Top Ten of 2008

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

Best tiger beetle

Cicindela formosa generosa

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

Best jewel beetle

Aegelia petelii

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

Best longhorned beetle

Tetraopes femoratus

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

Best non-beetle insect

Proctacanthus milbertii

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

Best non-insect arthropod

Argiope aurantia

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

Best non-arthropod animal

Prairie rattlesnake (Crotolus viridis)

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

Best wildflower

Victoria Glades

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

Best tree

Calocedrus decurrens

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

Best rockscape

Pipestone National Monument, Old Stone Face

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

Best landscape

Emerald Isle, Lake Tahoe

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

Best miscellaneous

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

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

Buppies in the bush(veld)

In writing an article for the most recent issue of SCARABS, I found myself reliving some long-dormant memories of my trip to South Africa. It was nine years ago right about this time of year when I made what was to become the collecting trip of a lifetime. What a completely different November/December experience compared to the gray skies and bare trees I see outside my window today. Writing that article was a lot of fun – going back through my slides (yep, slides – no digital for me then), reviewing material in my collection, and trying my best to recall some long forgotten details. Using a long-handled tropics net to collect Evides spp. from upper branch terminals of Lannea discolor at Geelhoutbos FarmOf course, scarabs were not my reason for going to Africa – buprestids were! Although I did manage to sneak a few buprestid photos into the SCARABS article, for the most part I was a good boy and kept my focus on the that newsletter’s intended subject. It wasn’t hard, given the gorgeous diversity of “dungers” (dung beetles) and flower chafers that I encountered in that spectacular country. Here, however, I offer a sampling of the Buprestidae I encountered during that trip.

Much of trip was spent in the bushveld (pronounced “bushfelt”) tropical savanna – a mix of grassland and semi-deciduous forest – below the rugged and rocky Waterberg Mountains, their rugged exposures of 2.7 billion year old sandstone and quartzite providing a spectacular backdrop. I’ve already posted a photo of Evides pubiventris, the largest and most spectacular buprestid seen there. A handsome, iridescent green that must be seen to be believed, these elusive beetles spend their days high off the ground on the upper branch terminals of their host trees, Lannea discolor. Success in collecting these beetles comes only to those willing to give it considerable effort. In this photo, I use a long-handled tropics net and tap the rim of the net on the undersides of the branch terminals. The adults are alert and quick to fly but often enough drop from the foliage into the net before taking flight. Many hours were spent during the several days we were at this spot with my neck craned upwards, but my efforts were richly rewarded with several specimens of E. pubiventris and the closely related E. interstitialis.

Agelia petalii - South Africa, Limpopo Province, vic. Waterberg Mountains, Geelhoutbos Farm, 30.xi.1999, on Grewia monticolaAnother of the more spectacular buprestids seen on the trip was Agelia petelii, a not too distant relative of Evides (both are in the subfamily Chrysochroinae, containing the bulk of the “classic” jewel beetles). Several individuals of this species were seen here in the Waterberg and also at Borakalalo National Park in North West Province. Their bold markings would seem to make them conspicuous targets for predation by birds but actually serve as protection by mimicking the warning coloration of Mylabris oculata, a common blister beetle in southern Africa that occasionally reaches pest status on leguminous crops and that is – like all blister beetles – largely protected from predation by the cantharidins in its hemolypmph. Many of these blister beetles were seen during the trip, and I had to pay close attention to each of them in order to secure my half dozen or so specimens of the much less common A. petelii.

Meliboeus punctatus - South Africa, Limpopo Province, 8.5 km S of Piesmoor River, 4.xii.1999, on unidentified Grewia-like shrubThis gorgeous little beetle, seen south of the Waterberg near the Piesmoor River, belongs to the enormously diverse but poorly known tribe Coraebini. This tribe – a cousin to the even more diverse genus Agrilus (see this post) – is represented by only a few species in North America but is richly represented in sub-Saharan Africa and Madagascar. Chuck Bellamy – my friend, colleague, and host during this trip – probably knows more about coraebines than anybody alive and has identified this as Meliboeus punctatus. The plant on which the beetles were found remains a mystery – it looks similar to plants in the rhamnaceous genus Grewia on which we saw so many other buprestid species but is clearly not a member of that genus. It is one of the few buprestids I collected on the trip for which I did not obtain host information (I hate that!).

Acmaeodera (Paracmaeodera) viridaenea swierstrae - South Africa, North West Province, Borakalalo National Park, along Moratele River, 24.xi.1999, on Grewia flava blossomThe genus Acmaeodera is another of the hugely diverse groups in the family, having radiated in all the biogeographic realms except Australian. This group is especially well represented in North America, with some 150 species occurring in our desert southwest and many more occurring down into Mexico. The vast majority of these are variously patterned with yellow and/or red markings on a black background. In southern Africa the genus is also diverse but shows greater diversity of form and has, accordingly, been divided into a number of well-defined subgenera. Like our North American species, adults of many African species are frequently found on flowers, where they feed on pollen and petals. I encountered at least a dozen Acmaeodera spp. on the trip, with one of the more striking species being A. (Paracmaeodera) viridaenea. Acmaeodera (Rugacmaeodera) ruficaudis - South Africa, South Africa, Limpopo Province, vic. Waterberg Mountains, Geelhoutbos Farm, 1.xii.1999, on Grewia flava blossomLike other species in this subgenus, adults are brilliantly colored and sexually dichroic, with the individual pictured here (above, left) being a female and the males being greenish brown with coppery sides. Other species are quite somber colored, such as A. ruficaudis in the subgenus A. (Rugacmaeodera) (right). Both of these individuals were found on flowers of Grewia flava.

Discoderoides immunitus - South Africa, South Africa, Limpopo Province, vic. Waterberg Mountains, Geelhoutbos Farm, 1.xii.1999, on Grewia flavaNot all “jewel beetles” do their name justice. This small species – Discoderoides immunitus (another member of the tribe Coraebini) – appears to resemble a piece of caterpillar frass. Several individuals were seen, all sitting on the leaves of Grewia flava like this individual rather than visiting the flowers like Acmaeodera. This beetle reinforced an important lesson I have learned repeatedly about field identification – upon my return to St. Louis, when I had an opportunity to examine these individuals more closely under the microscope, I found one specimen mixed in the batch that was, in fact, not this species, but a species in the closely related genus Discoderes. Moreover, that individual appears to represent an as yet undescribed species. Pity that I found only the single individual, since describing species from such uniques is not very desireable. Regardless, I’m glad I didn’t assume this individual was yet another D. immunitis in the field and pass it by – keeping the species in the still too-swollen ranks of the unknown and unseen.

One of the most exquisite species that I collected was Anadora cupriventris – a very large (by coraebine standards), heavily sculptured species densely covered with curled swaths of gold and brown pubescence. I regret not having the opportunity to photograph the single individual that I found. Another impressive species that I was not able to photograph was Agrilus (Personatus) sexguttatus, surely close to, if not the largest species in the genus and boldly patterned with black and rust red spots on olive green. One last species for which I have no images but is worthy of mention is an undetermined species of the genus Pseudagrilus. Looking like a chunky, brilliant green Agrilus with saltorial (jumping) metafemora, adults would “pop” off the Solanum plants on which they were found as soon as I looked at them. I eventually decided that “Flipagrilus” would have been a more appropriate name for the genus. All told, I collected some 66 species of Buprestidae, including several genera not previously represented in my collection (e.g., Brachmaeodera, Brachelytrium – a few becoming paratypes of new species then being described by Chuck Bellamy and Svata Bílý, Chalcogenia, Galbella, and many of the other above mentioned species). I should mention the assistance of Chuck and Svata for helping me with some of the identifications, as well as Gianfranco Curletti who identified all of the material in the difficult genus Agrilus. I sincerely hope that I have another chance to visit this incredible land of beauty and contrast!

“Dungers and Chafers – a Trip to South Africa”

Those of you who enjoy field trip accounts should check out the December 2008 issue of SCARABS. The lead article – authored by your’s truly – is a scarabcentric travelogue of an insect collecting trip I took to South Africa several years ago. Scarabs?!, you say? Well, even though I focus on bups, ‘bycids, and tigers (some would argue that actually demonstrates lack of focus), I never pass on the opportunity to collect “cool” insects of all types when traveling somewhere as “exotic” as Africa – and scarabs are definitely cool! Still, I did manage to sneak past the editors a few words and pictures about buprestids, one of the more impressive of which I offer here as further enticement. You can also read about heart attacks, flying Tonka trucks, and evil minions.

Previous issues of this fine newsletter can be found here (Coleopterists Society website under “Resources”) and here (University of Nebraska State Museum website under “Scarab Beetle Research”). For those really interested in scarab newsletter history, archives of a previous incarnation – SCARABAEUS – can be found here and here at the same websites.

Photos: (above) me standing next to a termite mound near the Waterberg, Northern Province (photo by Chuck Bellamy); (left) Evides pubiventris (family Buprestidae, tribe Evidiini) suns itself on high terminal foliage of Lannea discolor (family Anacardiaceae), Waterberg, Northern Province.

Two new species of Agrilus from Mexico

ResearchBlogging.orgThe enormous, cosmopolitan genus Agrilus (family Buprestidae – commonly called jewel beetles or metallic woodboring beetles) contains nearly 4,000 described species (Bellamy 2008). With many more still awaiting description, it is perhaps the largest genus in the entire animal kingdom (Bellamy 2003). Agrilus species are primarily twig and branch borers, utilizing recently dead wood for larval development – although there are notable exceptions, e.g. Agrilus anxius (bronze birch borer), A. bilineatus (twolined chestnut borer), and A. planipennis (emerald ash borer), which attack the trunks of living trees and, thus, are of significant economic importance in forest and ornamental landscapes. Host specificity among Agrilus species ranges from highly monophagous – associated exclusively with a single plant species – to rather oliphagous – utilizing several, usually related, plant genera. Adults of Agrilus species are most often found on the foliage of their larval hosts and do not generally visit flowers, as is common in some other genera (e.g., Acmaeodera and Anthaxia). Interestingly, despite the diversity and worldwide distribution of the genus, no species of Agrilus are known to be associated with coniferous plants – a fact that has limited their expansion into the vast northern boreal forests.

Texas, Bexar Co., San Antonio, nr. Fort Sam Houston, em. 25.iv-14.v.1997 ex Phoradendron tomentosum coll. ii.1997, D. Heffern & D. W. SundbergAs can be imagined by its enormity, a comprehensive understanding of the genus will remain a distant goal for many years. Progress will come incrementally, as formal descriptions of new species gradually improve our knowledge of the fauna that exists in each of the world’s main biogeographic provinces. In a recent issue of the online journal Zootaxa, Dr. Henry Hespenheide (UCLA) describes two new species of Agrilus from Mexico. These two species are interesting because of their association with ‘mistletoe’ plants in the genus Phoradendron (family Viscaceae1), obligate hemiparasites that attach to branches and stems of various woody trees and shrubs in tropical and warm temperate regions of the New World. Plants in this genus are known to support a variety of host-restricted insect herbivores, principally in the orders Hemiptera, Coleoptera and Lepidoptera. A single buprestid species has been associated with Phoradendron to this point – Agrilus turnbowi, recently described from specimens reared from dead stems of Phoradendron tomentosum attached to mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) in southern Texas (Nelson 1990) and pictured here from a specimen in my collection that was reared from dead mistletoe collected at the type locality. At the time of its description, this species was not relatable to any of the other known species in the genus.

1 The Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (2003) includes the Viscaceae in a broader circumscription of the family Santalaceae. However, recent molecular studies suggest the Santalaceae are polyphyletic, with strong support for Viscaceae as a distinct, monophyletic clade (Der & Nickrent 2008).

The two new Mexican species – A. andersoni from Guerrero and Puebla (Figs. 1-3), and A. howdenorum from Oaxaca (Figs. 4-6) – are apparently related to A. turnbowi, which they resemble by their purplish-red coloration and complex pattern of golden setae on the elytra. They are also superficially very similar to each other but differ most notably in size and the overall color and pattern of setae on the elytra.

Figures 1–3. Agrilus andersoni Hespenheide: 1. dorsal habitus; 2. lateral habitus (scale bar indicates 2.0 mm); 3. genitalia of male (scale bar indicates 0.5 mm) (from Hespenheide 2008).

Figures 4–6. Agrilus howdenorum Hespenheide: 4. dorsal habitus; 5. lateral habitus (scale bar indicates 2.0 mm); 6. genitalia of male (scale bar indicates 0.5 mm) (from Hespenheide 2008).

Hespenheide speculates that the color and pattern of the golden setae on the elytra may serve to make the beetles less conspicuous by disruptive coloration, noting the similar coloration of the setae to the leaves of Phoradendron as seen in the photograph of Agrilus howdenorum on its host plant (Fig. 7). This form of crypsis may also be enhanced by the purplish-red ground coloration of the adult, which resembles that of the small, darkened blemishes often observed on the foliage of these plants.

Figure 7. Agrilus howdenorum adult on mistletoe host plant near Diaz Ordaz, Oaxaca, México. The golden setae on the elytra are similar in color to the leaves of the mistletoe and may function as a disruptive color pattern. Photograph by C.L. Bellamy (from Hespenheide 2008).

REFERENCES

Angiosperm Phylogeny Group. 2003. An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG II. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 141: 399-436.

Bellamy, C. L. 2003. The stunning world of jewel beetles. Wings, Essays on Invertebrate Conservation, 26(2): 13-17.

Bellamy, C. L. 2008. A World Catalogue and Bibliography of the Jewel Beetles (Coleoptera: Buprestoidea), Volume 4: Agrilinae: Agrilina through Trachyini. Pensoft Series Faunistica No. 79, 722 pp.

Der, J. P. & D. L. Nickrent. 2008. A Molecular Phylogeny of Santalaceae (Santalales). Systematic Botany, 33(1):107-116.

Hespenheide, H. A. (2008). New Agrilus Curtis species from mistletoe in México (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) Zootaxa, 1879, 52-56

Nelson, G. H. 1990. A new species of Agrilus reared from mistletoe in Texas (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). The Coleopterists Bulletin, 44(3):374-376.

A new species of Xenorhipus from Baja California

ResearchBlogging.orgA few months ago I discussed Trichinorhipis knulli of the tribe Xenorhipidini (family Buprestidae). Members of this tribe exhibit highly sexually dimorphic antennae, with the distal segments of the male antennae highly modified into a very extended flabellate or lamellate condition. The surfaces of the flabellae/lamellae are covered with numerous, presumably olfactory sensillae that are lacking on female antennae (which retain the unmodified serrate condition), strongly suggesting a function involving detection of female sex pheromones. Although chemosensory structures are present on the antennae of nearly all buprestids, the extreme modification exhibited by the males of species in this tribe is not a common occurrence. Nevertheless, similar modifications have evolved independently in a few other genera within the family, including Knowltonia (four species in western North America), Mendizabalia and Australorhipis (monotypic genera in South America and Australia, respectively), and two species of the enormous Australian genus Castiarina. Indeed, males of Knowltonia and the two Castiarina species possess what might be termed ‘bipectinate’ or ‘biflabellate’ antennae due to dual projections from the terminal antennomeres (see Bellamy & Nylander 2007 for a more complete discussion of male antennal modifications in Buprestidae). The tribe Xenorhipidini is the most diverse group in which these modifications have arisen, comprised of the monotypic Trichinorhipis from California and the closely related Hesperorhipis (four species in Arizona and California) and Xenorhipis (until now, 14 species from North and South America and the West Indies).

Xenorhipis bajacalifornica Westcott, 2008 – holotype ♂ (1) & allotype ♀ (2).
Photos by Steve Valley (Oregon Department of Agriculture).

In a recent issue of the online journal Zootaxa, Rick Westcott (Oregon Department of Agriculture) describes a new species of Xenorhipis from the Cape Region of Baja California Sur, Mexico. Although assigned to the genus Xenorhipis, the new species – X. bajacalifornica – seems to bridge the gap between the genera Xenorhipis and Hesperorhipis. As currently recognized, Xenorhipis is distinguished from Hesperorhipis by the shape of the posterior coxal plates, which are scarcely narrowed laterally in the former genus, while in the latter genus they are triangular and with the hind margin strongly oblique. In X. bajacalifornica the posterior coxal plates are somewhat triangular but not as acute laterally as in some species of Hesperorhipis. Xenorhipis bajacalifornica also differs from other described Xenorhipis in its strongly abbreviated elytra, which in males barely reach the second ventrite – similar to species of Hesperorhipis. Other described Xenorhipis exhibit less abbreviated elytra, which cover at least the first three ventrites and in some species almost the entire abdomen. Despite these similarities to Hesperorhipis, a consistent distinguishing character between the two genera was found in the male antenna – in Xenorhipis the flabellar processes begin with the second antennomere, while in Hesperorhipis they begin with the third. It was on this basis that the new species was assigned to the genus Xenorhipis. (The genus Trichinorhipis differs from both Xenorhipis and Hesperorhipis by its rounded rather than quadrate pronotum and its unabbreviated elytra that cover the entire abdomen and has, as a result, been placed in its own subtribe.)

Xenorhipis brendeli ♂Xenorhipis brendeli ♀The photos left show the male (L) and female (R) of Xenorhipis brendeli, the only species in the tribe occurring in eastern North America (west to Minnesota and eastern Texas). Adults of this species are not commonly encountered and have been collected on a variety of deciduous hardwoods but reared almost exclusively from species of hickory (genus Carya). These individuals were reared from dead branches collected in southeastern Missouri – the male from pecan (Carya illinoensis) and the female from shellbark hickory (Carya laciniosa). The male exhibits the scarcely abbreviated elytra that cover almost the entire abdomen (as discussed above). Stan Wellso reported large numbers of males attracted to caged live females in Texas, apparently responding to sex pheromones released by the females.

Xenorhipis osborni ♀Xenorhipis osborni ♂This is another species in the genus – Xenorhipis osborni – known from west Texas. Joseph Knull described the species in 1936 from specimens collected in the Davis Mountains on whitethorn acacia (Acacia constricta), but larval hosts remained unknown until I reared a series of these specimens from dead branches of black acacia (Acacia rigidula) collected above the Pecos River in Val Verde County. I’ve also reared a few specimens from dead branches of catclaw acacia (Acacia greggii) collected in Big Bend National Park, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it breeds in other species of acacia. Again, in this speices the elytra are only slightly abbreviated, though more so than in Xenorhipis brendeli above and also more so in the male (L) than in the female (R). The male of this species is one of the prettiest I’ve encountered in the tribe.

Hesperorhipis albofasciatus ♂Hesperorhipis albofasciatus ♀The genus Hesperorhipis is illustrated here by these photos of H. albofasciatus. These specimens were reared by Rick Westcott from dead branches of walnut (Juglans sp.) – its only known host – collected in Tulare County, California. The elytra in this species are much more abbreviated than in Xenorhipis brendeli and X. osborni but similar to those of X. bajacalifornica – again with the male (L) exhiting greater abbreviation than the female (R). The three remaining species of Hesperorhipis exhibit even more highly abbreviated elytra than H. albofasciatus.

Dr. Charles Bellamy (California Department of Food and Agriculture) is currently revising the tribe. It will be interesting to see how, ulimately, he treats Xenorhipis and Hesperorhipis, given the blended characters exhibited by some species.

REFERENCE

Westcott, R. L. (2008). A new species of Xenorhipis LeConte and of Mastogenius Solier from Mexico, with a discussion of Chrysobothris ichthyomorpha Thomson and its allies and notes on other Mexican and Central American Buprestidae (Coleoptera) Zootaxa, 1929, 47-68

Trichinorhipis knulli

Just a little diddy on one of the more interesting species I’ve encountered over the years while I finish up a longer piece on the Loess Hills of Missouri. The specimen shown here is a male Trichinorhipis knulli. This quirky little species belongs to the equally quirky little tribe Xenorhipidini (family Buprestidae). Members of this tribe are among the few groups of Buprestidae in which evolution of the male antenna has diverged dramatically from the typical condition (i.e., serrate). In the Xenorhipidini, this condition may be considered very extended flabellate or even lamellate. As I mentioned, only males exhibit this antennal modification – females possess typical serrate antennae. The functional significance of this almost certainly involves detection of female sex pheromones. The surfaces of the flabellae in these species are covered with numerous presumably olfactory sensillae that are lacking on female antennae, and males of a related species (Xenorhipis brendeli) have been observed attracted in large numbers to caged live females. This antennal condition appears to have arisen independently in three other groups of Buprestidae as well, but Xenorhipidini is the only non-monotypic tribe in which males of all member species possess the condition.

Trichinorhipis knulli is restricted to southern California and has been encountered most often in the vicinity of Mountain Springs in Imperial County (just north of the Mexican border), where it breeds in dead branches of jojoba, Simmondsia chinensis. Very few individuals have actually been observed in the field – most existing specimens have been reared from caged, infested branches (as is the case with this specimen, which emerged August 1994 from a dead branch I collected in October 1992 – patience prevails!). At only 3.6 mm in length, it is one of the smallest members of the family, but I think you’ll agree that it is just as impressive under the microscope as any of the larger members of the family. The genus is monotypic (although I hear rumor of an undescribed species from west Texas) and has been placed in its own subtribe (Trichinorphidina) within the Xenorhipidini due to unique characters that distinguish it from the other included genera (Hesperorhipis and Xenorhipis). These include its entire (not abbreviated) elytra and broadly rounded pronotum lacking lateral margins. In Hesperorhipis and Xenorhipis the elytra are abbreviated, and the pronotum is quadrate with distinct lateral margins. The organization of the antennal sensillae also differs between Trichinorhipis and these other genera.

The tribe Xenorhipidini is currently being revised by my colleague and friend, Dr. Charles Bellamy, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Sacramento.

Dicerca pugionata

In my recent post, Glades of Jefferson County, I discussed the occurrence on these glades of the strikingly beautiful Dicerca pugionata, a jewel beetle that breeds in the scraggly ninebark plants growing along the glades’ moist toeslopes. Adults of this species are normally encountered only during March/April and then again during September/October, so I wasn’t able to photograph them during this recent visit. I did, however, have on hand some slides that I took back in April 1987 – one of which has been scanned and added here as well as to the original post immediately above the photograph of the beetle’s host plant. The full-sized version of the scan is slightly lacking in clarity, nevertheless I think you’ll agree that its brilliant coppery color, distinctive dorsal sculpturing, and reddish elytral apices make this quite a lovely beetle!

Glades of Jefferson County

We stood a moment to contemplate the sublime and beautiful scene before us, which was such an assembly of rocks and water—of hill and valley—of verdant woods and naked peaks—of native fertility and barren magnificence… – Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, 1818-1819

In the Ozark Border south of St. Louis, a series of natural openings punctuate the dry, rocky forests of Jefferson County. Commonly called “glades” or “cedar glades,” these islands of prairie in a sea of forest are home to plants and animals more commonly associated with the Great Plains region further to the west. Extending in a narrow arc from central Jefferson County east and south into northern Ste. Genevieve County, these glades occur most commonly on south and southwest-facing slopes below forested ridges and are characterized by thin soils and exposed dolomite bedrock of Ordovician age. Glades are, in fact, a common natural feature throughout much of the Ozark Highlands, an extraordinary plateau where the great eastern deciduous forest begins to yield to the western grasslands. A much more extensive system of dolomite glades occurs in the White River Hills of southwest Missouri, where they often extend up steep slopes and over the tops of knobs to form what Schoolcraft called “naked peaks” and are now called “balds” (and spawning the “Baldknobbers” of Branson fame). Additional glade complexes occur throughout the Ozark Highlands on different rock substrates – igneous glades abound in the St. Francois Mountains, sandstone glades dot the Lamotte landscape in Ste. Genevieve County and the northern and western Ozarks, limestone glades can be found in the northern Ozarks near Danville and Lake of the Ozarks, and chert glades occur in extreme southwest Missouri. These different glade systems share a common feature – shallow soils where tree establishment is limited due to summer moisture stress. They differ vegetationally, however, due to differences in hydrology and soil chemistry as a result of their different substrates. Floristically, dolomite glades exhibit a high degree of diversity relative to other glade types.

The term “glade” is derived from the Old English “glad,” meaning a shining place – perhaps the early settlers found their open landscapes a welcome respite after emerging from the confining vastness of the eastern deciduous forest. Whatever the meaning, the glades of Jefferson County hold a special place in my heart, for I “grew up,” entomologically speaking, in those glades. As a young entomologist, fresh out of school, I spent many a day scrambling through the glades and surrounding woodlands. It was here where my interest in beetles, especially woodboring beetles, was born and later grew into a passion. For eight years I visited these glades often – attracted by the extraordinary diversity of insects living within the glades and congregating around its edges. My earliest buprestid and cerambycid papers contain numerous records from “Victoria Glades” and “Valley View Glades” – the two best-preserved examples of the glades that once occurred extensively throughout the area (more on this later). My visits to these glades ended in 1990 when I moved to California, and although I moved back to the St. Louis area in 1995, the focus of my beetle research has more often taken me to places outside of Missouri. It had, in fact, been some 10 years since my last visit to these glades until last week, when I was able to once again spend some time in them.

Ozark glades differ from the true cedar glades of the southeastern U.S. in that they are not a climax habitat – they depend upon periodic fires to prevent succession to forest. Some recent authors have suggested the term “xeric dolomite/limestone prairie” be used to distinguish the fire-dependent glades of the Ozarks from the edaphic climax cedar glades of the southeast (Baskin & Baskin 2000, Baskin et al. 2007). Fires have been largely suppressed throughout Missouri since European settlement, leading to encroachment upon the glades by eastern red-cedar (Juniperus virginiana). Pure stands of red-cedar have developed on many former glades, crowding out the herbaceous plants that depend upon full sun and leading to soil formation that supports further encroachment by additional woody plant species such as post oak (Quercus stellata), blackjack oak (Q. marilandica), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), and fragrant sumac (Rhus aromatica) from the surrounding woodlands. Fire has returned to many of the Ozark glades situated on lands owned or managed by state and federal agencies such as the Missouri Department of Conservation, Missouri Department of Natural Resources, and U.S. Forest Service, as well as private conservation-minded organizations such as The Nature Conservancy. These agencies have begun adopting cedar removal and fire management techniques to bring back the pre-settlement look and diversity of the Ozark Glades. This is particularly true at Victoria Glades and Valley View Glades, the two largest and most pristine examples of the Jefferson County dolomite glade complex. Fires have been used to kill small red-cedars in the glades, as well as rejuvenate their herbaceous plant communities. Larger red-cedar trees are not killed outright by fire and must be removed by chainsaws. This above distant view of the TNC parcel at Victoria Glades shows many such burned red-cedars. The glades themselves are not the only habitat to benefit from this aggressive management – when I was doing my fieldwork here in the 1980′s the surrounding woodlands were a closed post oak forest bordered by fragrant sumac and with little or no understory in the interior. The photo at right now shows an open savanna with a rich understory of not only sumac and other shrubs, but also many herbaceous plants as well such as black-eyed susan (Rudbeckia hirta) and American feverfew (Parthenium integrifolium). Such open woodland more closely resembles what Schoolcraft saw across much of the Ozarks during his journey almost two centuries ago.

Victoria and Valley View Glades are dominated by little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), Indian grass (Sorghastrum nutans), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) and prairie dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis). A smaller but highly charismatic non-grass flora is also found on the glades – species such as Missouri evening primrose (Oenethera macrocarpa) (left), pale purple coneflower (Echinacea simulata) (pictured above and below), and prairie dock (Silphium terebinthinaceum) not only add beautiful color but also support both vertebrate and invertebrate wildlife. The Fremont’s leather flower (Clematis fremontii) is a true endemic, occurring only in this part of Missouri and entirely dependent upon these glades for its survival. Less well studied is the vast insect fauna associated with the glades. It is here where I first discovered the occurrence of Acmaeodera neglecta in Missouri. This small jewel beetle is similar to the broadly occurring A. tubulus but at the time was known only from Texas and surrounding states. In collecting what I thought were adults of A. tubulus on various flowers in the glades, I noticed that some of them were less shining, more strongly punctate, and exhibited elytral patterning that was often coalesced into longitudinal “C-shaped” markings rather than the scattered small spots typical of A. tubulus. These proved to be A. neglecta, which I have since found on many glade habitats throughout the Ozark Highlands. Both species can be seen in this photo feeding on a flower of hairy wild petunia (Ruellia humilis) – the lower individual is A. neglecta, while the upper individual and two inside the flower are A. tubulus. Another interesting insect-plant association I discovered at these glades was the strikingly beautiful Dicerca pugionata – another species of jewel beetle – and its host plant ninebark (Physocarpus opulifolius). Only a single Missouri occurrence had been reported for D. pugionata, despite the common occurrence of its host plant along rocky streams and rivers throughout the Ozark Highlands. This plant also grows at Victoria and Valley View Glades along the intermittent streams that drain the glades and in the moist toeslopes along the lower edges of the glades where water that has percolated through the rocks and down the slopes is forced to the surface by an impermeable layer of bedrock. Unlike the tall, robust, lush plants that can be found in more optimal streamside habitats with good moisture availability, the ninebark plants of Victoria and Valley View Glades are small and scraggly, usually with some dieback that results from suboptimal growing conditions. I surmise these plants have reduced capabilities for fending off attacks by insects, including D. pugionata, and as a result a healthy population of the insect thrives at these glades. Some might be inclined to call this beetle a pest, threatening the health of one of the glade’s plants. In reality, the insect finds refuge in these glades – unable to effectively colonize the vast reserves of healthy plants that grow along streams throughout the rest of the Ozarks, it strikes a tenuous balance with plants that are themselves on the edge of survival.

Despite the success in moving Victoria and Valley View Glades closer to their pre-settlement character, the integrity of these areas continues to be challenged. Poachers take anything of real or perceived value, and ATV enthusiasts view the open spaces as nothing more than tarmac. Pale purple coneflower occurs abundantly on these Jefferson County glades (but sparingly in other habitats – primarily rocky roadsides), where they provide a stunning floral display during June and sustain innumerable insect pollinators. Plants in the genus Echinacea also have perceived medicinal value, as herbalists believe their roots contain an effective blood purifier and antibiotic. There are no conclusive human clinical trials to date that fully substantiate this purported immune stimulating effect (McKeown 1999). Nevertheless, demand for herbal use has skyrocketed in recent decades, prompting widespread illegal harvesting of several coneflower species throughout their collective range across the Great Plains and Ozark Highlands. I witnessed massive removals of this plant from both Victoria and Valley View Glades during the 1980’s, but the pictures I took this year suggest that such illegal harvests have been suppressed and that the populations at both sites are recovering nicely.

The same cannot be said for the practice of rock flipping. This was a problem I witnessed back in the 1980’s, and I saw fresh evidence of its continued occurrence at both sites. The thin soils and sloping terrain leave successive layers of dolomite bedrock exposed, the edges of which shatter from repeated freeze-thaw cycles to create rows of loose, flat rocks along the bedrock strata. Lizards, snakes, tarantulas, and scorpions find refuge under these loose rocks, only to be ripped from their homes by flippers and transferred to a dark, cold terrarium to endure a slow, lingering death. As if poaching the glade’s fauna and watching them slowly die isn’t bad enough, the flippers add insult to injury by not even bothering to replace the rock in its original position after stealing its inhabitant, amounting to habitat destruction three times greater than the area of the rock itself. Firstly, the habitat under the rock is destroyed by sudden exposure of the diverse and formerly sheltered microfauna to deadly sunlight. Next, the habitat onto which the rock is flipped is also destroyed, as the plants growing there begin a slow, smothering death. Lastly, the upper surface of the rock, sometimes colonized by mosses and lichens that might have required decades or longer to grow, usually ends up against the ground – its white, sterile underside becoming the new upper surface. Rock flipper scars take years to heal, and nearly all of the flat, loose rocks seen in the more accessible areas of the glades exhibit scars of varying ages next to them. If a scar is fresh (first photo), I generally return to the rock to its original position – the former inhabitants cannot be brought back, but at least the original habitats are saved and can recover quickly. However, if a scar is too old (2nd photo) it is best to leave the rock in its new position – replacing it only prolongs the time required for recovery.

Even more damaging is ATV use. Herbaceous plants and thin soils are no match for the aggressive tread of ATV tires, and it doesn’t take too many passes over an area before the delicate plants are killed and loose soils ripped apart. I witnessed this become a big problem particularly on Victoria Glades during the 1980’s – actually finding myself once in a face-to-face confrontation with an ATV’er. Fortunately, he turned tail and ran, and it appears (for now) that such abuses have stopped, as I saw no evidence of more recent tracks during this visit. But the scars of those tracks laid down more than two decades ago still remain painfully visible. I expect several more decades will pass before they are healed completely.

My return to Victoria and Valley View Glades was a homecoming of sorts, and I was genuinely pleased to see the progress that has been made in managing these areas while revisiting the sites where my love affair with beetles was first kindled. Sadly, however, the larger glade complex of Jefferson County continues to deteriorate. Restoration acreage aside, red-cedar encroachment continues unabated on many of the remaining glade parcels – large and small – that dot the south and southwest facing slopes in this area. It has been conservatively estimated that as much as 70% of the original high quality glades in Missouri are now covered in red-cedar. Many of these are privately held – their owners either do not recognize their ecological significance or are loathe to set fire to them. An example can be seen in the picture here – this small parcel is part of the Victoria Glades complex but lies on private land in red-cedar choked contrast to the Nature Conservancy parcel immediately to the south. Small numbers of herbaceous plants persist here, but without intervention by fire or chainsaw their numbers will continue to dwindle and the glade will die. Aside from the loss of these glades, the continuing reduction of glade habitat complicates management options for preserved glades as well. Many glade associated invertebrates are “fire-sensitive” – i.e., they overwinter in the duff and leaf litter above the soil and are thus vulnerable to spring or fall fires. While these fires are profoundly useful for invigorating the herbaceous flora, they can lead to local extirpation of fire-sensitive invertebrate species within the burn area. Recolonization normally occurs quickly from unburned glades in proximity to the burned areas but can be hampered if source habitat exists as small, highly-fragmented remnants separated by extensive tracts of hostile environment. Grazing also continues to threaten existing remnants in the Jefferson County complex. Grazing rates are higher now than ever before, with greater negative impact due to the use of fencing that prevents grazers from moving to “greener pastures”. Over-grazing eliminates native vegetation through constant depletion of nutrient reserves and disturbance of the delicate soil structure, leading to invasion and establishment of undesirable plant species. Eventually, the glade becomes unproductive for pasture and is abandoned – coupled with fire suppression this leads to rapid woody encroachment. It is truly depressing to drive through Jefferson County and recognize these cedar-choked glades for what they were, able to do nothing but watch in dismay as yet another aspect of Missouri’s natural heritage gradually disappears. The continued loss of these remnant glades makes careful use of fire management on Victoria and Valley View Glades all the more critical – ensuring that a patchwork of unburned, lightly burned, and more heavily burned areas exists at a given time will be critical for preventing invertebrate extirpations within these managed areas.

I close by sharing with you a few more of the many photographs I took during this visit – stiff tickseed (Coreopsis palmata), three-toed box turtle (Terrapene carolina triunguis), climbing milkweed (Matelea decipiens – see the excellent post about this plant on Ozark Highlands of Missouri), downy phlox (Phlox pilosa), green milkweed (Asclepias viridiflora), and a “deerly” departed native browser.