Time to earn some BioPoints; what is this, what was it designed to do, and how does it work? I’ll be providing the answers and doling out the points next Monday, and I’ll keep comments moderated until then so everyone has an opportunity to win. Remember, humor and accuracy will both earn you points!
Alright, you can have a clue since it’s Tuesday:
Good luck!
Remember that last ID challenge I put to you? The one at the end of August which I’m only now getting around to answering? Ya, that one.
With the best turn out of commenters willing to wager on their IDs, I’m sorry it’s taken me so long to award those hard earned points. But no fear, that day is finally here!
It seems that Hippoboscidae have a face that more than it’s mother can love, as everyone correctly guessed the right family! I can’t say I blame the enthusiasm surrounding this fly, as their morphological adaptations for living on birds are pretty amazing!
Dorso-ventrally flattened to slide in amongst the feathers, plenty of thick setae on the thorax and abdomen which I assume are used for getting nestled in for the long haul, and trifurcated tarsal claws to hold onto their feathered hosts. Although I enjoy a morning bird watching from time to time, I’m not exactly a bird wrangler, so how did I come by this spectacular specimen? It seems my wife was putting out the bird vibes back in August while we were out hiking through Mono Cliffs Provincial Park (which is a fantastic hike by the way, definitely worth a visit if you’re in the area), and this fly latched on while we walked back to the parking lot.
Renee wasn’t all too impressed with her little hitchhiker, but I was ecstatic! I quickly scooped it off and put in my camera bag for a few snaps, all the while expecting it to get away. With these photos in hand, I threw it in my bag anticipating another opportunity to shoot it when I got home, but I guess all this excitement was too much, as it didn’t survive the car ride. Oh well, it found a good resting place in the Guelph Insect Collection, and also gave me a chance to identify it back in the lab.
Of course, that would prove more difficult than I had imagined, and I’m still not 100% confident in my final identification. The genus ID was relatively easy using the Manual of Nearctic Diptera, and I quickly had it keyed to the genus Icosta. That’s where the “fun” began however, as I tracked down the authoritative paper on Icosta taxonomy and biology published in 1969 by T.C. Maa of the Bishops Museum. Although the keys were well written and relatively well illustrated for a 1969 key, the characters needed for identification were anything but simple! I eventually ended up at Icosta ardeae (Macquart), although from what I could tell it was Icosta ardeae ardeae, a subspecies recorded from much of the Old World, ranging from the UK, down to South Africa and as far east as the Philippines and Australia! The other subspecies, Icosta ardeae botaurinorum, is listed as being known from North America, including Ontario, but the abdominal setae and wing shape illustrated just didn’t fit. Both species are known to choose herons as their preferred host, with I. a. botaurinorum breeding almost solely on American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), which could very well have been lurking in the pond near the parking lot.
So what’s the deal; is it I. a. ardeae, or I. a. botaurinorum? I’m not a big believer in the idea of subspecies, so I’m happy simply calling it Icosta ardeae, but it speaks volumes about our understanding of the taxonomy of the family. Often found on birds (one of the best studied groups on earth), you would assume these flies would be as well studied and well collected as their avian counterparts, and yet I can’t get a definitive ID on one found 30 minutes from Toronto! Without any further taxonomic work since Maa’s 1969 revision, and with Maa leaving numerous species unnamed in his paper, simply calling them Icosta sp. “S” or sp. “N”, Icosta seems like a great project for someone interested in fly and bird taxonomy, and I could see a cool phylogenetic comparison between hippoboscid species and their avian hosts!
With that suggestion for the future, lets finish off the past and allocate some BioPoints! Chris scores a cool 15 points (3 for family, 4 for subfamily, 2 for being the first to answer and 6 for the review of hippoboscid larval biology), Laurie Knight picks up 8 (3 for family, 2 for picking a related species, and 3 for sharing her awesome photos of hippoboscid’s with mallophagan lice attached), Miles scores 3 points for his family ID, and Matt grabs 5 points (3 for family plus 2 for providing the morphological characters he used).
Thanks for playing once again everyone, and watch for more ID challenges in the near future (I mean it this time, I swear…)
All notes on taxonomy and biology of these flies was found in:
Maa, T.C. 1969. Revision of Icosta (=Lynchia Auctt.) with erection of a related genus Phthona. Pacific Insects Monograph 20: pg. 25-203.
