Aglaoschema rufiventre in Chaco, Argentina

Aglaoschema rufiventre | Chaco Province, Argentina

I’ve mentioned a few times that April is not a very good time to look for beetles in northern Argentina, as the months preceding April are typically hot and dry. September through January would be a much better time, especially to look for the wood boring beetles (families Buprestidae and Cerambycidae) that I am so fond of. Still, if I am in Argentina in April then I must look for beetles in April, and while I didn’t see a single buprestid during my week in Corrientes and Chaco Provinces last month I did a fair number of cerambycid beetles on stands of goldenrod (Solidago chilensis) at a few localities in Chaco Province. One particularly common species was Aglaoschema rufiventre, a beautiful metallic green species with, you guessed it, a red abdomen. Aglaoschema is a rather large (27 species), exclusively Neotropical genus whose members superficially resemble the diurnal, brightly colored species of the tribe Trachyderini but actually belong to the tribe Compsocerini. Most of the species occur in Brazil, but six extend further south into Argentina. Of these, A. rufiventre most resembles A. haemorrhoidale and A. ventrale but is distinguished by its subcylindrical antennal scape—or first segment (clavate in A. ventrale) and non-roughened elytra (roughened—or “asperate”—in A. hemorrhoidale) (Napp 2007). No hosts have been reported for A. rufiventre (Monné 2001), so my finding of adults on flowers of S. chilensis seems to be the first reported host association for the species.

The species name refers to its “red belly”

I photographed several of these beetles on S. chilensis flowers at two locations in Chaco Province along Ruta 16 west of Resistencia, but I was generally unsatisfied with how the photos turned out. The combination of the beetles’ metallic sheen and the bright yellow color of the flowers made getting the right exposure and lighting difficult—I either blew out the yellow on the flowers or ended up with deep shadows on the beetles. One morning I encountered this female sitting on the seed head of an grass unidentified grass. Torpid from the cool temperatures and covered in morning dew, she was a most cooperative subject, and the colors of the seed head turned out to be much more complimentary for photographing the beetle that the bright yellow goldenrod flowers.

REFERENCES:

Monné, M. A. 2001. Catalogue of the Neotropical Cerambycidae (Coleoptera) with known host plant—Part I: Subfamily Cerambycinae, tribes Achrysonini to Elaphidiini. Publicações Avulsas do Museu Nacional 88:1–108.

Napp, D. S. 2007. Revisão do gênero Aglaoschema Napp (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae). Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 24(3):793–816.

Copyright © Ted C. MacRae 2012

Desmiphora hirticollis: Crypsis or Mimicry?

During my stay in Corrientes, Argentina last month, I was invited to spend the day with a colleague at his “camp” in Paso de la Patria. Located on the banks of the massive Rio Paraná at its junction with the Rio Paraguay, this small resort community boasts large tracts of relatively intact “Selva Paranaense,” which together with the Atlantic Forest in southeastern Brazil forms the second largest forest ecozone in South America outside of the Amazon. As my colleague skillfully prepared matambre, chorizo, and vacío (typical cuts of meat in Argentina) on the parilla (wood grill) at his camp, I explored the surrounding forest for insects. Early April is late in the season, and with generally droughty conditions in the area for the past several months there were few insects to be found. My luck improved, however, when I came upon a small area with stacks of fresh cut logs from recent wood cutting operations scattered through the area. Wood boring beetles (families Buprestidae and Cerambycidae) are often attracted to such wood piles, so approached each one slowly to look for day-active species of these beetles. After inspecting several piles without seeing anything on them, I began carefully turning over the logs to look for nocturnal species that tend to hide on the undersides during the day. Shortly I came across this highly cryptic species of cerambycid, and further searching revealed a fair number of these beetles hiding within the dozen or so log piles that I examined.

Desmiphora hirticollis on freshly cut guayabi (Patagonia americana) | Corrientes Prov., Argentina

I instantly recognized the genus as Desmiphora, an exclusively New World genus characterized by the presence of fasciculate tufts (or “pencils”) of erect or suberect hairs. Most of its nearly 50 species occur in Brazil, but two species extend as far north as southern Texas (Giesbert 1998). One of these is Desmiphora hirticollis, a widespread species found as far north as Corpus Christi, Texas and as far south as Bolivia and Argentina. I thought these beetles looked an awful lot like that species, and I later confirmed its identity as such due to its piceous (glossy brownish black) integument and the presence of small black pencils just before the elytral apices.

Adults are nearly impossible to see from overhead due to cryptic coloration…

The wood piles contained logs from several tree species, but all of the beetles that I encountered were on logs of guayaibi (Patagonula americana), a member of the family Boraginaceae and a characteristic component of Selva Paranaense (also an important timber species in Argentina). The number of individuals that I found and their occurrence only on guayaibi suggests it serves as a larval host for the beetle. Duffy (1960) described the larva from specimens collected out of Sapium sp. (family Euphorbiaceae), but in Texas this species is collected most often on Cordia spp. and Ehretia anacua (Rice et al. 1985)—both in the family Boraginaceae—with adults having been reared from Cordia eleagnoides (Chemsak & Noguera 1993).

…while the hair tufts may function in obscuring the body outline…

It seems obvious that coloration of the beetle and its pencils of hair function in crypsis. From overhead the beetles are almost impossible to discern as they sit motionless on the similarly colored bark of their host trees. Even in profile or oblique views where the body becomes somewhat more visible, the pencils seem to break up and obscure the outline of the body. I wonder, however, if crypsis is the only function of the pencils—Belt (2004) described the strong resemblance of another species in the genus, D. fasciculata—a similarly penicillate species, to short, thick, hairy caterpillars (insectivorous birds often refuse to prey upon hairy species of caterpillars). That species can be seen sitting openly on foliage during the day, while D. hirticollis seems to be strictly nocturnal; however, cryptic and mimetic functions need not be mutually exclusive, so perhaps for this species the pencils function a little for both.

…or perhaps even mimicking ”hairy” caterpillars.

REFERENCES:

Belt, T. 2004. The Naturalist in Nicaragua. Project Guttenberg eBook.

Chemsak, J. A. & F. A. Noguera.  1993.  Annotated checklist of the Cerambycidae of the Estacion de Biologia Chamela, Jalisco, Mexico (Coleoptera), with descriptions of new genera and species.  Folia Entomológica Mexicana 89:55–102.

Duffy, E. A. J. 1960. A Monograph of the Immature Stages of Neotropical Timber Beetles (Cerambycidae). British Museum of Natural History, London. 327 p.

Giesbert, E. F. 1998. A review of the genus Desmiphora Audinet-Serville (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae: Desmiphorini) in North America, Mexico and Central America. Occasional Papers of the Consortium Coleopterorum 2(1): 27–43.

Rice, M. E., R. H. Turnbow, Jr. & F. T. Hovore. 1985. Biological and distributional observations on Cerambycidae from the southwestern United States (Coleoptera). The Coleopterists Bulletin 39(1):18–24.

Copyright © Ted C. MacRae 2012

Retrachydes thoracicus – times four!

Disclaimer—these are not great photos!

A few days ago I posted this little quip as my status on Facebook: “Cool! Found a Retrachydes thoracicus thoracicus on the sidewalk outside my hotel!” I chuckled a little as I posted it, knowing that only a select few who read it would know what the heck I was talking about (of course, a right click to select “Search with Google” reveals the answer instantly). Of course, it is a species of longhorned beetle (family Cerambycidae) that apparently is found commonly in South America. I wanted to take some photographs of the beetle to show those who didn’t do the Google search just what it looked like. Unfortunately, the beetle was already somewhat moribund when I found it, and no matter how much I coaxed and prodded it on the stick I placed it on, it just looked… well, dumb. Legs out of position, antennae hanging limply, and the beetle itself laying prostrate on the branch, as if it barely had the strength to hang on (which actually was the case). Shame—it sure is an attractive species, with its densely pubescent and transversely gibbous pronotum (obviously the source of its name) and striking orange-banded antennae. C’est la vie!

Lately I’ve been trying to get a better handle on choosing backgrounds when I photograph insects, no longer content with the often busy and distracting backgrounds that show up in photographs taken completely in situ. It’s often a simple matter to hold the object on which the insect is sitting in front of something that gives the desired background effect, and having this perfectly calm yet strikingly attractive beetle to work with seemed to invite experimentation. I’m also trying to get a better feel for how to use higher ISO settings to make it easier to get these various “non-black” backgrounds while still using flash to get acceptable depth of field with the subject itself. Below are four of the better shots that came out of the session (yes—sadly, these are the “better” ones). I’m loathe to go below 1/160 sec exposure because of motion blur and would like to keep aperture settings quite small, so fairly high ISO settings are required to get the background effects I’m looking for. I think I’ve learned that ISO 1000 is about as high as I can go before the background gets unacceptably noisy—at small sizes the photos look fine, but open them up larger size and you’ll see what I mean. Anyway, ignoring the composition and noise issues, which background do you like best?

ISO 1000, 1/160 sec, f/14 - cloudy sky background

ISO 1600, 1/160 sec, f/14 - pavement background (close)

ISO 1600, 1/160 sec, f/14 - pavement background (more distant)

ISO 1600, 1/160 sec, f/14 - pavement background (foliage)

Copyright © Ted C. MacRae 2012

Memories of summer – Neoclytus scutellaris

Neoclytus scutellaris | 9 July 2011, Wayne Co., Missouri

During the short, cold days of winter it’s nice to take a break from the curatorial activities that dominate the season and look back on some of the insects seen during the previous summer. This is Neoclytus scutellaris, a longhorned beetle associated almost exlusively with dead/dying oaks in the eastern U.S. The species is sometimes confused with the very similar N. mucronatus but is distinguished by the transverse yellow band on the pronotum and its host (the latter being associated with hickory and hackberry).

Copyright © Ted C. MacRae 2011

Something for Adrian

Miscellaneous North American Cerambycidae - click for larger version (1680 x 1120).

In a comment on my Buprestidae exchange post, Adrian Thysse asked to see hi-res images of specimen drawers from my own collection. Like any good North American entomologist, Adrian was a little bothered by the card-mounting technique used by the sender of the specimen box featured in that post and wanted to see what a nice collection of properly pinned specimens might look like. It’s actually not the first time he’s made this request—back when I first moved this blog to WordPress (more than three years ago) he did so when I put up my Collection page featuring a photo of my “Oh wow!” insect drawer. I’ve thought about doing this ever since he first made this request, but the problem, or at least my problem, with photographing specimen drawers from my main collection is a combination of large drawer size (reducing the size of the specimens in an image of the drawer) and long series of a relatively small number of species in the same genus or closely related genera (making the drawer contents look rather uniform in appearance). I suppose some might still be interested in seeing drawers from a “working collection” such as mine, but I just never had enough motivation to start pulling out drawers and taking photos.

Adrian is in luck, however, as I just happened to be putting together a shipment of miscellaneous North American Cerambycidae for a collector in Europe (to whom I’ve owed insects for longer than I like to admit). The box I’m using for the shipment is smaller than a normal collection drawer and is packed with close to 100 species of this diverse beetle family. There might be a specimen here and there that was collected by someone else, but the vast majority were collected, mounted, labeled, and identified by me. I show this as an example of my curatorial technique, and as a bonus the above image is linked to a fairly large version (1680 x 1120) for those who might be interested in getting a really close look at the specimens and their labels. Here also are closer looks at the specimens in the bottom left and bottom right corners, respectively:

Hmm, is that a wasp at the bottom?

What species is that without the ''normal'' ID label?

Copyright © Ted C. MacRae 2012

A Brazilian longhorned beetle – Oxymerus aculeatus

Oxymerus aculeatus aculeatus | January 2011 | nr. Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil

I was going through photographs from my visit to Brazil this past January and came across this forgotten photo of a longhorned beetle taken near Campinas in São Paulo.  Although I didn’t recognize the genus immediately, I was rather sure it belonged to the great tribe Trachyderini, generally characterized by medium to large-sized, brightly colored, diurnal (active during the day) species.  Knowing this it didn’t take me long to identify the species as Oxymerus aculeatus, occurring from Nicaragua and the West Indies south to Bolivia and Uruguay and, thus, the most widely distributed of the ten species in this exclusively Neotropical genus. As is typical with such widespread species, a few subspecies have also been described—this one should be the nominate subspecies, widely distributed throughout central, eastern, and southeastern Brazil (Hingrid et al 2010).

Like most other members of the family Cerambycidae, O. aculeatus is presumed to utilize dead or dying wood for larval development, but little else is known regarding its habits and host plants. Members of the tribe are often found frequenting flowers, although this and a few other individuals were encountered resting on the underside of foliage on an unidentified tree. The Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services has become concerned about the possible establishment of this species in the U.S. after two recent collections of the West Indian subspecies in south Florida (Thomas 2006). Whether it goes on to have any economic impact remains to be seen, but if recent history with other wood boring beetles is any indication (e.g., Asian longhorned beetle, Anoplophora glabripennis; emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis; etc.) the concern may be warranted.

