eee 2 rire , ‘ eT Te an the : en cmecra at whe hee f item’
eae eee i
fore ee
ted tieded sents ats Cee pap tatat a ai fi : : antes ; ere sinew Ae. et im anaricte é pre ee a : etna. Care ee
us es Qacataste nes ate ern ie0e apt a eat inert
ath! fe rep
cnet: oats’
a thd creat
ae seaae Fn seroe ries ns * are : 2 = Sa ; : tf SHEE ; -
~ OTT ae te f ree ieee et
rene races As
ean easel we
ema
Pigs ee i, Gl” Aes (i ees | a tute tte i one . PR Sy 5. a ae r He on ron or vd ta
\ i 7 iy 7 i‘ ¥] its ti Mi 1 | caw . iY { j { ) 4 Pi 7 1 ‘ J 4 ae Lt D a Noh & \ : i ‘ | : : i uf : > any mw § Ay x ¥ ; 7 a isi i 7 j / ms fl ) i if: boyd oP Pal ; on j : i A Vv} . ‘ | | | - } a ' | . . | 4 | | ee ie | ' . ‘
ON r “ MC 00 : y. and Natural eA ih at Veiigine 3 - Bin
Ry a oe fu ay j ve / rm - Mea i bel : ere ve
we ; Sar y val <t
A) i i. i | on
; We ant f aS = # a i i { ae aa 7 ° 1 ' a 4 a en i [
ISSN: 0952-7583
British Journal of ENTOMOLOGY and Natural History
Volume 8 1995
Published by the British Entomological and Natural History Society and incorporating its Proceedings and Transactions
British Journal of Entomology and Natural History is published by the British Entomological and Natural History Society, Dinton Pastures Country Park, Davis Street, Hurst, Reading, Berkshire RG10 OTH, UK. Tel: 01734-321402. The journal is distributed free to BENHS members.
Editor Richard A. Jones, B.Sc., F.R.E.S., F.L.S. 13 Bellwood Road Nunhead London SE15 3DE
Editorial Committee Rev. D.J.L. Agassiz, M.A., Ph.D. R.D.G. Barrington, B.Sc. E.S. Bradford P.J. Chandler, B.Sc., F.R.E.S. B. Goater, B.Sc., M.I.Biol. A.J. Halstead, M.Sc. R.D. Hawkins, M.A. P.J. Hodge T.G. Howarth, B.E.M., F.R.E.S. I.F.G. McLean, Ph.D., F.R.E.S. Mrs F.M. Murphy, B.Sc. M.J. Simmons, M.Sc T.R.E. Southwood, K.B., D.Sc., F.R.S. R.W.J. Uffen, M.Sc., F.R.E.S. B.K. West, B.Ed.
© 1995 British Entomological and Natural History Society.
Registered charity number: 213149
Typeset by Dobbie Typesetting Limited, Tavistock. Printed in England by Henry Ling Ltd, Dorchester.
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY
Index to volume 8, 1995
Compiled by David Young, with the assistance of P.J. Chandler, A.J. Halstead, N. Hall, A.W. Jones, A.J. Pickles, J. Robbins and R.D. Hawkins
Dates of publication
Part | — January 1995 Part 2 — March 1995 Part 3 — September 1995 Part 4 — October 1995
GENERAL Entomological bygones or historical entomological collecting equipment and memorabilia 100 Flies in the Yorkshire museum 154 Ground beetles in the Yorkshire museum 154 Insect conservation biology 17 Insects: an outline of entomology 59 Insects: life cycles and the seasons 60 Invertebrate zoology 77 Invertebrates of Wales: a review of important sites and species 159 New life for old woods 216 Ranty 76 Systematic and applied entomology: an introduction 144
British species of Metopia with two new to Britain 33
Colour plates
Aculeate wasps and bees of Crow Wood, Finningley in
Watsonian Yorkshire, with the introduction of a
new national quality scoring system 49 Announcements
Bedfordshire butterflies and moths
rear cover part |
BENHS expedition 72
Blachford collection of Coleoptera 96
Microlepidoptera of Middlesex: an
appeal for records 42
Nat. Pyralid Recording Scheme 174
Prof. Hering Memonial Res. Fund 72
Public liability insurance rear cover part 3 Annual Exhibition Reports for 1994
Arachnida 212
Brush butterflies 177
British macrolepidoptera 181 1 101 British microlepidoptera 188 M177 III 208
Coleoptera 201
Corrigendum to 1992 report 213 Diptera 198
Dennaptera 210
Foreign lepidoptera 194 Hemiptera 207
Illustrations 212
Hymenoptera 207
Mecoptera 211
Correction to Butterfly Conservation’s claimed attitudes on conservation 171 Deadwood Coleoptera from two important Denbighshire parklands, including five new to Wales 156 Dipterists Forum 121 Dirhagus pygmacus and Hallomenus binotatus: two beetles new to Wales 158 Distribution and habits of the bee Hylaeus pectoralis in
Neuroptera 21] Britain 430 Odonata 210 Distribution and habits of the small carpenter bee Ceratina
Orthoptera 210 cyanea in Britain | Siphonaptera 211 Distribution of the Socicty’s Journal 222 Armadillidium pictum new to Gloucestershire 76 Doreatoma dresdensis new to Glos. 137 BENHS workshop 8 April 1995 The National Network Editorial. House style 5: County names in records 27 for Recording Britain’s Moth’s 170 Effects of cattle poaching on insects living at the margin Breeding experiment with the Small Copper Butterfly 97 of the river Itchen, 165 Book reviews and notices Ephemera lineata Eaton at Reading 75 Agricultural entomology 160 Field meetings of the BENHS Australian beetles 6 Tadnoll Heath, 23 May 1993 88 Book of the spider 10 Mount Cabum NNR, 19 June 1993 88 Butterflies and moths of Berkshire 221 Dinton Pastures , 23 April 1994 90 Butterflies’ fly-past 47 Aldbury Common, 11 June 1994 91
Colour guide to hoverfly larvae 48 Nunhead Cemetery, 9 July 1994 92 Dic Kafer Miltelcuropas 77 Richmond Park, 6 August 1994 93 Die Schmetterlinge Osterreichs (Lepidoptera). Abernethy Forest, 13 August 1994 94 Systematisches Verzeichnis mit Verbreitungs- Powerstock Common,11 June 1994 214 angaben fur die cinzelnen Bundeslander 35 Catfield Fen, 16 July 1994 214
ill
Further study of the behavioural patterns of six species of British butterfly whilst in copula 7 Indoor mectings of the BENHS 14 June 1994 78 12 July 1994 80 13 September 1994 81 10 October 1994 82 7 November 1994 84 13 December 1994 138 10 January 1995 140 28 February 1995 141 14 March 1995 144 Interesting saproxylic fauna at Snelsmore Common 74 Letters to the editor: Capital letters for English names 119 County names 169 Habitat preference in the Lepidoptera and distribution in light-traps 155 Life cycle, distribution and habits of Hypena obsitalis in Devonshire 37 Moths at Carlyon Bay, Comwall recorded 1989-1993 61 Myopites eximia new to Devon 157 Obituaries 1.G.Farwell 87 BJ.MacNulty 175 Observations of Bombus terrestris feeding on honeydew 73 Officers’ reports for 1994 Council’s report 145 Curator’s report 152 Editor’s report 153 Librarian’s report 151 Prof. Hering Memonial Res. Fund 150 Treasurer's report 146 Panoquina panoquinoides cugeon from the Winward Islands, Lesser Antilles 161 Report of the discussion meeting held on 12 May 1992 to consider invertebrate conservation in the UK 19 Rheotanytarsus rioensis, a new species of the pentapoda group, from the Canary Islands 11 Some observations on the pros and cons of being a bark- feeding insect 129 Some records of root-aphids on spruce in Britain 125 Swammerdammia compunctella in Merthyr Tydfill, 112 Two new species of Megaselia 113 Two species of Agromyzidae new to the British fauna 74 Understanding size and pattern variation in mainland Britain Pararge aegeria 102 Winter emergence of Phyllonorycter strigulatella 158
CONTRIBUTORS
Agassiz, D. 142
Alexander, K.N.A. 74,76,91,137,157, 158,198,201 ,207 Allen, A.W.J. 202
Archer, M.E. 49,83
Armitage, P.D. 11
Bailey, K.E.J.Plate 11,177 Baker, B-R. 47,75
Ball, S. 80
Barrington, R.D.G. 178
Bland, K.P. 188
Bowdrey, J.P. 208
Boyd, G. 78,199,207
Bradford, E.S. 181,188 Britton, M.R. 178,181,189 Brock, J.P. 208
Brotheridge, DJ. 181, Plate 111
lv
Bum, J.T. 49
Butcher, A.G.J. 181,Plate 111
Callow, M. 178
Callow, N.A. 87
GartersC. 141
Chandler, P.J. 199 °
Clancy, S.P. 182,189,Plate 111
Clarke, J.H. 182,Plate 111,212
Classey, E.W. Plate 11,178
Colenutt, S. 189, Plate 111
Collins, G-.A. 93,199,208,211
Cook, R.R. 182
Copestake, D.R. 202
Corke, D. 161,162
Corley, M.F.V. 182,189,194, Plate 111
Cramp, PJ. 183,189
Deeming, J.C. 74
Dennis, R.C. Plate 11,178
Disney, R.H.L. 113
Dobson, A.H. 37,183,189,Plate 111
Drake, C.M. 165
Else,G.R. 1,43,119
Elston, HJ. Plate 11,195
Emmet, A.M. 183,189
Eversham, B.C. 202,207,210
Falk, S.J. 33
Fensome, B. 178
Foster, A-P 91,183,189,198,201,207
George, R.S. 211
Gill, N. 183
Goater, B. 35,183,Plate 111
Godtrey, A. 199
Hackett, D.S. 81,84,86,195,200,203 212,213
Hall, N. 183,196
Halstead, A.J. 60,78,80,81,84,85,142, 144,200,203 208
Harley, B.H. 213
Hannan, T.W. 183,197,200,Plate 111
Hamner, A.S. Plate 11,179
Harper, M.W. 190,Plate 111
Han, C. 183
Harvey, P.R. 200,208
Hawkins, R.D. 200
Haywood, B. 183
Haywood, R. 183
Heckford, R.J. 190
Henderson, M. 203
Henwood, B.P. 213
Hey, M. cover part 1
Hoare, D.I.B. Plate 11,204
Hoare, R.J.B. 190,Plate 111
Hodge, P.J. 200,204,207,209
Houghton, D.W. 179
Howton, D.H. 184,190,209
Hoy, S. 82,83
Iley, M. cover part 1
Jenkins, A. 184
Jones, A.M. Plate 11,179
Jones, R.A. 6,48,77,80,82,86,89 ,92,93,120,138,142, 144,154,160,169
Kemp, R. 180
King, G. 197
Kitching, I. 80 .
Knill-Jones, S.A. 7,180,184,191,205
Kolaj, A. 184
Langmaid, J.R. 191,Plate 111
Langton, P.H. 11
Lees, D.C. 88
Lonsdale, D. 17,126,129
Lott, D.A. 205
MacKenzie Reid, I. 185
Major, E. 125
Manning, D.V. 185
McCormick, R. 185,216
McLean, I.F.G. 79,82
Meredith, S. 84,86
Merrifield, K. 140
Middleton, A.P. 197
Middleton, H.G.F. 185
Miles, S.R. 19,85,140,143
Morgan, J. 169
Morris, M.G. 206
Muggleton, J. 86
Murphy, F. 10
Natural History Museum 194
Owen, D.F. 185
Owen, J. 186
Page, K. 144
Parker, M. 88,214
Parsons, M. 76,78,79,93,186,191
Payne, J.H. 180
Perry, I. 200
Phillips, J.W. 186
Pickles, A.J. 175,213
Pittis, S. 221
Plant, C.W. 100,138,186,201 211,212
Porter, D.A. 207,209
Porter, J. 180,186,192,210
Pratt,C. 186
Pullem, A. 138
Robbins, J. 192,201,209
Roberts, S.P.M. 119,209
Quinn, R. 81
Revels, R. cover part 3,180
Robertson, T.S. 97, Plate 1
Rouse, T. 180,186
Salt Del. 125
Sawyer, N. 86
Scanes, J.J. 185,187,Plate 111
Scoble, MJ. 59
Simmons, M.J. 187,192,201
Simpson, A.N.B. 187,192
Sims, I. 187,192
Skinner, B. 142,187,193,Plate 111
Slade, DJ. 112,158
Softly, R. 79,86
Sokoloff, P. 213
Spalding, A. 61
Standing, P.A. Plate 11,180
Sterling, MJ. 187,194,Plate 111
Sterling, P.H. 187,194,Plate 111
Stubbs, A.E. 121,171, Plate 11,201
Tebbutt, P. Plate 11,180,187
Telfer, M.G. 202,207,210
Trembath, D.A. 197
Tremewan, W.G. Plate 11,181
Tubbs, R.S. 181
Turner, C. 73
Uffen, R.W.J. 210
Ward, J.W. 187,Plate 111
Waring, P. 78,82,84,86,90,94,138, 140,141,156, 198,213,214,217
Wame, BJ. 187
Watson, C. 210
Wedd, D. 187
Williams, R. covers part 2 and 4 Wilson, M.R. 158,159 Winokur, L. Plate 1,102 Wooldridge, D.B. 188
Wyaltt, N.P. 33
Young, D.A. 90,188,222
COLEOPTERA
Abdera quadrifasciata 157 Actidium aterrimum 205 Agapanthia villosoviridescens 203 Agonum ericeti 204 A.sexpunctatum 204 Agrilus laticornis 203 A.pannonicus 9] A.sinuatus 202
Altica brevicollis 207 Amara anthobia 202 A.apricaria 202
A.bifrons 202
A.consularis 202 A.equestris 202 A.curynota 202
A.fulva 202
A.fusca 202
A.lucida 202
Amauronyx maerkeli 202 Amphimallon ochraceus 201 A. solstitialis 93,202 Anaglyptus mysticus 203 Anthophagus alpinus 205 Anthriscus sylvestris 80 Aphodius contaminatus 203 A.distinetus 202
Apion genistae 204 A.stolidum 207 Aplocnemus pini 203 Apteropeda globosa 201 Arhopalus rusticus 142,203 A.tristis 142
Athous campyloides 93,203 Attelabus nitens 203 Auletobius convexifrons 206 A.cylindnicollis 206 Bagous brevis 202 Bembidion ascendens 205 B.azurescens 205 B.bipunctatum 204,205 B.octomaculatum 138
B. pallidipenne 204 B.quadripustulatum 207 Bitoma crenata 157 Bolitochara mulsanti 204 Boreaphilus velox 205 Brachinus crepitans 142 Broscus cephalotes 203 Calathus ambiguus 202 C.cinetus 202
Carabus auratus 204 C.glabratus 95 Cardiophorus asellus 202 Carpelimus nitidus 205 C.obesus 205
C.pusillus 205
Cassida nebulosa 202 Cathormiocerus attaphilus 206 C.britannicus 206
C.maritimus 206 C.myrmecophilus 206 C.socius 206
Chactarthnia similis 205 Choragus sheppardi 204 Chrysolina americana 78,203 C.banksi 86
C.fastuosa 204 C.orichaleea 203 C.sanguinolenta 202 Chrysomela populi 203 Cicindela campestris 95,204 C.maritima 201
Cicones undata 92
Cionus variegatus 206 Cleonus piger 202
Clytus arietis 93,203 Coccinella quinquepunctata 201 Colydium elongatum 202 Conopalpus testaceus 203 Copris lunaris 204 Cryptarcha stngata 157 Crypticus quisquilius 202 Cryptocephalus aureolus 89 C.biguttatus 203 C.bilineatus 89
Cteniopus sulphureus 202 Ctesias serra 75,157 Curculio villosus 203 Cychrus caraboides 203 Cylindrinotus laevioctostriatus 75 Cymindis humeralis 205 Dacne bipustulata 82 Dasytes niger 202 Deleaster dichrous 201 Deliphrum tectum 205 Dendroctonus micans 136 Derocrepis rufipes 142 Dirhagus pygmaeus 158,201,202 Doreatoma chrysomelina 75 D.dresdensis 137
D.serra 157
Dorcus parallelipipedus 203 Drypta dentata 202 Dytiscus marginalis 205 Elaphrus uliginosus 204 Eledona agricola 82,91,157 Epitrix atropae 89 Erichsonius signaticomis 205 Emoporus fagi 91,136,157,202 Euchlora dubia 202 Euheptaulacus villosus 89 Euryalea decumana 205 Gabrius astutus 205 G.nigrituloides 205 G.pisciformis 205 G.tirolensis 205
Galeruca tanaceti 202 Galerucella sagittariae 138 Gastrophysa polygoni 142 Gaurotes virginea 205 Geodromicus kunzei 205 Gcorissus crenulatus 201 Gnorimus nobilis 204 G.vanabilis 202
Gnypeta caerulea 205 Goedromicus kunzei 205
Vi
Grammoptera variegata 207 Gyrophaena angustata 204 Haliplus obliguus 207 H.varicgatus 207
Hallomenus binotatus 158,20] Harpalus affinis 202 H.attcnuatus 202
H.anxius 202
H.froclichi 202
H.honestus 202
H.puncticeps 202
H.rubripes 202
H.rufibarbis 202
H.rufitarsis 202 H.smaragdinus 202 H.vernalis 202
Helochares punctatus 203 Helophorus dorsalis 201 H.longitarsis 204
Helops cacruleus 203 Hesperorhynchus hesperus 206 Heterothops niger 202 Hydnobius punctatus 204 Hygrogeus aemulus 205 Hypera meles 204
Hyphydmus ovatus cover part 4 Ischnomera cyanea 157 Ischnopoda balteata 205 Kalcapion fortunatum 206 Laemostenus terricola 202 Laparocerus ellipticus 206 L.excavatus 206
Lapidapion canariense 206 Lathrobium angustatum 205 Lebia chlorocephala 89,142 Leptura livida 203
Lesteva monticola 205 Licinus depressus 202 Lilioceris lilii 204
Liogluta nitidiuscula 205 Lionychus quadnillum 205 Liparus germanus 204 Lissodema quadripustulata 202 Macrobrachonyx gouncllei 206 Magdalis cerasi 203 Masoreus wetterhali 202 Mecinus collaris 207
Medon npicola 205 Melanimon tibialis 202 Meligethes viduatus 204 Membidion bipunctatum 205 Mesosa nebulosa 207 Metabletus truncatellus 202 Metoecus paradoxus 93,203,207 Miarus micros 201 Micropeplus marietti 205 Microplontus triangulum 201 Mogulones biondii 206 M.pseudopollinarius 206 Molorchus umbellatarum 203 Mordellistena neuwaldeggiana 93 Mordellochroa abdominalis 80 Mycetophagus piceus 201 Nebria castanea 205 N.jockischi 205
Necrodes littoralis 95,144 Neobisnius procerulus 205
N.prolixus 205 Notiophilus aquaticus 95 Notoxus monocerus 202 Ochthebius pusillus 204 Ochthephilus longipennis 205 Ocypus chevrolati 205 O.ophthalmicus 202 O.picipennis 205 Oedemera nobilis 203 Olophrum alpinum 205 Omalium ferrugineum 205 Omaloplia ruricola 89 Oncomera femorata 204 Onthophagus coenobita 203 Oodes helopioides 204 Orsodacne cerasi 80,203 var: chlorotica 80 var: glabrata 80 var: lincola 80 O.lineola 80 Otiorhynchus scaber 205 Oxylaemus vanolosus 202 Paederus balcanicus 205 P.littoralis 142 Panagaeus bipustulatus P.cruxmajor 204 Paralister purpurascens 203 Parethelcus nesicola 206 P.pollinarius 206 Pediacus dermestoides 157 Perapion neofallax 206 P.tubiferum 206 P.violaceum 206 Philonthus cocrulescens 205 P.confinis 205 P.montivagus 205 P.palustris 205 P.rubripennis 204 P.rufimanus 205 Phloeophagus lignarius 203 Phyllobrotica quadrimaculata 201 Phytodecta decemnotata 91 Phytoecia cylindrica 202 Platyderus ruficollis 204 Platypus cylindrus 203 Plegaderus dissectus 201 P.vulneratus 202 Podabrus alpinus 91 Podagrica fuscipes 142 Polydrusus sericeus 203 Prionocyphon serricomis 157 Prionus coriarius 93 Prionychus ater 157 Psephidonus kunzei 205 Psylliodes luteola 202 P.sophiae 202 Pterostichus kugelanni Plate 11,204 P.multipunctatus 205 P.pumilio 205 Pyrochroa serraticomis 203 Quedius dubius 205 Q.obscuripennis 205 Q.punctatellus 205 Q.ventralis 157 Rhinoncus albicinctus 138 R.ruficollis 142 Rhissotrichum tubuliferum 206
202
Vil
Rhizophagus nitidulus 92 Rhynchaenus avellanac 202 Rugilus subtilis 204 Scolytus intricatus 75 S.scolytus 136
Scopaeus gracilis 205 S.laevigatus 205
Scymnus schmidti 89 Selatosomus bipustulatus 204 Sermylassa halensis 142 Silis ruficollis
Silpha carinata 204 S.laevigata 202
Sirocalodes mixtus 206 S.nigroterminatus 206 Sitona latipennis 206 Smicronyx pauperculus 206 S.reichi 89
Stenagostus villosus 203 Stenolophus teutonus 204 Stenopelmus rufinasus 206 Stenus canescens 205 S.fossulatus 205
Stranglia aurulenta 204 S.maculata 93
Tachys sexstriatus 205 Tachyusa balteata 205 Taeniapion atlanticum 206 T.delicatulum 206 Tetratoma desmaresti 157 T.fungorum 142
Tetrops pracusta 203
Tillus clongatus 91,142,201 Tomoxia bucephala 202 Trachyphloeus aristatus 201 Trachys scrobiculatus 202 Trichophya pilicomis 207 Triplax aenea 142 Tropiphorus terricola 204 Tomoxia bucephala 89,93 Trachyphloeus altemans 89 Trichius zonatus 204 Trichotichnus laevipennis 205 Tychius colonnellii 206 Typhaeus typhoeus 203 ,204 Xantholinus longiventris 207 Xestobium rufovillosum 157 Xyleborus dryographus 91,92 Xyloterus domesticus 157 Zcugophora subspinosa 91,142 Zyras humeralis 207
DIPTERA
Achanthiophilus helianthi 198,199,200 Acrocera orbicula 199 Agathomyia elegantula 199 A.wankowicziil 198,199 Agromyza prespana 74 Agromyzidae 201 Anasimyia contracta 199 Anthalia beatricella 200 Anthomyiidae 201 Anthomyza collini 167 Arctophila superbiens 199 Asilus crabroniformis 200 Aulacigaster leucopeza 200 Beris fuscipes 166
Bittacomorpha clavipes Plate 11,201 Brachyopa bicolor 200 B.pilosa 91,198,200 B.scutellaris 198 Brachypalpus laphriformis 91,199 Callicera aurata 200 Campsicnemus pectinulatus 166 Cecidomyiidae 201
Cetema neglecta 167 Chaetorellia loricata 200 Cheilosia grossa 199 C.impressa 89
C.soror 92
Cheilotrichia imbuta 166 Chloromyia formosa 167,215 Chrysotoxum sp. 201 C.cautum 199
C.festivum 92
C.verralli 199
Cleigastra apicalis 166 Clinocera stagnalis 167 Cnemacantha muscaria 200 Cocidomyiidae 201
Coenosia albatella 201 Colobaca distincta 200 Conopidae 201
Cosmetopus dentimanus 166 Cricotopus vierriensis 16 Ctenophora flaveolata 198 C.pectinicomis 91,200 Dictenidia bimaculata 91,199,200 Dichetophora finlandica 199 Dioctria oelandica 198 Dolichopeza albipes 201 Dolichopus campestris 166 Doros profuges 199 Drosophilidae 201
Elachiptera pubescens 166 Empis woodi 200
Epiphragma ocellare 200 Episyrphus balteatus 87,215 Erioptera fuscipennis 167 E.fusculenta 167
E.trivialis 167
Enstalinus sp. 201
Eumerus sp 201
E.sabulonum 198
Eutolmus rufibarbis 200 Fannia ringdahlana 201 Ferdinandea cuprea 200 F.ruficomnis 200
Helius flavus 166 Hercostomus plagiatus 166 Hilara obscura 166
H.morata 200
H.woodi 166
Leptogaster gultiventris 200 Limonia lucida 166
Lipara lucens 43,45,46
Lispe tentaculata 167
Mallota cimbiciformis 199,200 Megaselia sp 113,115 M.haraldlundi 113,114,115,116 M.intercostata 114,115 M.intonsa 117 M.jameslamonti 115,116,117,118 M.septentrionalis 115
vill
M.teneripes 116,118,119 Metopia argentata 33 M.argyrocephala 33,34 M.campestris 33,34 M.grandii 33,34
M.staegerii 33,34 ~ Microdon devius 199 Mycetobia pallipes 199 Myopa extricata 199 Myopites eximia 157
M. frauenfeldi 157 Nematoproctus distendens 199 Neoascia geniculata 166 N.tenur 166
Norellisoma spinimanum 167 Nyctia haltcrata 200
Odinia boletina 200 O.xanthocera 200
Ochthera mantis 199 Opomyza petrei 167
Orellia falcata 198,199,200 Ornithomyia avicularia 199 Orthonevra brevicornis 213 Oxycera mormisii 166 O.pardalina 198,199 Paragus sp. 201 Parallelomma vittatum 201 Paratrichocladius rufiventris 16 Parydra aquila 166
Pedicia rivosa 96
Phaonia cineta 200
Phryxe vulgaris 139 Phytoliriomyza melampyga 199 Phytomyza archhieracii 74 P.erigerophila 74
Pilaria fuscipennis 166 Platynochaetus rufus 201 Platypalpus infectus 166 P.leucothrix 89 P.pallidicornis 166 Portevinia maculata 213 Pseudopomyza atrimana 198,201 Pyrophaena rosarum 199,215 Rhagio lineola 95 Rheotanytarsus sp. 11,13,15 R.ororus 15
R. pentapoda 11,15,16 R.photophilus 11,16 R.rioensis 12,13,14,15,16 Sapromyza basalis 201 S.opaca 166
Sarcophagidae 33 Sarcotachinella sinuata 200 Sargus bipunctatus 84 Scaeva sp. 201
Scatella paludum 167 Scathophaga stercoraria 167 Scenopinus niger 198 Sciapus laetus 200
Sepsis cynipsea 167 S.orthocnemis 167 Spiniphora maculata 199 Stratiomys longicomis 200 Syneches muscarius 166 Syntormon denticulatus 166 S.pallipes 167
Systenus scholtzii 199
Tanyptera atrata 199 Tephritidae 201
Terellia longicauda 200 T.vectensis 200 Teuchophorus calearatus 199 T.spinigerellus 166 Thecophora atra 89,214 Themira minor 167 T.superba 166
Thereva nobilitata 86,200 Thricops aculeipes 200 Typhamyza bifasciata 199 Ulidia erythrophthalma 200 Urophora cardui 151 U.cuspidata 200 U.spoliata 200
Vanoyia tenuicomis 166 Volucella pellucens 92 V.zonaria 92
Xylota segnis 215 X.xanthocnema 199
HEMIPTERA
Agramma laeta 90
Alydus calcaratus 207 Bothynotus pilosus 95 Chorosoma schillingi 207 Cinara piceae 135 Coranus woodroffei 207 Cryptococcus fagisuga 130—-133,134,136 Cyphostethus tnstriatus 78 Eurydema dominulus 143 Globiceps dispar 95 Kermes quercus 135 Lasiacantha capucina 207 Liorhyssus hyalinus 207 Microvelia pygmaca 207 Neides tpularius 207 Pachypappa.tremulae 125 P.vesicalis 125 Pachypappella lactea 125 P.xylostei 125
Pemphigus sp. 141 Physatocheila smreezynskii 207 Pineus pini 135 Pionosomus varius 207 Podops inuncta 207 Polymerus unifasciatus 96 Prociphilus spp. 141 P.xylostei 125 P.imbricator 134,135 Pulvinaria regalis 135 Pyrrhoconss apterus 142 Saldula saltatoria 167 Schirus luctuosus 90 Stagona xylostei 125 Syromastus rhombeus 207 Thyreocons scarabaeoides 90,207 Trapezonotus ullrichi 207 Troilus luridus 86 Tubcerolachnus salignus 135 Xylocoris cursitans 91
HYMENOPTERA
Abia sp. 86 Ammophila sabulosa 59,207,210 Ancistrocerus oviventnis 58
C.rybyensis 207 Chrysididae 50
Chrysis angustula 58 C.cyanea 58
C.impressa 58
C.ruddii 58
Cimbex femoratus 208 Cleptes semiauratus 50,52,58 Coclioxys clongata 210 Colletes daviesanus 210 C.fodiens 59
C.halophilus 43
C.similis 210
C.succinetus 210 Colletidae 50
Crabro cribrarius 58 C.peltarius 58
Crossocerus distinguendus 210 C.elongatulus 58
C.nigritus 59
C.ovalis 58
C.palmipes 50,58 C.quadrimaculatus 59 C.tarsatus 59
C.varus 59
C.wesmaeli 59
Cynips divisa cover part 1, 1, 2,3 Dasypoda altereator 209 Diodontus luperus 59 D.minutus 59,209
D.tnstis 59
Dipogon subintermedius 207 Dolerus bimaculatus 208 Dolichovespula media 83,209 D.saxonica 83
D.sylvestris 58
Dryinidae 50
Ectemnius cavifrons 207 E.continuus 207
Elampus panzen 209 Entomognathus spp. 59 E.brevis 210
Epeolus variegatus 59 Episyron rufipes 207,210 Eumenidae 50 Eutomostethus gagathinus 208 Evagetes crassicornis 58 Fonnica fusca 49
F. rufa 83
Gasteruption assectator 47 G.jaculator 47
Gonatopus sepsoides 58 Gorytes bicinctus 210 G.quadrifasciatus 59 G.tumidus 59
Halictidae 50
Halictus rubicundus 59 H.tumulorum 59 Hedychndium 58
H.ardens 209
H.roseum 209
Hedychrum niemelai 209 Heterarthrus nemoratus 208 Hoplitis claviventris 4 Hoplocampa testudinea 208 Hylaeus brevicormnis 59 H.communis 43,59
H.comutus 210 H.pectoralis 43,44,45,46,47 Hyposoter clausus 80 Janus femoratus 208 Lasioglossum calceatum 59 L.leucopum 59 L.leucozonium 59 L.malachurus 210 L.nitidiusculum 59 L.punctatissimum 59 L.rufitarse 59
L.villosulum 59
Lasius brunneus 91 L.fuliginosus 83
L.niger 49,83
Leptothorax nylanden 82 L.tuberum 207
Lindenius albilabris 59 Lonchodryinus ruficornis 58 Macrophya rufipes 208 Macropis curopaca 209 Megachile leachella 209 M.versicolor 59 M.willughbiella 210 Megachilidae 50
Melitta haemorrhoidalis 210 M.tricincta 210
Mellinus arvensis 59 Metorus colon 39
Mimesa bruxellensis 209 Mimumesa spooneni 43 Mutilla curopaea 209 Mutillidae 50
Myrmecina graminicola 207 Myrmica atra 58 M.ruginodis 4
Myrmosa atra 209 Nematus capreae 208 N.ribesii 52
Nomada fabriciana 59 N.flavopicta 50,59 N.fulvicormis 49,59,209 N.goodeniana 59 N.leucophthalma 59 N.marshamella 59 N.panzen 59
N.striata 59
Nysson dimidiatus 209 N.spinosus 59 N.trimaculatus 50,59,210 Omalus auratus 58,93 Osmia leaiana 59 O.leucomelana 4 Oxybelus uniglumis 59 Panurgus banksianus 59 Paravespula germanica 58 P.vulgaris 58
Pareophora pruni 208 Passaloecus eremita 209,210 P.singularis 59
P.schioedtei 50,58 Prosopis kriechbaumeri 43 P.palustris 43
Psen bicolor 49,59 P.bruxellensis 210 P.dahlbomi 59 P.cquestris 59 P.lutarius 59 P.spooneri 43 Pseudogonatopus distinctus 58 Pseudopipona herrichii 209 Psithyrus bohemicus 59 P.vestalis 59
Rhogogaster chambersi 208 R.genista 208
Rhopalum coarctatum 59 Scolia sp. 86 Smicromyrme mifipes 209 Sphecidae 50
Sphecodes ephippius 209 S.fasciatus 59
S.geoffrellus 209
S.gibbus 59
S.longulus 210 S.monilicornis 59 S.pellucidus 59 S.puncticeps 209 S.reticulatus 209
Stelis omatula 209 S.punctulatissima 209,210 Symmorphus crassicornis 209 S.mutinensis 58 Tachysphex pompiliformis 58,210 T.unicolor 58
Tenthredo arcuata 78 Trypoxylon attenuatum 58 T.figulus 58
Vespa crabro 83
Vespula austriaca 58 V.rufa 58
Xiphydria prolongata 82
LEPIDOPTERA
abbreviata, Eupithecia 71,91 abictana, Eupithecia 183 abietella, Dioryctria 188,215 absinthiata, Eupithecia 68,71 acanthadactyla, Amblyptilia 188,191 achatana, Ancylis 191 Acraea sp. 197 acroxantha, Tachystola 191 acteon, Thymelicus ab.alba 179 ab.virescens 179 acula, Chrysodeixis 84,138,140 adelphella, Sciota 193 adspersella, Agonopterix 195 adustala, Ligdia 91 adustatella, Depressaria 195 advenella, Numonia 70
Pemphredon inomatus 59 peri ° 2
Philanthus triangulum 208,209,210 oad eee Ore. ee de 79 Pompilidae 50 ab.cockaynei 177
Pompilus cinereus 58 f.drumensis 102,105,108,109 Priocnemis exaltata 58 ab.pallidior 179
P.parvula 58 ab.parviocellata 178
P.perturbator 58 ab.schmidti 178
ssp.oblita Plate 1,102,103,104,105, armigera, Heliothis 63,71,183,184,186,187
107,108,109,110 ashworthii, Xestia 182 ab.cockaynei Plate 1,102,107,108,109 asinalis, Mecyna 62,70 ssp.tircis Plate 1,102,103,104,105, asseclana, Cnephasia 70 106,107,108,109,110 assimilella, Agonopterix 70 ab.cockaynei 102,107,108,Plate 1 asteris, Cucullia 183 ab.mesoventro-s2/s5 biocellata Plate 1, atalanta, Vanessa 39,83,85,92,213 105,106,107 ab.cos 213 acrugula, Nola 187 ab.klemsiewicz1 177 aescularia, Alsophila 70 ab.virgala 178 aestivaria, Hemithea 70,91 ataxella, Myrmecozela 194,195 aethiops, Erebia 96 atrifasciella, Infurcitinea 194 ab.flavescens 180 atriplicis, Trachea 187 ab.purpurea 180 augustella, Denisia 195 affinis, Cosmia 184 aurinia, Eurodryas 177,214 affinitata, Penzoma 71,186 ab.sebaldus 177,179 agathina, Xestia 71,184 ab.virgata Plate 11,179 agenjoi, Nemapogon 195 australis, Aporophyla 65 agenjoi, Peristomastix 194 autumnaria, Ennomos 182 agestis, Anicia 178 auxo Chalcosia ab.glomerata 181 ssp.albata 197 Agonopterix sp. 195 aversala, Idaea 70,155 ahenella, Hypochalcia 90 azaleella, Caloptilia 189,193 albicapitella, Swammerdamia 112 badiata, Anticlea 70 albicapitella, Paraswammerdamia 70 badiella, Depressaria 195 albicilla, Salebriopsis 140,189,193 bankiana, Deltote 181,183,187 albicosta, Coleophora 70 basaltinella, Bryotropha 191 albipuncta, Mythimna 63,71,181,186 basifasciella, Tinea 194 albofasciata, Xandrames 197 batis, Thyatira 70 albovenosa, Simyra 184 bellargus, Lysandra 87,180 albula, Meganola 62,65,66,68,69,71,182,185,Plate 111 ab.krodeli 180 albulata, Asthena 71 ab.parvipuncta 180 albulata, Perizoma 90 ab.striata 180 albumella, Teleiodes 190,Plate 111 bembeciformis, Sesia 63,70,214 alchemillata, Perizoma 68,71 berbera, Amphipyra 140,182,Plate 111 alfacariensis, Colias 179 ssp.svenssoni 188 algae, Archanara 184 berberata, Pareulype 220 alni, Acronicta 71 betularia, Biston 71,186 ab.suffusa 181 ssp.cognataria 186 alniana, Ennomos 71,185 betulinella, Nemaxera 191,192 alpicola, Xestia bicolorata, Hecatera 71 ssp.alpina 184 bicostella, Pleurota 195 alpinella, Platytes 189,191 bicruris, Hadena 71 alsines, Hoplodrina 71,187,Plate 111 bidentata, Odontopera 71,181,188,Plate 111 alternana, Semiothisa 68,71 bifasciana, Olethreutes 70 alternata, Epirrhoe 70 bilineata, Camptogramma 70,185 amaniella, Pleurota 195 binaevella, Phycitodes 90 amazonicus, Baeotus 197 bipartitella, Trichophaga 194,195 ambigualis, Scoparia 70 bipunctella, Ethmia 191,194 amparoella, Pscudatemelia 195 bipunctosa, Agonopterix 191 amydon, Agnas 197 biriviata, Xanthorhoe 183,220 analis, Parallelia 197 biselata, Idaea 70,155 anglicella, Paromix 70 ab.fimbriolata 184 angustana, Eupoecilia 70 blanda, Hoplodrina 71 angustea, Eudonia 70 blandella, Brachmia 70 angustiorana, Ditula 70 blandella, Caryocolum 70,190 ankerella, Neurothaumasia 194,195 blandelloides, Caryocolum Plate 111 annulifera, Psyra 197 blandiata, Perizoma 185 apiformis, Sesia 188 blomeri, Discoloxia 186 aprilina, Dichonia 71 bombycina, Polia 182 arenella, Agonopterix 70 borelii, Gortyna areola, Xylocampa 71 ssp.lunata 188 argiolus, Celastrina 81,83,92 Brachmia sp. 195 argus, Plebejus 181 bradleyi, Mompha 190,194 ab.nigrescens 180 brassicae, Mamestra 71 argyrana, Pammene 70 brassicae, Pieris 109,177,178 armigera, Helicoverpa 195 ab.coerulea 179
ab.flava 179 brevilinea, Photedes 184,215 britannica, Thera 71 britanniodactyla, Capperia 192 brizella, Aristotelia 189,191 brockeella, Argyresthia 70 brongniardella, Acrocercops 193 brumata, Operophtera 91 brunneata, Semiothisa 94 bucephala, Phalera 71 caesia, Hadena
ssp.mananii 183 caesiata, Entephria 96,184,185,186 caesiella, Swammerdamia 112 caja, Arctia 182
ab.fumosa 187 c-album, Polygonia 83 caliginosa, Acosmetia 196 cambridgei, Euchromius 196 camilla, Ladoga
ab.nigrina 177,181
ab.obliterae 181 cana, Eucosma 70 canapennella, Elachista 70 canella, Gymnancyla 191 caniola, Eilema 62,65,71 captiuncula, Photedes
ssp.expolita 181,182 capucina, Ptilodon 71 cardamines, Anthocharis 88,178 cardui, Cynthia 86,178,215
melanic Plate] 1 carpinata, Trichopteryx 71 casta, Psyche 215 castanea, Xestia 96,185 castancae,Phragmataecia 182,184,214 castrensis, Malacosoma 182 Catocala sp. 93 centaureala, Eupithecia 71 cerasana, Pandemis 70 cerasi, Orthosia 71,92,182,187
melanie 183 cerussclla, Platytes 70 cespilalis, Pyrausta 192 chalcites, Chrysodeixis 84,138,140,182,183 chamomillae, Cucullia 65,67,68,71 chenopodiata, Scotopteryx 68,70 chi, Antitype 186 chlorosata, Petrophora 71 choragella, Morophaga 74,192 chrysidiformis, Bembecia 212 chrysitis, Diachrysia 71 chrysopterella, Reisserita 195 cinerea, Agrotis 187,Plate 111
gynandromorph 183 cingulata, Pyrausta 189 ciniflonella, Exaeretia 188 cinxia, Melitaea 8,10
ab.wittei 180 clavipalpis, Caradrina 68,71,186 clavis, Agrotis 68,71,185 cloacella, Nemapogon 192,195 clorana, Earias 62,63,64,69,71,185,215
ab.flavimargo 64,183 clypeiferella, Coleophora 194 enicicolana, Epiblema 194 c-nigrum, Xestia 71
Xil
cognata, Thera 183,184 combinella, Pseudoswammerdamia 191 comes, Noctua 71,186,187 comma, Mythimna 71 complana, Eilema 65 - compunctella, Swammerdamia 112 concinnata, Chloroclysta 182 confusa, Hadena 71,183 confusalis, Nola 71 confusella, Stigmella 95 conigera, Mythimna melanic 181,Plate 111 consimilana, Clepsis 70 consonana, Paradarisa fnigra 184 conspicillans, Egira 185 contaminella, Pediasia 93,191 ab.sticheli 191 contigua, Lacanobia 186 continuella, Stigmella 188 convolvuli, Agrius 186 cordon, Lysandra 8,10,178,181 ab.cacca 178 ab.discreta 178 ab.fowleri 180 ab.inaequalis 178 ab.i-nigrum 180 ab.parallela 178 ab.postdiscoclongata 178 ab.striata 179 coronata, Phlyctaenia 70 corylata, Electrophaes 71 coryli, Colocasia 71,185 melanie 185 costalis, Hypsopygia 70,189 costella, Scrobipalpa 70 craccae, Lygephila 65 crassa, Agrotis 187 crassinotata, Problepsis 197 cratipennella, Coleophora 192 crenata, Apamea 71 crepuscularia, Ectropis 71 eribrumalis, Macrochilo 215 crocealis, Ebulea 70 erocella, Adela 191 croceus, Colias Plate] 1,179,180,181 fhelice 179 cruda, Orthosia 91 ab.haggarti 184 crypta, Euxoa 142 cuculata, Catarhoe 70,90 cuculipennella, Caloptilia 193 cucullatella, Nola 91 culiciformis, Synanthedon 183 culmella, Chrysoteuchia 70 cupressata, Thera 185,186,187 cursoria, Euxoa 183 cyanzimarmorella, Stenoptinca 194,195 daucella, Depressaria 70 deceptona, Lithacodia 175 decimalis, Tholera 71 decolorella, Blastobasis 189,191 decoratus, Marumba 197 decrepitalis, Udea 213 defoliaria, Erannis 91,184 degeerella, Nemophora 70 delunella, Eudonia 192,196
denotata, Eupithecia ssp.jasioneata 65 dentaria, Selenia 71,91 derivata, Anticlea 70 detrimentella, Pseudatemelia 195 diana, Choreutis 190 didymata, Penzoma 94 diffinis, Teleiopsis 68,70 diluta, Pempeliella 70 dilutaria, Idaca 138,182,186 dimidiata, Idaea 70,182 dimidioalba, Hedya 70 discordella, Coleophora 188 dispar, Lycaena 138 ssp.batavus 139 ab.radiata Plate! | dispar, Lymantria 182,188 dissoluta, Archanara 184,215 distans, Oxipulus 191 distinctaria, Eupithecia 62,65,71,181 dodonaea, Drymonia 187,Plate 111 dodoneata, Eupithecia 71,91 domestica, Cryphia 181,184,186 ab.suffusa 186 dominula, Callimorpha 194 ab.medionigra 185 douglasella, Depressaria 195 dromedarius, Notodonta 71,187 dubitella, Phyllonorycter 193 dumerilii, Luperina 142 dumetata, Odontognophos ssp.hibernica 183 duplaris, Ochropacha 70 efformata, Aplocera 185 elinguaria, Crocallis 71,187 ab.restncta 187 ab.unicolor 182,185 elpenor, Deilephila cover part 2,71,184 elutella, Ephestia 191 emargana, Acleris 70 emberizaepenella, Phyllonorycter 193 eremita, Dryobotodes 186 ericella, Pleurota 195 encinella, Aristotelia 70 crinaceella, Depressaria 195 erula, Euxoa 142 eugcon, Prenes 164 euphrosyne, Boloria ab.edna 177 evonymaria, Artiora 198 exanthemala, Cabcra 71 exclamationis, Agrolis 71,182,183,184,185 exigua, Spodoptera 183,185,187 expallidata, Eupithecia 185 extersaria, Paradarisa 186 extimalis, Evergestis 189,192 exulans, Zygaena ssp.subochracea 184 fagana, Pseudoips 71 fagaria, Dyscia 182 fagivora, Parornix 193 falcataria, Drepana 70 falconipennella, Caloptilia 193 falsella, Catoptria 188,192 fascelinella, Pediasia 189 fasciaria, Hylaea 71,96 fasciuncula, Oligia 71
xii
favicolor, Mythimna 187 ferchaultella, Luffia 192 ferrago, Mythimna 71,196 f.argyristis 196 ferrugalis, Udea 63,70 ferrugata, Xanthorhoe 70 ferruginea, Rusina 71 fibulella, Adela 192 filicivora, Psychoides 192 firmata, Thera 7] flammea, Panolis 71 flammealis, Endotricha 68,70 flavago, Gorlyna 71 flavalis, Mecyna 190 flavicaria, Therapis 198 flavicincta, Polymixis 71 flavicinctata, Entephria 184,185 ssp.ruficinetata 184 flavinigra, Arichanna 197 flaviventris, Synanthedon 182 flavofasciata, Perizoma 68,71 ,90,184 florescens, Gaurena ssp.albomaculata 197 floslactata, Scopula 70,184 fluctuata, Xanthorhoe 70,182,186 fluxa, Photedes 215 forficella, Schoenobius 188 formicacformis, Synanthedon 182 formosa, Oncocera 188 formosella, Epicallima 195 forsterana, Lozotaenia 70 fucosa, Amphipoea ssp.paludis 181 fuliginana, Parascotia 93,186,181 fuliginosa, Phragmatobia 71 fulvalis, Udea 191,193 fulvata, Cidaria 71 furcata, Hydriomena 71,94,184,185 furuncula, Mesoligia 68,71 furva, Apamea ssp.britannica 181,182,186 fuscalis, Opsibotys 90 fuscatella, Lampronia 189 fuscella, Niditinea 194,195 fuscovenosa, Idaca 70,138 galathea, Melanargia 10,Plate11,180,195 ab.nigricans 180 galiata, Epirrhoe 65,68,70,90,181 gamma, Autographa 39,40,63,71,186 ab.gammina 185 geminipuneta, Archanara 67,71,181 gemmifera, Ginshachia 197 geniculea, Agriphila 68,70 genistella, Oncocera 191 geometrica, Grammodes 197 germmana, Pammene 191 geryon, Adscita 181 gibbosella, Psoricoptera 93,189 gigantella, Schoenobius 188,192,193,215 glareosa, Paradiarsia 68,71 glaucata, Cilix 70 globulariae, Adscita 89,90,186 glyphica, Euclidia 214 gnoma, Pheosia 71 goedartella, Argyresthia 95 gothica, Orthosia 71,91 ab.gothicina 182
gozmanyi, Euchromius 196 graminis, Cerapteryx 93 granella, Nemapogon 195 grisealis, Herminia 71 griseata, Timandra 70 griseola, Eilema 71 grossulariata, Abraxas 71,155 ab.dohmii 184 hacmatidea, Agrochola 78,182,184 hamana, Agapeta 70 harpagula, Sabra 86 hastiana, Acleris 70,191 haworthii, Celaena 215 hebetella, Pleurota 195 Helicoverpa sp. 195 heparana, Pandemis 70 heracliana, Agonoptenx 70 herculeella, Alabonia 195 herminata, Diplodoma 192 heterodactyla, PseInophorus 78 hexadactyla, Alucita 70 hieroglyphica, Baorisa 197,Plate 111 hilarella, Phyllonorycter 193 honestalis, Actenia 196 honorella, Pleurota 195 hortulata, Eurrhypara 70 humuli, Hepialus 70 hyale, Colias 179 hylas, Cephonodes 197 hyperantus, Aphantopus 180,215 icarus, Polyommatus 8,10,178 ab.livida 178 melanic Plate11,181 ab.radiata 178,180 icteritia, Xanthia 91 ab.flavescens 181 imbecilla, Eriopygodes 186 imbuta, Alphaca 197 imella, Monopis 194 imitaria, Scopula 70 immundana, Epinotia 70 immutata, Scopula 70,215 impura, Mythimna 71 incarnalalis, Orthopygia 196 incarnatana, Epiblema 190 incerta, Orthosia 71 incertalis, Anarpia 196 inopiana, Phtheochroa 70,190 inomatella, Brachmia 194
inquinatella, Agriphila 189,192,Plate 111
insecurella, Epermenia 90,190 insulana, Earias 64,183 insulare, Ateliotum 194,195 interjecta, Noctua 71 io, Inachis 85,215
ab.belisaria 180 ipsilon, Agrotis 63,71,186,187 iridicolor, Iotaphora 197 iris, Apatura 86 urorella, Setina 187 janetta, Syntherata 197 janthina, Noctua 71 jota, Autographa 71 jubata, Alcis 185 junctella, Caryocolum 190,192 juniperata, Thera 85 juniperella, Dichomeris 194,Plate 111
Xiv
jurtina, Maniola 10,215 ab.pallidula 180
Kasyniana sp. 195
kollarella, Odites 195
lacticinia, Nyctemera 197
lacunana, Olethreutes 70 ;
lacustrata, Dipleurina 70
lalbum, Mythimna 62,63,64,65,67,68,71
lamisca, Plutodes 197 lancealana, Bactra 70 lancealis, Perinephela 70,193 lanestris, Eriogaster 184 lapidata, Coenocalpe 82,185 lapponica, Stigmella 95 lassclla, Coleophora 190,191,194 lasserrei, Powellinia 198 latruncula, Oligia 71 lavinia, Doxocopa 197 legeri, Charaxes 220 leporina, Acronicta 71 lcucographa, Cerastis melanic 182
Icucographella, Phyllonorycter 188,193
leucostigma, Celaena 215
ssp.scotica 186 leucotreta, Cryptophlebia 191 libatrix, Scoliopteryx 71 lichenaria, Cleorodes 71 lichenea, Eumichtis 68,71,186 lienigialis, Pyralis 189 licnigianus, Leioptilus 192 ligustri, Craniophora 71 ligustri, Sphinx 71,187,214,215 limacodes, Apoda 181,187 limbata, Evergestis 189,Plate 111 lineata, Hyles
ssp.livornica 188 lineolea, Coleophora 188 lincola, Thymelicus
ab.anuiordens 180 linga, Miltochrista 197 linneela, Glyphipteryx 191 literosa, Mesoligia 71 lithoxylaea, Apamea 71 litoralis, Mythimna 62,65,68,71 littoralis, Lobesia 70,190 lixella, Coleophora 90 longana, Cnephasia 190 lonicerae, Zygaena 187
ssp.jocelynac 185 loreyi, Mythimna 63,71 lota, Agrochola 71 loti, Zygacna
ssp.scolica 184 lubricipeda, Spilosoma 71,188 lucella, Ypsolopha 194 lucens, Amphipoea 182 lucernea, Standfussiana 65 lucida, Acontia 186 lucidella, Monochroa 189 lucina, Hamearis 214
ab.semibrunnea 181 lucipara, Euplexia 71 lunaedactyla, Marasmarcha 90 lunaris, Batia 195 lunularia, Selenia 187 luridana, Piercea 189,190
luridata, Scotopteryx muscerda, Pelosia 183,184,214
ssp. plumbaria 94,184 myrtillana, Rhopobota 70 lurideola, Eilema 71 nacvana, Rhopobota 96 lutatella, Brachmia 189 nanata, Eupithecia 71 luteago , Hadena nanatella, Agonopterix 195
ssp.barrettii 62,65,68,71 napi, Pieris 88,92,215 luteolata, Opisthograptis 71 nebulata, Euchoeca 71,184,215 luteum, Spilosoma 71 nebulosa, Polia 71 lutosa, Rhizedra 67,71 nera, Hesperocharis 197 lutosella, Exaeretia 195 nervosa, Agonopterix 70,195 lutulenta, Aporophyla 181 neustria, Malacosoma 65,70 lychnitis, Cucullia 182,187 nevadellus, Nemapogon 194 machaon, Papilio 215 ni, Trichoplusia 184 maculana, Epinotia 188 nickerlii, Luperina 183,Plate 111 macularia, Pscudopanthera 198 ssp.gueneei 182 maillardi, Polyphacnis ssp.leechi 65
ssp.assimilis 188 nigra, Aporophyla 71 malvae, Pyrgus 10 nigricans, Estigmene 197 manuelaria, Peribatodes 182 nigricans, Euxoa 65 marcella, Depressaria 195 nigricantella, Monopis 194,195 marcunella, Infurcitinea 194,195 nigricomella, Bucculatrix 193 margarilacea, Chersotis 198 nignpunctella, Tenaga 195 margaritata, Campaea 71,91 nigrivenella, Mussidia 189,Plate 111 marginana, Endothenia 70 nigropunclata, Scopula 184 marginata, Lomaspilis 71 nisella, Epinotia 70 marginella, Dichomeris 190,191 nitida, Agrochola 198 marginepunctata, Scopula 183 noctuclla, Nomophila 63,70 manitima, Phycitodes 62,68,70,191 notana, Acleris 19] maritimus, Chilodes 185 nupta, Catocala 93,185
ab.bipunctata 185 obductella, Pempelia 89,90
ab.nigristriata 185 obelisca, Euxoa 65 marmorea, Numonia 192 obeliscata, Thera 71,183 maronesis, Callicore 197 obfuscatus, Gnophos 185,186 matura, Thalpophila 183,196 obscurata, Gnophos 65
f.provincialis 196 obsitalis, Hypena 37,38,39,40,41,183,185,188 maturata, Parallelia 197 obsoleta, Mythimna 185,187 maura, Monno 71 obstipata, Orthonama 63,70,183 megacephala, Acronicta 71 obtusa, Pelosia 182,184,187,214 mendica, Diarsia 71,181,182,187,Plate 111 occulta, Eurois 185 menyanthidis, Acronicta 94 ocellana, Agonopterix 70 mercedella, Epicallima 195 ocellana, Spilonota 70 mercurella, Eudonia 70,196 ocellata, Cosmorhoe 70 merdella, Proterospastis 194,195 ocellea, Euchromius 196 meticulosa, Phlogophora 71 ochrearia, Aspitates 65 micacea, Hydraccia 71 ochroleuca, Eremobia 185 micella, Argolamprotes 190 oculea, Amphipoea 68,71 microdactyla, Adaina 215 oditis, Leucochlaena 65 miniata, Miltochrista 71 oleracea, Lacanobia 68,71,182 mitterbacheriana, Ancylis 189 olivalis, Udea 70 molesta, Cydia 192 olivata, Colostygia 185 molliculana, Cochylis 190,191,Plate 111 ononidis, Parectopa 188,189 monacha, Lymantria 71 oo, Dicycla 196 monilifera, Narycia 192 f.sulphurago 196 monoglypha, Apamea 71 operculella, Phthorimaea 190 montanata, Xanthorhoe 70 ophiogramma, Apamea 188 morellus, Morophaga 194 or, Tethea morpheus, Caradrina 71 ssp.hibernica 183 morrisii, Photedes 185,187 orbona, Noctua 182 mouffetella, Athrips 190 orstadii, Elachista 188 mundana, Nudaria 65 osseana, Eana 96 mundella, Bryotropha 194 osseola, Hydraccia munitata, Xanthorhoe 96,185 ssp.hucherardi 185,188 muralis, Cryphia 71 padella, Yponomeuta 70 murariella, Tinea 195 palealis, Sitochroa 188,189,191 muricolella, Novotinea 194,195 paleana, Aphelia 191 murinata, Minoa 186 pallens, Mythimna 71 muscaeformis, Bembecia 62,65,70,182,185 pallidata, Evergestis 189
XV
palpina, Pterostoma 71 palumbella, Pempelia 191 palustrella, Monochroa 189 pamphilus, Coenonympha 180 pandora, Pandoriana 86 panoquinoides, Panoquina ssp.crrans 163 ssp.cugcon 161,162,163,164 ssp.panoquinoides 161,163 paphia, Argynnis 87,220 ab.confluens 178 ab.ocellata 87,Plate11,179,180 paralellaria, Epione 86 parasitella, Tnaxomera 192 parenthesella, Ypsolopha 70 pariana, Choreutis 193 palustrana, Olethreutes 95 pasiuana, Cnephasia 188 pavonia, Pavonia 94,215 pectinataria, Colostygia 71 peltigera, Heliothis 183,185,186,187 pennaria, Colotois 183,184 pentadactyla, Pterophorus 70 peribolata, Scotopteryx 182 perlella, Crambus 70 permutana, Aclens 191,194 perotteti, Estigmene 197 perplexa, Hadena 65,71,182 ssp.capsophila 183 persicariae, Melanchra 71,181 personella, Nemapogon 192 philodoce, Colias 177 phlacas, Lycacna 10,97,98,Plate 1,178 ab.alba 97,99 ab.auronitens 97,98,100,Plate 1 ab.cuprinus 179 ab.obsoleta 97,98,99,Plate | ab.pallidula 97,98,99,Plate |
ab.partimauroradiata 97,98,99,Plate |
ab.radiala 97,98,99,Plate 1,180 ab.subradiata 97,98,100 phragmitella, Chilo 215 phragmitidis, Arenostola 185,215 pilosana, Apocheima 91,182 pinastri, Hyloicus 65 pinella, Catoptria 70 piniania, Bupalus 67,71 pinivorana, Rhyacionia 191 plagiata, Aglaemorpha 197 planella, Pleurota 195 plecta, Ochropleura 71 ab.rubricosta 181 plumigera, Pulophora 187 podana, Archips 70 populata, Eulithis 94,184 populetorum, Caloptilia 93,191 populi, Laothoe 71 porcellus, Deilephila 71 porphyrea, Lycophotia 71 postvittana, Epiphyas 70,189 potatona, Philudoria 70 practermissa, Parallelia 197 prasina, Anaplectoides 71 primaria, Thena 91 priscilla, Liptena 220 proboscidalis, Hypena 7 procellata, Melanthia 182
XVI
procerella, Bisigna 189 promissa, Catocala 188 pronuba, Noctua 71,155 pronubana, Cacoecimorpha 190 gynandromorph 181 protasella, Pleurota 195 . proximum, Caryocolum 189 prunata, Eulithis 155 pruni, Strymonidia 178 pruniana, Hedya 70 prunivorana, Cydia 190 pseudospretella, Hofmannophila 70 psi, Acronicta 71 pterodactyla, Stenoptilia 95 pudibunda, Calliteara 71,181 pudorina, Mythimna 183,215 pulchella, Sontia 197 pulchellata, Eupithecia 71 pulcherrimella, Depressaria 195 pulchrina, Autographa 71 punctalis, Synaphe 188 purpuralis, Zygacna ssp.caledonensis 185 ssp.sabulosa 183 purpurea, Agonopterix 195 pusana, Cabera 71 pusillata, Eupithecia 96,184,188 puta, Agrotis 71,185 putnami, Plusia ssp.gracilis 183,184,215 putrescens, Mythimna 62,65,71 putris, Axylia 71 pygarga, Protodeltote 71,182 pygmina, Photedes 185 pyramidea, Amphipyra 71,140 pyri, Stigmella 190 pyritoides, Habrosyne 70 quadrimaculana, Endothenia 191 quereana, Carcina 70,195 quercus, Lasiocampa ssp.callunae 94 ssp. quercus 70,184,215 quercus, Quercusia 179 ab.cacrulescens 179 quinqueguttella, Phyllonoryeter 193 ragusaclla, Neurothaumasia 194,195 ramburiellus, Euchromius 196 ramella, Epinotia 95 rancidella, Athnips 191 rapac, Pieris 10 gynandromorph 181 reclangulata, Chloroclystis 71,91 rectilinea, Hyppa 185 remissa, Apamea 71 repandana, Acrobasis 193 repandania, Epione 71 repandata, Alcis 71,182,194 f.conversana 184 retinella, Argyresthia 70 retusa, Ipimorpha 184,188 revayana, Nycteola 71 rhododactyla, Cnaemidophorus 213 , thomboidaria, Peribatodes 71 rhomboidella, Hypatima 70 ribeata, Deileptenia 183 ridens, Polyploca 91 riguata, Cataclysme 198
ripae, Agrotis 62,65,68,71,187,188
rivata, Epirrhoe 187
roborella, Phycita 70
rosaecolana, Epiblema 70
rostralis, Hypena 78
rotundella, Agonopterix 195
ruberata, Hydriomena 185
rubi, Callophrys 7,10,88
rubi, Diarsia 71,184
rubi, Macrothylacia 70
rubidalis, Orthopygia 196
rubidata, Catarhoe 62,65,70,187
rubiginata, Plemyria 215
rubiginata, Scopula 182
tubiginea, Conistra 62,71
rubricosa, Cerastis 71
rufa, Coenobia 93,215
rufata, Chesias 94
ruficornis, Drymonia 71,91,188 melanic 182
tufifasciata, Gymnoscclis 71
rufipennella, Caloptilia 193
rumicis, Acronicta 71,181 semi-melanic 182
turalis, Pleuroptya 70,191
turicolella, Nemapogon 192,194
rutana, Agonopterix 195
sacraria, Rhodomctra 63,70,93,181,182,183,184,185,187
salicella, Dasystoma 190 salicicolella, Phyllonorycter 193 saligna, Phyllocnistis 193 sambucaria, Ourapteryx 71,85 sannio, Diacrisia 186 saucia, Peridroma 63,71186,187 saxicola, Phycitodes 68,70 saxifragac, Kessleria 188,189 schuetzcella, Dioryctria 191 scoliaeformis, Synanthedon 182,185 scolopacina, Apamea 71,184 scopariella, Agonoptenx 195 scriptella, Teleiodes 190 scrophulariae, Cucullia 182,Plate 111 secalis, Mesapamea 71 seeboldi, Saragossa 198 segetum, Agrotis 71 semifascia, Caloptilia 193 sehestediana, Prochoreutis 189 selene, Boloria 214
ab.zeta Platel!,177 semele, Hipparchia
ab.holonops 180,181
ab.monocellata 180,181 semifasciana, Apotomis 189 senex, Thumatha 215 senticetella, Gelechia 191 sequax, Teleiodes 189 sericealis, Rivula 71 sertula, Lasiocampa 198 sexalata, Pterapherapteryx 71 signatana, Epinotia 192 silaceata, Ecliptopera 70 siletti, Numenes 197 similis, Euproctis 85,181 simpliciata, Eupithecia 65,68,71 simulans, Rhyacia 184 sinapis, Leptidea 214
sinuclla, Homoeosoma 70,189,193,Plate 111
sobrina, Paradiarsia 96,182 sociella, Aphomia 70,191 somnulentella, Bedellia 188 sororcula, Eilema 185 sororculella, Gelechia 188 sororiata, Carsia 94 spadicearia, Xanthorhoe 70 sparganella, Orthotaelia 188 sparsana, Acleris 191 sparsata, Anticollix 214 spartiella, Anarsia 70 spheciformis, Synanthedon 182 sphinx, Brachionycha 181 splendana, Cydia 70 statices, Adscita 186 steinkellneriana, Semioscopis 191 stellatarum, Macroglossum 185 stephensiana, Cnephasia 70 straminea, Cochylimorpha 70 straminea, Mythimna 184,215 straminella, Agriphila 70,95 stratiotala, Parapoynx 191 sticticalis, Margaritia 189 striana, Celypha 68,70 strigana, Lathronympha 191 strigilis, Oligia 71 strigulatella, Phyllonoryeter 158 suasa, Lacanobia ab.dissimilis 184 subcaudata, Plutodes 197 subfasciella, Cedestis 95 subfusca, Scopania 191 subfuscata, Eupithecia 71 sublustris, Apamea 90 subpropinquella, Agonoptennx 70,195 subsericeata, Idaea 68,70 subtusa, Ipimorpha 187 subumbrata, Eupithecia 90,184 succedana, Cydia 70 suffumata, Lampropteryx 70 sulphurella, Esperia 195 suspecta, Parastichtis 96,215 swammerdamella, Nematopogon 70 sylvata, Abraxas 186 sylvestris, Thymelicus 7,10 syringaria, Apeira 71,186 taenialis, Schrankia 62,71 tamaricalis, Lepidogma 196 tapetzella, Trichophaga 195 tarsipennalis, Herminia 71 temerata, Lomographa 71 templi, Dasypolia 65 tenuiata, Eupithecia 71 ternatella, Brachmia 195 testacea, Luperina 68,71,142,183 thapsiella, Agonopterix 195 thoracella, Bucculatrix 191 tiae, Mimas 183 tipuliformis, Synanthedon 187 tithonus, Pyronia 9,10,180,215 ab.caeca 178 ab.excessa 180 ab.obsoletissima Plate! 1,178 ab.postobscura 180 logata, Xanthia 71 tortuosa, Asota 197 trabealis, Emmelia 198
translucens, Tinea 194,195 trapezina, Cosmia 71 tremula, Pheosia 71 triangulum, Xestia 71 tricolor, Eterusia 197 tridactyla, Pterophorus 189 tridens, Calamia
ssp.occidentalis 188 trifolii, Discestra 68,71
melanic 181,Plate 111 trifolii, Lasiocampa
ssp.flava
ab.obsoleta 181 trifolu, Zygaena
ssp.decreta 186 trigemina, Abrostola 71 trigrammica, Charanyca 71,181
tringipennella, Aspilapteryx 188,193
triplasia, Abrostola 71 tripunctaria, Eupithecia 184 tristella, Agriphila 70 tritici, Euxoa 65,68,71,142 truncata, Chloroclysta 71,185 trux, Agrotis 62,65,71 tullia, Cocnonympha ab.cockaynci 181 ab.impupillata 181 turionella, Blastesthia 191 typhae, Nonagria 71 ab.fraterna 184 typica, Naenia 71 uddmanniana, Epiblema 70 umbra, Pyrrhia 90 umbrana, Acleris 190 uncula, Eustrotia 184,215 unionalis, Palpita 192 urticae, Aglais 85 ab.semiichneusoides 180 ustella, Ypsolopha 70 utonella, Biselachista 190 vaccinii, Conistra 71,184 varicoloraria, Pachyodes 197 variegana, Acleris 70 y-ata, Chloroclystis 71 venata, Ochlodes 92,215 ab.fuscus Plate11,180 venosata, Eupithecia 71 ssp.fumosae 183 verbascalis, Anania 192 verbasci, Cucullia 90 182 versicolor, Oligia 71 versurella, Coleophora 188 vestigialis, Agrotis 65,68,71 velusta, Xylena 184 vibicuria, Rhodostrophia 198 viburnana, Aphelia 191 vinculellus, Euchromius 196 vinula, Cerura 71 viretata, Acasis 71 Virgaureata, Eupithecia 68,71,213 Viridaria, Phytometra 214 viriplaca, Heliothis 183,186 vilalbata, Horisme 185 vitellina, Mythimna 63,71,184,186 vulgata, Eupithecia 71 vulpecalis, Actenia 196 wauaria, Scmiothisa 155
XViil
weaverella, Monopis 188,192 xanthographa, Xestia 71,91 xanthomista, Polymixis 62,65,71 xanthosoma, Pseudatamelia 195 xenias, Kasyniana 195 xylostella, Plutella 70 . zelleri, Melissoblaptes 193 zemyl, Reisserita 195 zeta, Apamea
ssp.assimilis 185 ziezac, Eligmodonta 71 zoegana, Agapeta 70
OTHER INSECT ORDERS
DERMAPTERA
Forficula auricularia 96 Labia minor 210
EPHEMEROPTERA Ephemera lineata 75,76
MECOPTERA Panorpa cognata 211
NEUROPTERA
Euroleon nostras 211 Hemerobius atrifrons 211 Micromus angulatus 211 Myrmeleon formicarius 211 Osmylus fulvicephalus 211 Psectra diptera 211 Wesmaclius betulinus 96
ODONATA
Coenagrion mercuriale 166 C.puella 211
Ischnura elegans 215 Sympetrum nigrescens 210 S.striolatum 83,211,215
ORTHOPTERA Conocephalus dorsalis 210 Leptophyes punctatissima 92 Meconema thalassinum 92 Melanoplus spretus 18 Stenobothrus lineatus 210 Tetrix undulata 91
SIPILONAPTERA Ceratophyllus farreni farreni 211 C.hinindinis 211
C.rusticus 212
Ctenocephalides felis felis 211 Monopsyllus anisus 211 Spilopsyllus cuniculi 211
OTHER ORDERS
ARACHNIDA
Eresus sp. 86
Euscorpius carpathicus candiota 212 Nuctenea umbratica 75
Segestria florentina 86,212,213
AVES
Circus aeruginosus 215 Locustella naevia 215 Picus viridis pluvius 63 Tetrao urogallus 95
BACTERIA Borrelia burgdorferi 80
ISOPODA Armadillidium pictum 76
REPTILIA Lacerta vivipara 95
PLANTS
Abies sp. 141
Acer sp. 135,199,209 A.campestre 91,190,193 A.pseudoplatanus 193 Achillea sp. 68 A.filipendulina 210
Aesculus hippocastanum 135,157,199,200
Alnus sp. 199,200 A.glutinosa 61
A.incana 158
Ammophila arenaria 61,62,68 Angelica sp. 47
Anthemis sp. 68
Armeria maritima 66,67,189 Asteraceae 4
Atriplex sp. 66,67,68 Azolla sp. 206
Betula sp. 66,189,200 B.pendula 88,96 B.pubescens 61
Buddleja sp. 92,187 Calluna vulgans 61,66,94 Campanula sp. 210 C.rotundifolia 4
Cardamine pratensis 88 Carex vesicaria 190 Centaurea sp. 199
C.cyanus 4
Cerastium sp. 190
Ceralina cyanea 209 Chamaecypanis lawsoniana 78 Chenopodium 66 Chrysanthemum 78
Cicuta virosa 213
Cirsium arvense 151,190,209 C.oleraceum 115
Cistus monspeliensis 206 Clematis 74
Clinopodium vulgare 4 Conifer sp. 66
Conyza canadensis 74 Corylus avellana 140 Crassula helmsii 138 Crassulaceae 206 Crataegus sp. 141,200 C.monogyna 91,140,193 Crocosmia x crocosmiflora 61 Cuscula sp. 206
Cynodon dactylon 163 Cyltisus scoparius 94
XIX
Dactylis glomerata 102 Daucus sp. 210
D.carota 47
Dryopteris sp 213
Echium sp. 206
E.vulgare 4
Elatine hexandra 138
Emex spinosa 206
Epilobium hirsutum 190,194 Erica cinerea 61
Erigeron acer 74
E. canadensis 74
E. uniflorum 74
Euonymus sp. 198 Eupatorium cannabinum 5,215 Fagus sp. 192,200,201 ,202,203 F.grandiflora 134
F.sylvatica 73,78,91,130,131,132,134,136,137,157,193
Fragaria 66
Frangula alnus 215 Fraxinus excelsior 141,157,192 Fumaria sp. 206 Galeopsis sp. 68 G.tetrahit 204
Galium sp. 68
Genista anglica 204 Gramineae 66 Heracleum sp. 210 H.sphondylium 47 Helianthemum 189 Helichrysum sp. 140 Heracleum sphondylium 203,204 Hieracium sp. 197 Hippocrepis comosa 9 Hypochoenis sp. 4
Inula crithmoides 157 Lhirta 210
Iris pscudacorus 61,167 Jasione montana 202 Juncus sp. 82 J.articulatus 192 J.bufonius 190,191,194 Juniperus sp. 78 Lamium album 198 Lanx sp. 141 Leontodon sp. 47 L.hispidus 4 Leucanthemum vulgare 7,193 Ligustrum vulgare 193 Lilium pyrenaicum 204 Linum catharlicum 4 Lonicera sp. 140,141 L.periclymenum 66,193 Lotus corniculatus 4 L.glaucus 206
Lygos monosperma 206 Lysimachia vulgaris 209 Lythrum salicaria 139 Malus sp. 208
M. sylvestris 207 Malva sylvestris 86 Mercurialis annua 206 Mimosa camporum 163 M.pudica 163
Mycelis muralis 78 Odontites 189,210 O.vema 190
Oenanthe crocata 66
Ononis spinosa 90
Oreopteris sp. 213
Origanum vulgare 89,90
Osmunda regalis 215
Parietaria sp. 206
P.judaica 37,38,39,40,41,189
Persicaria amphibia 138
Phalaris arundinacea 167
Phragmites australis 43,45 ,66,67,139,167,215
Picea sp. 141
P.abies 125
P.sitchensis 125
Picris echioides 190,191
Pinus sp. 14
P.canariensis 206
P.sylvestris 94
Plantago lanceolata 193
P. maritima 201
Populus sp. 116,141,200
P.canescens 141
P.tremula 86,91
Potentilla sp. 66
P.anserina 61
P.erecta 4,82
P.reptans 61
Prunclla vulgaris 4
Prunus spp. 92,140
P.spinosa 91,190,204,208
Pseudotsuga sp. 141
Pteridium aquilinum 61
Pulicaria dysenterica 66
Pyracantha coccinea 188,193
Pyrus pyraster 190
Quercus spp. 66,74,75,91,157,158,192,193,194199,200, 201 202,203,207
Q.petraca 189
Ranunculus acris 4,82,88
R. bulbosus 4
Reseda lutea 207
Rhinanthus sp. 4
Rhododendron simsii 193
Ribes nigrum 187
Rosa sp. 3
R.canina 190,213
R.rugosa 61
R. spinosissima 4
Rosmarinus officinalis 78,203
Rubiaceae sp. 198
Rubus sp. 61,68,200,206
R.caesius 66
R.fruticosus 1,5,47
R.idaeus 207
Rumex acetosella 68
R. hydrolapathum 139,140
Salix sp. 63,66,68,115,193,198,203
S.caprea 193
S.cinerea 61,91,213
S.fragilis 193
S.repens 193
Sambucus sp. 204,210
Scrophularia 206
Scutellaria minor 189
Senecio sp. 4,68
S.jacobaea 61,209
Silene sp. 68
S.maritima 66
S.uniflora 66,68 Smymium olusatrum 209 Solcira soleirolii 40 Solidago virgaurea 213 Sonchus arvensis 47 S.asper 208
Sporobolus jacquemontii 163 S.virginicus 163
Stelis ornatula 209 Stellaria graminea 190,192 S.media 189
Taraxacum spp. 67,68 Thesium humifusum 190 Thuja sp. 78
Thymus sp. 4 T.polytrichus 66 T.praecox 66
Tilia sp. 135
T.cordata 189 Tragopogon sp. 200 Tripleurospermum maritimun 66,67,68 Triticum aestivum 74 Trollius sp. 200
Typha sp. 66
Ulex europacus 61,88 Umbelliferae 203
Urtica sp. 206
U.dioica 37,38,39,40 Vaccinium myrtillus 94,96 Verbascum thapsus 90 Veronica chamaedrys 4
V. officinalis 4
Vicia sp. 68,206
LICHENS Lichen sp. 66
FUNGI
Bjerkandera adjusta 192 Coriolus versicolor 192 Ganoderma adspersum 137,192 G.applanatum 199
Inonotus dryadeus 74,157 Laetiporus sulphureus 91,157,158,201 Nectria coccinea 130 Ophiostoma novo-ulmi 136 Piptoporus betulinus 192 Polyporus squamosus 192 Pscudotrametes betulinus 192 Stereum hirsutum 194 Tyromyces stipticus 192
OTHER PABULA
Hymenoptera nests 66 Mole’s nest 202 Rabbit midden 203
XX
ISSN 0952-7583 Vol. 8, Part 1
BRITISH JOURNAL OF
ENTOMOLOGY
AND NATURAL HISTORY
Published by the British Entomological and Natural History Society and incorporating its Proceedings and Transactions
Price: £3.00
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY Editor:
Richard A. Jones, B.Sc., F.R.E.S., Ee-SENITHSON]Z 13 Bellwood Road WV Nunhead London SE15 3DE (Tel: 0171 732 2440) (Fax: 0171 277 8725)
Editorial Committee:
{
\ MAR 6 1996 LIBRARIES
Rev. D. J. L. Agassiz, M.A. T. G. Howarth, B.E.M., F.R.
R. D. G. Barrington, B.Sc. i BE) Ge Meccan, Ph De bake E. S.
E. S. Bradford Mrs F. M. Murphy, B. Sc.
P. J. Chandler, B.Sc., F.R.E.S. M. J. Simmons, M.Sc.
B. Goater, B.Sc., M.I.Biol. T. R. E. Southwood, K. oe DSc) FE Rebs A. J. Halstead, M.Sc. R. W. J. Uffen, M.Sc., FR. | BS,
R. D. Hawkins B. K. West, B.Ed.
P. J. Hodge
British Journal of Entomology and Natural History is published by the British Entomological and Natural History Society, Dinton Pastures Country Park, Davis Street, Hurst, Reading, Berkshire RG10 OTH, UK. Tel: 01734-321402.
The Journal is distributed free to BENHS members.
©1995 British Entomological and Natural History Society.
Typeset by Dobbie Typesetting Limited, Tavistock, Devon. Printed in England by Henry Ling Ltd, Dorchester, Dorset.
BRITISH ENTOMOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY Registered charity number: 213149
Meetings of the Society are held regularly in London, at the rooms of the Royal Entomological Society, 41 Queen’s Gate, London SW7 and the well-known ANNUAL EXHIBITION is planned for a Saturday in late October 1995 at Imperial College, London SW7. Frequent Field Meetings are held at weekends in the summer. Visitors are welcome at all meetings. The current Programme Card can be had on application to the Secretary, R. F. McCormick, at the address given below.
The Society maintains a library, and collections at its headquarters in Dinton Pastures, which are open to members on the second and fourth Sundays of each month, telephone 01734-321402 for the latest meeting news.
Applications for membership to the Membership Secretary: A. Godfrey, 10 Moorlea Drive, Baildon, Shipley, West Yorkshire BD17 6QL.
Subscriptions and changes of address to the Assistant Treasurer: M. G. Telfer, 12 Jasmine Close, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7NE.
Non-arrival of the Journal, faulty copies or other problems arising from distribution of the Journal or notices to the Distribution Secretary: D. Young, 9 Marten Place, Tilehurst, Reading, Berkshire RG3 6FB.
Orders for books and back numbers of the Journal and Proceedings to the Sales Secretary: R. D. Hawkins, 30d Meadowcroft Close, Horley, Surrey RH6 9EL.
General Enquiries to the Secretary: R. F. McCormick, 36 Paradise Road, Teignmouth, Devon TQ14 8NR. Tel: 01626-779543.
Cover illustration: Scanning electron microscope picture of the head of a female gall wasp, Cynips divisa Hartig (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea). Photo:.M. Iley.
NOTE: The Editor invites submission of photographs for black and white reproduction on the front covers of the journal. The subject matter is open, with an emphasis on aesthetic value rather than scientific novelty. Submissions can be in the form of colour or black and white prints or colour transparencies.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 1
THE DISTRIBUTION AND HABITS OF THE SMALL CARPENTER BEE CERATINA CYANEA (KIRBY, 1802) (HYMENOPTERA: APIDAE) IN BRITAIN
GEORGE R. ELSE
Department of Entomology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 SBD.
INTRODUCTION
Ceratina cyanea (Kirby, 1802) is a small, almost hairless metallic blue or blue-green bee. It is the sole representative of its genus in north-west Europe, though numerous species occur further south, around the Mediterranean. The genus is especially well represented in North Africa (Daly, 1983), the Levant, and south-west Asia. Formerly it was considered to be one of the great rarities among the British bee fauna and few collections, either museum or private, contained specimens. It is listed as ‘rare’ by Falk in his account of the scarce and threatened bees of Great Britain (1991). Falk defines a ‘rare’ taxon as one with a small population that is not at present endangered or vulnerable, but is at risk; such species are estimated to exist in only 15 or fewer 10-kilometre squares since 1970. However, a reappraisal of the status for this species would seem to be in order as it has been reliably recorded since 1970 from 18 10-kilometre squares (Fig. 1) and, in the western Weald (from which most recent records originate), from thirty-three 2-kilometre squares (Fig. 2).
While collecting aculeate Hymenoptera on Oxenbourne Down, a reserve of the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust, 6 kilometres south of Petersfield, Hampshire, on 14.vii.1972, I encountered a dead female C. cyanea wedged between the split ends of a dry bramble (Rubus fruticosus L. sensu lato) stem. On sorting out my catch at home later that day I found I had collected another female. These were the first records of the species from Hampshire.
C. cyanea has long been known both to nest and overwinter in dead, dry stems (e.g. Smith, 1846; Shuckard, 1866). Prior to my finding this bee, I had not sought stem nests of any aculeate. However, Danks’ excellent account of the biology of British stem-nesting aculeate Hymenoptera (1971) (which contains a key to the nests of these species) proved to be invaluable as an introduction to the subject, and the key briefly described the nest of this bee. On further visits to Oxenbourne Down on 23.ix and 7.x.1972 I searched for suitable stems and found a number of dead, cut bramble stems which each had an obvious burrow in the exposed pith. On opening these stems, some were found to contain overwintering adults of both sexes of C. cyanea; in some instances a stem contained several individuals.
Locating occupied stems is undoubtedly the easiest way of finding this very local bee, as more can be found in this way than by searching for specimens visiting flowers. Furthermore, the adult occurs in every month of the year, although the flight period extends only from May to August or early September.
BRITISH HABITAT AND DISTRIBUTION
In Britain C. cyanea is a strongly thermophilous species, being confined to warm, sheltered sites, particularly those which are exposed to the sun for much of the day, and where the soil heats up quickly. Thus, the bee is associated with scrub on the south-facing slopes of chalk downland (there are no reports of the species from north- facing slopes), open rides in woodland on chalk, disused sand pits, and the
2 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
© Before 1970
@ 1970 onwards
“3 Unconfirmed literature records
Fig. 1. British distribution of Ceratina cyanea.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 3
Fig. 2. Distribution of Ceratina cyanea in Sussex.
edges of heathland. The species is sometimes locally common in suitable stems.
Although C. cyanea occurs as far north as southern Sweden (Erlandsson, 1954; Janzon & Svensson, 1988), recent British records (post-1970) of the species are entirely from south-east England. Records (Figs 1 and 2) are known from the following counties: eastern Hampshire, West Sussex, Surrey, north Kent and south Essex. There are older, confirmed records from Avon and Suffolk, and unsubstantiated reports in the literature from south Cornwall (Clark, 1906, 1907), Devon (Smith, 1876), and Hereford & Worcester (Saunders, 1896). All post-1970 records have been confirmed.
LIFE-CYCLE IN SOUTHERN ENGLAND
The following account is based on a personal study carried out on Oxenbourne Down in 1972-73. Unfortunately no figures of the immature stages suitable for publication were prepared at that time. However, as no other, detailed observations on the nesting biology of this species seem to have been published, the following contribution may be of interest.
The nest
Both sexes become active during May, when the presence of mounds of fresh, fine, pith fragments directly beneath the cut ends of dead stems betray the presence of females engaged in nest building. Mating also seems to occur at this time. Nest burrows are excavated only in dead, broken stems in which the pith has been exposed; common examples are those of bramble and rose (Rosa species). Such stems usually become broken by the action of large herbivores, or as a result of scrub-clearance. In my experience preferred stems lie on, or are suspended close to, the ground in sunlit situations. Female C. cyanea will often accept as nest sites cut, loose pieces of dead Rubus stems (‘trap-nests’) laid out on short turf in open areas. Stems of sufficient length (e.g. about 30 cm or more) will sometimes attract two females, each excavating a nesting burrow from opposite ends of the stem.
The nest burrow varies from about 57 to 110 mm in length and is usually characterized by a constriction just within the entrance. An occupied nest has been illustrated by Westrich (1989). Smith (1846) observed C. cyanea entering stems excavated by the
4 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
small megachiline bee Hoplitis claviventris (Thomson) [as Osmia leucomelana] and thought it probable that the former species may use a ready-made burrow as a nest site; this, however, has not been confirmed and seems unlikely.
Cells are 7-9 mm in length and 3 mm in width, and are separated from one another by pith fragment partitions, these being about 1 mm wide. Male and female cells are not segregated within the nest. Sometimes the last cell to be built (i.e. that nearest the nest entrance) has no outer partition. In such an instance the female sometimes remains just within the nest burrow and guards her brood; she may remain with it until the young adults emerge.
Each cell is provisioned with a roughly brick-shaped pollen loaf; one typical loaf measured 6mm long, 4mm wide and 3 mm deep. Loaves have a shallow dorsal depression and, of those examined on the study site, were always bright yellow in colour. The entire ventral surface of the provision probably lies on the side of the cell nearest the ground (most stems containing nests of this species are usually horizontal or nearly so).
C. cyanea is polylectic. An analysis of pollen in loaves from three Oxenbourne nests by G. Clarke produced the following results (the percentages were calculated by identifying 200 pollen grains from each sample and halving the results). Nest 1: yellow-rattle (Rhinanthus species) 37%; cinquefoil (Potentilla cf. erecta (L.)) 24%; buttercup (Ranunculus cf. acris L.) 20%; Asteraceae (probably a cat’s ear (Hypochoeris species)) 15%; cornflower (Centaurea cyanus L.) 2%; and purging flax (Linum catharticum L.) 2%. Nest 2: Asteraceae (probably a cat’s ear (Hypochoeris species)) 48%; yellow-rattle (Rhinanthus species) 29%; buttercup (Ranunculus cf. acris) 15%; and birdsfoot-trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.) 8%. Nest 3: Asteraceae (probably a cat’s ear (Hypochoeris species)) 50%; cinquefoil (Potentilla cf. erecta) 27%; yellow-rattle (Rhinanthus species) 9%; buttercup (Ranunculus cf. acris L.) 8%; and Asteraceae (ragwort, or near (cf. Senecio species)) 6%. The lowest percentages may only indicate grains fortuitously picked up whilst the females were drinking nectar, or wind-blown grains contaminating a major pollen source. Bees have also been observed (in various British localities) at bulbous buttercup (Ranunculus bulbosus L.), bramble (Rubus), common tormentil (Potentilla erecta (L.)), burnet rose (Rosa spinosissima L.), viper’s bugloss (Echium vulgare L.), common speedwell (Veronica officinalis L.), germander speedwell (V. chamaedrys L.), thyme (Thymus species), wild basil (Clinopodium vulgare L.), self-heal (Prunella vulgaris L.), harebell (Campanula rotundifolia L.) and rough hawkbit (Leontodon hispidus L.), but it is not known whether the bees were foraging from these, or simply visiting them for nectar. An Oxenbourne Down specimen was collected carrying an unidentified orchid pollinium attached to the upper portion of the clypeus (S. P. M. Roberts (pers. comm.). He has also observed individuals of Ceratina curcubitina (Rossi) carrying orchid pollinia on their faces in Crete).
THE IMMATURE STAGES
The egg is laid on the posterior part of the pollen loaf, with its base glued to the inner side wall of the cell. The egg is elongate, strongly curved and rather translucent; except for the transparent apices. It is about 4mm long and slightly less than 1 mm wide at its mid-point. Following oviposition the cell is sealed with a partition of pith fragments.
The larva lies on a membranous pad (usually stained by the pollen and is therefore sometimes difficult to see) which is about 2mm long and 1 mm wide. Part of this pad is firmly attached to the provision, with the remaining posterior portion attached
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 5
to the cell wall. The larva is firmly attached to the pad and while the feeding phase continues it is most difficult to remove a larva from the pad without causing injury. The pad seems to be composed of the accumulation of the exuviae from earlier instars.
The fully grown larva is faintly brownish in colour (caused by food in the gut) and possesses a fleshy, slightly raised lateral ridge which extends from the first to the penultimate segment; at this instar the spiracles are distinct. The mandibles are strongly sclerotized, brown, narrow and unidentate, the tooth extending a little beyond the apex of the mandible. With the exception of the mandibles, the prepupa (a fully fed larva which has voided the excrement it accumulated during its development) is entirely white and is about 6 mm in length. Its trunk, including the head capsule, is weakly sclerotized; the head bears a pair of prominent antennal tubercles. The lateral ridge characteristic of the mature larva has been lost and the spiracles may be indistinct. The thoracic segments are swollen, their intersegmental divisions being only weakly defined. The surface of the thorax is smooth and almost devoid of wrinkles, except in the immediate vicinity of the spiracles. The abdominal intersegmental divisions are obvious, except for that between the last two segments. Michener (1953) draws attention to the absence of body tubercles, the unidentate mandible and the distinct antennal tubercle of Ceratina larvae.
The larva spins no cocoon and remains quiescent for a few days prior to pupation. The most noticeable feature of the pupa is its long glossa and galea.
Parasitoids
I have found a larva of an ichneumonid wasp (possibly Aritranis signatorius (F.)) in the act of devouring a C. cyanea larva. Unfortunately the wasp larva died in its cocoon.
In mainland Europe, Malyshev (1968) records Aritranis heliophilus Tschek [as A. mediterraneus Tschek ] (a species not known from Britain) as a parasitoid of C. cyanea. Daly et al. (1967) review the natural enemies of Ceratina species in North America; Daly (1983) describes those parasitoids recorded from Ceratina nests in Iberia and Tunisia.
The hibernaculum
The new generation of bees emerges from the pupa by August or early September and may occasionally be found visiting flowers at this time. The autumn and winter months are spent as an adult within a hibernaculum. This may be the cleaned-out parental nest, as has been noted in other Ceratina species found in temperate regions (Daly, 1983). The hibernaculum resembles a nest but lacks partitions. Burrow lengths of hibernacula vary: I have found the mean length of 21 hibernacula to be 78 mm (range 25-170 mm); the internal diameter is 3-4 mm. Usually a little pith adheres to the walls, but the burrow contains no pith fragments. Most hibernacula that I have found were in bramble stems, but others were in hemp agrimony (Eupatorium cannabinum L.), and one in a dead Apiaceae stem. Adults of both sexes occupy the hibernacula from September to May, either singly or in small groups (rarely more than six individuals to a stem). They always enter the burrow head first and remain in this position throughout the winter.
Females in particular are usually long-lived, with an adult life-span of almost a year. One hibernaculum which I collected in late January contained an apparently old, diapausing female which may have been overwintering for a second time (its age was assessed by its discoloured and abraded wings). If this was correct, then the specimen must have been about 18 months old when collected.
6 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am grateful to the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlifé Trust (formerly the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Naturalists’ Trust) for permission to collect aculeate Hymenoptera on Oxenbourne Down in 1972-73, to G. H. L. Dicker, M. Edwards and P. Harvey for their records of this species, and to G. Clarke (formerly of the Department of Botany, The Natural History Museum, London) for identifying the pollens present in samples which I submitted to him for analysis. S. P. M. Roberts very kindly prepared the distribution maps (drawn on DMAP).
REFERENCES
Clark, J. 1906. The bees, wasps and ants of Cornwall. Rep R. Cornwall Polytech. Soc. 1906: 92-130.
Clark, J. 1907. Hymenoptera Aculeata In: The Victoria county history of Cornwall.
Daly, H. V. 1983. Taxonomy and ecology of Ceratinini of North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). Syst. Ent. 8: 29-62.
Daly, H. V., Stage, G. I. & Brown, T. 1967. Natural enemies of bees in the genus Ceratina (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). Ann. Ent. Soc. Am. 60: 1273-1282.
Danks, H. V. 1971. Biology of some stem-nesting aculeate Hymenoptera. Trans. R. Ent. Soc. Lond. 122: 323-399.
Erlandsson, S. 1954. Ceratina cyanea Kirby, eine thermophile Art der fennoskandischen Fauna (Hym. Apidae). Opusc. Ent. 19: 211-212
Falk, S. 1991. A review of the scarce and threatened bees, wasps and ants of Great Britain. Research and Survey in Nature Conservation. No. 35. The Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough.
Janzon, L. & Svensson, B. G. 1988. 110 4r med trabiet Ceratina cyanea (Hym., Anthophoridae). Ent. Tidskr. 109: 19-23.
Malyshev, S. 1968. Genesis of the Hymenoptera and the phases of their evolution. Methuen & Co, Ltd, London.
Michener, C. D. 1953. Comparative morphological and systematic studies of bee larvae with a key to the families of hymenopterous larvae. Kans. Univ. Sci. Bull. 35: 987-1102.
Saunders, E. 1896. The Hymenoptera Aculeata of the British Islands. L. Reeve & Co., London.
Shuckard, W. E. 1866. British Bees: an introduction to the study of the natural history and economy of the bees indigenous to the British Isles. L. Reeve & Co., London.
Smith, F. 1846. Description of the British species of bees belonging to the genera Chelostoma, Heriades, Ceratina, Eucera, Panurgus, and Anthidium; with observations on their economy etc. Zoologist 4: 1445-1454.
Smith, F. 1876. Catalogue of British Hymenoptera in the British Museum. Part 1. Andrenidae and Apidae. London.
Westrich, P. 1989. Die Wildbienen Baden-Wiirttembergs. Eugen Ulmer GmbH & Co., Stuttgart.
BOOK REVIEW
Australian beetles, by J. F. Lawrence and E. B. Britton, Melbourne University Press, 1994, x + 192 pages, hardback, Aus $39.95, about £28.—For anybody imagining that this book could only be of interest to someone going to visit Australia, think again. This book is of international interest in putting together in concise and available form the authors’ thoughts on the higher classification of the Coleoptera. The text is highly illustrated with line figures and there are several coloured plates to whet the appetite with bright exotic forms. This is a must for coleopterists.
RICHARD A. JONES
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 af
A FURTHER STUDY OF THE BEHAVIOURAL PATTERNS OF SIX SPECIES OF BRITISH BUTTERFLY WHILST IN COPULA
S. A. KNILL-JONES Roundstone, 2 School Green Road, Freshwater, Isle of Wight PO40 9AL.
Between 1989 and 1994 I have been fortunate enough to observe six species of British butterfly in copula and now describe their behavioural patterns. This follows my earlier observations on 6 other species (Knill-Jones, 1989).
SMALL SKIPPER (THYMELICUS SYLVESTRIS PODA)
At 11.23 a.m. on 4.viii. 1991 I was walking to Golden Hill, Freshwater when I came across a pair of small skippers (7hymelicus sylvestris Poda) in copula at rest on an oxeye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare Lam.). The female was facing due west and the male north 15 degrees east as they basked in warm hazy sunlight. They remained motionless except for the opening and closing of their wings in that position until 12.30 p.m., six minutes prior to separation, when they both quickly altered their positions in two movements ending up with the female facing north 10 degrees east and the male due west.
When I first noticed them their wings were closed, but after 5 minutes they opened their wings and except for four occasions at intervals of 20 minutes when they both had their wings closed for about 5 minutes, their wings remained partially opened whilst they were in copula. The female’s wings were open from 10 to 45 degrees whereas the male on two occasions around noon had its wings nearly fully open at 75 degrees. Occasionally both sexes, with the female more frequently, would briefly close their wings for a few seconds especially when the wind blew them. The female did show some other movement when after each period of about 15 minutes had passed it would roll its head & antennae whilst its forelegs remained static.
At 12.36 p.m., after 6 minutes preparation when they changed positions on the flower, they separated with the male flying off first, leaving his mate feeding on the daisy with her wings partially open until she flew off five minutes later.
They remained in copula for 1 hour and 13 minutes.
GREEN HAIRSTREAK (CALLOPHRYS RUBI L.)
May 3lst, 1994 was a warm, cloudless, sunny day when Brian Warne and myself visited Compton Down with a view to observing the butterflies there. While walking up a footpath towards the down Brian disturbed a pair of Callophrys rubi (L.) in copula which had been resting on a sycamore and they flew a few yards before alighting on a long blade of grass at 11.48 a.m. After a little bodily movement they settled down with the female facing due west and the male facing east south east. Throughout the whole time in copula their wings remained tightly closed and they only opened them to fly away after separation.
At 12.10 p.m. the female briefly moved its front legs and at 12.12 p.m. the male did likewise. Throughout their time together similar slight leg movements were made at intervals of between 10 and 20 minutes. At 12.22 p.m. and 12.35 p.m. they both moved their positions slightly before resorting to their initial ones. At 12.49 p.m. the female moved to west north west and the male east south east and at 1.02 p.m. they moved again, rotating with the position of the sun to north west and south east respectively. At 1.50 p.m. there was a gust of wind which caused them to alter their
8 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
position with the male facing directly up the blade and its mate down the grass blade. Now there was also some bodily movement shown by the female and at 2.37 p.m. they moved a further inch up the grass blade. At 2.40 p.m. there was considerable bodily movement as they tried to separate and 5 minutes later they successfully parted and the male flew off. The female remained motionless for a further 2 minutes and at 2.47 p.m. it flew off into the distance. I had observed them in copula for 2 hours and 57 minutes.
COMMON BLUE (POL YOMMATUS ICARUS ROTT.)
Shortly before noon on a warm sunny day on 9.ix.1991, whilst walking on Tennyson Down, I noticed a pair of Polyommatus icarus Rott. flying together over some old thistle heads. At 11.54 a.m. they settled on a small thistle head and mated. Soon the male was facing due east with its wings open and the female faced due west with its wings closed. After 3 minutes the male closed its wings before opening them again two minutes later. It continued this movement of its wings for 10 minutes until it finally closed them. Except for a brief moment when facing south its wings remained closed for the final 20 minutes. The sun was fully out all the time and there was a cloudless sky. The female however had its wings closed for the whole time whilst they were in copula except for 4 minutes at 12.10p.m. when facing due south, her wings were held at an angle of 45 degrees.
Approximately every 5 minutes they would change position on the flower head and each faced all the main points of the compass for 3 to 5 minutes. Both sexes opened their wings when facing south directly towards the sun. About 5 minutes before separation there was considerable movement as they rotated several times around the thistle attempting to find a new position. When they were static their abdomens pulsated rhythmically giving considerable movement.
At 12.25 p.m. they both opened their wings (they separated). The male flew off almost immediately to a nearby thistle. Its mate remained on the original flower for 2 minutes before departing. They had been in copula for 31 minutes.
Compared to Lysandra coridon Poda., P. icarus remained in its original resting place for the whole duration whereas L. coridon moved its position once after being disturbed. The time spent in copula was four times longer with L. coridon.
GLANVILLE FRITILLARY (MELITAEA CINXIA L.)
On 11.vi.1994, a warm sunny day apart from the occasional passing cumulus clouds, I went to Compton Bay with a view to seeing a pair of Melitaea cinxia in copula. My visit was rewarded and at 10.38 a.m. I noticed a pair flying together; after a minute they had mated. They flew a couple of yards and I observed that the larger female carried the male in flight. They settled on a blade of grass and after a few minutes the male ended up facing south south west and the female north west. They stayed there until 11.04.a.m. when the male changed its direction to face due south. Their wings were mainly open and up until 11.54 a.m; there was considerable opening and closing of the wings. Throughout the whole time in copula the male remained the passive partner with its wings being closed for a far longer period than its mate. The female opened and closed its wings far more often. Between 12.14 p.m. and 1.00 p.m. they both kept their wings closed except for an occasional flap.
At 1.00 p.m. they moved about 15 feet to a grass flower where the female held its wings fully open and the male held its wings at an angle of 75 degrees. At 1.02 p.m. there was considerable movement and they flew a few more feet and alighted on a
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 9
yellow flower of the horseshoe vetch (Hippocrepis comosa L.) where they began to feed at about 10 minute intervals. At 1.10 p.m. there was further bodily movement and their position changed through an angle of 180 degrees before finally coming to rest with the male facing due west and the female east north east. During this time their wings remained open until 1.40 p.m. when the male closed its wings and its mate’s were fully open. This situation continued until 2.34 p.m. when there was considerable movement and they flew off together, quickly separating in mid-air.
They had been in copula for 3 hours and 55 minutes, the longest that I have observed for any butterfly.
SPECKLED WOOD (PARARGE AEGERIA L.)
At exactly mid-day on 17.iv.1989 I came across what I thought was a single Pararge aegeria L. attempting to fly. I put my finger under it and realized that it was a pair in copula which on being disturbed, flew for several feet until they settled onto another blade of grass. The male rested with its wings folded and faced north west in the sun whilst the female faced downwards in a south easterly direction with its wings also folded. The male remained motionless with its wings closed even though the sun was fully out, although the female made three rapid movements when it opened and closed its wings. After 5 minutes both of the butterflies flapped their wings as they separated. The male left first and the female about 20 seconds later.
It is difficult to say how long they had been in copula before I found them amongst the grass but it seems that this species is in copula for only a short time, probably less than a half an hour. I have often seen them flying together in pairs and I have observed this courtship behaviour continuing for about 30 minutes, but I have yet to witness them actually mating.
GATEKEEPER (PYRONIA TITHONUS L.)
At 3.22 p.m. on 28.vii.1991 on the way to Golden Hill, Freshwater I noticed a pair of Pyronia tithonus (L.) in copula at rest in the afternoon sunshine on a blackberry leaf. After 2 minutes they flew 3 feet to another piece of bramble and I observed that the female carried the male whilst in flight. At rest the female faced due east and the male faced west 10 degrees north. Between 3.24 p.m. and 4.17 p.m. they flew to five different resting places, three of which were on blackberry and two on blackthorn. On two occasions they changed perches when they were disturbed by a bee, but they moved of their own free will on the other occasions. On all except two occasions the female faced due east and the male west 10 degrees north. Once the female faced west 10 degrees north and the male due east when they flew to a bramble flower and for a brief period of 5 minutes the female faced south 10 degrees east and the male due north at another resting place.
There was no opening and closing of the wings by either sex during the whole time in copula except when the male opened its wings on being disturbed by a bee and when on one occasion it opened its wings several times after alighting on a new bramble leaf. There was no such movement in spite of the bright afternoon sunshine, when the temperature in the shade was over 70 degrees, which is an unusual feature in comparison to other species of butterfly that I have observed.
At 4.17 p.m. they moved for the last time alighting on a blackberry leaf and remained there motionless until 5.02 p.m. when they separated. The male flew off first; its mate followed 4 minutes later having remained motionless with its wings closed for 3 minutes before a hoverfly disturbed it. She opened her wings and flew off a minute later. They remained in copula for 1 hour 40 minutes.
10 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
I give below a table of the durations, in order of the length spent in copula, for the 12 species that I have observed over the last 11 years.
Date Species Time Duration 17.1v.1989 Pararge aegeria L. 12 noon-12.05 p.m. 5 min 9.ix.1991 *Polyommatus icarus Rott. 11.54 a.m.-12.25 p.m. 31 min 13.v.1984 Pyrgus malvae L. 12.28-1.00 p.m. 32 min 4.vill.1991 Thymelicus sylvestris Poda 11.23 a.m.-12.36 p.m. 1h 13 min 3.vil. 1984 Maniola jurtina L. 3.05-4.25 p.m. 1h 20 min 7.vil.1984 Melanargia galathea L. 10.45 a.m.-12.20 p.m. 1h 35 min 28.vii.1991 Pyronia tithonus L. 3.22-5.02 p.m. 1h 40 min 12.1x.1984 Pieris rapae L. 4.30-6.15 p.m. 1h 45 min 27.vii. 1984 *Lysandra coridon Poda 10.40 a.m.-12.45 p.m. 2h 5 min 31.v.1994 Callophrys rubi L. 11.48 a.m.-2.45 p.m. 2h 57 min 26.1x.1983 *Lycaena phlaeas L. 11.35 a.m.-2.40 p.m. 3h 5 min 11.vi.1994 *Melitaea cinxia L. 10.39 a.m.-2.34 p.m. 3h 55 min
*denotes a species in which the actual mating to the time of separation was observed.
Except for Melitaea cinxia L. when separation took place in mid-air it was always the male which left first whilst the female remained static for a minute or two before flying off.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I should like to thank my mother for reading and commenting on the manuscript and to Brian Warne for his patience while I was observing Callophrys rubi L.
REFERENCE
Knill-Jones, S. A. 1989. A study of the behavioural patterns of six species of British butterflies whilst in copula. Br. J. Ent. Nat. Hisi., 2: 139-141
BOOK REVIEW
The book of the spider by Paul Hillyard. London, Hutchinson, 1994, 196 pages, 26 plates, numerous figures in text, £16.99, hardback.—Although the author works on spiders at the Natural History Museum in London, this is a popular rather than an academic collection of interesting facts and entertaining anecdotes on a variety of arachnological topics.
He discusses arachnophobia and its causes but without coming to any conclusion. Also he mentions some of the modern treatments to ameliorate this condition. He passes on to folklore and then ballooning, venomous spiders (actual and believed), a brief account of a spider’s life and some especially interesting types of spider, uses of spider silk and various webs, South American spiders and finally a brief history of arachnology from Aristotle to the present day with accounts of the lives and works of some well-known arachnologists.
This is a book for those who are mildly interested in spiders, rather than for those who prefer a more academic treatment. It may well act as an antidote to the irrational fear of spiders. It would certainly intrigue the young. Alternatively it would make a good bedside book.
The book is pleasantly printed and produced. I think that it is a pity that the illustrations in the text are frequently unlabelled and unexplained.
FRANCES MURPHY
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 11
RHEOTANYTARSUS RIOENSIS (DIPTERA: CHIRONOMIDAE), A NEW SPECIES OF THE PENTAPODA GROUP FROM THE CANARY ISLANDS
PETER H. LANGTON AND PATRICK D. ARMITAGE*
3 St Felix Road, Ramsey Forty Foot, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire PE17 1YH and *The Institute of Freshwater Ecology, River Laboratory, East Stoke, Wareham, Dorset BH20 6BB.
Rheotanytarsus species of the pentapoda group are characterized by the form of two structures of the male hypopygium: the narrow, elongate apices of the gonostyles turned downwards at the tip, and the narrow, gently sinuate or curved appendage 2a. The form of the flattened plates at the tip of appendage 2a appear to be good species discriminators, but these are usually indistinguishable in normal mounts as they project nearly vertically from the shaft of the appendage, are very thin and nearly transparent. In general, in this genus pupal structure provides confirmation of specific identity.
The described west Palaearctic species of the pentapoda group are pentapoda (Kieffer) and photophilus (Goetghebuer). Specimens of all stages of a further species of this group were collected by PDA from an irrigation conduit on Tenerife.
Terminology follows that of Szether (1980), except that the flattened setae on the pupa are referred to as taeniae (singular taenia, adjective taeniate), a replacement term for the misnomer ‘filament’.
Abbreviations used. AR antennal ratio: in adults, ratio of length of apical flagellomere divided by the combined length of the more basal flagellomeres; in larvae, length of basal segment to combined length of the remaining segments. LR leg ratio: ratio of metatarsus length to tibial length. BR bristle ratio: ratio of length of longest seta of tarsal segment 1 divided by minimum width of tarsal segment 1. VR venarum ratio: ratio of length of Cu to length of M.
DESCRIPTION
Holotype male deposited in Zoologische Staatssammlung, Munich; paratypes also in the University of La Laguna, Tenerife, The Natural History Museum, London, and in the authors’ collections.
Adult male, total length 2.1-2.7 mm (n=6). Head including appendages brown, eyes black; thorax brown, scutellum and halteres pale; anterior legs pale at base of femur, progressively more brownish to metatarsus, thereafter brown; posterior legs only weakly darkened to tarsus with tibial combs conspicuously black; abdomen brownish, a little darker posteriad.
Head. AR 0.8-1.2 (m= 1.0, n= 11). 7 or 8 temporal setae; 2 postocular setae; 19-27 clypeal setae. Lengths of palp segments: 30-55, 30-40, 93-130, 103-138, 160-215 um 9)
Thorax. 7-11 dorsocentral setae (n = 9) extending from anterior edge of dorsiventral muscle attachment to scutellum; occasionally there may be 1-3 additional setae in the humeral area. 20-26 (n = 8) biserial acrostichals ending at mid-thorax. | prealar seta. 8 scutellar setae. Wing length 1.46-1.75 mm (n= 8), 3.4-3.7 times as long as broad. Anal lobe absent. Costa not produced. VR 1.32-1.44 (n= 8). Membrane and veins with dense macrotrichia from near base to tip. Legs: lengths (in »m) and proportions (n= 6):
leg fem tib tar 1 tar 2 tar 3 tar 4 tar 5 LR BR
1 760-830 380-460 780-900 420-470 300-350 270-310 120-150 1.8-2.0 2.2-3.4 2 690-790 500-620 300-350 150-180 110-130 80-100 60-70 1.3-1.5 3.0-5.7 3 760-880 630-750 420-510 260-330 240-270 150-180 85-100 1.2 4.5-6.1
12 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Anterior tibia with a peg-like spur apically; mid and hind tibia with a pair of small apical combs, each with an outwardly curved spur about twice the length of the comb setae.
Abdomen. Tergites and sternites with setae arranged in anterior and posterior transverse bands; a longitudinal lateral row also present on tergites; setal numbers:
tergite: IV Vv VI Vil Vil
anterior band 8 7-9 6-10 7-8 8-9
posterior band 11 8-10 9-11 5-10 6-10 lateral row 5 5 5(6) 4 3
sternite: IV V VI VII_«sCV*'IzCZzCT anterior band 5 5 6-7 6-8 14-15 posterior band 5 a 6-8 6-10 10-14
Hypopygium (Fig. 1). Anal tergite with 6 very short setae spreading forwards from between the anal point combs, 5 or 6 about 18 ym long setae on each side of the anal point base, and 3 slightly longer setae immediately below the anal point. Anal point contracted to the posterior extent of the combs, thereafter slightly swollen to the
Fig. 1. Rheotanytarsus rioensis. Male hypopygium dorsal and appendage 2a lateral. Scale=0.1 mm.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 13
rounded apex; anal combs high. Gonostyles swollen, contracted strongly in distal quarter, the narrow, gradually narrowing apex bent downwards at tip. Appendage 1 with 2 inner marginal setae, 5 or 6 dorsal setae and | ventral seta directed inwards. Appendage la peg-shaped, reaching, or not quite reaching, the inner apical margin of appendage 1. Appendage 2 somewhat clubbed apically, where there is a patch of setae dorsally, most of which are curved forwards. Appendage 2a narrow, nearly parallel- sided, with setae on inner margin from near base; at apex with three flat extensions.
Adult female, length 1.7-2.2 mm (n=6). Colour as in male.
Head. Antennal flagellomere lengths: 70-100, 53-60, 63-68, 58-63, 75-88 »m (n=5). 6-9 temporal setae. 2 postorbital setae. 21-26 clypeal setae. Lengths of palp segments: 20-35, 30-45, 103-115, 108-120, 166-200 ym (n=5S).
Thorax. Dorsocentral setae: 8-9 from anterior margin of dorsiventral muscle attachment to scutellum; in addition a humeral patch of 3-6 setae connected to the posterior dorsocentrals by one or two intermediate setae. 20-24 biserial acrostichal setae. 1 prealar seta. 8 scutellar setae. Wing (Fig. 2), length 1.44-1.60 mm (n= 5); 3.1—3.4 times as long as broad. Anal lobe slight. Costa not produced. VR 1.4-1.5. Legs: lengths (in wm) and proportions (n= 3):
leg fem tib tar 1 tar 2 tar 3 tar4 tar5 LR BR 1 640-680 380-390 690-740 380 270-280 DAO, 120) 1.6—157 228 2 610-650 420-500 280-290 130-150 100-110 60-80 60 1.3-1.5 3.8-5.3 3. 670-700 560-630 380-390 220-240 200-210 120-130 80 1.1-1.2 5.0
Tibial spurs and combs as in male.
Genitalia (Fig. 3). Cerci with a sharp, nearly right-angled point dorsally, gently curved posteriorly and strongly curved ventrally to base. Seminal capsules 70 wm long. Notum 2.1 times as long as seminal capsules. Gonapophysis VIII with ventrolateral lobe broad, weakly rounded, and dorsomesal lobe strongly projecting, smoothly rounded.
Pupa (Rheotanytarsus Pe2 Langton 1991), length 3.0-3.9mm (n=10). Cephalothorax brownish, somewhat darker anterodorsally, around the base of the wingsheaths and ventrally at the base of the legsheaths; wing sheaths margined with brown. Abdomen very pale brown, laterally darker, these lateral bands intensifying posteriad. Anal segment brown, anal lobes with a median colourless band.
Cephalothorax. Frontal setae and cephalic tubercles absent. Frontal apotome granulate towards apex. Thoracic horn (Fig. 4a) 225-265 wm long (n=9); 6.6-8.9 as long as broad, without setulae or points. Nose of wingsheaths prominent. Lateral
Fig. 2. Rheotanytarsus rioensis. Female wing. Scale=0.1 mm.
14 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Fig. 3. Rheotanytarsus rioensis. Female genitalia ventral and cercus lateral. Scale=0.1 mm.
antepronotal setae about 80m long, narrow taeniate; median antepronotal seta narrow taeniate. Precorneal setae length: 35-40 .m (setaceous); 75 wm (narrow taeniate); 100-160 um (narrow taeniate). Dorsocentral setae bristle-like; lengths 15-25; 28-50; 15-18; 30-50 ym. Suture with a narrow band of granules along margin. Abdomen (Fig. 4b). Tergites II-VI with a pair of dark brown point patches anteriorly, twice as broad as long on tergite II, progressively reduced and more circular on following segments; point patches small, e.g. little more than 0.1 length of tergite on IV. Tergites III-V covered with minute shagreen points arranged in more or less transverse rows, less extensive on II; on VI and VII this fine armament is progressively reduced posteriorly; tergite VIII with antero-lateral shagreen patches only. 70-89 hooks in hook row of tergite II. Segment VIII with a single posterolateral brown spur. Chaetotaxy:
I II Ill IV Vv AY) Conceal lf Coe UH be TE dorsal 3 4 5) 5 5 5 5 1 0 lateral 0 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 28-36 ventral 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 1
Larva, length 3.9 mm. Greenish-pink in life, smudged brownish posteriorly. Head brown, mentum and apices of mandibles dark brown.
Antenna (Fig. 5e), segments 80, 23, 7.5, 5, 5 wm long; AR 2.0. Antennal seta on first segment at 0.55-0.7 from base; ring organ at base of first segment; blade about as long as second segment, accessory blade about half as long as blade. Lauterborn organs on segment 2 reaching tip of antenna. Mentum (Fig. 5d) with anterior outline weakly convex: teeth generally very worn (Fig. 5a); median tooth simple, weakly shouldered laterally; the inner four of the five lateral pairs of teeth about equal in size, the outermost much smaller. Ventromental plates (Fig. 5d) about six times as
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 15
oo _________J
Fig. 4. Rheotanytarsus rioensis. Pupa: a. thoracic horn and precorneal setae, b. abdominal segments II and III dorsal. Scale=0.1 mm.
wide as long, nearly touching medially. Mandibles (Fig. 5b) with outer tooth extending as far as inner apical tooth; three inner teeth. Labrum (Fig. Sc), labral lamella with about 24 teeth, pecten epipharyngis undivided, with about 16 teeth. Maxillary palp as in Fig. Sf.
SYSTEMATIC CONSIDERATIONS
The hypopygium of only one previously described Rheotanytarsus species possesses appendage la (digitus) in common with rioensis: an African species, ororus Lehmann (Lehmann, 1979). It is, however, not a member of the pentapoda-group, for its styles are not markedly narrowed and bent downwards at their tips. (The generic description and key in Cranston ef a/. (1989) require emendation to include the presence of appendage la in some species.) The pupa of rioensis is similar to that of pentapoda (Langton, 1991), but differs from all previously described Rheotanytarsus in the extensive shagreen of many of the abdominal segments, necessitating emendation of the generic description in Pinder & Reiss (1986). Very few females and larvae of this genus have been described; those of rioensis show no striking differences to allow separation.
ECOLOGY
Known only from Tenerife, Canary Isles.
Adults were collected from a swarm over an open conduit on 15.xii.1983 in Barranco del Rio at an altitude of 480 m. Subsequent collections at the same place on 14.xii.1985 included adults (males and females) and pupae with associated larvae. The conduit
16 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Fig. 5. Rheotanytarsus rioensis. Larva: a. characteristically worn mentum, b. mandible, c. labrum, d. mentum and ventromental plates, e. antenna, f. maxillary palp. Scale=0.1 mm.
was rectangular in cross-section, about 0.6 m wide with a water depth of about 0.25 m. The water velocity was between 0.5 and 1.0ms_!. Algae covered the sides and base of the conduit which had no loose substratum.
Two other species of Chironomidae were also found at the same site: Paratrichocladius rufiventris (Meigen) and Cricotopus vierriensis Goetghebuer.
Two further records of this species are known from collections made by Malmaqvist et al. (1993) in riffles in the natural stony bottomed stream in Barranco del Rio at an altitude of 1450 m on 2.xi.1991 and in the stream Ijuana at an altitude of 770m on 16.iv.1991. The specimens were identified from pupal material.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We are grateful to Mrs A. M. Matthews for the original drawing of the male genitalia, and to Dr F. Reiss for advice and the loan of the types of Rheotanytarsus photophilus and pentapoda.
REFERENCES
Cranston, P. S., Dillon, M. E., Pinder, L. C. V. & Reiss, F. 1989. 10. The adult males of Chironominae (Diptera: Chironomidae) of the Holarctic Region—Keys and diagnoses. Ent. Scand. Suppl. 34: 353-502.
Langton, P. H. 1991. A key to pupal exuviae of West Palaearctic Chironomidae. 386 pp. Privately published.
Lehmann, J. 1979. Chironomidae (Diptera) aus Fliessgewassern Zentralafrikas (Systematik, Okologie, Verbreitung und Produktionsbiologie). I. Teil: Kivu-Gebiet, Ostzaire. Spixiana Suppl. 3: 1-144.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 17
Malmavist, B., Nilsson, A. N., Baez, M., Armitage, P. & Blackburn, J. 1993. Stream macroinvertebrate communities in the island of Tenerife. Arch. Hydrobiol. 128: 209-235.
Pinder, L. C. V. & Reiss, F. 1986. 10. The pupae of Chironominae (Diptera: Chironomidae) of the Holarctic region—Keys and diagnoses. Ent. Scand. Suppl. 28:299-456.
Seether, O. A. 1980. Glossary of chironomid morphology terminology (Diptera: Chironomidae). Ent. Scand. Suppl. 14: 1-51.
BOOK REVIEW
Insect conservation biology by M. J. Samways. London, Chapman & Hall, 1994, xvi + 358 pages, hardback, £37.50.—The growing popularity of conservation in western countries has not been matched by a public awareness of the nature and relative scale of the damage that human activities inflict on different forms of wildlife. Vertebrate taxa receive most of the attention, but this book assembles a body of compelling evidence to show that the risk of extinction is greater for insect species, not only because there are immensely more of them, but also by virtue of their often exacting habitat requirements. The first chapter illustrates the evolutionary adaptation of insects to almost every terrestrial ecosystem. The author draws on some interesting data; for example in a survey of Seram rainforest, over half the estimated 43.3 million individual arthropods in one hectare were Collembola, reflecting the importance of habitats in the soil. The very success of insects, which has produced perhaps 10 million extant species, belies the vulnerability of many species which are so closely adapted to geographically restricted biotopes that even a slight change can wipe them out, often to the point of total extinction. In the tropics, both the diversity of species and the threats to them may seem to make British conservation issues pale into insignificance. However, despite our relatively small insect fauna, our ratio of species to land area appears to be surprisingly high by world standards.
The remaining introductory chapters describe the many ways in which insect habitats have been damaged, while also outlining the aims and responsibilities of national and international organizations which seek to ameliorate this loss. A central problem, which has a chapter of its own later in the book, is the fragmentation of biotopes. This is less serious for relatively mobile animals, especially birds, whose requirements often seem uppermost in the minds of those who influence conservation policy. Fragmentation prevents species from re-colonizing suitable sites following chance local extinctions. In the longer term it could also prevent species from keeping pace geographically with climate change or other large-scale events (as many did during past glaciations). When fragmentation and other problems are viewed in the context of tropical ecosystems, current conservation efforts seem inadequate in scale and often inappropriate in emphasis.
The author goes on to examine ways in which conservation could become more effective by taking proper account of insect population ecology. The ability of species to disperse in a fragmented landscape must be understood in order to determine the optimum size and shape of reserves and the value of different types of ‘corridor’ between otherwise isolated habitats. He stresses the need to think about very small-scale ‘micro-sites’ within biotopes, which are essential for survival. Studies on single species show that their different developmental stages and sometimes the two sexes have greatly different micro-site requirements. This does not necessarily mean that we must tinker with sites to help favoured species, since a broader-brush management of the landscape can achieve diversity in a way that is compatible with the economic use of the land.
Although there are still places where the protection of natural ecosystems is the main objective of conservation, there are many other parts of the world where the
18 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
sympathetic management of agricultural and other ‘disturbed’ land is important. The author describes systems of ‘adversity agriculture’ in which populations of vulnerable species can often fall below a ‘minimum viable level’, leading to local or even total extinctions. This has happened even to former pest species such as the Rocky Mountain grasshopper (Melanoplus spretus) in North America. The risk of extinction is lower in ‘agroecology’ systems, in which areas of natural vegetation can support a high proportion of the local insect fauna while serving as refugia for natural enemies of crop pests. There are, however, no absolute rights and wrongs in agricultural methods. Burning, for example, is very harmful to many species, but others depend on it. Similarly, although biological control is often a ‘green’ alternative to the use of chemical pesticides, it can be disastrous when the agents released are able to persist and to attack non-target species.
The author looks at the pros and cons of ‘restoration ecology’ and concludes that it is worthwhile in some cases, as when trees are planted for agroforestry in deforested tropical areas, or when herb-rich grassland is re-established in temperate farmlands. Restoration strategies can be helped by knowing the specific requirements of individual species, but the most vulnerable species are usually less able to recolonize the restored sites than widespread ones with greater tolerance of varied conditions. Some of the vulnerable species get special attention and can be artificially re-established, but the author sees this as a last resort.
The rate at which insect species are being lost worldwide, according to one estimate quoted by the author, could be 19 per hour over the next 30 years. Such figures serve both to stimulate concern about individual species and to emphasize that attempts to save a favoured few cannot address a problem of such proportions. The need is for an ‘umbrella’ approach which can take account of both small-scale and large- scale elements of the landscape. To the extent that individual species can be helped, there is a need to improve methods of assessing their status; for example by recording the number of habitat sites per 10-km square; not just mapping a dot for the entire square. Attention also needs to be focused on species which are good indicators of diversity and which can be recorded efficiently in site surveys, rather than on taxa which happen to enjoy the most popularity. On a global scale, it is important to identify the regions of ‘mega-diversity’ and endemism where efforts should be concentrated.
By concentrating on the biology behind conservation, this book helps to identify the most urgent uses to which time and money should be devoted. However, the author admits that such an analysis is not supported by human attitudes towards insects, which often involve taxonomic favouritism or hypocrisy, as exemplified by those who are less aware of their own daily mass slaughter of insects than of the sadism of pulling the wings off a fly. Governments that ignore the wider conservation issues may pass laws to protect species against collecting or trade, but the result is often a high black market price.
The extensive bibliography testifies to the great deal of work that has gone into producing this book. Its emphasis on fundamental issues and on scientific evidence will complement other recent works which have concentrated more on practical conservation. A subject like this is intrinsically hard to divide into distinct sections, but there could perhaps have been less overlap and repetition of ideas. It required a good index, and the one provided here is certainly comprehensive, although it fails to list all the entries for some important topics. The author’s commitment to the cause makes this much more than a dry academic treatise, but it-will perhaps be more useful to students, research workers and policy makers than to the amateur conservationist.
D. LONSDALE
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 19
REPORT OF THE DISCUSSION MEETING HELD ON 12 MAY 1992 TO CONSIDER INVERTEBRATE CONSERVATION IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
STEPHEN R. MILES
At the beginning of this meeting a handout entitled ‘‘Invertebrate conservation— major discussion points’’, produced by the author, was provided to each participant to focus on the major issues within this subject; this is reproduced below. A brief introduction was also given to the meeting, explaining the history and role of the Joint Committee for the Conservation of British Invertebrates, by Helen Smith, its Conservation Officer. An introduction to the Wildlife Link organization was provided by Steve Brooks, the JCCBI representative.
Stephen Miles, BENHS representative to JCCBI, then read out a paper reviewing the existing status of invertebrate conservation in the UK, suggesting a change to the status quo, in that a single invertebrate conservation membership organization should be formed. This paper is also reproduced below.
INVERTEBRATE CONSERVATION—MAJOR DISCUSSION POINTS
1. Do you consider that invertebrate conservation is well served by:
a. the Joint Committee for the Conservation of British Invertebrates, (JCCBI) which is mainly a national advisory organization for policy and project formulation;
b. governmental organizations, e.g. English Nature, and the Scottish and Welsh successors to the former Nature Conservancy Council and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (custodians of the Invertebrate Site Register);
c. the main non-governmental conservation organizations, e.g. the county wildlife trusts, World Wide Fund for Nature, Woodland Trust, the National Trust and Butterfly Conservation;
particularly as to how the organizations that have reserves, manage them for insect conservation or promote the well-being of the invertebrates within them?
2. Do we need to worry about the retention of invertebrate habitats and their appropriate management? At each of this society’s annual exhibitions, exciting new discoveries of species found in new localities are exhibited each year, despite some reported losses. Even species new to Britain are a regular occurrence.
3. How many county trust nature reserves have been specifically set up to safeguard invertebrate habitats? Is it unrealistic to expect any to be set up just for what is perceived to be the narrow field of invertebrates?
4. As well as the JCCBI, which is only a committee, is there a need for a separate organization specifically set up to campaign for the conservation of invertebrate habitats?
5. Or should the existing entomological societies take on this role through the JCCBI? (As in theory they do at present). or
Should the JCCBI be somehow reconstituted into a national invertebrate conservation trust? or
Should it be suggested that Butterfly Conservation broaden its role to take on all insects, or even all invertebrates?
20 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
6. How does Butterfly Conservation’s mainly anti-collecting stance on Lepidoptera fit in with the necessity to collect voucher specimens of nearly all other groups of invertebrate species, as well as many moths?
7. Do we as entomologists promote our subject and educate others in its complexities sufficiently?
8. Does the JCCBI need to advertise itself more to entomologists and to the general nature conservation community?
9. How can invertebrate conservation be funded in the non-governmental organization sector? Clearly there should at least be one general invertebrate conservation organization to which people can make donations or leave legacies.
10. Would invertebrate conservation benefit from having a demonstration reserve where the special management techniques that ensure that a wide variety of habitat niches are continually available could be readily seen by other natural history organizations?
11. Would the Balfour-Browne Club (the water-beetle organization) defend a site containing rare solitary bees and wasps, or Butterfly Conservation promote the conservation of a site containing no interesting butterflies? In effect with a multiplicity of order- or family-based entomological conservation groups is the advance of invertebrate conservation hindered?
REVIEW OF THE EXISTING STATUS OF INVERTEBRATE CONSERVATION IN THE UK
As one of the two current representatives for this society to the Joint Committee for the Conservation of British Invertebrates I considered that it was about time the society’s membership was consulted for their views on the way invertebrate conservation is organized and promoted in this country. Personally I have been somewhat dissatisfied with the extent to which invertebrates and their special habitat needs are considered by the mainstream conservation organizations. The positive publicity which invertebrates other than butterflies receive in the natural history press appears to me to be absolutely minimal. But unlike most other species groups the lack of a specific membership organization representing the promotion of the conservation of all invertebrates seems to be the major omission. Birds have the RSPB, plants have Plantlife. Apart from JCCBI, which is after all only a committee, what do invertebrates have?
To look at the organization of invertebrate conservation I suggest we will need to examine the following points.
Have the existing bodies that work either directly or indirectly to secure and promote the conservation of invertebrate habitats and their appropriate management succeeded in this role?
Could or should the entomological community in the UK and Europe be better organized or focused in our conservation role? Can we afford to be complacent; can we assume that all the niches invertebrates inhabit will always be represented, at least somewhere in Europe.
Existing bodies able to influence invertebrate conservation
The existing bodies in this field in the UK are principally the statutory government bodies: English Nature, Countryside Council for Wales, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. In the voluntary sector there is the JCCBI itself, the British Entomological and Natural History Society, the Amateur
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 21
Entomologists’ Society, the Balfour-Browne Club (for water beetles), the British Dragonfly Society, Butterfly Conservation and lastly the Initiative for Scottish Insects. The county trusts network through the Royal Society for Nature Conservation are also relevant as are the National Trust and the World Wide Fund for Nature.
Are these bodies effective? I will comment briefly on their performance and propose some questions worth exploring on some of them.
You have heard about the JCCBI; may I remind you however that it is primarily an advisory and policy group and it is rarely able to do anything to defend specific sites. It does have a very valuable role though as a forum for airing views on legislation and other political issues likely to affect invertebrate conservation. I believe it is not as effective as it could be due inevitably to the fact that it lacks a firm financial foundation and as a consequence is not staffed on a full-time basis. If JCCBI is to continue more effectively in the future how can the funding problem be resolved?
I am not sure that the entomological community fully supports the JCCBI, or that they would feel it necessary to support any other type of organization that might be set up to promote invertebrate conservation. Perhaps entomologists are mainly lone workers, as many people have suggested to me, not feeling the need to co-ordinate their activities in the same way that the ornithologists have in recent years.
If we look at the statutory organizations, as they have only recently been completely reorganized by the government following the dismembering of the former Nature Conservancy Council, it is perhaps too early to say whether they will be as effective as the latter body appeared to be. The present plans to do without an entomologist in the headquarters of Scottish Natural Heritage do not bode well for the future though. To the outsider the old NCC achieved a lot as a unified body; certainly insect conservation appeared to be successfully promoted by some of the BENHS’s own distinguished members employed by it. The ‘‘Research and Survey in Nature Conservation Series’’ reviews of different invertebrate groups are useful in synthesizing the requirements for habitat management of the invertebrate fauna. The one-day workshops arranged for staff of other nature conservation organizations to attempt to advise them on how to adopt the special management requirements of invertebrates are examples to us all of the sort of promotion work that needs to be done. I understand these events are being continued in England at least, by one of NCC’s successor bodies, English Nature.
The designation of certain SSSI’s has been considerably assisted following the receipt of knowledge about sites representing important invertebrate assemblages through the Invertebrate Site Register scheme. However I understand that not all the best sites for invertebrates will be designated SSSI, firstly because in some cases their vegetation features are not correspondingly as good. Secondly it is said to be more difficult to defend SSSI’s designated purely on invertebrate interests only. If this is truly the situation is the JCCBI or the entomological community sufficiently well organized and do we hold sufficient data to be able to challenge this? I believe we do not.
The British Butterfly Conservation Society or Butterfly Conservation as it is now known, from its inception nearly 25 years ago, is arguably the most successful non- governmental insect conservation organization in this country. Of course it has obvious advantages; it is dealing with a small species group which are probably the most popular group of insects world-wide. Perhaps its members can be more active in a conservation sense, as they are mostly observers or other types of sympathizers to the cause of butterfly conservation. Thus as non-collectors they do not have to be involved with curation activities or concerned about taxonomic problems, leaving more time for active involvement in butterfly promotion and site management. The acquisition by Butterfly Conservation of its own reserves has also been a significant step forward.
22 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Regarding the county wildlife trusts, how many of their in excess of 2000 reserves are devoted to invertebrate conservation you may ask? Our president writing nearly 20 years ago in an article entitled ‘‘Insect conservation and a county trust’’ (AES Conservation Group Bulletin 4, 1971), summarized the typical position of a county trust then, in this case the Gloucestershire Trust; none of its reserves were specifically devoted to insects. Its primary aim was to acquire at least one example of the major habitat types present in the county. Has this situation improved in the intervening period in better favour of invertebrates throughout the wildlife trusts’ network?
The National Trust appears to me to have improved its record on invertebrate habitat management. Provided its management committees and land agents take notice of the entomological advisers to its Biological Survey team, it will be well placed to continue to assist the conservation of the invertebrate habitats in its ownership. Members should note a member of this team sits as an observer at the main JCCBI meetings.
What improvements are needed in invertebrate conservation?
The JCCBI does not appear to campaign for site retention; should it change or must we rely on the hope that the county wildlife trusts will by chance save sites holding important invertebrate assemblages? Could the JCCBI do more? For example should its future remit include advising landowners of nature conservation sites, on how to manage them appropriately for invertebrates? Are we as entomologists organized in such a way as to be able to influence the trusts and government organizations in the procurement of important invertebrate sites? Are these organizations maintaining the appropriate conditions on their existing reserves for the invertebrate inhabitants?
In a speech nearly 2 years ago (28 November 1990) the departing chairman of the Nature Conservancy Council, Sir William Wilkinson, highlighted the gradual decline in interest of SSSIs through lack of adequate management. A paper I have seen suggests that there is a high representation of nationally important invertebrates on National Nature Reserves and SSSIs. Have we voiced our concern that these special sites are managed appropriately for their invertebrate interest? While I have great respect for the abilities of the staff of the government nature conservation organizations, I believe we rely too much on them. Are they too constrained now by a government policy which does seem less than committed to the national series of SSSIs particularly since the break up of the old Nature Conservancy Council? At present, however, I have little confidence in the ability of entomologists as a group, as we are currently organized, outside of the government organizations, to have any influence in safeguarding the well-being of important invertebrate sites.
I believe there is considerable scope for us to have greater influence in the future over these matters provided we are organized in some way under a single umbrella group, but one that is not just a committee. Surely this would command more respect for entomologists if we could actively campaign for site retention and correct management as well. Certainly then we could not only give more support to the Government’s invertebrate conservation advisers but also be a more influential force in non-governmental nature conservation. At present JCCBI appears often to just lend its name to other groups’ campaigns. Should we in fact become a little more strident?
The setting up of a new organization would be a major undertaking, as the existing entomological societies often find it difficult to fill their functional voluntary positions. Reorganization of the JCCBI is probably the best option. Additionally in either case there would be major problems with funding. It is also important here, to make the
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 23
observation that if any of us wished to leave some wealth or land specifically to the invertebrate conservation cause, apart from butterflies, there is no organization to which such resources could be left in our wills. This should change.
There is one further important point I would like to make and that is that there is a growing anti-collecting sentiment in the wider world and perhaps particularly within Butterfly Conservation, RSPB, and in Europe in Germany influenced by extreme ‘‘Green’’ politics. There is a danger here, I believe, in that those groups who look down on the formation of natural history collections and even despise the modest insect collector are going to be seen as making all the running in invertebrate conservation initiatives. Entomologists or the main entomological organizations that fully acknowledge the need for specimen collection do need to become more involved in invertebrate habitat conservation.
It should also be borne in mind that it is more politically expedient to prohibit collecting and thus the collector than to act to save invertebrate habitats. And the collector is of course the main person able to feed back information about species declines.
Conclusion
The platform of success of the Amateur Entomological Society’s recent habitat conservation book (Fry, R. & Lonsdale, D., 1991, Habitat conservation for insects—a neglected green issue), and of the Royal Entomological Society’s 15th symposium publication The conservation of insects and their habitats (Collins, N. M. & Thomas, J. A., eds) are the flagships on which an invertebrate conservation organization could go forward. These publications plus the invertebrate and insect ‘‘red data books”’ and the NCC’s invertebrate species reviews reveal that we have a large amount of knowledge to make a start in seeking a higher profile for invertebrates and their habitats; it is time we invested more effort in such activities.
Our insect survey expertise can form the basis for the designation of SSSIs as in the recent case of Richmond Park being named in the press as one of the most important UK sites for beetles. Although the species survey is essential and one of the foundations of our interest I believe we need to combine it with more efforts in the public relations and political lobbying aspects of entomology which most of us appear to avoid. Perhaps there is an obvious reason for our lethargy which I am too naive to see, but if we don’t take command of the situation it will be manipulated by others to the detriment of entomology.
In a paper given to the 3rd European Congress of Entomology in 1986 (Velthius, H. W., ed.), the dipterist Martin Speight said, ‘‘the one group within Europe’s population that might be expected to be promoting conservation of Europe’s entomofauna is the entomologists. But do entomologists promote insect conservation?’’ he asked. It seems he was convinced they did not. For his next statements were to this effect.
*‘Among amateur entomologists in particular there is a tendency to use insects as an escape from the trials and tribulations of normal human existence, to practice as it were, zen through the art of entomology‘‘.
Although Martin’s comments are perhaps slightly off-putting and extreme I think he is making an important point. He went on to say “‘if entomologists are not prepared to put time and effort into the promotion of insect conservation, they can hardly expect other people to do so’’.
Finally for those entomologists who are not already aware of it they should know that nature conservation was pioneered in this country by an insect collector, Charles Rothschild. He founded the Society for the Promotion of Nature Reserves in 1912, the forerunner of the Royal Society for Nature Conservation. It is ironic isn’t it that
24 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
80 years later, of the major natural groups, invertebrate conservation could be said to be the least financially supported and organized in this country in a unified sense. However perhaps this discussion meeting will re-assure me that all is well and that I am being pessimistic—as usual, as Council would say.
DISCUSSION SESSION
Despite the range of points provided in the handout and in the preliminary papers, the meeting appeared to settle down to the consideration of seven major topics. These were: habitats; the county wildlife trusts and their reserves; the multiplicity of different entomological groups; the Joint Committee for the Conservation of British Invertebrates (JCCBI); Government agencies, SSSIs and information collection; SSSIs; and, finally, collecting.
Habitats
FRANCES MuRPHY said achievement of balance in invertebrate conservation is difficult; the management of one group of invertebrates may be to the detriment of others. Habitat conservation is better than purely caring for individual species, thereby political lobbying for the retention of these habitats is essential.
STUART BALL indicated that in entomology there was still much work to be done on finding out where species occur. This was the great value of the Invertebrate Site Register scheme as information fed to the scheme, such as where the best invertebrate assemblages occurred, led to its use in assisting site management plans. He also felt that a single invertebrate conservation group promoting invertebrate habitats for conservation would not be effective. It was a far better approach to base reserves on habitat types and manage them to maintain the broad assemblage associated with that habitat. In future, he thought, emphasis should be placed on habitats not well represented in existing reserves.
The county wildlife trusts and their reserves
A disparate collection of views was expressed regarding invertebrate conservation and the county wildlife trusts as follows.
IAN FERGUSON cited the observation that most interesting insect species invariably seem to occur outside reserves.
MARTIN DRAKE mentioned that county wildlife trusts tend to purchase reserves of SSSI quality, often because they desired representative types of each major habitat type present in their county.
ROGER Morais stated that entomologists need to be on the boards of management of their local wildlife trusts and trust reserves to influence and advise in favour of sympathetic management for invertebrates.
Davip LONSDALE mentioned that local entomologists are often active within their local wildlife trust but central groups, like JCCBI, don’t hear of their activities, perhaps this represents a lack of coordination between entomologists.
Multiplicity of different entomological groups
Knowledge of what occurs on any one site needs to be shared. STEVE BROOKS maintained that the British Dragonfly Society believe that they are good at achieving this and able to influence conservation landowners in the process,
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 25
despite being a small organization themselves. He felt that mass membership is not desirable within organizations as it can dilute the knowledgeable members and reduce influence. In this context he did not believe that Butterfly Conservation would become the main organizer of invertebrate conservation in the UK, because of their lack of specialists in the other orders.
STUART BALL felt that small active organizations like the Balfour-Browne Club were very effective.
STEPHEN MILES had asked during his address ‘‘Should there be a unified invertebrate group to promote invertebrate conservation?’’ If so he felt it must not duplicate what others were already doing. This approach was not felt by the conservation professionals from English Nature and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, present at the meeting, to be likely to be effective. It was maintained that a ‘‘mega’’ invertebrate society would still not stop loss of sites. There are three general entomological societies in the UK. It was felt that there was no need for any others.
A major concern of the meeting was that Butterfly Conservation could take over as the main conservation organization for invertebrates, as it is keen to take on a wider role. The meeting felt that Butterfly Conservation would not be able to take on this responsibility. However the general opinion was that it might set the agenda for the issue of insect collecting. Butterfly Conservation is viewed as a large society of non-specialists, as is the RSPB, however that organization is also very successful.
The need for special interest groups organized by taxon was therefore justified as they can work with other larger groups, like the RSPB, and influence them. This should be the way forward.
JOHN MUGGLETON felt that more interest in the conservation of invertebrate assemblages needs to be shown by other entomological societies. Furthermore a specific society dedicated to promoting reserves for insect/invertebrate conservation alone might lead to more appropriate management for insects rather than other things.
Joint Committee for the Conservation of British Invertebrates (JCCBI)
The view of some at the meeting was that this committee should promote itself and its products more, as it was not well-known. For instance many people had not heard of the ‘‘code for insect collecting’’ or the ‘‘code for insect re-establishment’’, both produced by the committee. However JCCBI’s limitations in not being a society were a problem, it could not publish its own activities without its own funds. It was pointed out that it was up to individual societies who finance some of JCCBI’s activities to publish the details of the committee’s activities. But it was also recognized that most societies normally want to promote their own activities, not those of a third party, especially if promotion costs money.
DAVID LONSDALE said that the AES Conservation Committee feeds ideas to JCCBI. It had promoted various ideas in attempts to raise funding for the JCCBI because he considered that JCCBI should have a full-time conservation officer. He also recognized that JCCBI needed to move forward from discussion to action.
To be effective JCCBI needs to be able to act quickly, much more so than at present; its purpose, it was considered, should be to influence and educate people in the merits of invertebrate conservation. But it could not concern itself with sites or it would very quickly be bogged down in paperwork.
26 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Government agencies, SSSIS and information collection
IAN FERGUSON perceived that invertebrates were well down the list of priorities for these agencies. They act to announce SSSIs but the designation is then perceived as being ignored by the government. Countryside legislation is seen as excellent but can so often be overruled, even against the government’s own expert advisers, the countryside agencies, English Nature etc.
Others felt that organizations like English Nature were ‘‘tied by the leg’’, unable to tell a landowner what to do positively. These organizations have limited budgets, their staff are not necessarily expert on every order, they need information to be channelled to them efficiently by entomologists through the wildlife trusts and local and national recording schemes.
ROGER Morris said there was a perception that many entomologists were not keen on sending information in to these organizations because they saw this whole process as a chore. What was the role of entomologists, were they collectors or surveyor/consultants? Were they interested in the wider issues of legislation and conservation?
PETER CHANDLER confirmed that he just wanted special sites to be still extant, not lost to development or other threats.
SSSIs
Some members felt these should be based more on invertebrate assemblages rather than as traditionally they are perceived, just on plant communities.
In relation to landowners the SSSI system appeared coercive but ‘‘environmental sensitive areas’? were seen more positively as co-operative systems. However the problem still remains that SSSI designations are largely ignored by government when it suits them. Habitat management of SSSIs was seen as a priority. Overall the SSSI system is seen very positively with many sites being successfully defended at public enquiries but MARTIN DRAKE inferred that one weakness was that designations cannot enforce appropriate management, they can only ban specified harmful practices.
Collecting
Butterfly Conservation was perceived as having an anti-collecting attitude, which may be its worst attribute in the eyes of other entomologists. Collecting was seen as not absolutely necessary for butterflies but essential for the learning process of correct identification for all other groups. The case for collecting needs to be strongly and favourably stated by all entomologists, the meeting decided.
Conclusions
Habitat management and conservation of broad assemblages of invertebrates, birds, animals and plants was seen as the focus, a holistic approach; it being considered as a trap for the unwary to concentrate on management just for a few single species of invertebrates. Specialist interest groups based on taxon were still desirable; overall the meeting appeared to conclude that there was no need for a single dominant invertebrate conservation group.
The British Entomological and Natural History Society was identified as having a future additional role: to promote invertebrate conservation more, perhaps through including more articles on this topic in its journal.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 27 EDITORIAL
HOUSE STYLE 5: COUNTY NAMES IN RECORDS
Accurate presentation of records is of vital importance, and details of locality are arguably the most vital. The overriding consideration must be whether or not someone reading of an insect’s discovery can identify the locality. This is not so that collectors can rush off to the same place to make further captures, but to aid distribution and recording schemes which may take place years into the future.
A grid reference is the nearest we can get to pin-pointing the exact spot, but rows and rows of grid reference numbers make poor reading, and offer little insight into patterns of distribution. The traditional compromise has always been: (i) the locality (be this a named wood, hill, river, lake etc); (ii) the nearest village, town, city or district, and (ili) the county or vice-county.
Localities, villages and towns rarely change their names, though many appear more than once across the country. Access to a gazetteer will clear up many misunderstandings before they occur. Counties on the other hand have proved troublesome, particularly their borders. With the interest in county lists, promulgated particularly since the Victoria county histories, has also come the confusion created by boundary changes, the creation and the abolition of various administrative areas. With the possible dissolution of Avon and Humberside and the restructuring of Yorkshire into a form resembling its former Ridings, more confusion looks on its way.
The vice-county system
In an attempt to overcome some of this confusion and standardize recording, the British vice-county system created by Watson (1852) was formalized in Dandy (1969). Vice-counties for Ireland, H1 to H40, were created by Praeger (1896, 1901) and Ragge (1965) gives a list of these together with an explanation of the subsequent changes used by recent Irish biogeographers. A complete list of British and Irish vice-counties is given in several publications, notably Druce (1932) and appears at irregular intervals in Watsonia, the journal of the Botanical Society of the British Isles.
The ‘Watsonian’ system remains well known and moderately well understood and forms the basis for much biological recording. However, individual entomologists do still go their own ways; among recent ‘county’ lists some stick rigidly to vice-county boundaries (e.g. Duff, 1993) while others have overridden these artificial frontiers by creating other equally artificial perimeters (e.g. Plant, 1993).
In putting forward records in the journal, the vice-county scheme would seem to be the best, but it is impossible to lay down the law about how individuals record their finds. The following list of abbreviations, expanded and revised from the list given by Buck (1959), is supplied in the interests of conserving space on the printed page. Watsonian vice-counties, together with modern and old administrative areas are listed. As will be quite clear from Dandy’s (1969) maps and accompanying text, the strict vice- county boundaries are sometimes significantly different from modern-day ‘equivalents’.
Sometimes, the terminology of modern equivalents can seriously upset understanding of the original vice-counties. South of the River Thames, ‘London’ is divided between West Kent (VC16) and Surrey (VC17). According to Dandy (1969) West Kent includes ‘the south-eastern part’ of London and Surrey ‘the south-western part’. But the modern London postcodes ‘SE’ and ‘SW’ do NOT correspond. Nunhead Cemetery, London SE15 is actually south-western in the Watsonian sense and hence in ‘Surrey’. For many border localities, examination of old Ordnance Survey maps may be necessary.
28 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Capitalization of cardinal points
The cardinal points, north, south, east and west, and their Various combinations, do not ordinarily take capital letters when spelled out in full. Thus: the north part of the wood, the northern slope of the downs, the north-easterly direction of the wind. However, if part of a place name, a capital letter is required, thus: West End, East Sussex, North America, West Devon but [the] south [of] Devon, South Coast (of England) but south coast of Ireland (and elsewhere).
Punctuation of abbreviations
In the following list, Salop and Hants (and by analogy Northants) are not followed by a full stop because they are not abbreviations, but are older names for their respective counties. Middx is not followed by a full stop because it is a contraction
rather than an abbreviation. RICHARD A. JONES
REFERENCES
Buck, F. D. 1959. The style of the house. Proc. S. Lond. Ent. Nat. Hist. Soc. 1958: 116-117.
Dandy, J. E. 1969. Watsonian vice-counties of Great Britain.Ray Society, London. 38 pp, 2 maps.
Druce, G. C. 1932. The comital flora of the British Isles. Buncle, Arbroath, pp. i-xxxii, 1-406, 1 map.
Duff, A. 1993. Beetles of Somerset. Somerset Archaeological and Natural History Society, Taunton, 270 pp.
Plant, C. W. 1993. Larger moths of the London area. London Natural History Society, London. 292 pp.
Praeger, R. L. 1896. On the botanical subdivisions of Ireland. Jrish Nat. 5: 29-38, 1 map.
Praeger, R. L. 1901. Irish topographical botany. Proc. R. Irish Acad. 3rd series 7: i-clxxxviii, 1-410, 8 maps.
Ragge, D. R. 1965. Grasshoppers, crickets and cockroaches of the British Isles. Warne, London.
Watson, H. C. 1852. Cybele Britannica. Vol. 3, pp. 524-528.
List of county name abbreviations
Where it is not desired to spell the names of counties in full, the following abbreviations should be used. Watsonian vice-counties (VCs) may differ significantly from modern administrative boundaries. Reference to Dandy (1969) is advised.
Note: many counties take their names from county towns, the names of which should not be abbreviated. Thus Aberdeenshire may be abbreviated to Aber., but Aberdeen (the city) should always be spelled in full. Confusion is also possible because the corresponding Watsonian vice-county names are South and North ‘Aberdeen’, not South and North Aberdeenshire. In the following list, vice-county numbers are given and the Watsonian vice-county names when these are necessary.
Aberdeenshire Aber. [VCs 92, S. Aber. and 93, N. Aber. ]
Anglesey Angl. [VC 52, (East Anglia should be abbreviated to E. Anglia) ]
Argyllshire Argyll. [Most of the mainland is VC 98, Main Argyll,
others are VC 101, Kintyre, VC 102, S. Ebudes, VC 100, Clyde Is. of Bute and Arran]
Armagh Arm. [VC H37]
Ayrshire Ayr. [VC 75]
Angus Angus [also known as Forfar, VC 90} Antrim Antrim [VC H39]
Avon Avon [a modern administrative area]
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Banffshire Bedfordshire Berkshire Berwickshire Borders
Brecknockshire
Breconshire Buckinghamshire Buteshire
Caernarvonshire
Caithness Cambridgeshire Cardiganshire Carlow Carmarthenshire Cavan
Central
Channel Islands
Cheshire Cheviotland Clackmannan Clare Cleveland Clwyd
Clyde Isles Cork
Cornwall Cumberland Cumbria
Denbighshire Derbyshire Derry Devon(shire) Donegal Dorset Down Dublin Dumfriess & Galloway Dumfriesshire Dunbartonshire
Durham
Dyfed
Banff. Beds. Berks. Berw. Borders
Breck.
Brecon. Bucks. Bute.
Caer.
Caith. Cambs. Card. Carlow Carm. Cavan Central
Chan. Is.
Ches. Chev. Clack. Clare Cleve. Clwyd
Clyde Is. Cork
Corn. Cumber. Cumbria
Denb. Derbys. Derry Devon Don. Dorset Down Dublin Dumf. & Gall. Dumf. Dunb.
Dur. Dyfed
29
[VC 94]
[VC 30]
[VC 22]
[VC 81]
[modern administrative region of south-east Scotland comprising several former counties ]
[ alternative name for Breconshire, not to be con- fused with Breckland, the Breck of East Anglia ]
[VC 42]
[VC 24]
[part of VC 100, Clyde Is. ]
[mainland part is VC 49, Caernarvon, Anglesey is VC 52]
[VC 109]
[VC 29]
[VC 46]
[VC H13]
[VC 44]
[VC H30]
[modern administrative area comprising several former counties ]
[although technically part of the British Isles, sufficiently foreign to warrant separate status ]
[VC 58]
[ VC 68, the northern part of Northumberland ]
[VC H9, includes Aran Isles]
[modern administrative county of Wales, comprising several former counties ]
[VC 100, comprising Bute, Arran and other islands of Argyllshire]
[VCs H3, W. Cork, H4, Mid Cork and HS, E. Cork]
[VCs 1, W. Corn. and 2, E. Corn. ]
[VC 70]
[modern administrative county ]
[VC 50]
[VC 57]
[VC H40]
[VCs 3, S. Devon and 4, N. Devon]
[VCs H34, E.Don. and H35, W. Don.]
[VC 9]
[VC H38]
[VC H21]
[modern administrative area comprising several former counties ]
[VC 72]
[VC 99, Dunbarton, not to be confused with Dumbarton the county town]
[ VC 66, to distinguish city from county, use Co. Dur. if necessary]
[modern administrative county ]
30
East Anglia East Lothian Easterness Ebudes
Edinburghshire Elgin(shire) Essex
Fermanagh Fife(shire) Flintshire Forfarshire
Galway Glamorgan(shire) Gloucestershire Grampian
Greater London
Greater Manchester
Gwent
Haddingtonshire Hampshire
Hebrides Hereford & Worcester Herefordshire Hertfordshire Highland
Humberside Huntingdonshire Inverness-shire Isle of Man
Isle of Wight Isles of Scilly
Kent
Kerry
Kildare
Kilkenny Kincardine(shire) King’s County Kinross
E. Anglia E. Loth. Easterness Ebudes
Edin. Elgin. Essex
Ferm. Fife Flint. Forf.
Gal. Glam. Glos. Gramp.
Gt. Lond.
Gt. Manc.
Gwent
Hadd. Hants
Hebr. Heref. & Worcs. Heref. Herts. Highland
Humb. Hunts. Inv. I.o.M. I.o.W. Fors:
Kent Kerry Kild. Kilk. Kine.
King’s Co.
Kinr.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
[combination of several VCs]
[also known as Haddingtonshire, VC 82]
[ VC 96, the north-east part of Inverness-shire |
[ various isles of Argyllshire and Inverness-shire, VCs 102, S. Ebudes, 103 Mid Ebudes, 104, N. Ebudes]
[VC 83, also known as Midlothian]
[VC 95, also known as Morayshire]
[VCs 18, S. Essex, 19, N. Essex]
[VC H33]
[ VC 85, includes Kinross-shire ] [VC 51]
[VC 90, also known as Angus]
[VCs H15, S. E. Gal., H16, W. Gal. and H17, N. E. Gal.]
[VC 41]
[VCs 33, E. Glos. and 34, W. Glos. ]
[modern administrative area comprising several former counties |
[modern administrative area comprising parts of several former counties }
[modern administrative area ]
[modern administrative county ]
[ VC 82, also known as E. Lothian]
[VCs 11, S. Hants and 12, N. Hants; VC 10 is Isle of Wight ]
[Outer Hebrides are VC 110]
{modern administrative area]
[VC 36]
[VC 20]
[modern administrative region of Scotland comprising several former counties, not to be confused with ‘the Highlands’, a more general term]
[modern administrative region ]
[VC 31]
[VCs 96 Easterness, 97 Westerness |
vem
[VC 10]
[also known as the Scilly Isles; part of VC1, W. Corn. |
[VCs 15, E. Kent, 16, W. Kent]
[VCs H1, S. Kerry and H2, N. Kerry] [VC H19]
[VC H11]
[VC 91]
[former name for Offaly, VC H18] [part of VC 85, Fife]
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8:
Kintyre Kirkcudbrightshire
Lanarkshire Lancashire Laois Leicestershire Leitrim
Leix
Limerick Lincolnshire Linlithgowshire
Londonderry Longford Lothian Louth
Main Argyll
Mayo
Meath Merionethshire Merseyside Middlesex Midlothian Monaghan Monmouthshire Montgomeryshire Morayshire
Nairnshire Norfolk Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Northumberland Northumbria
Offaly
Orkney Isles Outer Hebrides Oxfordshire
Peebleshire Perthshire
Pembrokeshire Powys
Queen’s County
1995
Kintyre Kirk.
Lan. Lancs. Laois Leics. Leit. Leix Lim. Lincs. Linlith.
Lon. Longf. Loth. Louth
Main Argyll Mayo Meath Merion. Mersey. Middx Midloth. Monag. Mon. Montg. Moray.
Nairn.
Norf. Northants Notts. Northumber. Northumbria
Offaly Ork. Is. Out. Hebr. Oxon.
Peeb. Perth.
Pemb. Powys
Queen’s Co.
31
[VC 101, part of Argyllshire] [VC 73]
[VC77]
[VCs 59, S. Lancs., 60 W. Lancs. ]
[VC H14]
[VC 55, includes Rutland]
[VC H29]
[former name for Laois, VC H14]
[VC H8]
[VCs 53, S. Lines., 54, N. Lincs.]
[VC 84, Linlithgow, also known as West Lothian ]
[alternative for VC H40, Derry]
[VC H24]
[VG-HS1] [VC 98]
[VCs H26, E. Mayo and H27, W. Mayo] [VC H22]
[VC 48]
[modern administrative region ]
rve Zt
[also known as Edinburghshire, VC 83] [VC H32]
[VC 35]
[VC 47]
[also known as Elginshire, VC 95]
[part of VC 96, Easterness ]
[VCs 27, E. Norf., 28, W. Norf.]
[VC 32]
[VC 56]
[VCs 67, Northumber. S., 68 Cheviotland ]
[VC H18] [VC 111] [VC 110] [VC 23]
[VC 78]
[VCs 87, W. Perth, 88, Mid Perth, 89, East Perth]
[VC 45]
[modern administrative county ]
[former name for Laois, VC H14]
32
Radnorshire Renfrewshire Roscommon
Ross & Cromarty Roxburgh(shire) Rutland
Selkirk(shire) Shetland Isles Shropshire Sligo Somerset Staffordshire Stirling(shire) Strathclyde Suffolk Surrey
Sussex Sutherland
Tayside Tipperary Tyne & Wear Tyrone
Warwickshire Waterford Westerness Western Isles West Lothian West Midlands Westmeath Westmorland Wexford Wicklow Wigtownshire Wiltshire Worcestershire
Yorkshire
Zetland
Rad.
Renf.
Rosc.
R. & Crom. Rox.
Rut.
Selk. Shet. Is. Salop Sligo Som. Staffs. Stirl. Strath. Suff. Surrey Sussex Suther.
Tay. Tip. Tyne & Wear Tyr.
War.
Wat. Westerness Western Is. W. Loth. W. Midi. Westmeath Westmor. Wex. Wick. Wig. Wilts. Worcs.
Yorks.
Zetl.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
[VC 43]
[VC 76]
[VC H25] °
[VCs 105, W. Ross, 106, E. Ross] [VC 80]
[part of VC 55, Leics. ]
[VC 79]
[also known as Zetland, VC 112] [VC 40]
[VC H28]
[VCs 5, S. Som, 6, N. Som.]
[VC 39]
[VC 86]
[modern administrative region ] [VCs 25, E: Suff.,.26,'W. Suite] [VC 17]
[VCs 13, W. Sussex, 14, E. Sussex] [VCs 107, E. Suther., 108, W. Suther. ]
[modern administrative region] [VCs H7, S.. Tip.cand/H10, N. Tips] [modern administrative region]
[VC H36]
[VC 38]
[VC H6]
[VC 97, north-east part of Inverness-shire] [modern administrative region]
[also known as Linlithgowshire, VC 84] [modern administrative county ]
[VC H23]
[VC 69]
[VC H12]
[VC H20]
[VC 74]
[VCs7, N. Wilts., 8, S. Wilts. ]
[VC 37]
[VCs 61, S.-E. Yorks., 62, N.-E. Yorks., 63, S.-W. Yorks., 64, Mid-W. Yorks., 65, N.-W. Yorks. ]
[VC 112, also known as Shetland Isles]
Past Presidents
1872-4 J. R. WeLimAN (dec.) 1941 F. D. Coore, F.R.£.s. (dec.) 1875-6 A. B. Farn, F.E.s. (dec.) 1942 S. Wake-y (dec.) 1877 J. P. Barrett, FES. (dec.) 1943 R. J. Burton, L.D.S., R.C.S.ENG. (dec.) 1878 J. T. Wittiams (dec) 1944 Stan.ey N. A. Jacoss, F.R.£.S. (dec.) 1879 R. STANDEN F.E.s. (dec.) 1945-6 Capt. R. A. JACKSON, R.N., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1880 A. Fick.in (dec.) 1947 L. T. Forp, B.A. (dec.) 1881 V. R. Perkins, F.e.s. (dec.) 1948 Col. P. A. Carpew (dec.) 1882 T. R. Bittups, F.e.s. (dec.) 1949 J. O. T. Howarp, o. A. (dec.) 1883 J. R. WELLMAN (dec.) 1950 Air-Marshal Sir Ropert SAUNDBY, 1884 W. West, L.p.s. (dec.) K.B.E., C.B., M.C., D.F.C., A.F.C., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1885 R. South, F.E.s. (dec.) 1951 T. G. Howarth, M.B.E., F.R.E.S., F.Z.S. 1886-7 R. Apbkin, F-.E.s. (dec.) 1952 E. W. Ctassey, F.R.E.S. 1888-9 T. R. Bittups, F.E.s. (dec.) 1953 F. STANLEY-SMITH, F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1890 J. T. CarrincTON, F.L.S. (dec.) 1954 Stantey N. A. Jacoss, S.B.ST.J., F-R.E.S. (dec.) 1891 W. H. TucGwett, pu.c. (dec.) 1955 F. D. Buck, A.M.I.PTG.M., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1892 C. G. Barrett, F.E.S. (dec.) 1956 Lt-Col. W. B. L. ManL_ey, F.R.E.s. (dec.) 1893 J. J. Weir, F.us., etc. (dec.) 1957 B. P. Moore, B.SC., D.PHIL., F.R.E.S. 1894 E. Step, F.v.s. (dec.) 1958 N. E. Hickin, PH.D., B.SC., F.R.E.S (dec.) 1895 T. W. HALt, F.E.s. (dec.) 1959 F. T. VALLINS, A.C.LL., F.R.E.S (dec.) 1896 R. Soutn, F.£.s. (dec.) 1960 R. M. Merg, F.R.E:s. (dec.) 1897 R. Apbkin, F-.E.s. (dec.) 1961 A. M. Masse, 0.B.E., D.SC., F.R-E.S. (dec.) 1898 J. W. Tutt, Fes. (dec.) 1962 A. E. GaArpner, F.R-E.S. (dec.) 1899 A. Harrison, F.L.S. (dec.) 1963 J. L. MESSENGER, B.A., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1900 W. J. Lucas, B.A., F.E.S. (dec.) 1964 C. G. Rocue, F.C.A., F.R.E.S. 1901 H. S. FREMLIN, M.R.CS., L.R.C-P., F.E.S. (dec.) 1965 R. W. J. UFFEN, F.R.E.S 1902 F. Noap Crark (dec.) 1966 J. A. C. GREENWOOD, 0.B.E., F-R.E.S (dec.) 1903 E. Step, rF..s. (dec.) 1967 R. F. BRETHERTON, C.B., M.A., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1904 A. Sicu, FES. (dec.) 1968 B. GoaTER, B.SC., F.R-E.S 1905 H. Main, Bsc., FES. (dec.) 1969 Capt. J. ELLERTON, D.S.c., R.N. (dec.) 1906-7 R. ADKIN, F.E.s. (dec.) 1970 B. J. MacNUuLty, B.SC., PH.D., F.R.I.C.S., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1908-9 A. Sicu, FES. (dec.) 1971 Col. A. M. Emmet, M.B.E., T.D., M.A. 1910-1 W. J. Kaye, F.e.s. (dec.) 1972 Prof. H. E. Hinton, PH.D., B.SC., 1912-3 A. E. ToncE, F-.E.s. (dec.) F.R.S., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1914-5 B. H. Smitn, B.A., F.E.S. (dec.) 1973 J. M. Cuatmers-Hunt, F.R.E.S. 1916-7 Hy. J. Turner, F-E.s. (dec.) 1974 C. MACKECHNIE JARVIS, F.L.S., F.R-E.S. 1918-9 StanLey Epwarps, F.L.S., ETC. (dec.) 1975 M. G. Morris, M.A., PH.D., F.R.E.S. 1920-1 K. G. Bair, B.sc., F.E.s. (dec.) 1976 W. G. TREMEWAN, M.I.BIOL. 1922 E. J. Bunnett, m.a. (dec.) 1977 R. Tusps, 0.B.E., F.R.1.B.A., F.R.E.S. 1923-4 N. D. Ritey, F.z.s., F.E.s. (dec.) 1978 G. Prior, F.L.S., F.R-E.S (dec.) 1925-6 T. H. L. Grosvenor, F.E.s. (dec.) 1979 Rev. D. J. L. AGassiz, M.A. 1927-8 E. A. CocKkAYNE, D.M., F.R.C.P., F.E.S. (dec.) 1980 R. FairRCLOUGH, F.R-E.S. 1929 H. W. Anprews, Fes. (dec.) 1981 A. E. Stusss, B.SC., F.R.E.S. 1930 F. B. Carr (dec.) 1982 J. HeaTH, F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1930 C. N. Hawkins, F.k.s. (dec.) 1983 B. R. BAKER, B.SC., A.M.A., F.R.E.S. 1931 K. G. Bair, B.SC., F.Z.S., F.E.S. (dec.) 1984 P. A. SOKOLOFF, M.SC., M.I.BIOL., F.R.E.S 1932 T. H. L. Grosvenor, F.E.s. (dec.) 1985 P. J. BAKER, C.ENG., F.R.H.S. 1933 C. G. M. De Worms, M.A., PH.D., 1986 J. M. Cuacmers-Hunt, F.R.E.S
A.LC., F.R.E.S., M.B.0.U. (dec.) 1987 Prof. J. A. Owen, M.D., PH.D., F.R.E.S. 1934 T. R. Eactes (dec.) 1988 I. F. G. MCLEAN, PH.D., F.R.E.S. 1935 E. E. Sys, F-.R.E.s. (dec.) 1989 Mrs F. M. Murpny, B.sc 1936 M. Nistett (dec.) 1990 C. W. PLant, B.SC., F.R.E.S. 1937 F. J. Courson (dec.) 1991 A. J. HALsTEAD, M.SC 1938 F. Sranvey-SMith, F.R.E.s. (dec.) 1992 J. MUGGLETON, M.SC. PH.D. M.I. BIOL., F.R.E.S 1939 H. B. Wiitiams, LL.D., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1993 D. LonsDALE, PH.D, B.SC. 1940 E. A. CockayNe, D.M., F.R.C.P., F.R.E.S. (dec.) 1994 P. M. Warina, M.A., PH.D., F.R.E.S.
ANNOUNCEMENT
Bedfordshire butterflies and moths—I am taking part in an historical review of Bedfordshire Lepidoptera since the beginning of the century when the Victoria County History was published and have been looking for early records. Recently I was very pleased to find a few specimens taken by W. G. Nash who collected in the early part of this century. His collection was sold in the 1930s and some of it came into the BENHS collections and thence to members as ‘‘duplicates’’. I would be most interested to hear from anyone who has any of his specimens or indeed any others from Bedfordshire in their collection. Charles Baker, 3 Holywell Close, Studham, Dunstable, Beds., LU6 2PB.
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY
19
2,
10 1Y/
VOLUME 8, PART 1, JANUARY 1995
ARTICLES
The distribution and habits of the small carpenter bee Ceratina cyanea (Kirby, 1802) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in Britain. G. R. ELSE
A further study of the behavioural patterns of six species of British butterfly whilst in copula. S. A. KNILL-JONES
Rheotanytarsus rioensis (Diptera: Chironomidae), a new species of the pentapoda group from the Canary Islands. P. H. LANGTON AND P. D. ARMITAGE
PROCEEDINGS AND TRANSACTIONS
Report of the discussion meeting held on 12 May 1992 to consider invertebrate conservation in the United Kingdom. S. R. MILES
Editorial. County names in records
BOOK REVIEWS Australian beetles The book of the spider
Insect conservation biology
{ BS5Q2 MARCH 1995 ISSN 0952-7583 Vol. 8, Part 2
an 8 Be oe
BRITISH JOURNAL OF
ENTOMOLOGY
AND NATURAL HISTORY
Published by the British Entomological and Natural History Society and incorporating its Proceedings and Transactions
Price: £6.00
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY Editor: Richard A. Jones, B.Sc., F.R.E.S., F. 13 Bellwood Road Nunhead London SE15 3DE
(Tel: 0171 732 2440) (Fax: 0171 277 8725)
Editorial Committee:
Rev. D. J. L. Agassiz, M.A., Ph.D. T. G. Howarth, B.E.
R. D. G. Barrington, B.Sc. I. F. G. McLean, Ph.D., F.RESS.
E. S. Bradford Mrs F. M. Murphy, B. Sc.
P. J. Chandler, B.Sc., F.R.E.S. M. J. Simmons, M.Sc.
B. Goater, B.Sc., M.I.Biol. T. R. E. Southwood, K.B., D.Sc., F.R.E.S. A. J. Halstead, M.Sc. R. W. J. Uffen, M.Sc., F.R.E.S.
R. D. Hawkins, M.A. B. K. West, B.Ed.
P. J. Hodge
British Journal of Entomology and Natural History is published by the British Entomological and Natural History Society, Dinton Pastures Country Park, Davis Street, Hurst, Reading, Berkshire RG10O OTH, UK. Tel: 01734-321402.
The Journal is distributed free to BENHS members.
©1995 British Entomological and Natural History Society.
Typeset by Dobbie Typesetting Limited, Tavistock, Devon. Printed in England by Henry Ling Ltd, Dorchester, Dorset.
BRITISH ENTOMOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY Registered charity number: 213149
Meetings of the Society are held regularly in London, at the rooms of the Royal Entomological Society, 41 Queen’s Gate, London SW7 and the well-known ANNUAL EXHIBITION is planned for Saturday 28 October 1995 at Imperial College, London SW7. Frequent Field Meetings are held at weekends in the summer. Visitors are welcome at all meetings. The current Programme Card can be had on application to the Secretary, R. F. McCormick, at the address given below.
The Society maintains a library, and collections at its headquarters in Dinton Pastures, which are open to members on the second and fourth Sundays of each month, telephone 01734-321402 for the latest meeting news.
Applications for membership to the Membership Secretary: A. Godfrey, 10 Moorlea Drive, Baildon, Shipley, West Yorkshire BD17 6QL.
Subscriptions and changes of address to the Assistant Treasurer: M. G. Telfer, 12 Jasmine Close, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7NE.
Non-arrival of the Journal, faulty copies or other problems arising from distribution of the Journal or notices to the Distribution Secretary: D. Young, 9 Marten Place, Tilehurst, Reading, Berkshire RG3 6FB.
Orders for books and back numbers of the Journal and Proceedings to the Sales Secretary: R. D. Hawkins, 30d Meadowcroft Close, Horley, Surrey RH6 9EL.
General Enquiries to the Secretary: R. F. McCormick, 36 Paradise Road, Teignmouth, Devon TQ14 8NR. Tel: 01626-779543. ES
Cover illustration: The elephant hawkmoth, Deilephila elpenor (L.). Photo: Robin Williams.
NOTE: The Editor invites submission of photographs forblack and white reproduction on the front covers of the journal. The subject matter is open, with an emphasis on aesthetic value rather than scientific novelty. Submissions can be in the form of colour or black and white prints or colour transparencies.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 33
BRITISH SPECIES OF METOPIA (DIPTERA: SARCOPHAGIDAE) WITH TWO SPECIES NEW TO BRITAIN
NIGEL P. WYATT Department of Entomology, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD AND STEVEN J. FALK
Herbert Art Gallery and Museum, Jordan Well, Coventry CV1 5QP.
The flesh-flies (family Sarcophagidae) are medium sized to large silvery or yellowish- grey pollinose flies, usually with tessellate, spotted or banded patterns on the abdomen. The world fauna consists of approximately 2500 species, of which 56 were included in the most recently published checklist of the British fauna (Kloet & Hincks, 1976); however this total has now increased to 59 following subsequent additions and amendments (Rognes, 1986; Pape, 1987; Wyatt & Sterling, 1988; Wyatt, 1991). Four subfamilies are recognized by Verves (1986) of which two, the Sarcophaginae and Paramacronychiinae, have mainly necrophagous or parasitic larvae (either with invertebrate hosts or acting as agents of myiasis in mammals), while the other two, Macronychiinae and Miltogrammatinae, are mainly cleptoparasites with their larvae developing within the nests of aculeate Hymenoptera.
Sarcophagids are represented by a substantially larger number of species in Continental Europe than in the British Isles: for example, Pape (1987) gives accounts of 30 species of Miltogrammatinae recorded in Fennoscandia and Denmark, while only nine are known from Britain (Kloet & Hincks, 1976) including only two species of Metopia: M. campestris (Fallén) and M. argyrocephala (Meigen). Here we record a further two species of Metopia, M. staegerii (Rondani) and M. grandii Venturi, both of which are widely distributed in the western Palaearctic and eastwards, and we provide a key for their identification.
There is a key to British Sarcophagidae (Emden, 1954—as a subfamily of Calliphoridae), but this now requires updating. Some species may be more easily identified by using more recently published keys to the western Palaearctic fauna, such as that by Pape (1987) which includes most of the British species including all of the Miltogrammatinae, and provides illustrations of the diagnostic characters for species of Metopia. Verves (1986) regards staegerii as a junior synonym of argentata Macquart, the latter being an older name, which may therefore be preferred in future publications.
KEY TO BRITISH SPECIES OF METOPIA
1. Middle tibia with 1 av seta. Male: fore tarsus with very long posterior hairs, the longest up to 4 times the width of the tarsus itself; frons with broad dark frontal vitta approximately 3.3 times as broad as fronto-orbital plates, thus lacking an SRLCUSIV CNY SILVED UTOMS Um. 0st). iP a. Palle ob. utd wnt M. campestris (Fallén) Recorded from nests of Pompilidae, Vespidae and Sphecidae. England, Wales, Scotland (north to Sutherland), Ireland, generally distributed.
—Middle tibia without av seta. Male: fore tarsus without or with only short hairs BOePencMOnSUTlace LCs mee sh AAG Ae BAGELS: psec Dye anon dee wre remaey 2
2. Abdomen: syntergite 1+2 lacking median marginal setae. Male: dark frontal vitta 3.5 times as broad as fronto-orbital plates, thus lacking an extensively UG IMIS ES - Wie ices hie ASS. £ seca as ctslstane oo rierAd cheb M. grandii Venturi Hosts unknown. Southern England and Wales, northwards to Glamorgan, Worcestershire and Norfolk.
34 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
— Abdomen: syntergite 1 + 2 usually with a pair of median marginal setae, but these occasionally weak or absent. Male with broad contiguous,fronto-orbital plates, obliterating the median vitta, thus frons extensively silver (females of following
species. presently inseparable)! ji... 24 Gos. Oe 00s gs 5s oe es > Oe 3 3. Male: fore tarsus with long curled hairs on posterior surface, the longest 1.5 times the width Of the tarsus’... eR ok Bead. wee cutee M. staegerii (Rondani)
Hosts unknown. Fairly widespread but local, England: Devon, Suffolk, Norfolk, Oxon; Scotland: Forfar, Moray.
— Male: fore tarsus without long hairs on posterior surface ...............sceeseeeeees SE ee er ces See Te oe Cos ae ae M. argyrocephala (Meigen) Recorded from nests of Vespidae, Sphecidae and Apidae. England, Wales, Scotland (to Moray Firth), generally distributed.
M. argyrocephala and M. campestris remain the two most frequently encountered British species, with a wide distribution encompassing both inland and coastal areas. These two Metopia species are cleptoparasites of various aculeates; Pape (1987) cites that both M. argyrocephala and M. campestris are recorded from a variety of ground- nesting aculeate species, especially sphecids, but also a few vespids, apids and pompilids. There are no published biological data available yet for M. staegerii or M. grandii, but it is likely that their biology is similar, but perhaps with differences in the range of host species, or in the preferred location of the host nest.
METOPIA STAEGERII RONDANI, 1859
This species is predominantly recorded from coastal dunes, but it has also been taken at inland sites with sandy soil in Oxfordshire and Suffolk. At Winterton Dunes in east Norfolk males were observed to be especially common basking on birch shrubs on mid dune while others were on hind dune areas together with M. argyrocephala, and at Elvedon Holiday Village in the west Suffolk Breck a solitary male was collected with a series of M. argyrocephala on chalk heath with scrub and conifer plantations.
Females of M; staegerii cannot be separated from those of M. argyrocephala. All current British records are based on males.
Material examined and other records (BMNH: The Natural History Museum, London; OUM: Hope Entomological Collections, Oxford University Museum). S. Devon: Dawlish Warren (SX9676), two males, 29.vi.1957 and 26.vii.1962, G. M. Spooner (BMNH). N. Devon: Maiden Down (ST0716), two males, 9-16.vii.1949, E. C. M. d’Assis Fonseca; 9.vii.1949, J. Cowley (BMNH); Braunton Burrows (SS4534), 21.vi. 1987, S. J. Falk. Oxon: Shotover (SP5606), 6.viii.1903, A. H. Hamm (OUM). W. Suffolk: Elvedon Holiday Village (TL8080), one male, 23.vii.1994, S. J. Falk. E. Norfolk: Winterton Dunes (TG4920), 7.vii.1993, S. J. Falk. England: one male, no locality or date, A. Piffard (BMNH). Forfar: Monifieth (NO4932), 6.vi.1915, 24.vi.1917, A. E. J. Carter (QUM). Moray: Culbin Sands (NH9862), 14.vi.1984, J. H. Cole (pers. comm.). Also occurs widely elsewhere in the western Palaearctic east to the Altai Mountains.
METOPIA GRANDII VENTURI, 1952
This species has been recorded mainly from inland sites. At Sot’s hole in Staffordshire a male was found resting on oak foliage beside a sandy bank, whereas another male collected at Woodbastwick Fen in East Norfolk was found on bramble foliage in an area of damp woodland and fen with little light soil in the vicinity.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 35
Material examined and other records. S. Devon: River Tamar, one male, 10.vii.1949, E. C. M. d’Assis Fonseca (BMNH). Somerset: Dunster (SS9943), one male, 24.v.1953, E. C. M. d’Assis Fonseca (BMNH). W. Kent: Woolwich Wood, one male, 30.vii.1953, E. C. M. d’Assis Fonseca (BMNH). E. Norfolk: Woodbastwick Fen (TG3316), 5.vii.1993, S. J. Falk. Herefordshire: Stoke Wood (SOS53), one male, 24.vii.1902, J. H. Wood (BMNH). Worcestershire: Wyre Forest, one male, 3.vi.1934, C. J. Wainwright (BMNH). Staffordshire: Sot’s Hole, West Bromwich (SP0192), one male, 8.viii. 1986, M. Bloxham. S. Glamorgan: Kenfig Hill, one male, 5.vi.1903 (SS7981), Col. J. W. Yerbury (BMNH). Also occurs widely elsewhere in the Palaearctic region, from western Europe to Japan.
The authors recommend that all British records of Metopia species are reappraised.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks are due to John Ismay and Jonathan Cole for providing extra records of M. staegerii, and to Mike Bloxham for the extra record of M. grandii.
REFERENCES
Emden, F. I. van, 1954. Diptera Cyclorrhapha Calyptrata (1), section (a): Tachinidae and Calliphoridae. Handbk. Ident. Br. Insects 10(4a): pp. 133
Kloet, G. S. & Hincks, W. D. 1976. A checklist of British insects (second edition), part 5: Diptera and Siphonaptera. Handbk Ident. Br. Insects 11: pp. 139.
Pape, T. 1987. The Sarcophagidae (Diptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Ent. Scand. 19: pp. 203.
Rognes, K. 1986. The systematic position of the genus Helicobosca Bezzi with a discussion of the monophyly of the calyptrate families Calliphoridae, Rhinophoridae, Sarcophagidae and Tachinidae (Diptera). Ent. Scand. 17: 75-92.
Verves, Y. G. 1986. Family Sarcophagidae. In: Soos, A. & Papp, L. (Eds). Catalogue of Palaearctic Diptera, Volume 12, Sarcophagidae-Calliphoridae, pp. 58-193.
Wyatt, N. P. 1991. Notes on Sarcophagidae (Dipt.), including one species new to Ireland, one new to science from England and Malta and a change in the British list. Entomologist’s Mon. Mag. 127: 1-6.
Wyatt, N. P. & Sterling, P. H. 1988. Parasites of the brown-tail moth Euproctis chrysorrhoea (L.) (Lep., Lymantriidae), including two Diptera (Tachinidae, Sarcophagidae) new to Britain. Entomologist’s Mon. Mag. 124: 207-214.
BOOK REVIEW
Die Schmetterlinge Osterreichs (Lepidoptera). Systematisches Verzeichnis mit Verbreitungsangaben fir die einzelnen Bundeslander, by P. Huemer & G. Tarmann. Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum, Innsbruck, 1993, 224 pages, Price OSch 200, (about £12).—Although Austria is some distance across Europe from Britain, this nicely-produced list of the Lepidoptera of that country will be of great interest to British lepidopterists, for several reasons.
Following some introductory remarks, a list of superfamilies, families and subfamilies is given, with the number of Austrian representatives in each category: this makes a useful and readily accessible comparison with our own fauna. For example, the list gives 207 Austrian Coleophoridae, 45 Sesiidae, 310 Pyraloidea, 25 Hesperioidea, 187 Papilionoidea, 463 Geometridae and 582 Noctuidae in a total lepidopterous fauna of nearly 4000 species. The sequence of superfamilies, which
36 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
reflects the result of recent research, may come as a surprise to some of us: for instance, Cossoidea, Sesioidea, Zygaenoidea and Choreutoidea are placed just before the Tortricoidea; Urodoidea, Schreckensteinioidea, Epermenioidea, Alucitoidea, Pterophoroidea and Copromorphoidea are placed between Tortricoidea and Pyraloidea; and the Lasiocampoidea and Bombycoidea (which includes Sphingidae) come before the butterflies.
The main list is attractively presented and easy to read, but all taxonomic categories are in italics. Reference back to the introductory list, in which Roman characters are usefully employed, suggests this may have been inadvertent. The species are numbered, giving a total of 3963 species, and a table to the right of the species list indicates records of each species in the 10 Austrian provinces (Ldnder)—an extremely interesting bonus. The sequence of species in some families may be unfamiliar and, although in line with some recent studies, is still controversial and unlikely to be the last word. There appears to be general agreement at present that the most satisfactory arrangement of Noctuidae commences with Herminiinae and concludes with Agrotis, and Huemer and Tarmann adhere to the sequence proposed by Fibiger & Hacker (1990). Another change which is adopted here is in the pyrales, in which a sound overview remains a problem. The Pyraloidea are composed of two taxa accorded full family ranking: Pyralidae comprising Galleriinae, Pyralinae and Phycitinae, and Crambidae in which Crambinae, Nymphulinae, Schoenobiinae, Scopariinae, Heliothelinae, Evergestinae, Odontiinae, Glaphyriinae and Pyraustinae are included.
A consequence of intensive research into some taxonomic groups has resulted in a proliferation of genera which this reviewer considers unfortunate. Other workers have made sensible use of the subgenus to indicate differences between groups of species, for example in Zygaenidae and Noctuidae. No subgenera are indicated in the presently reviewed work, but full play is made with novel genera, particularly those proposed by Beck and by Berio for Noctuidae, and a number of them refer to British species. Thus in Sesiidae, we now have Pyropteron chrysidiformis and Synansphecia muscaeformis, and in Noctuidae Pyramidcampa pyramidea and P. berbera, Loscopia scolopacina, Leucapamea ophiogramma, Eremobina pabulatricula, Melanarta melanopa, Coranarta cordigera, Aneda rivularis (=cucubali), Colonsideridis albicolon, Putagrotis puta and more. Apart from devaluing the rank of genus, cross-reference to other recently published lists is made more difficult, especially when no generic synonymy is given. A further plethora of irritating changes results from the concept that the species name is adjectival to, and not in apposition to, the generic name, affecting particularly certain Geometridae, in genera such as Perizoma.
Subspecific rankings are used sparingly; it would have been helpful to include the nominotypical combination, with author and date, in square brackets, where this does not occur in Austria, e.g. with 3900 Standfussiana lucernea and 3912 Xestia alpicola.
There is a useful list of species which have been incorrectly reported from Austria in the past, an extensive table of annotations concerning unconfirmed records, a very full bibliography and separate indices for species and for higher taxa.
Misprints are annoying in any work, but an abomination in a definitive check list. They are very difficult to eliminate altogether, and even this carefully-produced work has its share, such, aptly, as 2866 hulimiata for humiliata!
This is the first list of the Lepidoptera of Austria to have been written, and is a valuable addition to the published faunas of the European countries.
B. GOATER
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 37
THE LIFE CYCLE, DISTRIBUTION AND HABITS OF HYPENA OBSITALIS (HUBN.) (LEPIDOPTERA: NOCTUIDAE) IN DEVONSHIRE
ANTHONY H. DOBSON 282 Britten Road, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG22 4HR.
This is an account of further studies into the life cycle, distribution and habits of Hypena obsitalis (Hiibn.) (the Bloxworth snout) since the discovery of a colony by the author on the Torbay coast (Dobson, 1991). The same field work techniques that were used during the 1990 to 1994 investigations were also used in the same area during 1947 to 1959 when the author’s home was in Torquay, suggesting very strongly that the species did not then occur in the Torbay area. Alas now living in Hampshire, it has not been possible to carry out a weekly survey throughout the year, but the data provided should illustrate the moth’s life cycle and habits in Devonshire.
Following the discovery of the colony on 2 and 3.viii.1990, Dr Barry Henwood obtained a female obsitalis on 8.viii at the same location (Henwood, 1991). Of the four larvae received in the post from him, two were fed with Parietaria judaica L. and the others with Urtica dioica L.; the former two were reared successfully and resulting imagines emerged on 15.ix.1990, but the latter two struggled and died before pupating. As the imagines had been set for exhibiting, the cycle through to the following year could not be studied.
In the Channel Islands the imago has been recorded in every month of the year except February during 1960 and 1963 and on 8.ii.1972 over 200 were counted overwintering in an old German bunker (Emmett & Heath, 1983). It has also been found in garden sheds, garages and other buildings (Skinner, 1984). To find possible overwintering sites, the location was visited on 19.i.1991. Using a beating tray and a stick, an attempt was made to find or dislodge specimens from possible hiding places: low hedges, tangled undergrowth, scrub on upper cliff slopes, rabbit holes and deep crevices in the cliff just above the beach, but without success.
From the August 1991 breeding of ova and larvae sent through the post by Barry Henwood and Bernard Skinner, seven specimens were retained for overwintering. From 12 to 17.ix the imagines were put into a clear plastic box, dimensions 279 x 159 x 102 mm with Parietaria judaica L., tissue and a small cotton wool ball soaked in red wine steeped in sugar to give the moths sustenance. The plastic box was placed on the raised carpeted floor of a wooden shed in Basingstoke. However on 21.ix, the maximum day temperature in the shade outside the shed was 23.5 °C and because the imagines were so lively, the container was kept for a week during daylight hours in a cool bedroom and at night in the shed. At dusk on 29.ix five were lively when disturbed, one was crippled and one dead. At dawn on 5.x, when the temperature was 6 °C and the imagines in a state of torpor, the five healthy imagines were transferred to another container with similar contents. It was then discovered that two ova had been laid on a piece of tissue. The imagines then remained in a state of torpor. After a hard frost outside, minimum temperature of — 3.5 °C, during the night of 6/7.xii, they were examined next morning and found still alive, though in torpor. With even severer frosts forecast, newspaper was wrapped around the container, which was placed on boxes about a metre off the floor. During the night of 10/11.xii the minimum temperature outside was — 8.5°C, and the next day three imagines were dead and the ova collapsed. A bag of potatoes covered with newspapers in the shed was also frosted. The following night there was another severe frost, minimum temperature —8 °C, during which the remaining two succumbed.
38 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
From observations of the imagines in the shed, at 15 °C or higher outside temperature, the moths were very alert and any movement in the shed would result in them flying, particularly at dusk. From 14°C down to 7 °C they were quiet and would not fly unless the container was tapped and below 7 °C outside temperature, they were in a state of torpor. In the protection of the shed they survived an outside temperature of —3.5 °C, but in their habitat it is feared they would not survive a temperature lower than —5°C in their overwintering site. It has been found since that the shed temperature is 1 °C warmer on a cold night than the outside temperature. The probable overwintering sites would be in a deep cover of scrub, ivy and vegetation, because of a lack of suitable buildings in most locations. The species can survive the winter in south Devonshire with its milder climate and close proximity to the sea. However, if the south Devonshire coast were to experience a severe winter, the species would die out.
The next step was to find when overwintering imagines would awaken. A careful watch was kept on the weather forecasts and in recording temperature, making an allowance for the south Devonshire coast. The temperature at dusk first reached 16 °C on 14.v.1992. On 24.v with a dusk temperature of 16 °C the location was visited from dusk onwards. No imagines were in flight. Parietaria and Urtica were swept vigorously to check if there were any larvae. One female was swept out from a thick growth of Parietaria deep within the hedge and close to the thick vegetation on the other side. The following night also with optimum weather conditions for most other species with many moths again in flight, not one obsitalis was seen, probably due to the temperature being only 13 °C. Then a return to Hampshire had to be made. Bob Heckford (pers. comm.) informed me later that on 12.vi. he saw two worn imagines at two locations. On 20.vi another evening visit was made, but no imagines were seen. The Parietaria that had not been cut by the council workmen was searched randomly for ova and then tapped with a stick over a beating tray but no ova or larvae were found. So it appeared that overwintering specimens were reappearing during late May to early June and the ova probably overlooked.
With a long illness in 1993, the author was unable to visit Devonshire, but with improved health in 1994, was determined to find first brood larvae, the second brood larvae having been found on 22.viii.1992 in another location (Pickles, 1993). An estimation had to be made for suitable dates for finding the larvae. Breeding the second brood in captivity took 5 days for the ovum, 16 days for the larva, 16 days for the pupa, resulting in a total of 37 days (Henwood, 1991). Calculating forward from imagines seen on 12.vi, larvae should be found from 17.vi to 3.vii. Calculating back from imagines on 2.viii (Dobson, 1991) and 11.viii (Henwood & Skinner, pers. comm.), larvae should be found from 2 to 17.vii and from 10 to 27.vii respectively. A holiday to south Devonshire was booked for the week 16 to 23.vii. Unbeknown to the author, Roy McCormick made visits to three of the locations and David Wedd made one to the second location during 1994. Their records have been added to the 1994 results.
To protect the species, locality and local feature designations and map references have been omitted. All locations listed are within the Torbay Borough Constituency Boundary and are on or near an imaginary north-north-west to south-south-east line spanning 10.5 km. Height and distance measurements are either based as accurately as possible on Ordnance Survey map data or estimated.
First location: hedgerow with good growth of Parietaria judaica L. up to 1.25m in height amongst Urtica dioica L. and other herbage beneath a canopy of shrubs and trees; aspect—east and shaded, 105 m above sea level and 220 m from the sea; known history—female, early viii.1991 (B. P. Henwood, pers. comm.), imagines 1992
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 39
(Clarke, 1993), 9.vi.1994 none (R. F. McC.), 17.vii.1994 Parietaria and Urtica searched and beaten, foliage disturbed, none, though probably in pupal stage, if there (A. H. D).
Second location: horizontal cleft in cliff, third of way up from beach between scree and scattered herbage below and overhanging rock above with restricted Parietaria growth with nearby dense herbage and foliage against cliff, also adjacent footpaths with Parietaria growth along sides and with empty and inhabited buildings nearby; aspect—cliff, north-north-east and shaded, paths, various and sunny or shaded, 30 to 10m above sea level, 15 to 40 m from the sea; known history—22.viii.1992, larvae from which imagines were bred from 16.ix.1992 (Pickles, 1993), 7.vi.1994 none, 17.vii.1994 cliff site, tapping some Parietaria onto beating tray produced one larva in third and three in fourth instars, edge of path beneath fencing, one fifth instar larva on Parietaria (A. H. D.) (third instar larva died in the next instar, parasitized, the cocoon posted to Dr A. A. Allen, who bred on 5.viii.1994, a female Metorus colon (Hal.) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a species attacking a wide range of lepidoptera larvae and which does not seem attached to a particular habitat or larval strategy), the fourth and fifth instar larvae produced imagines on 2 and 3.vili.1994), 3.viii.1994 imago and larvae, 13 and 22.viii.1994 larvae (R. F. McC.), 25.viii. 1994 larvae in last instar, which produced imagines which laid third brood ova in September, and worn imagines (D. J. W.).
Third location: rocks and sparse herbage near path at base of cliffs; aspect—east and sunny until mid-afternoon, seen 7m above sea level, 12m from sea; known history—12.vi.1992, worn imago (R. J. H.), 19.vii.1994 whole area searched above and below cliffs, which are now too dangerous to climb, no Parietaria in sight, deep clefts in upper cliffs for overwintering imagines. Nearest Parietaria found on wall of car park 400 m away as the crow flies, full grown larvae of Autographa gamma (L.) beaten out and a larva in its second instar which looked like obsitalis, but proved to be gamma in the third instar.
Fourth location: coastal path with mostly low compact hedges with lush growth of Parietaria in places, but many plants next to path were cut down by council workmen during the first half of June, 1994; a derelict garden shed found nearby, but most of roof missing so little protection for overwintering imagines; low thick scrub down to cliffs, danger of cliff fall to part of path; aspect—south-west to south-east, sunny except for one continuously shaded patch of Parietaria, 20 to 35 m above sea level, five to 50 m from the sea; known history—2 and 3.vili.1990, 12 imagines (Dobson, 1991), 8.viii.1990, female (Henwood, 1991), 29.vii.1991, male (A. H. D.), 11.viii.1991 two females (B. P. Henwood & B. F. Skinner), 6.ix.1991, imago (Heckford, 1992), 24.v.1992, female (A. H. D.), 12.vi.1992, one worn imago, (R. J. H.), 10.vi.1994 none (R. F. McC.) (temperature not high enough for flight), morning 19.vii.1994 using beating tray under Parietaria produced larvae of Vanessa atalanta (L.) and Autographa gamma (L.), but no obsitalis. Towards end of beating session a male flew out of a bush. Parietaria growing in the shady area was collected to feed larvae back at the cottage, later when checking the foodplant before putting it into larvae containers, three scattered ova under one leaf later produced gamma larvae and two singleton ova under other leaves produced obsitalis larvae; night 20/21 .vii.1994 pre-dusk to 22.00 hours, seven imagines, one female ovipositing on Parietaria near where ova had been found, at 00.05 hours, one imago and at 00.45 hours, two imagines in flight (A. H. D.); 3.viii.1994 none, 26.viii.1994 larvae (R. F. McC.).
Fifth location: cliff top site, short grass with Parietaria growing at base of walls; aspect—various and sunny, except in shade cast by walls, 52 m above sea level, 120 m from the sea; known history—28.vii.1989, one female at M. V. light (Henwood, 1991) and believed to have been a migrant, the first confirmed county record, 22.vii.1994
40 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
a brief visit at 22.30 hours, two females, one ovipositing on Parietaria, and a male seen (A. H. D.).
From a few ova, ex female secured on 20.vii.1994, secondebrood imagines were bred on 21 and 22.viii.1994. The two kept for overwintering have been going into and out of torpor with the range of temperature experienced. They are still alive today (9.x.1994) but now in torpor with the overnight temperature in the shed having dropped to 2 °C. To facilitate recharging the contents of the plastic box when the temperatures were higher, the box was kept in the refrigerator overnight so that at 5 °C next morning the imagines were in a state of torpor.
Regarding flight habits, the original statements (Dobson, 1991) still remain true, though the moth will fly after midnight. The species usually ignores light; only two of the 1994 imagines flew towards torch light. The species was attracted neither to Barry Henwood’s bulb over a sheet nor to Dobson’s actinic (Heath) trap, 1.5 and 2m respectively from the imagines’ flight paths.
Abroad, Urtica dioica is a recorded foodplant and the Iford, Dorset specimen was seen amongst nettles (Emmett & Heath, 1983). In south Devon, the only foodplant appears to be Parietaria judaica; however, the few Urtica plants seen could have been worked at the wrong time or overlooked in preference to Parietaria with which the author was having success. It is still advisable for others to work both plants. In captivity the species has been reared successfully on Soleira soleirolii (Dandy) (Riley, 1992). The ovum and larva in the early instars could be confused with Autographa gamma (L.). The ovum of gamma in its development turns to a shade of pale green similar to obsitalis. Its larva in the first two instars is like obsitalis in its stance at rest, colour and markings but it has three pairs of prolegs compared to the four pairs of obsitalis. The larva does seem to prefer shady places (Seitz, 1914). The pupa of obsitalis has not yet been found in the wild on mainland Britain; in captivity the larva spins a flimsy cocoon amongst leaves of Parietaria out of which the pupa can fall, when the leaves are moved.
The life cycle in Torbay will now be compared with statements in literature. It was believed that obsitalis was ‘single-brooded, flying from August to October and after hibernation in May and June’ (Skinner, 1984). From the data, there appears to be a staggered awakening from the overwintering state from late May to mid-June. This could be the result of weather and variation between the aspects and micro-climates of the locations. The earliest first brood cycle commenced with ova laid in early June resulting in imagines about 17.vii as witnessed in locations four and five. The latest first brood cycle with ova laid at the end of June resulted in imagines emerging in early August and with larvae on 17.vii as witnessed in location two. The second brood imagines emerge from late August to mid-September with a flight period until mid- October, earlier or later according to the temperature. All these cycles can be affected by the weather; in 1990, June was the dullest, coolest and wettest for many years resulting in the first brood imagines flying in early August in location four. Could there be a third brood? Dobson and Wedd have experienced ova of a third brood being laid in captivity, but there is no evidence yet of it taking place in nature in the British Isles. In Continental literature there is some confusion over the broods, probably the result of an extended ovipositing period and overlapping broods; in May and June and in August and September. Observed in May and December in Portugal, the larva lives in April and May and in the late summer (Spuler, 1908); south of France, southern Europe, north Africa and Asia Minor, moth from April to September, sometimes later according to terrain, larva in Spring (Culot, 1914-17); localities chiefly in southern France, June, July to October (Lhomme, 1923-35); in Alsace, Valais and southern Alps to 1000 m, mostly common in two to three not clearly separated generations from early June, overwintering to mid-May, the moth comes into houses
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 41
to overwinter, larvae from May and in the autumn (Forster & Wohlfahrt, 1971); throughout the whole year, often captured in caves and dark places (Calle, 1983); Greece, flight period March to December, two or three generations, adults of autumn generation overwinter in caves, holes and buildings (Hacker, 1989). The flight periods do vary according to terrain and latitude, hence June to October in France and March to December in Greece. Could Spuler’s statement imply that ova overwintered or did he overlook a March flight? The earlier authors appear to have been unaware of overwintering. A number of sites for overwintering on the Continent and the Channel Islands have been mentioned but as yet none has been found in Devon and it is hoped that further work will be carried out by others to resolve this. However the Rye, Sussex specimen of 6.i11.1983 being disturbed in a garage, flew and resettled on a beam (Tweedie, 1983) (the previous September being good for migrant moths, followed by a very mild winter, strongly suggest that the specimen overwintered).
It has been suggested that obsitalis occurred in south Devon, in the late 19th century, but the only statement that has been found is the late Captain Stidston’s: ‘In my own collection there are eight specimens rather old and worn. I recognise my setting of early collecting days and therefore may have been taken in the South Hams district but, of course, the record cannot stand’ (Stidston, 1952). The species is now established in Torbay and further to the south Roy McCormick (pers. comm.) has found larvae on 16.viii.1994 in a location by the mouth of the River Dart. David Wedd (pers. comm.) has found larvae common on Parietaria in an open site on the north Cornwall coast, but it is very doubtful if this colony was established by the 1943 migrant specimen at Boscastle, for the extremely low temperatures of the 1947 severe winter would have wiped out any colonies in the south-west. If such weather does not recur, the future prospects for this species on mainland Britain are good. Parasitism is low at present and the colonies, being on or close to cliffs, should be safe from development. It should be found in more localities, where its foodplant occurs, from Land’s End to the Isle of Purbeck.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I should like to thank Dr A. A. Allen for his help with identifying the parasite, B. Goater and A. J. Pickles for loosely translating and providing Continental references, and Dr J. H. Clarke, R. J. Heckford, Dr B. P. Henwood, R. F. McCormick, A. J. Pickles, B. F. Skinner, Miss M. A. Turner and D. J. Wedd for their help in supplying records and/or information.
REFERENCES
Calle, J. A. 1983. Noctuidos Espanoles. Madrid, Vol. 1, p. 171.
Clarke, J. H. 1993. [Examples of summer and autumn broods of Hypena obsitalis (Hiibn.). Exhibit at BENHS Annual Exhibition, 1992.] Br. J. Ent. Nat. Hist. 6: 54.
Culot, J. 1914-17. Noctuelles et géométres d’Europe. Geneva, Vol. 2, Noctuelles, pp. 225-226.
Dobson, A. H. 1991. Hypena obsitalis (Hiibn.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) temporarily established in Devonshire. Br. J. Ent. Nat. Hist. 4: 64.
Emmet, A. M. & Heath, J. (Eds). 1983. The moths and butterflies of Great Britain and Ireland. Harley Books, Colchester, Vol. 10, p. 387.
Forster, W. & Wohlfahrt, T. A. 1971. Die Schmetterlinge Mitteleuropas: Eulen (noctuidae). Stuttgart, Vol. 1, p. 310.
Hacker, H. 1989. Herbipoliana. Mark Tleuthen, Germany, Vol. 2, die noctuidae Griechenlands, p. 408.
Heckford, R. J. 1992. [Hypena obsitalis (Hiibn.) from Torbay. Exhibit at BENHS Annual Exhibition, 1991.] Br. J. Ent. Nat. Hist. 5: 56.
42 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Henwood, B. P. 1991 Hypena obsitalis (Hiibn.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) bred in Devon; Entomologist’s Gaz. 42: 81-83.
Lhomme, L. 1923-35. Catalogue des lépidoptéres de France et de Belgique. Le Carriol, Vol. leepsoane
Pickles, A. J. 1993. Larvae of Bloxworth snout Hypena obsitalis (Lep: Hypeninae) in Devon. Entomologist’s Rec. J. Var. 105: 37.
Riley, A. M. 1992. A new larval foodplant for captive rearing of Hypena obsitalis Hubner, the Bloxworth snout. Entomologist’s Rec. J. Var. 104: 82.
Seitz, A. 1914. Macrolepidoptera of the world. Stuttgart, Vol. 3, Palaearctic Noctuidae, pp. 435-436.
Skinner, B. 1984. Colour identification guide to moths of the British Isles. Viking, London, p. 156.
Spuler, A. 1908. Die Schmetterlinge Europas, Stuttgart, Vol. 1, p. 330.
Stidston, S. T. 1952. A list of the Lepidoptera of Devon. Devonshire Association Entomological Section, Torquay, part 1 and introduction, p. 49.
Tweedie, M. W. F. 1983. The Bloxworth snout: Hypena obsitalis Hbn in 1983. Entomologist’s Rec. J. Var. 95: 126.
ANNOUNCEMENT
Microlepidoptera of Middlesex: an appeal for records.—Following on from the success of the recent publication of Larger moths of the London area the London Natural History Society now proposes to work towards publication of a checklist of the microlepidoptera of Middlesex. It is expected that this exercise may take about 5 years to complete.
The term Middlesex involves the entire vice-county 21 and thus includes all the London boroughs north of the River Thames with the exception of the five lying east of the River Lea; these five are in South Essex. Middlesex also incorporates some areas which lie in the current administrative county of Hertfordshire, notably the Potters Bar area. Records are actively sought from appropriate persons for all those families generally regarded as ‘‘micros’’—thus including the Psychidae which were formerly referred to as ‘‘macros’’, as well as those which are sometimes referred to as ‘‘mesolepidoptera’’ (Tortricidae, Alucitidae, Pyralidae and Pterophoridae).
Records should include the species name, the Bradley and Fletcher code number (to avoid nomenclatural confusion) the date where possible and the locality. Records will be assumed to relate to imagines unless ‘‘mine’’, ‘‘larva’’ or other qualifying statements are given alongside. Localities will ideally involve a place name and a four figure grid reference. Place names should be those appearing on the Ordnance Survey maps; precise localities, such as the names of nature areas or ecology parks in London are desirable, but if these do not appear on OS maps the nearest locality should always be given. Where a grid reference can not be obtained, a precise address as it appears in one of the various published books of street maps of London should be used. Site lists will ideally be presented in log book order to facilitate data entry. Overnight trap dates should be given according to the example 23/24 August or 23 August, and not as 24 August. Approximate counts and sexes are desirable for immigrants. Confidentiality of selected records may be requested. Records are required from all time, not just the present period.
Records should be addressed to C. W. Plant, 14 West Road, Bishop’s Stortford, Hertfordshire CM23 3QP, who will happily provide more detailed information. All communications will be acknowledged and records fromoutside Middlesex contained in mixed lists will always be forwarded to appropriate recorders unless directions are given to the contrary.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 43
THE DISTRIBUTION AND HABITS OF THE BEE HYLAEUS PECTORALIS FORSTER, 1871, (HYMENOPTERA: APIDAE) IN BRITAIN
GEORGE R. ELSE
Department of Entomology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 SBD.
R. C. L. Perkins (1900) described Prosopis palustris as a species new to science, which had been collected at Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire, and in similar localities in Suffolk. Both this name and Prosopis kriechbaumeri Forster, 1871, are now regarded as junior synonyms of Hylaeus pectoralis Forster, 1871. For many years following its discovery in Britain, this small bee was found only in a number of wetland sites in East Anglia (particularly at Wicken Fen). There is also an unconfirmed record from Matley, New Forest, Hampshire, in August 1901 (Morley, 1903).
On 26.vii.1972 I collected both sexes of a Hy/aeus in fenland adjacent to the River Alver at Browndown, near Lee-on-Solent, Hampshire, which I assumed were large individuals of H. communis Nylander. However, it soon became apparent that these were H. pectoralis. Further visits to the site in 1972, and in later years, demonstrated that it was well established in this locality. In subsequent years I also reared numerous specimens of the bee from nests, built in the galls of the chloropid fly Lipara lucens Meigen, collected in the same area. From 1973 onwards I searched for the species in other, similar wetland localities in the county and found a further 17 sites. Most of these localities are on the coast, but some are also inland (including Matley, corroborating Morley’s old record). Searches by me in suitable localities in other counties produced records from Dorset, Essex, the Isle of Wight, Suffolk, and West Sussex. Further recent records by others are from Cambridgeshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Surrey and West Sussex. In addition, there are pre-1970 records from Northamptonshire, Suffolk and north Norfolk. All records (for most of which there are voucher specimens in The Natural History Museum, London) are shown on the distribution map (Fig. 1).
H. pectoralis is a good example of an ‘‘Anglo-Dutch”’ or ‘‘Doggerland’’ species. Before Britain became separated from mainland Europe (c. 6000 years ago) it was joined to the Continent by a largely swampy land bridge, through which the Rhine flowed northwards. Some species of insects which occurred on the banks of the river are, in Britain, still mainly confined to south-east England. These ‘‘Doggerland’’ species also include the bee Colletes halophilus (Verhoeff) and the sphecid wasp Mimumesa spooneri (Richards) [sometimes cited as Psen spooneri] (Richards, 1964).
HABITAT, NESTING HABITS AND PARASITOIDS
H. pectoralis is associated with stands of the common reed, Phragmites australis (Cav.). Perkins (1900) described the bee as ‘‘burrowing in the dry stems of reeds’’. More recently J. P. Field (pers. comm.) reared a specimen from a bundle of cut, dead Phragmites stems suspended as ‘‘trap nests’ from a pole within a reed bed. However, the majority of nests have been found in the vacated, spindle-shaped galls of Lipara lucens. These galls are located on the apices of the flower stems of the Phragmites, their development inhibiting flowering (Fig. 2). In a gall containing a larva of L. /ucens the ensheathing leaves are tightly pressed together (forming a sharp apical point) and are green in colour. L. /ucens overwinters within a puparium in the cavity which it created as a result of its larval feeding activity within the basal half of the gall (Fig. 3). By this time the gall has generally assumed a brown coloration, following the death of the leaf sheaths. The adult fly emerges in the early summer
44 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
© Before 1970
@ 1970 Onwards
Fig. 1. British distribution of H. pectoralis.
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 45
Fig. 2. Old gall of Lipara lucens Meig. on Phragmites australis (Cav.) stem. Browndown, Hampshire (G. R. Else).
and it is only then that the gall becomes available for use as a nest site by the bee. Old galls, which may contain nests of this bee, can further be recognized by their frayed tips.
The female H. pectoralis apparently always removes the fly’s empty puparium from the gall chamber, as this has never been found in one containing a nest (those without such a nest contain the eclosed puparium, unless the L. /ucens larva was parasitized or eaten by a bird). The female bee builds its nest within the gall chamber, the cells sometimes extending into the apical leaf sheathing. The nest entrance is between the leaves which form the apex of the gall, and is generally not clearly visible. The galls of L. lucens vary considerably in size, and this dictates the number of cells each can contain, the usual range being from two to eight, as the cells are constructed as a linear series (Fig. 4). Those cells destined to contain female progeny are generally the first to be built (i.e. the cells furthest from the nest entrance), whereas males are found in those built nearest the nest entrance. In common with those of other British Hy/aeus, cell linings are formed from a secretion of the female’s salivary glands, the viscous liquid being spread on to the inner walls of the gall with the bee’s short, bilobed glossa;
46 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Fig. 3. Opened gall chamber of L. /ucens gall with puparium of this species in situ (G. Dickson).
Fig. 4. Occupied cells of Hy/laeus pectoralis Forster in gall of L. lucens. (G. Dickson).
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 47
the cell partitions are constructed in similar fashion. On drying, the secretion produces a thin, transparent, cellophane-like membrane which is impermeable to water (it also ensures the cells retain the semi-liquid pollen/nectar provision). British pollen sources are not known, but the species is probably polylectic (as in Germany (Westrich, 1989)). In Britain individual bees have been observed visiting bramble (Rubus fruticosus L., sensu lato), angelica (Angelica species), hogweed (Heracleum sphondylium L.), wild carrot (Daucus carota L.), hawkbit (Leontodon species) and field milk-thistle (Sonchus arvensis L.) flowers.
A provisioned nest is sealed with a substantial plug of compacted, finely shredded reed leaf fragments which often extends up into the leaf sheath of the gall. This plug immediately betrays the presence of a nest when a gall is opened by carefully tearing away the outer leaf sheathing. H. pectoralis overwinters as a prepupa within its cell; the larva does not spin a cocoon. A photograph of an opened nest also appears in Imms (1971).
I have reared both the evanioid wasps Gasteruption assectator (L.) and G. jaculator (L.) from nests of this bee. No other parasitoids seem to have been recorded.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am most grateful to M. Edwards and S. Falk for their records of this species, and to S. P. M. Roberts for preparing the distribution map of Hylaeus pectoralis (drawn on DMAP). G. Dickson kindly permitted the use of his photographs (Figs 3 and 4) to illustrate this paper.
REFERENCES
Imms, A. D. 1971. Insect natural history. Collins New Naturalist, London.
Perkins, R. C. L. 1900. Prosopis palustris, sp., nov., an addition to the British Hymenoptera. Entomologist’s Mon. Mag. 36: 49-50.
Morley, C. 1903. Insects, especially parasitic Hymenoptera, noticed in the New Forest in August, 1901. Entomologist’s Mon. Mag. 39: 25-29.
Richards, O. W. 1964. The entomological fauna of southern England with special reference to the country around London. Trans. Soc. Br. Ent. 16: 1-48.
Westrich, P. 1989. Die Wildbienen Baden-Wiirttembergs. Eugen Ulmer GmbH & Co, Stuttgart.
BOOK REVIEWS
The butterflies’ fly-past by Clive Simson. Leeds, Peregrine Books, 27 Hunger Hills Avenue, Horsforth, Leeds LS18 SJS, 1994, xviii + 127 pages, £19 (post free), hardback. —‘This book is in no way a textbook’. So begins, and ends, the author’s first sentence, and for this much we should be forever thankful. Were it otherwise, what gems from many an entomological encounter, what field-notes from past years and what other pleasures we should have missed. These, together with carefully detailed observations from the wider field of natural history, liberally populate this unusual book—and all is achieved without the aid of a single dot-distribution map.
But I have jumped the gun, for the stage is set by a foreword written in forthright style by Wilson Stephens, Editor of The Field from 1951 to 1977. Here, one or two sacred cows are, of necessity, put to slaughter, but in a well reasoned, open and totally honest fashion, a manner which is matched by each page of the ensuing fly-past.
The author admits to having chosen unusual chapter headings. What, I wonder, will the reader make of ‘Big Fritz and little Fritz’, ‘Purple is for Caesar’, ‘A brown study’, ‘Putting on the Ritz’, ‘Birth of the blues’, ‘Streaking’, ‘Buddleia bugs’, ‘All white’ and ‘Skip for joy’?. All these, in the author’s inimitable style, relate to groupings of the
48 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
fifty-five species of our native butterflies, a ‘native’ being interpreted as one which must regularly be present in some form throughout the year. In writing of these fifty-five species, many accurate observations are made of the various life stages and inevitably details are given of successful captures with the net. What is so refreshing is to find these captures chronicled in such an honest way—no pussy-footing here—specimens have not just been recorded, they have actually been taken. I have no intention of opening a contentious can of worms generously sprinkled with hot potatoes, for many people ‘have a thing’ about butterflies. Far better, let the author’s wise words speak for themselves: ‘Of course, moderation is the key word. I do not believe that butterfly collecting in moderation, can seriously affect butterfly populations. There is no need for a long series of a species, all looking the same, so prevalent in Edwardian times. What is essential is the conservation of habitat and the careful control of chemicals.’ There is more, but to know how much more you should read the book.
On a point of detail we read ‘I have released every female iris I have bred’. How fortunate this was for the brood of binocular-carrying enthusiasts, assembled under the watchful eye of the ever present warden, in that wood near Oxford. In the following few seconds they learned more from a man who knows his craft than from many an hour spent in scanning the oak tops. Books written in this style have been absent for far too long. In the 30s I treasured J. H. Bell’s Days with a butterfly net, then came the first of the P. B. M. Allan classics to be followed later by his others, and now, Clive Simson offers us a new one to savour.
Butterfly illustrations have not been lacking in recent years. Some are fine, clinically executed examples of set specimens, others are best termed fanciful and leave much to be desired. The eight delightful colour plates by Mandy Shepherd which grace this book are truly alive and match the spirit of the words upon the pages. This spirit (‘butterflies are beautiful; they are fun’) pervades the book and has full rein when novel methods are required to assist the lepidopterist in reaching new ground. Over the years I too have tried a few innovations, yet surely only Clive Simson could have thought of seeking the aid of an ex-RAF inflatable dinghy!
Happy paddling to you Sir, albeit these days with the paddle of memory. Your invitation to review this delightful book has been accepted with great pleasure.
BRIAN R. BAKER
Colour guide to hoverfly larvae (Diptera: Syrphidae), by G. E. Rotheray, Dipterists’ Digest number 9, Derek Whiteley, Sheffield, 1994, 156 pages (including 16 colour plates), £11.95, paperback.—After an introduction discussing how to recognize hoverfly larvae and how to find them, short illustrated keys lead variously to species or genus. Generic accounts give a brief description of overall appearance, offer some confirming characters and give notes on the varying biologies of these curious and fascinating creatures. There is an extensive reference list. However, the main reason people will buy this book is for the colour plates which show the larvae of 76 species. Most of these are photographed in life, although a few are of preserved specimens. Opposite these are further explanatory notes and diagrammatic sketches. There are also a few colour photographs of habitats and larval damage. ~
I found the layout somewhat underdesigned and the headings are not as clear as they could have been. Since the generic accounts are sadly in alphabetic rather than taxonomic order the index to genera is redundant and an index to species would have been much more useful. On the whole though a neatly produced and useful book
and excellent value. R. A. JONES
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 49
THE ACULEATE WASPS AND BEES OF CROW WOOD, FINNINGLEY IN WATSONIAN YORKSHIRE, WITH THE INTRODUCTION OF A NEW NATIONAL QUALITY SCORING SYSTEM
MICHAEL E. ARCHER University College of Ripon & York St John, York YO3 7EX AND JOHN T. BURN
I Sycamore Avenue, Armthorpe, Doncaster, South Yorkshire DN3 3HO.
Crow Wood has been found to be an excellent locality for aculeate wasps and bees, having 135 recorded species, nine species of national importance, and 15 species of regional significance.
Crow Wood, an area of about 152 ha, is situated immediately to the south of Finningley (VC63, SK6697). The region has sandy acid soils of remnant heathland. At present, Crow Wood consists of old sand and gravel pits gradually being filled with waste materials, coniferous afforestation, regenerating woodland with flowery areas, open sandy surfaces, some of which are used as motor-cycle and go-kart tracks, grassland, and arable farming. The dry open areas with ditches and mounds of sand and gravel provide nesting areas for many aculeate wasps and bees.
About 50 visits have been made to Crow Wood, mainly during May, June, July, and August, with a few during March, April, and September. Most visits were made by J.T. Burn (1971-1991: in excess of 36 visits to a sample area of about 18 ha) and M.E. Archer (1986-1989: 10 visits to a sample area of about 55 ha). Collecting was by visual observation, but J.T. Burn also collected by sweeping low mixed vegetation. A smaller number of visits were made by J.H. Flint (1965) and P. Skidmore (1973).
Biological names are according to Kloet & Hincks (1978), except for the Dryinidae which are according to Olmi (1984, 1989).
This paper was written by M. E. Archer (M.E.A.). The contributions of J.T. Burn were the many records from his large number of visits, and all information relating to the Bethylidae and Dryinidae.
RESULTS—SPECIES PRESENT AT CROW Woop
A full list of recorded species is given in the Appendix. The taxonomic distribution is given in Table 1, at the family level. The 135 species represent about 46% of the aculeate wasp and bee species (including the bethylids and dryinids) of Watsonian Yorkshire. In addition the following ant species (Formicidae) have been recorded: Myrmica ruginodis Nylander, Formica fusca L., Lasius niger (L.).
The accumulated records from any locality can be analysed to understand the ecological relationships of the recorded species and the conservation value of the locality in a regional or national context. This paper assesses ecological relationships with the concepts of cleptoparasitic load and aerial nester frequency and conservation value with the aid of regional and national quality scores and species quality scores.
QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF SOLITARY SPECIES
Two species are nationally rare or ‘red data book species’ (Falk, 1991). Both of these, Psen bicolor (RDB2) and Nomada fulvicornis (RDB3), reach the northern boundary of their British distribution in Watsonian Yorkshire.
50 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
Table 1. The number of species of aculeate wasps and bees recorded from Crow Wood.
Family No. species Solitary wasps Dryinidae 14 Bethylidae 2 Chrysididae fi Mutillidae 1 Pompilidae 12 Eumenidae 4 Sphecidae 36 Total solitary wasps 716 Solitary bees Colletidae 3 Andrenidae 17 Halictidae 13 Megachilidae 2 Anthophoridae 10 Total solitary bees 45 Total solitary wasps & bees 121 Social wasps and bees Vespidae 5 Apidae 9 Total social wasps & bees 14
Seven species are nationally scarce or notable species (Falk, 1991). Andrena tibialis, which is a category A scarce species, reaches the northern boundary of its British distribution in Watsonian Yorkshire. The other six species, which are category B species, are either at the northern boundary of their distribution (Cleptes semiauratus, Priocnemis schioedtei, Nysson trimaculatus, Andrena humilis, Nomada flavopicta), or are more widespread in Britain (Crossocerus palmipes).
Fifteen species are rare in the context of Watsonian Yorkshire (Archer, 1993a); these are indicated in the Appendix.
There are 27 species of solitary wasps and bees, which although not rare in Watsonian Yorkshire, have a local distribution being more or less restricted to sandy habitats (Archer, 1994a). Seventeen of these local species (indicated in the Appendix) are found at Crow Wood.
The 105 species of solitary wasps and bees can be considered to have a common, frequent, occasional or rare status in Watsonian Yorkshire (Archer, 1993a) (Table 2). The dryinid and bethylid species cannot be given a status as insufficient information
Table 2. The regional coding of the 105 species of solitary wasps and bees recorded from Crow Wood (Dryinids and Bethylids excluded).
Status No. species Common 39 Frequent 31 Occasional 20
Rare 15
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 51
exists on their distributions. By giving each species a value depending on the above statuses, including a higher value for the nationally scarce and rare species, a regional quality score of 416 can be calculated by the addition of the status scores (Table 3). Dividing this quality score by the 105 species gives a regional species quality score of 4.
Table 3. The regional status scheme of the 105 species of solitary wasps and bees recorded at Crow Wood.
Status Status value No. species Status score (A) (B) (A x B)
Common 1 38 38 Frequent 2 31 62 Occasional 4 19 76 Rare 8 8 64 Nationally scarce 16 7 112 Nationally rare 32 2 64
105 416
Summation of status value times number of species gives a final regional quality score of 416. Dividing this by the number of species (105) gives a regional species quality score of 3.96, approximately 4.
Ball (1992) proposed a methodology for scoring the value of invertebrates at sites in a national context. Archer (in press) has adopted this methodology for use in Watsonian Yorkshire. Using the Ball methodology on the 105 Crow Wood species, a national quality score of 274 and a national species quality score (274 + 105) of 2.6 can be calculated (Table 4).
Table 4. The Ball (1992) national status evaluation of the 105 species of solitary wasps and bees recorded at Crow Wood.
Status Status value No. species Status score (A) (B) (A x B)
Common 1 62 62 Local 2 26 52 Regional notable 4 8 Sy Scarce B 8 6 48 Scarce A 16 1 16 Rare 32 2 64
105 274
Two objections can be raised against the Ball methodology. First, many regions of England and Wales lack a list of regionally notable species making it sometimes impossible to apply Ball’s methodology. Secondly, a national scheme should logically give a species status based upon that species’ importance in a national and larger geographical setting but not in a smaller or regional distribution.
To overcome the above two objections M.E.A. suggests the following scheme in which the statuses of ‘common’, ‘local’ and ‘regionally notable’ of Ball are replaced by: ‘universal’, ‘widespread’ and ‘restricted’. At present there is no objective way of assigning a ‘universal’, ‘widespread’ or ‘restricted’ status to the species of the British aculeate Hymenoptera. From personal experience M.E.A. has therefore assigned
52 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995
British aculeate Hymenoptera one of these three statuses based upon abundance and distribution within England and Wales. Ireland, the Channel Islands and Scotland have not been included: little information is available on Irish distributions of aculeate Hymenoptera; fauna of the Channel Islands relates more to France than the British Isles; and Scotland’s cooler climate greatly reduces diversity. A ‘universal species’ would therefore refer to a common species found throughout England and Wales, usually with some extension into Scotland. A ‘widespread species’ would be one found in about three-quarters of England and Wales, usually either with a distribution in Wales, southern and midland England or in northern and western England and Wales. A ‘widespread species’ would also be found throughout England and Wales but either with a local distribution or a less-than-common abundance. A ‘restricted species’ would be one mainly found in about one-half of England and Wales, and usually confined to southern England and East Anglia. The status of a species may not be fixed and can change as its range or abundance changes. As such the statuses of species need to be kept under constant review. Using this new methodology for the 105 Crow Wood species a national quality score of 266 and a national species quality score (266 + 105) of 2.5 can be calculated (Table 5).
Table 5. The Archer national status scheme of the 105 species of solitary wasps and bees recorded at Crow Wood.
Status Status value No. species Status score (A) (B) (A XB)
Universal 1 56 56 Widespread 2 39 78 Restricted 4 1 4 Scarce B 8 6 48 Scarce A 16 1 16 Rare 32 2 64
105 266
CLEPTOPARASITIC LOAD
The cleptoparasitic load (CL) is the percentage of aculeate species that are cleptoparasites (or parasitoids) on other host aculeates (Table 6). A more-or-less complete list of species in a locality should be made before the CL is calculated to avoid possible bias of either host or cleptoparasitic species. Cleptes semiauratus, dryinids and bethylids are not considered as they are parasitoids on non-aculeate hosts. C. semiauratus is a parasitoid on the cocoons of sawflies, e.g. Nematus ribesii (Scop.). The two bethylid species are parasitoids on lepidopterous larvae. B. cephalotes has been recorded using hollowed-out plant stems to shelter its larvae while feeding on its paralysed host. Dryinids are predators and parasitoids of Homoptera Auchenorrhyncha.
Table 6. The relative frequency of the cleptoparasitic species among the solitary wasps and bees from Crow Wood.
No. No. Cleptoparasitic hosts cleptoparasites load (H) (C) CL = 100 x C/((H + C) Solitary wasps 49 10 16.9
Solitary bees 32 13 28.9
BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 8: 1995 53
The CL for the species of solitary bees is higher than the CL for the species of solitary wasps.
AERIAL NESTER FREQUENCY
The aerial nester frequency (AF) is the percentage of host aculeate species that have aerial nest sites. Again a more-or-less complete list of species in a locality should be made before the AF is calculated to avoid possible bias of either aerial or subterranean nesters. Aerial nests are often in old beetle burrows in dead wood, or the central cavities of stems such as those of bramble. Subterranean nesters nest in the soil, usually in burrows dug by themselves, but sometimes in crevices or pre-formed burrows. The AF for the species of solitary wasps is higher than the AF for the species of solitary bees (Table 7).
Table 7. The nesting habits of the host solitary wasp and bee species from Crow Wood.