Monday, November 19, 2012
Black-Legged Ticks
We guest-wrote another brief article for the Kentucky Native Plant and Wildlife blog, a site maintained by U.K. Wildlife Extension Specialist Dr. Tom Barnes. The topic: black-legged ticks. These are the ticks that spread Lyme disease in the northeastern United States. Well, the tick has been found in Kentucky now, too. Are we at risk for Lyme disease? Take a look at the article and find out.
Saturday, September 8, 2012
Monarch Tagging at the Children's Garden
Blake Newton, UK Extension Entomology
Come to the UK-LGUCG Arboretum in Lexington Kentucky during the month of September to help with monarch butterfly tagging!
Monarch butterflies are one of the few butterfly species that migrate long distances. The monarchs that hatch in Kentucky during the summer actually migrate all the way to Mexico at the end of the year. Then, they return to Kentucky next year to lay more eggs! Scientists are interested in studying their migration patterns and survival rates, and the best way to do this is by capturing live monarch butterflies and tagging them with harmless stickers. Then, when the butterflies have completed their southern migration, those stickers are cataloged by scientists in Mexico.
Kids (and their parents) can help by going to the Children's Garden at the Lexington Arboretum. There, you can take command of a butterfly net and try to catch a monarch. It's tougher than it sounds: I chased one around for 15 minutes the other day and I still couldn't catch it. They're aerodynamic! But most kids are faster than I am, so take a trip to the Children's Garden on a sunny, warm day in September and ask to help with butterfly tagging!
You can read more about the monarch tagging project at MonarchWatch.org.
Come to the UK-LGUCG Arboretum in Lexington Kentucky during the month of September to help with monarch butterfly tagging!
Monarch butterflies are one of the few butterfly species that migrate long distances. The monarchs that hatch in Kentucky during the summer actually migrate all the way to Mexico at the end of the year. Then, they return to Kentucky next year to lay more eggs! Scientists are interested in studying their migration patterns and survival rates, and the best way to do this is by capturing live monarch butterflies and tagging them with harmless stickers. Then, when the butterflies have completed their southern migration, those stickers are cataloged by scientists in Mexico.
Kids (and their parents) can help by going to the Children's Garden at the Lexington Arboretum. There, you can take command of a butterfly net and try to catch a monarch. It's tougher than it sounds: I chased one around for 15 minutes the other day and I still couldn't catch it. They're aerodynamic! But most kids are faster than I am, so take a trip to the Children's Garden on a sunny, warm day in September and ask to help with butterfly tagging!
You can read more about the monarch tagging project at MonarchWatch.org.
Saturday, August 25, 2012
2012 Kentucky State Fair: 4-H Entomology Winners
Blake Newton, UK Extension Entomologist
The Kentucky State Fair is happening right now in Louisville, Kentucky. Last week, I had a chance to judge this year's entries in the 4-H Entomology insect collection contest! Overall, we had 28 collections and I think that they looked better than ever. Here are the winners for each category...
1st Year (Class 687): Emmett King, Oldham Co
2nd Year (Class 688): Cody Hart, Metcalfe Co
3rd Year (Class 689): T.J. Svoboda, Clark Co
5th Year (Class 691): Sandra Brock, Harrison Co
And the overall champs:
Grand Champion: T.J. Svoboda - Clark Co (Class 689)
Reserve Champion: Cindesta Belcher - Estill Co (Class 689)
It was nice to see that several of last year's winners were able to win this year as well (you can see last year's winners here). Congratulations to everyone, and keep it up for next year! You can learn more about making a 4-H Entomology insect collection here.
The Kentucky State Fair is happening right now in Louisville, Kentucky. Last week, I had a chance to judge this year's entries in the 4-H Entomology insect collection contest! Overall, we had 28 collections and I think that they looked better than ever. Here are the winners for each category...
1st Year (Class 687): Emmett King, Oldham Co
2nd Year (Class 688): Cody Hart, Metcalfe Co
3rd Year (Class 689): T.J. Svoboda, Clark Co
5th Year (Class 691): Sandra Brock, Harrison Co
And the overall champs:
Grand Champion: T.J. Svoboda - Clark Co (Class 689)
Reserve Champion: Cindesta Belcher - Estill Co (Class 689)
It was nice to see that several of last year's winners were able to win this year as well (you can see last year's winners here). Congratulations to everyone, and keep it up for next year! You can learn more about making a 4-H Entomology insect collection here.
Friday, July 27, 2012
Moth 5: National Moth Week
Blake Newton, UK Extension Entomology
Here's my last moth for National Moth Week:
Yep, it's really a moth. This one is trying to look like a paper wasp, but the "fluffy," scaly body and thick, feathery antennae reveal its true nature. A real paper wasp has shiny integument and thin antennae.
I don't have much to say about the identification of this one. That's because I haven't been able to figure out what it is! You would think that a moth this distinctive would be easy to identify, but there is actually a whole "tribe" (a tribe sits somewhere between Family and Genus) of wasps that look similar to this, all of which belong to the Family Sesidae, a group filled with wasp-like moths.
On Bugguide, I was able to find at least three moths in our area that could be a match: Paranthrene asilipennis, Paranthrene dollii, and Vitacea polistiformis. To me, all of these look very similar, and I think it takes a real expert in this group to tell the difference. I'll probably never learn what it is, unless one of those experts takes a look at this blog.
So my week with moths comes to an end. I am still not a moth expert. If anything, I have learned that the world of moth diversity is even more complex than I thought. But you can't learn about every moth at once. This week, I learned a little bit about five of them. Only about 125,000 to go!
Here's my last moth for National Moth Week:
Yep, it's really a moth. This one is trying to look like a paper wasp, but the "fluffy," scaly body and thick, feathery antennae reveal its true nature. A real paper wasp has shiny integument and thin antennae.
I don't have much to say about the identification of this one. That's because I haven't been able to figure out what it is! You would think that a moth this distinctive would be easy to identify, but there is actually a whole "tribe" (a tribe sits somewhere between Family and Genus) of wasps that look similar to this, all of which belong to the Family Sesidae, a group filled with wasp-like moths.
On Bugguide, I was able to find at least three moths in our area that could be a match: Paranthrene asilipennis, Paranthrene dollii, and Vitacea polistiformis. To me, all of these look very similar, and I think it takes a real expert in this group to tell the difference. I'll probably never learn what it is, unless one of those experts takes a look at this blog.
So my week with moths comes to an end. I am still not a moth expert. If anything, I have learned that the world of moth diversity is even more complex than I thought. But you can't learn about every moth at once. This week, I learned a little bit about five of them. Only about 125,000 to go!
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Moth 4: National Moth Week
Blake Newton, UK Extension Entomology
Today's moth looks a lot like a butterfly:
In fact, I thought it was a butterfly the first time I saw it. It's got colorful wings like a butterfly. It was flitting around during the day like a butterfly. What makes it a moth instead of a butterfly? The key is the antennae: most butterflies have knobbed antennae, while most moths have straight, threadlike antennae (or plumed, feathery antennae). There are some exceptions to this rule, but not among moths and butterflies that you are likely to find in Kentucky.
This creature has threadlike antennae, so it's a moth. Where do we go from there?
This one was pretty easy to identify. Google Image: "black moth red white." I find something that looks like my moth in the second image. A click takes me straight to bugguide's entry for Psychomorpha epimenis, a.k.a. the "Grapevine Epimenis." A quick check through the info suggest that this moth is occurs in my area and that there aren't any moths that are commonly mistaken this one, so I'm pretty confident on this one.
Today's moth looks a lot like a butterfly:
In fact, I thought it was a butterfly the first time I saw it. It's got colorful wings like a butterfly. It was flitting around during the day like a butterfly. What makes it a moth instead of a butterfly? The key is the antennae: most butterflies have knobbed antennae, while most moths have straight, threadlike antennae (or plumed, feathery antennae). There are some exceptions to this rule, but not among moths and butterflies that you are likely to find in Kentucky.
This creature has threadlike antennae, so it's a moth. Where do we go from there?
This one was pretty easy to identify. Google Image: "black moth red white." I find something that looks like my moth in the second image. A click takes me straight to bugguide's entry for Psychomorpha epimenis, a.k.a. the "Grapevine Epimenis." A quick check through the info suggest that this moth is occurs in my area and that there aren't any moths that are commonly mistaken this one, so I'm pretty confident on this one.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Moth 3: National Moth Week
Blake Newton, UK Extension Entomology
Here's a moth that I've seen many times, but I've never known what it was. I finally got a nice picture of it a couple of nights ago on my porch:
It's very delicate and pretty, with translucent wings and blue spots. One of my favorites. So what's its name?
Since I went into great detail on the identification process for the last two moths, I'll give the abbreviated version for the rest of the week.
Google Image: "tan moth translucent wings." Nothing. Looks a little like a moth in family Geometridae, so Google Image: "Geometridae translucent blue spots." Nothing. Maybe it's a tiger moth, family Arctiidae... many tiger moths are white or beige, with spots. Google Image: "tiger moth translucent wings blue." Nothing. I'm still convinced that it looks like Geometridae, even though it doesn't have wavy lines in its wings. Those creamy translucent wings just look like geometer wings. Google Image: "Geometridae translucent wings." Hey, there's something, about 55 images in. A Flickr images identified as "The Beggar, Eubaphe mendica." Is that my moth?
Bugguide: "beggar." http://bugguide.net/node/view/3876. So it is a geometrid, and it even says "this is not a typical geometer in appearance, at least." I'm pretty sure that's my moth! Very nice. I don't think I'll forget this pretty lady.
Here's a moth that I've seen many times, but I've never known what it was. I finally got a nice picture of it a couple of nights ago on my porch:
It's very delicate and pretty, with translucent wings and blue spots. One of my favorites. So what's its name?
Since I went into great detail on the identification process for the last two moths, I'll give the abbreviated version for the rest of the week.
Google Image: "tan moth translucent wings." Nothing. Looks a little like a moth in family Geometridae, so Google Image: "Geometridae translucent blue spots." Nothing. Maybe it's a tiger moth, family Arctiidae... many tiger moths are white or beige, with spots. Google Image: "tiger moth translucent wings blue." Nothing. I'm still convinced that it looks like Geometridae, even though it doesn't have wavy lines in its wings. Those creamy translucent wings just look like geometer wings. Google Image: "Geometridae translucent wings." Hey, there's something, about 55 images in. A Flickr images identified as "The Beggar, Eubaphe mendica." Is that my moth?
Bugguide: "beggar." http://bugguide.net/node/view/3876. So it is a geometrid, and it even says "this is not a typical geometer in appearance, at least." I'm pretty sure that's my moth! Very nice. I don't think I'll forget this pretty lady.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Moth 2: National Moth Week
Blake Newton, UK Extension Entomology
Today's moth is a tough one. Why? Take a look:
I found it in my garage a couple of weeks ago and I took a picture of it specifically for this"moth week" blog project. Now, I regret it. I should have found an easier moth to identify!
To me, this one is hard to identify because it is a medium-sized gray and/or brown moth. In the U.S., there are literally hundreds of species of medium-sized, gray and/or brown moths. Many of them are very closely related to each other, and they all have very similar body shapes and structure, so the only differences between many of them are in the colors found on their wings. I'm not colorblind, but, honestly, all of the gray and brown patterns look the same to me (heck, the patterns on butterfly wings look the same to me too, so I guess it doesn't have anything to do with gray and brown).
So, at first glance anyway, this one is a very typical gray and brown moth. Some clues: it was a little bigger than what I would call medium-sized. The pegs in that pegboard are 1" apart (center-to-center), so the moth was about 1" long. That's actually pretty large for a moth. Also, this moth showed up at night, so it is probably a night-flier. That's not much of a clue--most moths are night fliers. But this fact may help me to eliminate a few possibilities down the road.
When looking at a brown or gray moth, my first thought is always "noctuid." Noctuid is a name used for moths in the family Noctuidae. The word is also used (informally, and sometimes incorrectly) for a few other kinds of moths, some of which were once a part of Noctuidae family, and some of which are closely related to Noctuidae. There are many species of these so-called noctuids. The family noctuidae alone includes about 3,000 species in North America. MANY of these are gray or brown, and around 1" long. From a picture, there is no single, reliable way to tell whether a moth belongs to the family Noctuidae or not. As far as I know, the best way to identify this creature is to hunt for pictures on the net. So let's go!
Instead of going for an entomology textbook or Bugguide, the first thing I do is a Google Image search for "gray moth rusty." I used those terms because the moth is mostly gray (that's the way it looks in the photo, anyway) and it has some waves and blotches that look, to me, like a rust color. The first few results didn't look anything like my moth, but about 100 images in, I found something that looked similar but not identical. Here it is, at a blog maintained by Dave H. Small: http://goo.gl/YkBIR
Like I said, the moth isn't exactly right. The rusty blotches aren't in the right places. But it looks like it might be related to my moth. It's name, according to Dave H. Small, is the "Ultronia Underwing," Catocala ultronia. Dave's I.D. might not be exactly right, but I'll bet that he's close. This seems like a good lead, so it's time to check Bugguide. Is my moth closely related to Catcala ultronia?
Well, here's how to identify Catcala ultronia, according to Bugguide: "forewing pattern predominantly longitudinal (running from base to outer margin), rather than transverse (running from costa to inner margin) as in many other Catocala species; typically has dark brown to black strip along inner margin, and similar-colored subapical patch extending from outer margin to PM line or reniform spot; central longitudinal area light gray or brown, but the extent and intensity of shading varies considerably among individuals; pale brown patch usually present along costa at apex; hinding dark orangish-red, rarely pinkish or yellow, with complete black median band and wider black terminal band; small white patch at apex; antennae filiform; sexes similar"
Ah, come on, man. I've been an entomologist for 16 years now, and that sounds like gibberish to me. Entomologist are supposed to talk tarsomeres and sternites, not "black strips" and "white patches." Damn it Jim, I'm an entomologist, not an interior decorator. And how can a pattern be "predominantly longitudinal"? A color pattern is a two-dimensional field and it doesn't have direction!(!!!)
So that description is not really useful to me. Not yet, anyway.
From Bugguide's entry for Catocala ultronia, I back up one step to the Catocala genus page here: http://bugguide.net/node/view/368/bgimage. Catocala is indeed in the family Noctuidae, and it represents the so-called "underwing" moths. Underwings are distinguished by their brightly-colored hind wings. These colors are hidden when the moth is at rest, like the moth in my photo. I have seen many underwings before, so I am somewhat familiar with these moths, but I did not realize that they all belonged to the same genus. Nice! The next step is to check is the number of species. 110 in North America. Gulp. And something else from this page: these moths are known for the "challenge of identifying specimens (many are difficult to distinguish from one or more similar species)." That sounds like pep talkin' to me!
I'm still not convinced that my moth is an underwing, or even a noctuid, but this is as good a place as any to start. It's time to look at a bunch of pictures. So at the top of the Catocala page I click "images", which leads me to Bugguide's collection of images for moths in this genus.
For those of you who are not familiar with Bugguide, here's the deal. It's probably the most important resource on the internet for the identification of insects (photographed insects, anyway) in North America. Bugguide is organized by its users: people send in photos and ask for them to be identified. Other users look at the photos and move them into the correct place on the site. Bugguide is used by professional entomologists, amateur hobbyists (who often know insect I.D. better than the pros!), and anyone else with an interest in insect identification. Bugguide isn't perfect. It's not useful for insects that are difficult or impossible to photograph (such as insects that live inside leaves or wood). And there are some insects that are truly impossible to identify from photographs. And sometimes the bugs are "filed" in the wrong places on the site(these errors are usually corrected quickly, though, by other members). But I use Bugguide almost every day in my job. It's not an exaggeration to say that Bugguide has changed entomology (and for the better, I think!).
Here's another minor problem with Bugguide: every picture that gets sent in, stays in. So there are often hundreds of images of single species, including ones that are easy to identify. And sometimes you have to look through all these to get to the one you want. For the genus Catocala, Bugguide has 63 pages of images! A typical Bugguide page has about 20 pictures. That's a lot of gray and brown moths. And not nearly enough bullets.
Click. Click. Click. That's me clicking through the first 12 pages of Catocala. All of the images on the first 12 pages are not identified any further than "Catocala". These images are not very useful to me, except to show me that, yes, there are a few moths here that look a little like mine, so perhaps I'm in the right place. These unidentified images also give you an idea of how difficult these moths are to identify. It may also mean that there are a few species that haven't been officially cataloged by scientists! I hope that my moth isn't one of those.
Click Click Click Click Click Click. More pages, no matches. Soon, though I get to Catocala ultronia again. Hmmm... it still looks the most like my moth. Gotta keep clicking, though.
Clickity-click. Lots of interesting names here. Peninent Underwing... Little Underwing... Serene Underwing... Woody Underwing...
Wait a second. Woody Underwing? Catocala grynea, you say? Light gray wings... rusty stripes and blotches. This looks a lot like my moth! Best match so far and by far. Close enough, at least, to suggest that I am in the correct family and genus. But let's keep looking through Catocala for even better matches.
I see a few other candidates. Charming Underwing comes closest, but it's no contest. Wood Underwing is my best bet. And its info-page checks out: this moth is found in my area, its about the right size, and it flies in June. Unless I'm way off, and my moth is from some other genus or species, I'm fairly sure that the creature in my photo is Catocala grynea.
Am I 100% sure? No way. Identifying insects from photos is a fun game and it can be instructive, but it isn't science. The moth pictured above is Catocala grynea right up until someone tells me that I'm wrong!
Today's moth is a tough one. Why? Take a look:
I found it in my garage a couple of weeks ago and I took a picture of it specifically for this"moth week" blog project. Now, I regret it. I should have found an easier moth to identify!
To me, this one is hard to identify because it is a medium-sized gray and/or brown moth. In the U.S., there are literally hundreds of species of medium-sized, gray and/or brown moths. Many of them are very closely related to each other, and they all have very similar body shapes and structure, so the only differences between many of them are in the colors found on their wings. I'm not colorblind, but, honestly, all of the gray and brown patterns look the same to me (heck, the patterns on butterfly wings look the same to me too, so I guess it doesn't have anything to do with gray and brown).
So, at first glance anyway, this one is a very typical gray and brown moth. Some clues: it was a little bigger than what I would call medium-sized. The pegs in that pegboard are 1" apart (center-to-center), so the moth was about 1" long. That's actually pretty large for a moth. Also, this moth showed up at night, so it is probably a night-flier. That's not much of a clue--most moths are night fliers. But this fact may help me to eliminate a few possibilities down the road.
When looking at a brown or gray moth, my first thought is always "noctuid." Noctuid is a name used for moths in the family Noctuidae. The word is also used (informally, and sometimes incorrectly) for a few other kinds of moths, some of which were once a part of Noctuidae family, and some of which are closely related to Noctuidae. There are many species of these so-called noctuids. The family noctuidae alone includes about 3,000 species in North America. MANY of these are gray or brown, and around 1" long. From a picture, there is no single, reliable way to tell whether a moth belongs to the family Noctuidae or not. As far as I know, the best way to identify this creature is to hunt for pictures on the net. So let's go!
Instead of going for an entomology textbook or Bugguide, the first thing I do is a Google Image search for "gray moth rusty." I used those terms because the moth is mostly gray (that's the way it looks in the photo, anyway) and it has some waves and blotches that look, to me, like a rust color. The first few results didn't look anything like my moth, but about 100 images in, I found something that looked similar but not identical. Here it is, at a blog maintained by Dave H. Small: http://goo.gl/YkBIR
Like I said, the moth isn't exactly right. The rusty blotches aren't in the right places. But it looks like it might be related to my moth. It's name, according to Dave H. Small, is the "Ultronia Underwing," Catocala ultronia. Dave's I.D. might not be exactly right, but I'll bet that he's close. This seems like a good lead, so it's time to check Bugguide. Is my moth closely related to Catcala ultronia?
Well, here's how to identify Catcala ultronia, according to Bugguide: "forewing pattern predominantly longitudinal (running from base to outer margin), rather than transverse (running from costa to inner margin) as in many other Catocala species; typically has dark brown to black strip along inner margin, and similar-colored subapical patch extending from outer margin to PM line or reniform spot; central longitudinal area light gray or brown, but the extent and intensity of shading varies considerably among individuals; pale brown patch usually present along costa at apex; hinding dark orangish-red, rarely pinkish or yellow, with complete black median band and wider black terminal band; small white patch at apex; antennae filiform; sexes similar"
Ah, come on, man. I've been an entomologist for 16 years now, and that sounds like gibberish to me. Entomologist are supposed to talk tarsomeres and sternites, not "black strips" and "white patches." Damn it Jim, I'm an entomologist, not an interior decorator. And how can a pattern be "predominantly longitudinal"? A color pattern is a two-dimensional field and it doesn't have direction!(!!!)
So that description is not really useful to me. Not yet, anyway.
From Bugguide's entry for Catocala ultronia, I back up one step to the Catocala genus page here: http://bugguide.net/node/view/368/bgimage. Catocala is indeed in the family Noctuidae, and it represents the so-called "underwing" moths. Underwings are distinguished by their brightly-colored hind wings. These colors are hidden when the moth is at rest, like the moth in my photo. I have seen many underwings before, so I am somewhat familiar with these moths, but I did not realize that they all belonged to the same genus. Nice! The next step is to check is the number of species. 110 in North America. Gulp. And something else from this page: these moths are known for the "challenge of identifying specimens (many are difficult to distinguish from one or more similar species)." That sounds like pep talkin' to me!
I'm still not convinced that my moth is an underwing, or even a noctuid, but this is as good a place as any to start. It's time to look at a bunch of pictures. So at the top of the Catocala page I click "images", which leads me to Bugguide's collection of images for moths in this genus.
For those of you who are not familiar with Bugguide, here's the deal. It's probably the most important resource on the internet for the identification of insects (photographed insects, anyway) in North America. Bugguide is organized by its users: people send in photos and ask for them to be identified. Other users look at the photos and move them into the correct place on the site. Bugguide is used by professional entomologists, amateur hobbyists (who often know insect I.D. better than the pros!), and anyone else with an interest in insect identification. Bugguide isn't perfect. It's not useful for insects that are difficult or impossible to photograph (such as insects that live inside leaves or wood). And there are some insects that are truly impossible to identify from photographs. And sometimes the bugs are "filed" in the wrong places on the site(these errors are usually corrected quickly, though, by other members). But I use Bugguide almost every day in my job. It's not an exaggeration to say that Bugguide has changed entomology (and for the better, I think!).
Here's another minor problem with Bugguide: every picture that gets sent in, stays in. So there are often hundreds of images of single species, including ones that are easy to identify. And sometimes you have to look through all these to get to the one you want. For the genus Catocala, Bugguide has 63 pages of images! A typical Bugguide page has about 20 pictures. That's a lot of gray and brown moths. And not nearly enough bullets.
Click. Click. Click. That's me clicking through the first 12 pages of Catocala. All of the images on the first 12 pages are not identified any further than "Catocala". These images are not very useful to me, except to show me that, yes, there are a few moths here that look a little like mine, so perhaps I'm in the right place. These unidentified images also give you an idea of how difficult these moths are to identify. It may also mean that there are a few species that haven't been officially cataloged by scientists! I hope that my moth isn't one of those.
Click Click Click Click Click Click. More pages, no matches. Soon, though I get to Catocala ultronia again. Hmmm... it still looks the most like my moth. Gotta keep clicking, though.
Clickity-click. Lots of interesting names here. Peninent Underwing... Little Underwing... Serene Underwing... Woody Underwing...
Wait a second. Woody Underwing? Catocala grynea, you say? Light gray wings... rusty stripes and blotches. This looks a lot like my moth! Best match so far and by far. Close enough, at least, to suggest that I am in the correct family and genus. But let's keep looking through Catocala for even better matches.
I see a few other candidates. Charming Underwing comes closest, but it's no contest. Wood Underwing is my best bet. And its info-page checks out: this moth is found in my area, its about the right size, and it flies in June. Unless I'm way off, and my moth is from some other genus or species, I'm fairly sure that the creature in my photo is Catocala grynea.
Am I 100% sure? No way. Identifying insects from photos is a fun game and it can be instructive, but it isn't science. The moth pictured above is Catocala grynea right up until someone tells me that I'm wrong!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