As hurricane season arrives and dangerous storms approach the east coast of North America, it’s worth considering what causes these deadly cyclones. Not necessarily the warm waters off of Africa, but perhaps a butterfly on the other side of the world, whose flapping wings have set off an unpredictable set of events. Although the butterfly effect (as it relates to chaos theory, not that questionable Ashton Kutcher movie) may not be totally responsible for storms causing billions of dollars damage annually, the idea that simple atmospheric changes made by a flying butterfly can impact the total world is quite astounding.
Now to make you really think: as species become threatened with extinction thanks to human activity, how might a reduction or lack of these small atmospheric changes affect future weather patterns and civilization? Fewer storms? More? Who knows.
All joking and theorizing aside, if you or those you know live in places prone to hurricane or cyclone activity, please be safe in the coming weeks.
This song is available on iTunes – Butterflies and Hurricanes – Absolution
Today’s guest post is by Stephen Luk, the lead author of Fireflies of Ontario (Coleoptera: Lampyridae), which was recently published in the Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification. Stephen is an M.Sc. candidate at the University of Guelph as part of the Insect Systematics Lab, and while his main research is now focusing on Sphaeroceridae taxonomy, he has maintained a keen interest in the remaining Insecta. Stephen is a frequent contributor to BugGuide.net, and an avid nature photographer.
Photinus obscurellus by Stephen Luk
Over the moist meadows where stargazers behold the star-studded sky, insect enthusiasts can admire the summer scintillations of fireflies. Their neon glows spark fond childhood memories: of fields lit by symphonic displays; of brilliant twinkling in a jar set among the grass or over a book. But the fireflies of lore and poetry are truthfully poorly understood. They are often difficult to identify both in the field and in the laboratory. The shape and colour of a species can vary bewilderingly, and only an informed observer is capable of confidently identifying species amid the dazzling nocturnal orchestration. This is said of adults, and scarcely of immature stages, the knowledge of which is mostly sparse to absent.
Thankfully, the confusion is subsiding with the advent of novel identification tools. “The Fireflies of Ontario (Coleoptera: Lampyridae)”, published in the Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification, features an updated list of Ontario fireflies as well as a comprehensive and user-friendly key to adult fireflies in Canada east of Ontario. Users will discover a practical platform upon which to illuminate the fascinating lives of fireflies. This resource arrived just as these wonderful beetles mesmerized the public with their seasonal light shows. Fireflies were certainly well represented this summer in southwestern Ontario — I observed nearly a dozen species upon a few occasions here in Guelph.
Behind the scenes with fireflies
I became acquainted with fireflies as an undergraduate student, and was appalled that creatures so familiar were so harrowing to identify. Thus, I assembled obscure literature, meticulously determined specimens and wrestled long with species in the genus Photinus (remarkably similar species in this region). I amalgamated and redesigned keys while gladly illustrating them with pinned specimens, but disapproved the paucity of suitable live images, and have since embarked on a quest to rectify this personally. The product was defended and published fourteen months later, rendering Ontario’s adult fireflies identifiable. I have since accumulated additional images, and was even privileged to dispense some expertise through the CBC.
Steve was also interviewed for an article in the London Free Press
Luk, S., Marshall, S., & Branham, M. (2011). The Fireflies of Ontario (Coleoptera: Lampyridae) Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification DOI: 10.3752/cjai.2011.16 OPEN ACCESS
… to put the name of your choice on a new species, and have your name become a permanent piece of biological history?
Holotype male, Pterostichus (Pseudoferonina) bousqueti Bergdahl, sp. n., dorsal habitus. Scale line = 1.0 mm. Automontage digital image by D. H. Kavanaugh. (Bergdahl & Kavanaugh, 2011)
The topic of nomenclature for sale arises every now and again, occasionally even making mainstream media. You may recall the story of a recently discovered Australian shrimp, who’s naming rights were auctioned off to the highest bidder on eBay (that bidder turned out to be a professional athlete interested in conservation biology) and the resulting funds donated to marine conservation (McCallum & Poore, 2010). Or perhaps the $650,000 Golden Palace Casino paid to give Callicebus aureipalatii it’s name (that money was also donated to conserving the native habitat of the species).
While the wholesale of species naming rights is relatively uncommon, ask any taxonomist and they’ll likely have an opinion on the subject, often one of caution and fear of abuse. Consider what may happen if the business of species naming becomes as popular as the business of selling star names (which is pretty well a scam by the way; stars aren’t officially named, they’re numbered by the IAU); countless fly-by-night companies splitting the slightest variation to turn a few bucks and causing true taxonomists endless headaches as they deal with an infinite number of synonymies. A pretty simple ruse given the current rules of zoological nomenclature; give a brief description, say you’re depositing the type specimen somewhere, and then provide several public libraries with copies of the descriptions, which don’t even need to be peer-reviewed.
You can see why taxonomists have a vested interest in keeping a close eye on sponsored taxonomy; we have enough true species to find and describe without needing to waste our time dealing with splitting-for-profit names.
While the threat of poor taxonomy is ever present with current ICZN regulations, most taxonomists are extremely underfunded (if funded at all) and would love some extra money to help do their jobs, even if it means providing a patronym.
So why am I bringing up the subject now? Just this week James Bergdahl, an “amateur” taxonomist, posted to the ENTOMO-L email listserv offering the name of a recently discovered ground beetle (Carabidae) for sale. From the email:
The species is a flightless ground-beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in the genus Pterostichus. Adults of the species are primarily black, flightless, and approximately 1 cm in length, and live exclusively along small, forested headwater streams. Similar species have recently been described by Bergdahl & Kavanaugh (2011)*. The species is a member of a closely related group of beetles, restricted in distribution (endemic) to the Pacific Northwest, that have experienced a spectacular radiation across the many coastal and interior mountain ranges of the region.
The minimum offer accepted is estimated to be approximately US$20,000. These funds will be used to support all aspects of wildlife and habitat research by the Conservation Biology Center, including office, travel, lab and publication expenses.
You may think that US$20,000 is a lot of money to ask for naming an obscure, tiny, black beetle, but consider a partial list of the costs associated with taxonomy:
That brings a low end estimate of the cost to describe this species at around $10,000, not including salary and that all-important priceless category, making a $20,000 asking price less incredulous. In fact, it’s been hypothesized that the average cost for describing a species is US$48,500 (Carbayo & Marques, 2011), making this ground beetle a steal of a deal (especially compared to that GoldenPalace.com Monkey)!
While in a perfect world taxonomists wouldn’t need to prostitute their work to pay the bills, if done responsibly, it may be an alternative mode of rectifying the taxonomic impediment.
So if you or someone you know has an extra $20,000 laying around and would like to help a taxonomist disseminate his knowledge, why not contact James and become a part of history?
What do you think of taxonomic funding via patronage? Would you consider paying a taxonomist for the honour of naming a species? Leave a comment below!
Bergdahl, J., & Kavanaugh, D. (2011). Two new species of Pterostichus Bonelli subgenus Pseudoferonina Ball (Coleoptera, Carabidae, Pterostichini) from the mountains of central Idaho, U.S.A. ZooKeys, 104 DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.104.1272 (OPEN ACCESS)
Carbayo, F., & Marques, A. (2011). The costs of describing the entire animal kingdom Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 26 (4), 154-155 DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.01.004
ANNA W. McCALLUM, & GARY C. B. POORE (2010). Two crested and colourful new species of Lebbeus (Crustacea: Caridea: Hippolytidae) from the continental margin of Western Australia Zootaxa, 2372, 126-137 Preview Here
Yes, this is my best Canadian moth photo...
This week saw the publication of one of the broadest identification aids yet in the Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification; A Matrix Key to Families, Subfamilies and Tribes of Lepidoptera of Canada by Jason Dombroskie.
Arguably the most popular insects, butterflies, skippers and large, showy moths have had many a field guide written about them, and are generally easy to identify simply by comparison to photographs. However, the large majority of Lepidoptera are small, obscure and have traditionally been difficult to identify. By using simplified characters (including morpho-metric ratios), Jason has created an open-ended, user-friendly matrix key which aims to streamline the identification of even the most minuscule moths. Each subfamily/tribe covered includes a representative photo, notes on biology and taxonomy, and citations for further information.
The key is designed to be used in the lab with a dissecting microscope, but I decided to see how it worked for identifying photos. Using my only 2 photos of Lepidoptera from Canada (I’m not a fan of leps, what can I say), I ran them through the key to get a feel for how the matrix worked. First up was the photo of a female Fall Cankerworm (Alsophila pometaria; Geometridae) pictured above; wingless and not very moth-looking, I thought it’d be an easy ID. I thought wrong. After going through every character included in the key which I could confidently see in my series of photos, I was left with 4 possible tribes in 3 different families (one of which was correct). Unfortunately a photo of a wingless female wasn’t the representative for the taxon page, so I was unable to confidently assign an identification via this key; a shame considering how conspicuous this large, wingless moth is! My second attempt was with a photo of a European Skipper (Thymelicus lineola; Hesperiidae), and again I was stymied by a multitude of possible end taxa. While I have no doubt that this key will be invaluable for identifying micro-moths under a microscope, I’ll be sticking to traditional field guides if I happen to photograph other lepidopteran megafauna.
It’s also important to note that the key is run in a third-party program (XID), which is currently Windows-exclusive (although I hear there is an Android app in the works…). So if you’re a Mac user, you’ll need to borrow someone’s PC to identify your moths!
Despite some compatibility issues and my ineptitude with Lepidoptera, this is another extremely valuable paper which will certainly make the identifications of those tiny Tineidae and other micro-moths a much simpler task!
Dombroskie, J. (2011). A Matrix Key to Families, Subfamilies and Tribes of Lepidoptera of Canada Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification, 17 DOI: 10.3752/cjai.2011.17 OPEN ACCESS
What’s this antlered little wasp you may be asking yourself? To be honest, I have no clue! Probably something in the Chalcidoidea, but really, I have no idea.
What I do know is there’s somewhere I could go to learn all about these endearing little wasps, as well as their larger yet equally diverse parasitic brethren. That place? The HYM Course, offered by a collaboration of top hymenopterists from around the USA. This course was designed to teach you how to identify parasitic Hymenoptera, and provide information on the phylogenetic relationships between groups, as well as the behaviour, biology and host interactions which make these wasps fascinating.
The course is being held August 14-20 at the Humboldt Field Research Institute in beautiful coastal Maine, and looks to be a good time, with lessons taught in the field, in the lab, and in the classroom. The enrollment is limited to 14 people (with 5 instructors, that promises plenty of 1-on-1 interaction), and there are still several spaces available from what I’ve been told. If you’re a naturalist, insect photographer, graduate student or professional entomologist who wants or needs to learn more about parasitic Hymenoptera, then this course is a steal for gaining valuable knowledge and making important connections with some of the world’s leading taxonomists!
For more information, and to find out how you can enroll and begin exploring the Parasitica, check out the promotional PDF. Contact any of the instructors listed at the bottom of the flyer to enroll or to receive additional details!
With new identification aids, entomological collections begin to give up all manner of hidden treasures. The “Miscellaneous” drawers are no longer out of reach, and determining the species found in your own backyard (sometimes literally) can result in surprising finds.
Rhagoletis meigenii
Rhagoletis meigenii is an introduced species from Europe which infests fruits of European barberry (Barberis vulgaris) as larvae. This species had previously been recorded in North America as early as 1986, but after examining specimens from the Lyman Entomological Museum and here at the University of Guelph Insect Collection, I found specimens collected as early as 1956 in Montreal, Quebec and 1977 in Oakville, Ontario! This indicates that it had made it’s way to North America much earlier than previously thought, and either spread extremely rapidly across eastern North America, or had multiple introduction events! Luckily this species isn’t of economic concern (European barberry fruits are eaten and used in jams in Europe, but the plant harbours wheat rust and is considered noxious in North America), but it indicates how easily a non-native species can slip into a new area unnoticed by scientists and society.
Urophora affinis
Not all fruit flies enter North America “illegally” though. All three species of Urophora found in Ontario are native to Europe, but were intentionally introduced to help control unwanted, invasive knapweed species. Two of the species introduced became established and quickly spread through southern Ontario (Urophora cardui and Urophora quadrifasciata) while one species didn’t appear to survive. Urophora affinis was experimentally introduced in western Canada where it seemed to thrive, but after release in the early 1980’s at a research plot in Hastings County it failed to be found the next few years, leading the researcher to assume the population hadn’t survived the winter. But, a fly collected 250 km away and more than 20 years later in Simcoe County made it through the curatorial stream, and low-and-behold it was Urophora affinis! Apparently this species did in fact survive the winter, and managed to spread at low population density across central Ontario.
Rhagoletotrypeta rohweri
Finding flies thought to be gone is unfortunately not as unlikely as it may seem. Rhagoletotrypeta rohweri is a rarely collected species that hadn’t been seen since 1962. Or at least it hadn’t been thought to have been seen since then! The University of Guelph Insect Collection actually has 4 specimens collected between 1978 and 1985 around Point Pelee National Park. Hopefully this is evidence that this species is still clinging to existence in small pockets of eastern North America!
Rhagoletis chionanthi
To round out some of the important species uncovered during this study, here’s Rhagoletis chionanthi. This species had previously only been recorded from North Carolina and Florida, making it’s presence in Ontario a significant expansion of its natural range! Of course this also begs the question as to what it’s using for a larval habitat; the only recorded host plant for R. chionanthi is Chionanthus virginicus (see what they did there, naming the species after its host? Crafty taxonomists…), a plant species which hasn’t been recorded from Canada yet! So what may be happening here? Has the plant expanded it’s range into Canada, bringing it’s pest with it? Or does Rhagoletis chionanthi have multiple hosts? Of course, the apple maggot fly, Rhagoletis pomonella, actually underwent a host-shift from hawthorn to apples when the latter were cultivated in North America, so perhaps Rhagoletis chionanthi has undergone a similar host-shift which we aren’t aware of!
Of course none of these records would have been possible without the entomological collections housed at universities or under provincial or federal care. At a time when taxonomy and natural history collections are devastatingly under funded (or threatened with military take-over), their intrinsic value is made clear through faunistic studies such as this. Who knows what other treasures are awaiting discovery in entomological collections, both large and small? New species await description, rare species make surprise appearances, and the dynamics between species and geography are unfolding with every study!
We’ve heard it repeated in the media before, with varying degrees of alarmism; honey bees are disappearing, and society better repent before we follow them. Termed Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) in North America, the number of bee colonies which are dying or exiting en mass (swarming) leaving beekeeper’s hives empty has garnered a great deal of attention in the past few years. Of course there’s plenty of evidence that honey bee populations have been in decline for decades and CCD isn’t really a new phenomenon, but sometimes facts just get in the way of a good story, don’ t they?
That’s the way I felt after watching the new documentary Queen of the Sun: What Are The Bees Telling Us? – the production team didn’t want to weigh the audience down with actual evidence for theories proposed by featured beekeepers or even some of the “experts”. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the film, I did, I just left feeling that so much more could have been done to educate the audience.
The movie starts off with endless acres of almond trees in California and the bees trucked in from around the USA tasked with pollinating this giant monoculture. From here the film gathers the opinions of some of the most eccentric beekeepers I’ve seen (which is saying something, trust me) on why the bees are disappearing, with some input from “experts”. It was the beekeepers which make this movie worth a watch, and while each and every one of them personifies bees more than I’d like (damn my scientific objectivity), and there is a lot of Gaiaism and Druid religious undertones, meeting and watching these beekeepers work was a lot of fun. Whether it was the bee historian/Yogi who tickles his bees with his impressive mustache or the rooftop apiculturists in London, UK & Brooklyn, New York (where in the former city beekeeping is legal and the latter illegal), the filmmakers found some very interesting people who shared a passion for their hobby/trade.
The majority of the theories on what is causing the decline of the bees comes from the beekeepers with notes thrown in from the chosen “experts”. I’m using the term “expert” loosely, mainly because there were virtually no credentials or explanation about what made each person an “expert” on the topic. Some I recognized, like May Berenbaum from University of Illinois or Scott Black of the Xerces Society and trusted their opinions because of my knowledge of their work. Others, I have no clue why they were consulted; a physicist discussing genetically-modified plants transferring modified bacteria genomes to bees, without mention of why a physicist would be involved with this research or what institute she was associated with? Providing further credentials and background for each expert would allow the audience to make an informed decision on the information provided to them.
Overall, Queen of the Sun was an entertaining movie with some beautiful photography and fantastic people. If you’re looking for a movie which celebrates individuality and passion for apiculture, then this is your movie. If you’re looking for a scientific nature documentary, stick to David Attenborough and the BBC!
Ryan Fleacrest sometimes hangs with Michael Bubonic
Normally I have a bit of fun with Tuesday Tunes, whether mocking sugary pop music or giving props for mad entomological rhymes. Today however, I want to share a few trends which are both topical and disheartening (don’t worry, I still have a great song for you at the end of the post).
Last week, a report came out of Vancouver in which doctors reported bed bugs harbouring antibiotic resistant bacteria (Staphylococcus aureus [MRSA] and Enterococcus faecium [VRE]). While it’s a scary proposition, it’s unknown whether the bed bugs are capable of transferring the bacteria at this point. As Jonathan Eisen points out, it shouldn’t be too much of a surprise that MRSA was found; bed bugs are ectoparasites and MRSA is primarily a skin/wound-related infection. In fact, bed bugs have never been shown to transmit diseases (bacterial or viral) despite plenty of research attention, and as far as I can tell, have never been implicated in a human death. More people have died from improper handling and use of pesticides intended to kill bed bugs than from the bed bugs themselves!