[tn-moths] Re: A nice night

  • From: "Jean Obrist" <innisfreehorses@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <tn-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 16:02:11 -0400

When the common name describes the caterpillar, I think it sounds better to add 
"moth" to it.  (e.g. Armyworm Moth or Hickory Horned Devil Moth)  Some 
descriptions can be confusing, e.g. "looper".  One could wonder if the 
caterpillar loops like an inchworm, or does the moth do a loop-de-loop.
For records' sake, I am grateful people use the scientific name.  Also, it 
helps me when the Hodges number is included, because my records are in that 
order.  Thanks.
Jean 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: kjchilds 
  To: ncsc-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ; tn-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 3:49 PM
  Subject: [tn-moths] Re: A nice night


  When I'm labeling my photos, I go with whatever feels right. For example, 
calling Antaeotricha leucillana a "Pale Gray Bird-dropping" doesn't feel right 
so I add Moth to the end. Calling Lacosoma chiridota a "Scalloped Sack-bearer" 
sounds OK, IMHO. 


  Ken Childs
  Henderson, TN
  Chester County

  http://tinyurl.com/Kens-Moths-2011



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: Jean Obrist <innisfreehorses@xxxxxxxxxx>
  To: ncsc-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; tn-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:40 PM
  Subject: [ncsc-moths] Re: A nice night


  Hugh, some people are very new to mothing, and just learning to use MPG for 
IDs.  I like dropping the word "Moth" from the end of the common name.  We can 
all do that.  As for anything more complex, we will get it in time.   Thanks 
for teaching us.
  Jean Obrist
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Hugh McGuinness 
    To: ncsc-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ; TN Moths 
    Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 1:34 PM
    Subject: [ncsc-moths] A nice night


    Dear Southern Leppers,

    Now that summer vacation is near, I was thinking I might post some of my 
Long Island sightings. A few people suggested that I do so when I joined the 
list, but if there is a groundswell that feels LI moths are not appropriate for 
this list, I would certainly understand.

    Last night I traveled to my field site in Montauk, set four traps and then 
set up blacklights at a small house on the edge of the village. Montauk is the 
eastern tip of LI's south shore and was in fact an island when English settlers 
arrived. The moths at Montauk are spectacular and diverse largely because 
nearly 70% of the Montauk peninsula is parkland--if only there had been so much 
foresight on the rest of Long Island!

    The wind was fairly gusty until about 1 am so moths didn't settle much, but 
I did manage my first 100 species night--the current total is 130, but I have a 
few unidentified micros to add. Highlights included Several Io Moths, a lone 
Polyphemus Moth, Melsheimer's Sack-bearer, Lacosoma chiridota, and Bondia 
crescentella, which is a cool micro that looks a lot like a Nolid. 

    First of the season moths for me were Acrolophus plumifrontella, 
Argyresthia oreasella, Clepsis peritana, Snowy Urola (Urola nivalis), Plain 
Besma (Besma endropiaria), Packard's Wave, Eyed Paectes (Paectes occulatrix), 
Meganola minuscula, Tufted Bird Dropping (Cerma cerintha), Black-bordered Lemon 
(Marimtha nigrofimbria), and Lycophotia phylophora.

    The sample from my four traps appeared to hold the promise of more than 250 
species, but that number won't be determined for several moths when I pull them 
out of the freezer to actually ID and count them after the bulk of the field 
season is over. 

    Finally, while I have the floor, I have been meaning to say something about 
the common names of moths. First point is that while I have huge amounts of 
respect and appreciation for Bob Patterson and what he has contributed to moth 
ID, I do not like his naming conventions. He has attached the superfluous word 
"moth" to virtually every adult Lep, however, this subverts the original common 
names of groups and adds extra words to the name, and I just plain don;t like 
it. An example, Acronicta are not Dagger Moths, but Daggers. Similarly Sphinx 
Moths are Sphinxes, Lithophane are Pinions (not Pinion Moths), etc. Many of our 
common names were pioneered by Brits, and I like to follow their conventions 
when referring to the common name of a genus, or of a group of closely related 
genera. The majority of the rest of our common names were made up by Charlie 
Covell (and  I have heard with considerable help from Eric Quinter) when he 
wrote his famous field guide. I asked Charlie several years ago what he lessons 
he had learned about common names, and he said "I wish I hadn't named any after 
the genus." Onew example of the \ problem is that everything that has the 
common name Bomolocha is now in the genus Hypena--here is a group that needs a 
new common name. So what I am suggesting is that within reason, until there is 
an official list of common names, people might want to use the common names as 
they were original intended and get creative and clever and make up new common 
names for groups that are in desperate need of them (e.g., Bomolocha). (OK, got 
that out of the system.)

    Hugh



Other related posts: