[ncsc-moths] Re: State Moth List

  • From: Harry Wilson <harrywilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: ncsc-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 15:34:48 -0400 (GMT-04:00)

Hugh,

I appreciate your helpful comments, as well as Lance's response. Seems to me that lively discussion on such matters can only prove beneficial to us moth-ers.

I tried to rediscover the reason I had included Georgia in the range and I found it. The Dalton State website indicates that a specimen has been collected in their state, so I have restored L. disposita to my list (which I know is unofficial anyway). If a separate southern form is ever identified by better lepidopterists than I am, I will be glad to update my list.

One word about the list is in order. As I worked through the MPG range maps I saw a few cases where a moth had been reported predominantly from western states, with one report from a state nearby. My normal handling of those cases has been to exclude the moth, since I considered that the eastern report may have been an erroneous identification. I also agonized over some range maps that showed a distribution suggesting that the moth might be expected to occur in our mountains. In those cases, or at least most of them, I included the moth because of the proximity of reported sites of occurrence.

Isn't this hobby fun!

Harry

-----Original Message-----
From: Hugh McGuinness
Sent: Apr 22, 2012 9:39 AM
To: ncsc-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ncsc-moths] Re: State Moth List

Hi Harry,

I wouldn't remove L disposita from your checklist just yet. While Schweitzer may be correct about his hypothesis of two species, so far no evidence has been presented. When he publishes his data, we will be able to evaluate his supposition, but until then all phenotypes belong under the name of L. disposita. When I talked with Dave Wagner, he says he does not know of larval characters that distinguish the two, even though they may exist. This is not a case of a generally recognized undescribed  species, but the speculation of a single person, so until it is published, I would recommend you maintain the name L disposita. You might want to mention the phenotype observed in NC so that if this proposed taxon is ever elevated to species level, future workers will be clear about the name that should be applied to the NC material.

Hugh

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 10:59 PM, lance biechele <ltb0076@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Harry,
   Your NC State List is truly impressive!  I most certainly recognize
your private achievement.
   Two families that have personally interested me are both the
Acronicta and Lithophanes.  In fact, I think that Merrill has my list
of the dagger moths of the Delmarva.
   The attraction of these two familes has also been most rewarding
with my friendship with Dale Schweitzer.  Several times, I have sent
him photos of a Pinion that absolutely must be Lithophane disposita
It's NOT!
   Unfortunately, L. disposita does not occur South of Indiana, Ohio or
the northern "panhandle" of West Virginia.  It is also, obiviously, absent
from the Coastal Plain south of Long Island, NY.
   Dale has discovered that there is a most deceiving look-a-like species
that extends further south of L. disposita's range and as of this email, it
still remains unnamed, although I think he is working on publishing this
new species.
   So, Lithophane disposita must be discounted from your list.  I await,
with great ancticipation, the final paper to the name of our "southern"
look-alike!
   With all Best Regards,
Lance



--
Hugh McGuinness
Sag Harbor, NY

Other related posts: