science

The “buzzard signal fly”

/ Ted C. MacRae / 15 Comments

Waterberg RangeDuring our time at Geelhoutbos farm in South Africa’s Northern (now Limpopo) Province, we spent most of our time in the foothills below a magnificent north-facing escarpment of the Waterberg Mountain Range. We were here to collect Buprestidae (including the magnificent Evides, featured previously in this post), and it was in the low bushveld woodland where the greatest diversity of buprestids would be found. Many of the buprestids we encountered were associated with the acacias that abundantly dotted the landscape – especially the iconic “umbrella thorn” (Acacia tortilis) and “sweet thorn” (Acacia karoo), providing sustenance for everything from bitsy beetles (including our beloved buprestids) to giant giraffes. Still, I kept eyeing the mountains, yearning to clamber up on top of the billion year old massif for no other reason than because it was there. Chuck had the good sense to stay down below amongst the acacias and buprestids while I spent an afternoon winding my way up the escarpment in the company of our hostess, Susan Strauss. I didn’t collect many buprestids during that trek, and if success is measured solely by numbers of buprestids collected then Chuck won. But if success also includes the chance to see spectacularly endless vistas from an otherworldly landscape on a once in a lifetime trip, then I didn’t do too badly.

Bromophila caffra

While I didn’t see many buprestids during that afternoon, I did see a few other insects interesting enough to attract my attention and maybe an attempt at a photo. This stunning fly was one of those insects. Even though it exceeded a full inch in length, it still wasn’t the largest fly I had ever seen. However, with its black body, metallic blue wings and large, round, wax-red head it was certainly among the most impressive. A quick scan through my recently acquired Field Guide to Insects of South Africa (Picker et al. 2002) has at last identified this fly as Bromophila caffra. It is a member of the family Platystomatidae, commonly known as signal flies and part of the great superfamily Tephritoidea of fruit fly fame (i.e., true fruit flies – not “the” fruit fly which belongs to the family Drosophilidae and which are more properly called vinegar flies).

Signal flies are interesting on several fronts, firstly because of their catholic tastes – Sivinski (1999) records rotting tree trunks, bulbs, roots and fruit, dried flowers and dead grass stems, dung and fungus as breeding sites, and notes – gruesomely – that mass graves dug in World War II sometimes produced huge numbers of the species Platystoma lugubre. It is some of the Australasian species, however, that have truly made a name for this family. In the tropical rainforests of Guinea and Queensland, males of many species exhibit modifications of their heads that are used in agonistic interactions with sexual rivals. These vary from broadening of the face into a surface used to push against the face of another male, to extremely well-developed stalk eyes used to gauge rival male’s size and strength in face to face combat.

But what about Bromophila caffra? Aside from being one of the most recognizable of flies in Africa, it’s sluggish disposition and apparent noxiousness were obvious even to early naturalists. Marshall (1902) noted the similarity of its coloration (black body, blue wings, red or yellow head) to that of two Pompilus spp. and one sphecid wasp with which it occurred sympatrically. Regarding its habits, he also noted:

The Bromophila fly is very plentiful; it is the most sluggish fly known to me, and settles about on trees and bushes in a very conspicuous manner. It ejects a yellow liquid from the mouth when handled, and was refused when offered to my baboons and Cercopithecus monkey.

Andrew Whittington, commenting on a photo of this species posted on DipteraInfo.com, provides further clues that seem to confirm the noxious qualities of this species, explaining not only its striking color and brazen habits but also the ease with which I obtained the above photograph:

Our knowledge of larval habits is very rudimentary. There appears to be an association with the roots of Terminalia trees (Combretaceae), from which the larvae sequester various toxic compounds (probably cyclic triterpenes) possibly for defense. This may render the adults toxic too, as a defense against predation – not a thoroughly tested hypothesis.
Adults are slow moving and ponderous … and photogenic!

I find it surprising that a large, strikingly distinctive, abundant insect such as Bromophila caffra should lack a common name, but it appears this is the case. None was given in Field Guide to Insects of South Africa, nor amongst the several South African wildlife and dipteran websites which I encountered featuring photos of this insect. In thinking about what common name Bromophila caffra could have, I can’t help but draw comparisons between this insect and the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), or “buzzard,” of North America (despite their belonging to entirely separate phyla). Both species are among the larger members of their respective orders and make their living eating repulsive foodstuffs. Hulking black with naked, red, plastic-like heads, most predators regard them as too vile and noxious to bother with, leaving them free to pass their lives in unmolested disdain. With this in mind, I hereby propose “buzzard signal fly” as the official common name for this insect 😉

Additional photographs of Bromophila caffra can be seen at Joan Young’s fine blog, South African Photographs, and at Biodiversty Explorer, the web of life in Southern Africa. This is the fifth in a series of posts covering a natural history excursion to South Africa in November/December 1999. Click on “South Africa” under “Tags” to see links and summaries for other posts in this series.

REFERENCES:

Marshall, G. A. K. 1902. Five year’s observations and experiments (1896-1901) on the bionomics of South African insects, chiefly directed to the investigation of mimicry and warning colours. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London, 1902:287-584.

Picker, M., C. Griffiths and A. Weaving. 2002. Field Guide to Insects of South Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, 444 pp.

Sivinski, J. 1999. Breeding habits and sex in families closely related to Tephritidae: Opportunities for comparative studies of the evolution of fruit fly behavior, pp. 23-39. In: M. Aluja and A. L. Norrbom [eds.], Fruit Flies (Tephritidae): Phylogeny and Evolution of Behavior, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 984 pp.

Tyrant ground beetles

/ Ted C. MacRae / 19 Comments

I return to my Afrikaans theme with a distinctive group of ground beetles (family Carabidae) called tyrant ground beetles or spotted ground beetles (tribe Anthiini). I think I prefer the former. This tribe is largely restricted to Africa and is especially diverse and abundant in the arid, sandy Karoo and Kalahari regions of southern Africa (Scholtz & Holm 1985). These beetles are large, powerful predators that rely on speed and agility for capturing prey, and since they are also flightless these characteristics come in handy for avoiding becoming prey themselves. Failing that, they employ chemical defense in the form of secretions from a pygidial gland located in the area of the ninth abdominal segment. The chemical cocktail within these secretions contains concentrated organic acids or quinone that can be squirted at potential predators in a strong jet. This is an effective deterrent to small mammalian and avian predators, and I suppose a careless beetle collector might also regret handling these beetles without due respect. These defensive spray capabilities give rise to another common name for the group, “oogpister” – an Afrikaner word that literally translates to (ahem) “eye pisser.”

Anthia (s. str.) thoracicaDuring my time in Africa, Chuck Bellamy and I were primarily focused on collecting buprestids. However, we still couldn’t resist hanging an ultraviolet light in front of a sheet and searching the ground with flashlights at night to see what diversity of other African insects we might encounter. Truth be told, one of the non-buprestid groups that I’d really hoped to encounter was a near relative of these beetles – the so-called “monster tiger beetles” of the genus Manticora (family Cicindelidae1). We never did see any monsters, but we did encounter several species of anthiine ground beetles around our encampment at Geelhoutbos farm near the Waterberg Range in Limpopo Provice. Anthia (s. str.) thoracica, the giant African ground beetle (above), was the most impressive of these. Click on the photo to see a larger version – only then will it begin to convey how truly appropriate such a common name is for this species. It is certainly the largest ground beetle that I have ever seen – a full 50 mm in length! That’s 2 inches, folks! This species is easily recognized by the depressed lateral expansions of the pronotum covered with dense white/yellow pubescence, and the slightly smaller male that I caught exhibits more elongated mandibles (though not so incredibly as in Manticora) and marvelous lobes extending backward from the pronotum.

1 Increasingly placed within the Carabidae as subfamily Cicindelinae on the basis of molecular phylogenetic analysis, along with Paussinae and Rhysodinae (e.g., Beutel et al. 2008).

Anthia (Termophilum) omoplataIn addition to true Anthia, we saw two species of the subgenus Anthia (Termophilum)2. The species shown right is A. (T.) omoplata3, with the common name “two-spotted ground beetle” (Picker et al. 2002). It was almost as large as its giant brother above, measuring 47 mm in length. Of this species, I only saw this one individual, but I did also find two individuals of a related species, T. fornasinii. Unfortunately I was unable to photograph the latter species, which is equally large but with the elytral white markings limited to a thin marginal band and the surface of the elytra bearing strong longitudinal intervals – a handsome beast, indeed! Picker et al. (2002) mention T. homoplatum being a diurnal hunter, but we found all of our anthiines active nocturnally.

2 Treated variously in the literature as either a full genus or as a subgenus of Anthia. I follow Carabidae of the World, in which it is given subgeneric status. The name is often cited as “Thermophilum” in the literature, but this is an incorrect subsequent spelling according to Alexandre Anischenko (in litt.), coordinator/editor of Carabidae of the World.

3 Usually cited as “homoplatum” or “homoplata” in the literature, but this is an incorrect subsequent spelling (Anischenko in litt.).

cypholoba-alveolataA second genus in the tribe is Cypholoba, represented here by C. alveolata. As far as I can tell it lacks a common name, which is not surprising since it is somewhat smaller than the Anthia species mentioned above. Still, my two specimens measure 38 and 35 mm in length – not puny by any standard. There can be no doubt as to the origin of the specific epithet of this species’ scientific name, with its marvelously alveolate elytra. I don’t think I’ve seen such an extraordinary example of this type of surface sculpturing on a beetle of this size, making the species every bit as spectacular as the larger anthiines.

A truly fascinating aspect of Africa’s tyrant ground beetles is their role as models in Batesian mimicry systems. That these beetles should serve as models is not at all surprising due to their chemical defensive capabilities and obviously aposematic coloration. What is surprising is the mimic – juveniles of the lizard species, Eremias lugubris, in what is believed to be the first reported case of a terrestrial vertebrate mimicking an invertebrate (Huey & Pianka 1977). The juveniles not only copy (roughly) the black and white coloration of anthiine beetles but also mimic their rapid, skitty movements – foraging actively with “jerky” motions and arched backs. Their tails remain somber colored, however, allowing them to blend into the sand. These adaptations combine to give the harmless little lizard the size, color, profile, and gait of the beetles. As the lizards reach adulthood (and their greater size makes them less prone to predation), they take on a more typical cryptic coloration and move in a slower, more deliberately lizard-like manner. This mimicry association effectively reduces predation of the juveniles by potential predators, who quickly learn to avoid the noxious, and more frequently encountered, anthiine models.

REFERENCES:

Beutela, R. G., I. Riberab and O. R. P. Bininda-Emonds. 2008. A genus-level supertree of Adephaga (Coleoptera). Organisms, Diversity & Evolution, 7:255–269.

Huey, R. B. and B. R. Pianka. 1977. Natural selection for juvenile lizards mimicking noxious beetles. Science, 195 (4274):201-203.

Picker, M., C. Griffiths and A. Weaving. 2002. Field Guide to Insects of South Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, 444 pp.

Scholtz, C. H. and E. Holm (eds.). 1985. Insects of Southern Africa. Butterworths, Durbin, 502 pp.

Review of Calodema and Metaxymorpha

/ Ted C. MacRae / 8 Comments

ResearchBlogging.orgNylander 2008Insects are not only the most diverse group of animals in the world, they are also among the most beautiful.  Beetles, of course (with apologies to any lepidopterists that may be reading this), are responsible for a hefty slice of this majestic diversity, with the most spectacular of these belonging primarily to a few select families.  Longhorned beetles, who combine vibrant colors with grossly elongated antennae and legs.  Scarabs, upping the anty by sporting a monstrously wonderful array of horns or just sheer size to go along with their bright colors.  Tiger beetles, whose elaborate designs and vivid colors are further augmented with toothy-jawed, behavioral charisma.  Yet, it is the Buprestidae upon which the moniker “jewel beetles” has been bestowed, despite their lack of obvious morphological gimmicks – a testament to their bright, sparkling, even gaudy colors and exquisite surface sculpture.

Calodema spp.Some of the most beautiful buprestids in the world are found in the rainforests of southeast Asia, Indonesia, New Guinea and northern Australia.  Genera such as Catoxantha, Chysochroa, Megaloxantha, and Chrysodema come to mind – big, beautiful beetles with screaming iridescence of green, red, yellow and blue.  Living jewels!  These and related genera comprise the great tribe Chrysochroini – the “classic” jewel beetles.  Not as well known but perhaps even more spectacular than the chrysochroines are two genera with strictly Australasian affinities – Calodema (left) and Metaxymorpha (below).  These two genera are the subject of a review authored by Swedish entomologist Ulf Nylander and published in the journal Folia Heyrovskyana by Kabourek.  This gorgeously printed, copiously illustrated, and handsomly bound volume is as much a work of art as it is a technical review.

Metaxymorpha spp.Calodema and Metaxymorpha are among several genera comprising the tribe Stigmoderini in the subfamily Buprestinae.  Six genera, including Calodema and Metaxymorpha, are strictly Australasian, while another five genera are of southern Neotropical occurrence.  This now-disjunct tribal distribution suggests an origin on Gondwana prior to its break up beginning about 167 million years ago during the mid-Jurassic.  Calodema and Metaxymorpha are restricted to New Guinea and its associated islands and the northern and northeastern coastal areas of Australia.  The two genera share certain features that distinguish them from other stigmoderines, notably elongated mouthparts adapted to feeding on nectar and a streamlined, aerodynamically-shaped body with the prosternum (ventral sclerite behind the head) curiously prolonged into a large conical process.  Nylander discusses the possible function of this process in serving as a ballast to help stabilize the flight of these large beetles as they fly through branches and other obstructions in the upper forest canopy searching for flowers on which to feed.  This thought is based on the observation that adult beetles dropped from any angle are able to quickly right themselves and fly away before hitting the ground, while stigmoderines in other Calodema ribbeigenera – lacking the prosternal process – more often drop to the ground and feign death (presumably an adaptation for predator avoidance in the more open environments where they occur).  Calodema and Metaxymorpha are clearly related to each other but are distinguished by the smaller scutellum and nonoverlapping elytra of Calodema versus larger scutellum and distinctly overlapping elytra (in the apical area, usually left over right) of Metaxymorpha.

Fifteen species of Calodema and 18 species of Metaxymorpha are recognized, with comparative tables, figures, and keys provided to differentiate the species and species groups within each genus.  Four species are described as new, including Calodema hanloni, C. longitarsis and Metaxymorpha alexanderiensis from Papua New Guinea, and M. hanloni from Australia.  Species treatments include synonymies, information on type specimens and type localities, label data for specimens examined, detailed descriptions, and comments on distribution and flight periods when known.  Metaxymorpha nigrofasciataHigh quality, full color photographs are provided for every species.  In many cases, multiple specimens are illustrated to show the degree of intraspecific variation encountered in the specimens studied, as shown in the examples included here for Calodema ribbei (above) and Metaxymorpha nigrofasciata (right).  These fabulous plates would almost be enough to justify ‘coffee table book’ status, were it not for the decidedly technical nature of the text itself.  Lest you think this makes for a strictly dry read, there are additional comments for several species regarding historical localities and collection circumstances.  One of the more fascinating is this passage for Calodema vicksoni from Papua New Guinea:

The holotype was captured by a native lady who found this specimen feeding on flowers near her house in the jungle in a very remote location in the Owen Stanley Range.  She caught the beetle and gave it to her husband.  Sadly enough, shortly afterwards she was bitten by a Papuan Blacksnake and died.

The morbid origins of this species become even more gruesome, as Nylander further explains that the species was named to honor the memory of the late Vickson Kotaseao – an associate at the Wei Institute in Papua New Guinea who was the first person to discover the larva of Calodema, and who was later brutally murdered in an ambush while on duty.  The book concludes with a summary of the meager biological information recorded for species of Calodema and Metaxymorpha, including observations of larvae presumed to be Calodema ribbei and their host tree.  As a special bonus, the book comes with a DVD that includes videosequences of adults of several species (Calodema regalis, C. blairi, C. ribbei, C. hudsoni, Metaxymorpha nigrosuturalis, and M. meeki) feeding on their flower hosts in the Australian and Guinean rain forests.  While the color photographs in the book are truly stunning, seeing these beetles on video emphasizes their true spectacularity as living, behavioral creatures and not just dead, pinned specimens.

This book is a beautiful assemblage of all that is currently known about some of the world’s most gorgeous beetles.  Sadly, it also emphasizes just how incomplete that knowlegde really is.  Of the 33 species now recognized in these two genera, 20 of them (60%) have been described in just the past 15 years, and virtually nothing is known of the biology of the vast majority of them.  Seven species are known from just a single specimen, and several more are known by only a very small handful.  In an age where advanced molecular genetic techniques offer great promise for unlocking stores of knowledge about evolutionary relationships among earth’s biota, Calodema and Metaxymorpha offer a sobering reminder that there is still much to do in the less glamorous world of alpha taxonomy.  As noted by Nylander, the center of diversity for these spectacular buprestids appears to be in the Papua New Guinea central highlands – primary rain forests that are increasingly threatened by both legal and illegal logging.  To destroy such a biodiversity “hotspot” would be a sad legacy to leave – but to destroy it without even knowing what was there to begin with would be simply shameful.

I thank Ulf Nylander for granting me permission to scan and post these gorgeous plates, representing but a few of the many beautiful illustrations that can be found in his book.

REFERENCE:

Nylander, U. (2008). Review of the genera Calodema and Metaxymorpha (Coleoptera: Buprestidae: Stigmoderini) Folia Heyrovskyana, Supplementum 13, 1-84.

Afrikaans ants

/ Ted C. MacRae / 6 Comments

A few for Alex…

I photographed these ants in South Africa during my visit to Borakalalo National Park (North West Province) in November 1999.  Dr. Brian Taylor, author of the impressive Ants of Africa website, kindly identified and provided some information about the ants in these photos.  Pachycondyla tarsata - South Africa, North West Province, Borakalalo National Park, 25.xi.1999The first photo shows a worker ant dragging another dead ant.  Dr. Taylor identified the worker as Pachycondyla tarsata, which according to his website is known as the ‘Stink Ant’.  This pan-African species usually forages singly and nests directly in the ground, with the entrance often surrounded by excavated soil and remains of arthropods and other food. He wasn’t sure about the identity of ant being carried but guessed that it could be the queen of Camponotus (Myrmopiromis) fulvopilosus1.  That species is South African and appears to be of the right size for the individual in this photo.  Ants may have taken over the world, but at least they clean up after themselves.

1 Edit 01/17/09: Dr. Taylor sent an email to me saying that, after a second look at the above photo, he now believes the queen being carried by the Pachycondyla tarsata worker probably represents Carebara vidua, discussed below.

These next photos might have been better posted on Wednesday (ahem… “hump” day).  424046-r1-e009_009_mating_ants_21Dr. Taylor identified them as Carebara vidua. According to Lepage and Darlington (1984), colonies of this termitophagous species produce broods of alates ready to fly during the short November rains (as we experienced during our visit), as well as the longer April rains. Male and female alates are usually produced in separate nests, and after the flight the alate males seek out the females. The mating swarm I photographed shows several males attempting to mate with a single female – I counted five males at first, although one dropped off while I continued taking photos trying to get a good shot of the “lucky fellow”. 424046-r1-e010_010_mating_ants_21I am pleased that Dr. Taylor considered these photos informative enough to post on the species page at his Ants of Africa website. Lepage and Darlington (1984) reported nests of this species established in 2-10% of Macrotermes termite mounds  in Kenya, although nests can also occur well away from mounds. In the laboratory, dealate female ants exposed to Macrotermes workers remained passive and elicited no aggression. After 39 days, the mated females were capable of producing broods of about 1,000 workers, able to overpower, kill and eat the much larger Macrotermes workers.

REFERENCES:

Taylor, B. 2008. Ants of Africa. http://www.antbase.org/ants/africa/antcover.htm.

Lepage, M. G. and J. P. E. C. Darlington. 1984. Observations on the ant Carebara vidua F. Smith preying on termites in Kenya. Journal of Natural History 18(2):293-302.

Top Ten of 2008

/ Ted C. MacRae / 10 Comments

For the first post of 2009, I begin with a look back at some of my favorite photos from 2008 (idea stolen from Alex Wild and others).  I initially hesitated to do a “best photos” post since I’m not really a photographer – just an entomologist with a camera.  Nevertheless, and with that caveat in mind, I offer ten photos that represent some of my favorites from this past year. To force some diversity in my picks, I’ve created “winning” categories (otherwise you might just see ten tiger beetles!). Click on the photos to see larger versions, and feel free to vote for your favorite. If so, what did you like about it? Was there a photo I didn’t pick that you liked better?  Enjoy!

Best tiger beetle

Cicindela formosa generosa

From “All the better to see you with, my dear!” (September 2008).  Picking a top tiger beetle photo was tough with so many to choose from.  Ultimately, I decided I really like these face-on shots, and of the several I’ve posted this one of Cicindela formosa generosa has the overall best composition, balance and symmetry.  I considered this one of Cicindela formosa formosa – with its half-cocked jaws, it probably has better personality.  However, the one above got the final nod because it is a true field shot of an unconfined, unmanipulated individual.

Best jewel beetle

Aegelia petelii

From Buppies in the bush(veld) (December 2008).  Although taken back in 1999, I just recently scanned and posted this photo of Agelia petelii from South Africa.  I like the bold, contrasting colors of the beetle combined with the soft colors of the host foliage.  Runners up included these photos of Evides pubiventris with its sumptuous iridescent green blending beautifully with the green background (but suffering slightly from shallow depth of field) and Chrysobothris femorata with its intricate surface sculpturing.

Best longhorned beetle

Tetraopes femoratus

From Rattled in the Black Hills (September 2008).  This was an easy choice – none of the other longhorned beetle photos that I posted during 2008 matched this photo of Tetraopes femoratus for clarity, composition, and the striking contrast between the red color of the beetle and the green color of the host plant.  I especially like the detailing of the body pubescence.

Best non-beetle insect

Proctacanthus milbertii

From Magnificently Monstrous Muscomorphs (November 2008).  I do like other insect besides beetles, and robber flies are hard to beat for their charisma.  This photo of Proctacanthus milbertii (which, as Chris Taylor pointed out, literally translates to “Milbert’s spiny butt”), has great composition and nice, complimentary colors.  I like contrast between the fine detail of the fly and the soft background.

Best non-insect arthropod

Argiope aurantia

From Happy Halloween! (October 2008). I didn’t have many non-insect arthropod photos to choose from, but this photo of a female Argiope aurantia (yellow garden spider) would be deserving of recognition no matter how many I had to choose from. I like the bold, contrasting colors and symmetry of the spider in front of the dappled background of this photo.

Best non-arthropod animal

Prairie rattlesnake (Crotolus viridis)

Another one from Rattled in the Black Hills (September 2008).  This is admittedly not the best photo from a purely technical perspective – it’s a little out of focus, and the color is a bit off.  However, no photo could better convey the moment – confronted with a live, angry prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis) (among the more aggressive species in the genus).  The forked tongue and rattle – blurred in motion – were icing on the cake.

Best wildflower

Victoria Glades

From Glades of Jefferson County (July 2008).  I had several wildflower closeups to choose from, but I kept coming back to this field shot of pale purple coneflower (Echincea simulata) and Missouri evening primrose (Oenethera macrocarpa).  The eastern redcedars (Juniperus virginiana) in the background are at once indicative of their preferred habitat (limestone/dolomite glades) and also testament to their threatening encroachment.

Best tree

Calocedrus decurrens

From the very simply and aptly named Lake Tahoe, California (March 2008).  Incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), with its reddish, deeply furrowed bark and great height, is one of the most majestic of western conifers.  I was captivated by this tree – beautiful even in death and contrasting nicely with the surrounding green foliage.

Best rockscape

Pipestone National Monument, Old Stone Face

From Pipestone National Monument (April 2008).  “Old Stone Face” is one of Pipestone’s most recognizable geologic features, and the short angle of the sun on this early spring day provided nice detail to the cracks and fissures of the rock – almost appropriately adding a weathered “age” to this old man.

Best landscape

Emerald Isle, Lake Tahoe

Another one from Lake Tahoe, California (March 2008).  Few places on earth are more photogenic than Lake Tahoe, and this perspective overlooking Emerald Bay is among the finest views I’ve seen.  Brilliant blue skies and majestic snow covered mountains reflected perfectly from the still surface, with Fannette Island providing a perfect focal point for the photo.

Best miscellaneous

Water drops, Ozark Trail, Trace Creek SectionFrom Ozark Trail, lower Trace Creek Section (December 2007).  While technically not a 2008 photo, it’s close enough.  This was one of the first macro photographs I took with my camera, and it remains one of my favorites.  A chance occurence of an unlikely subject, created by cold temperatures and heavy moisture-laden air. I like the contrast between the water drops – sharp, round, and clear – with the vertical shapes of the leaf petioles and background trees.  Viewing the image full-sized reveals the reflection of the photographer in the leftmost water drop.

Subsequent edit: Okay, so after I put this post together, I realized I actually featured eleven photos – too much difficulty choosing, I guess. Let’s call it a baker’s ten.

Cicindela lengi vs. Cicindela formosa

/ Ted C. MacRae / 8 Comments

Back to beetle blogging – I hope everyone enjoyed their holiday break as much as I. One of the tiger beetles that I most hoped to see on my trip to Nebraska and South Dakota last September was Cicindela lengi (blowout tiger beetle). This is another one of the several tiger beetle species confined to dry sand habitats in the central/northern Great Plains (Pearson et al. 2006). Its common name would suggest it prefers sand blowouts, the most barren of dry sand habitats and where the co-occurring C. limbata (sandy tiger beetle) can be found. In reality, it also can be found in slightly more vegetated habitats such as dune margins, sand flats, and sandy roadsides along with the much more common C. formosa (big sand tiger beetle) and C. scutellaris (festive tiger beetle). It can also be found occasionally on sand bars along rivers, where the aptly-named C. lepida (ghost tiger beetle) is likely to occur, and in the northern part of its range it even inhabits boreal coniferous forest along sandy roadsides.

Cicindela lengi lengiDespite its relatively loose habitat requirements, C. lengi is not a common species. In Nebraska it may be locally abundant (Spomer et al. 2008), and while planning my trip I was fortunate to get a specific locality from Steve Spomer and Matt Brust for one of these localized populations in far northwestern Nebraska. [Happily, that locality was very close to the locality where I would be looking for another priority species for the trip, C. nebraskana (prairie long-lipped tiger beetle)]. The site – a sandy roadside embankment – was characterized by a very fine-grained sand, which Matt Brust tells me the species appears to favor over the coarser-grained sands more typical of the Sandhills to the east. Success did not come easily – when no adults were seen at the site after two consecutive days of searching, I hedged my bets and extracted larvae that I hoped would represent this species for an attempt at rearing them out to adulthood in the laboratory. Persistence paid off, however – a hunch told me to make one more visit to the site after a couple days in the Black Hills, with two adults (and another C. nebraskana!) being my reward.

The individual shown in the above photo was an unexpected surprise. It was captured a day later in the Sandhills proper at a locality where I expected to see not this species, but C. limbata (which I did succeed in finding at a nearby locality – see “Cicindela limbata – epilogue“). When I first saw this individual, I thought it was the ever present C. formosa (pictured below), which it greatly resembles and which, along with C. scutellaris, occurs commonly in suitable sand habitats throughout the Sandhills. Cicindela formosa formosaSomething about the way it flew gave me pause, however, and after capturing and looking closely at it in my hand I realized what it was. Cicindela lengi is distinguished from C. formosa morphologically by its slightly narrower form and longer, narrower labrum, but the quickest field identifier is the obliquely straight humeral marking (“C”-shaped in C. formosa). There are subtle behavioral differences also – both species are alert and quick to fly, but C. lengi lands quickly after a short flight, whereas C. formosa flies further and tends to land with a comical bounce and tumble or two across the sand. Cicindela lengi and C. formosa are not closely related despite their similar appearance – the former is assigned to subgenus Cicindela (Tribonia), while the latter is assigned to the nominate subgenus. The individual pictured above represents the nominate C. lengi lengi – populations north of Nebraska and Colorado exhibit a distinct coppery underside to the thorax and are assigned to subspecies C. lengi versuta, while populations in the southwestern part of its range show broadly coalesced elytral maculations and are assigned to subspecies C. lengi jordai.

REFERENCES:

Pearson, D. L., C. B. Knisley and C. J. Kazilek. 2006. A Field Guide to the Tiger Beetles of the United States and Canada. Oxford University Press, New York, 227 pp.

Spomer, S. M., M. L. Brust, D. C. Backlund and S. Weins. 2008. Tiger beetles of South Dakota & Nebraska. University of Nebraska-Lincoln Special Publication, 60 pp.

You messin’ with me?

