SC - USA
http://www.tils-ttr.org


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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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