www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Maculinea arion
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Maculinea arion

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Technical and Studio Photography -- Macro and Close-up
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tpe



Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 467
Location: Copenhagen Denmark

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:50 pm    Post subject: Maculinea arion Reply with quote

Or large blue? I think these things were totally extinct in the UK recently? Now we know where they went;). As larvae are raised in ants nests, preumably as the ants got rarer so did the butterflies. Does anyone know if they protected the ants as much as the butterfly? For an insect to become protected it tends to have to be pretty?!.









The 2 above are definatly the same species, so counting spots looks not to be a great way to identify these things Smile ?

Tim
_________________
www.scientificillustration.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18235
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:14 pm    Post subject: Re: Maculinea arion Reply with quote

tpe wrote:
I think these things were totally extinct in the UK recently?

"Extirpated" would be more precise, but the word is not commonly known.

According to Wikipedia it disappeared from the UK in 1979, "but has since been reintroduced by conservationists."

There is a good article in Lepidopterology, HERE. Interesting snippets:
Quote:
The study shows how the large blue's extreme dependence on a single ant species led to the butterflies' demise, as their habitat became overgrown, causing soil temperatures to drop and ant numbers to diminish. Before this discovery, butterfly collectors were generally blamed for the decline of this butterfly
...

In the late 1970s, after 40 years of trying to save the large blue by fending off butterfly collectors, conservationists followed Thomas' recommendations and restored the butterfly's proper habitat by clearing scrub and reintroducing grazing animals.

Starting in 1983, Thomas and his colleagues began introducing large blue butterflies imported from Sweden, into restored habitat sites. As of 2008, the butterflies occupied 30 percent more colonies than they had in the 1950s, before the major decline began. The large blue is now one of just three UK butterflies on course to meet the Convention of Biological Diversity's target to reverse species' declines by 2010.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ken Ramos



Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 6996
Location: lat=35.4005&lon=-81.9841

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Butterflies with "cell towers!" Those are lovely. Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The BAT



Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 111
Location: Ballarat, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:12 pm    Post subject: Re: Maculinea arion Reply with quote

tpe wrote:
Or large blue? I think these things were totally extinct in the UK recently?

[Tim


Wouldn't surprise me at all if they became extinct, with unnecessary 'bulk' collections like this being stored??? Just a personal opinion.
Bruce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18235
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seems like collections always touch raw nerve endings.

Carefully sampled, labeled, cataloged, and preserved museum & research collections are generally one of the best methods available to find out what's out there and how they might relate to each other. With mammals, you can do a lot with scat; with butterflies, that's rather more challenging. The impact of sampling on populations is also far different, given the relatively large number of individuals that will be found in even a threatened insect population.

As described in the article that I linked earlier, the original populations of these butterflies were done in by changes in their habitat. Following restoration of habitat over 25 years ago, colonies were re-established from foreign populations. I presume the re-established colonies were started from what then appeared to be the closest relatives to the original colonies. Those judgments were probably based on appearance and ecology since DNA testing at the time was pretty crude.

The labels shown here suggest that these specimens are now undergoing modern DNA sequencing tests. I'm guessing that the date shown, 6.5.2008, tells when the leg sample was taken.

Tim, do you know when the specimens themselves were collected? What else can you tell us about this collection and how it is now being used?

--Rik

PS. I just noticed that this thread was misplaced in Nature Photography. I have moved it to Technical and Studio.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tpe



Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 467
Location: Copenhagen Denmark

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It also seems like this is an odd case from Riks article, in that the collectors actually contributed to preserving the local populations by providing the initial information on their population reduction?

The collection is part of a larger and very old collection (by the looks of the oldest container about 150 years but will check). So far it has not suffered any infestations or deterioation, and I am told this is unusual for a collection of this age. (although some of the pins have a green filamentous clump where they meet the thorax). I will ask dates that it was collected over, but it is in the region of 400 odd specimines collected for the Museum of Zoology or Natural History Museum (zoologiskmuseu) in Copenhagen. Recently they have been resampling the collection to see how bottlenecks/genetic drift are afffected in relation to change in population size and time.

I kind of realised afterwards that this was not really a post for the nature forum, it was in the natural history museum and under very non studio type conditions Smile. However, they have said that if necessary we can move some of the samples individually if anyone knows anything that would be useful to get a shot of ? Smile
_________________
www.scientificillustration.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18235
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tim, thanks for the additional information. Very interesting!

Quote:
It also seems like this is an odd case from Riks article, in that the collectors actually contributed to preserving the local populations by providing the initial information on their population reduction?

I think the oddness in this case is only that recovery has been successful.

As I wrote earlier, collections provide most of the information about distributions, both current and historical. What I did not mention is that museum collections and other aggregates, such as checklists and distribution maps, often draw from smaller collections made by individual naturalists. At the University of Washington, where I have some personal knowledge, much of the butterfly collection consists of material contributed from personal collections. Roughly 1000 of my own specimens are physically in the UW collection, representing a very sparse sampling of north central Washington in the 1960's. More data, not always physical specimens, have been gleaned from the specimen labels and field notes made available by other collectors.

The problem with field notes alone is that all they contain is what the original observers noticed and thought to write down. It's not unusual to realize years later that what people thought was a single species was actually two or more. And of course even the most careful observers in the 1800's were notably deficient at recording DNA sequences.

It is unfortunate that carefully curated resources like the one pictured here are sometimes misinterpreted as "unnecessary bulk collections". That description might be appropriate for a drawer of unlabeled specimens being warehoused for commercial sale, but that's a far different situation.

Quote:
However, they have said that if necessary we can move some of the samples individually if anyone knows anything that would be useful to get a shot of?

There is some risk of damage anytime specimens are disturbed. Since these are not replaceable, moving them should not be done casually.

The best people to ask about "useful" would be ones either researching this species or curating the collection. The museum folks might well appreciate having some high quality digital photos that they could post out to provide a sort of virtual access to the collection.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Harold Gough



Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5787
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here are some details of the latest success in re-estalblishing the species:

http://www.ceh.ac.uk/news/news_archive/2009_news_item_24.html

Harold
_________________
My images are a medium for sharing some of my experiences: they are not me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Technical and Studio Photography -- Macro and Close-up All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group