/ Ted C. MacRae / 11 Comments

Cicindela formosa formosa

This is another one of the tiger beetles I brought back alive from the Sandhills of western Nebraska since I was unable to get any good photographs of this species in the field.  If this photo looks familiar, you may recall this headshot of another individual, representing the eastern subspecies (Cicindela formosa generosa), that I took back in September in southeast Missouri.  Compare the two photos to see the distinctly reddish dorsal coloration of nominotypical C. formosa versus the darkened coloration of C. formosa generosa.  Nominotypical C. formosa also has a much more violaceous ventral coloration.

If this guy looks a little angry, it’s because he is! I had prodded and poked him for some time by the time this photo was taken, trying to coax/force him away from the edge of terrarium in which I had him confined.  Every time I thought I had him sitting still in a good position, he would run suddenly and make a beeline to the edge – a most unphotogenic place.  He even reached up a few times, seemingly out of shear frustration, and bit at my finger while I tried to push him back away from the terrarium wall (talk about biting the hand that feeds you!).  Finally I got him sitting still in the middle of the terrarium – his half-cocked mandibles suggesting exhaustion or rage, or maybe both.

Like the Cicindela limbata individual from the same locality that I brought back alive for photographs, this little beast lived for 10 weeks in his terrarium before, ahem… donating his body to science.   Also like C. limbata, he amusingly reached up and grabbed caterpillars directly from the forceps almost every time one was offered.  I think my colleagues in the lab enjoyed feeding time as much as the tiger beetle!

Welcome to the “new” Beetles In The Bush

/ Ted C. MacRae / 5 Comments

After much consideration, I have decided to move Beetles In The Bush to its new home here at WordPress.  To those of you coming here from the old site, thank you for following the link.  To those of you who have stumbled upon this site from somewhere else, welcome!

The decision to move was not easy, nor was it taken lightly, but it was something I had been considering for quite awhile.  The debates about WordPress versus Blogger are well chronicled, and you will find many who strongly believe in one or the other.  For me, the choice was not so clear – each offers advantages relative to the other.  What really attracted me to  WordPress, however, was the horizontal menu bar linked to static “Pages” that are separate from chronologically-ordered posts – ideal for expanded profiles, tables of contents, indices, annotated link galleries, etc.  I toyed with different methods for creating these in Blogger and actually found a way to simulate them along with the menu bar.  However, it took a lot of effort learning HTML code, and the results were just not very crisp when compared this standard WordPress feature.  Frankly, I’d rather spend my time writing posts rather than HTML code.  Moreover, I’ve always been impressed with the clean, professional look of the WordPress templates – very attractive.

Nevertheless, the idea of actually moving my blog was still a daunting thought.  Would everything transfer or would I have to start over?  Would I lose my photos?  Would the post formatting get messed up?  The more I researched it, the more feasible it seemed, and when I actually created a site for beta testing I was immediately impressed with the functionality and ease of use.  Setting up the new blog, transferring the posts and comments from the old site, adding the “page” features that I had so long desired, and all the fine-tuning to achieve the “look” that I wanted only took a few hours.  The hardest part was deciding on a template.  Alex may think I simply copied what he did, the truth is I previewed both the initial blog and the finished blog in every template offered by WordPress.  I liked the clean lines, crisp fonts, and simple elegance of this layout.  I also debated about whether to replace the old banner, but ultimately decided a move to a new site deserved a new banner to go along with it.  I suppose switching sites might mess up page stats, Google rankings, and other technical issues that concern serious bloggers.  I’ll need to keep the old site live, since that is where all the photos from the previous posts are housed – that might ‘steal’ hits that would have otherwise come to this site when people do Google searches.  I guess all I can hope is that people landing on the old site will follow the redirect.

So, welcome to the new Beetles In The Bush – I hope you’ll take a moment to explore the new pages.  I’ve included a short biography in About, a Table of Contents with a complete list of posts (and recommendations for some of my favorites), a description of my personal Insect Collection with links to inventories for certain taxa, a complete list of my Publications, and an annotated list of Links that I’ve found useful for identification and nomenclature of insects and plants.  Comments are always welcome, and feel free to Contact me directly if you have specific questions or comments.  Don’t forget to update your links from:

http://beetlesinthebush.blogspot.com

to:

http://beetlesinthebush.wordpress.com