REFERENCE:

Hingrid Y. S. Q., J. P. Botero R. and M. L. Monné. 2010. Insecta, Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Cerambycinae, Trachyderini: New state and country records from South America. Checklist 6(3):364–376.

Thomas, M. C. 2006. Another Neotropical longhorn beetle (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) apparently new to the mainland of Florida. UF/IFAS Pest Alert (website accessed 7 Nov 2011).

Copyright © Ted C. MacRae 2011

Crossidius coralinus fulgidus

Crossidius coralinus fulgidus | Uintah Co., Utah

Tiger beetles may have been the primary focus of last week’s 9-day, 10-state, 4,700-mile collecting trip; however, they were not the only beetles I was hoping to see. Longhorned beetles (family Cerambycidae) of the genus Crossidius are unusual in the family because of their fall rather than spring/summer adult activity period, and they just happen to occur in dizzying variety throughout the Great Basin and surrounding mountainous areas. Larvae of all species are presumed to feed on the roots of perennial, shrubby, fall-blooming composites, primarily in the genera Chrysothamnus, Ericameria, Gutierezzia, and Haplopappus (Linsley and Chemsak 1961), with the adult activity period undoubtedly timed to allow congregation and mating on the late-season blooms of their host plants.  Only 13 species are currently recognized, but these are further divided into 37 subspecies and innumerable locally distinct populations.  Not having spent much time in the mountain west during the fall, this group has till now been poorly represented in my collection.

The species shown here, Crossidius coralinus fulgidus, was among the first of many that we encountered during our trip.¹  This population was seen near Vernal in northeastern Utah.  It was late in the day and the adults had settled for the night onto the flowers of their host plant, Ericamera nauseosa.  Flower-visiting longhorned beetles are notoriously frustrating subjects to photograph, as their constant movement and long legs and antennae make focus and composition difficult.  These beetles had essentially ceased activity, allowing me to carefully compose and focus the shot, and the low sun in the western sky provided a bright blue eastern sky to use as a colorfully contrasting background.  The photo above (the very long antennae identify it as a male) was taken hand-held with my Canon 100mm macro lens at ISO 400 and 1/60 sec to allow exposure of the sky and flash at an aperture of f/16 to illuminate the subject and achieve good depth of field.  My only criticism of this photo is the small amount of blur seen in the distal antennal segments.

¹ “We” refers to myself and Jeff Huether from Geneva, NY. Jeff is primarily interested in Meloidae but like me also has an interest in Cerambycidae. I was fortunate to have Jeff with me on this trip, as he has collected extensively throughout the Great Basin region and encountered nearly all of North America’s named species and subspecies of Crossidius. It is only because of his prior experience with this group that I was able to find this and several others that we saw during the trip.

ISO 100, 1/200 sec

ISO 400, 1/200 sec

ISO 400, 1/60 sec

Because the beetles were so calm, I spent some time with this female individual trying different settings to see their effect on background color, subject illumination, and detail.  All were taken hand-held using the same lens at f/16, with the left photo also using my “typical” settings of ISO 100 and 1/200 sec.  The background is very dark (in post-processing I might choose to make it black)—good for some subjects but not this one, and although the focus is good the lighting is rather harsh (I had to decrease highlights in post-processing much more than I normally like).  The center photo was taken with ISO increased to 400 and results in a much more pleasing, if still not very natural-looking sky background.  Focus remains good and the shorter flash duration needed reduces the amount of highlighting that needs post-processing adjustment.  Overall I like this photo the best except that the sky is not true in color.  The right photo is also at ISO 400 but uses a slower shutter speed (1/60 sec).  The sky in this photo is the most natural-looking, and as might be expected problems with flash highlights are minimal—it almost looks like a natural light photograph.  However, some amount of motion blur can be detected, especially in the antennae.  Perhaps intermediate shutter speeds (e.g. 1/120 sec) or slightly higher ISO might effectively deal with this while still allowing the truest colors.  What do you think?

REFERENCE:

Linsley, E. G. and J. A. Chemsak.  1961.  A distributional and taxonomic study of the genus Crossidius (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae).  Miscellaneous Publications of the Entomological Society of America 3(2):26–64, 3 color plates.

Copyright © Ted C. MacRae 2011

Bumelia borer on white

Plinthocoelium suaveolens suaveolens | Ozark Co., Missouri

Last weekend I visited one of my favorite collecting spots in all of Missouri—Long Bald Glade Natural Area (part of Caney Mountain Conservation Area in Ozark Co.).  Nestled at the eastern edge of the White River Hills in southwestern Missouri, its deeply dissected hills are home to numerous plants and animals that are more typical of the southern Great Plains and which have found refuge in the xeric, thin-soiled calcareous prairies (commonly “cedar glades”) that cover the area’s southern- and western-facing slopes.  These include some rather impressive insects, such as a disjunct population of Cicindelidia obsoleta vulturina, which I just found here last year as the new northeasternmost extent of the population, as well as the marvelously monstrous Microstylum morosum, North America’s largest robber fly and so far known in Missouri only from Long Bald Glade where it was discovered in 2009. 

Another quite striking insect found at Long Bald Glades (though not restricted in Missouri to the White River Hills) is the bumelia borer, Plinthocoelium suaveolens.  This beetle occupied much of my time in July 2009 as I committed to photographing the species in the wild, and it was Long Bald Glade where I finally (if not completely satisfactorily) succeeded in that goal.  This time I was visiting the Glade to look for the earliest individuals of C. obsoleta vulturina and, hopefully, document additional glades within Caney Mountain that might support the beetle.  However, in the back of my mind I was also keeping a lookout for P. suaveolens—this species is primarily active during July and August in Missouri, but I do have records of it as late as September.  As I looked for (and found) tiger beetles, I also checked out each bumelia tree that I passed hoping to see a P. suaveolens adult perched on its lower trunk.  It was not until later in the afternoon that I heard a loud “buzz” approaching from behind and turned to see one of these beauties fly right past me—legs and antennae held outstretched—before landing on a nearby tree.  Now, over the years I’ve learned a few lessons, and one is that you don’t try to take in situ photographs of the first individual you encounter of a prized species.  More often than not it gets away before you even fire the first shot, and you’re left with nothing.  My standard procedure now is to procure the first individual immediately and keep it alive.  If attempts to photograph subsequent individuals are not successful (or none are seen), then at least I have a backup for studio shots (not my first choice, but better than nothing!).  Such was the case with this individual.

Although I still lack that “perfect” beetle-on-a-branch shot that I hope to eventually get for this species, it seemed a good subject for some white-box photography.  I’ve vacilated between true white-box w/ indirect flash versus getting a white-box effect by using direct, diffused flash with the subject on a white background.  I decided now was the time for a direct comparison of the two techniques.  All of the following photographs were taken with the Canon 100mm macro lens on a Canon 50D body at 160 ISO, 1/200 sec, and f/16.  For the closeups (photos 3 and 5 of each series), 68mm of extension tubes were added.  The photos on the left are true white-box photos, i.e. the flash heads were directed up and away from the subject placed inside a box lined with white tissue (Kim-Wipes laboratory wipers).  The photos on the right mimic the white-box effect by placing the subject on white filter paper, but the flash heads were pointed directly at the subject through my DIY concave diffuser (click on photos for 1200×800 versions):

Indirect flash in white box

Direct flash w/ DIY diffuser

Indirect flash in white box

Direct flash w/ DIY diffuser

Indirect flash in white box

Direct flash w/ DIY diffuser

Indirect flash in white box

Direct flash w/ DIY diffuser

Indirect flash in white box

Direct flash w/ DIY diffuser

I must admit, looking at the photos on the camera playback screen I had the impression that I would like the direct-diffuser photos better, but after reviewing them on the computer and applying typical post-processing enhancements (e.g., levels, slight shadow reduction, and unsharp mask), the true white-box photos appear to have benefited from more even lighting, resulting in truer color, less shadowing, and minimal specular highlighting.  Not that the direct-diffuser photos are bad—they’re just not as good as the white-box photos.  I guess what this means is that my DIY diffuser, while a significant improvement over my previous diffusers, still could use some improvement (if ability to create white-box-like results is the ultimate test of a diffuser’s effectiveness).  I’d be interested in knowing your opinions based on these comparisons.

Congratulations to Ben Coulter, who wins yet another Super Crop Challenge and strengthens his lead in the overall standings of the current BitB Challenge Session #4 with 13 points.  Mr. Phidippus also correctly identified the species and takes 2nd place in the challenge with 8 points, keeping him in 2nd place in the overall standings as well.  Morgan Jackson takes 3rd place in the challenge with 7 points, but Roy’s retains 3rd place in the overall standings by way of his 6 points in this challenge.  Congratulations to these top points earners, and thanks to all who played.

Copyright © Ted C. MacRae 2011