Spanish Pyrgus
Spanish Pyrgus
I'd be grateful for ideas on this pyrgus seen at about 2200m in the Val d'Aran in early August. Thank you in advance.
- Roger Gibbons
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 5:29 pm
- Location: Hatfield, Herts
- Contact:
Re: Spanish Pyrgus
I can find reasons why it’s not any known Pyrgus species. But it must be something, so I think it’s down to which species has the least reasons to preclude it. Starting at the least likely end:
serratulae: the unh discal s1 looks right (round, non-leaning), but the basal s7 mark is clearly not round or even rounded, so this the main reason for not serratulae (there are others).
carlinae: the upf cell spot is not remotely C-shaped. The unh marginal mark on v5 does not have a neat internal edge and is not long enough. Not carlinae.
onopordi: lots of reasons, but unh discal s4/5 clearly wrong.
bellieri: upf markings nowhere near heavy enough. Not bellieri.
alveus: possible, but the upf markings are quite heavy except for the cell spot.
armoricanus: perhaps the least objections here, although the upf spot is very light. The unh discal s1 mark is non-leaning and this counts against armoricanus (it also counts against alveus to possibly a greater extent), but the discal s4/5 mark looks right and the veins are very prominent which in my book strongly suggests armoricanus (although I’m not sure Guy concurs on the veins question).
It will be interesting to see what Guy thinks. I noticed he had a questionable Pyrgus in his diary a couple of days ago that didn’t fit neatly into any accepted template, although I thought there were less reasons to preclude serratulae than others.
Roger
serratulae: the unh discal s1 looks right (round, non-leaning), but the basal s7 mark is clearly not round or even rounded, so this the main reason for not serratulae (there are others).
carlinae: the upf cell spot is not remotely C-shaped. The unh marginal mark on v5 does not have a neat internal edge and is not long enough. Not carlinae.
onopordi: lots of reasons, but unh discal s4/5 clearly wrong.
bellieri: upf markings nowhere near heavy enough. Not bellieri.
alveus: possible, but the upf markings are quite heavy except for the cell spot.
armoricanus: perhaps the least objections here, although the upf spot is very light. The unh discal s1 mark is non-leaning and this counts against armoricanus (it also counts against alveus to possibly a greater extent), but the discal s4/5 mark looks right and the veins are very prominent which in my book strongly suggests armoricanus (although I’m not sure Guy concurs on the veins question).
It will be interesting to see what Guy thinks. I noticed he had a questionable Pyrgus in his diary a couple of days ago that didn’t fit neatly into any accepted template, although I thought there were less reasons to preclude serratulae than others.
Roger
- Padfield
- Administrator
- Posts: 8216
- Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:19 pm
- Location: Leysin, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Spanish Pyrgus
Hi both. I agree completely. I breezed through this post earlier today, when I didn't have a chance to reply, and thought armoricanus the most likely candidate. There might have been a misunderstanding in a previous post from what you say about the veins, Roger. Like you, I've always held bright veins to be a good sign of armoricanus. Then again, when I reply to things in haste I do often write some daft things and I don't doubt I was the cause any confusion!
Guy
Guy
Guy's Butterflies: https://www.guypadfield.com
The Butterflies of Villars-Gryon : https://www.guypadfield.com/villarsgryonbook.html
The Butterflies of Villars-Gryon : https://www.guypadfield.com/villarsgryonbook.html
Re: Spanish Pyrgus
Thank you, Roger and Guy. I'm grateful for your time and help on this. The largish number of pyrgus photos I brought back from our holiday is quickly being reduced to two piles, armoricanus and carthami. On the plus side, it's a good excuse for a repeat trip.