Spanish skippers

[Robin]

Hi,

Pat & I had the priviledge of joining Pete and friends on a visit to the Tremp area of north western Spain in June of this year. Needless to say I haven't been able to id all of the butteflies seen. This is the first lot, all grizzled type skippers.
The first two pics are of the same butterfy, I think it maybe a Rosy Grizzled Skipper:

The next two are different butterflies, I think they maybe Safflower Skippers:

This next one was noticably large:

Again the next two are of the same butterfly chased for several hundred yards along a river bank:

The next two (shocking photos) are also the same butterfly:

I'm wondering if this could also be Safflower:

And finally this one:

Thanks,
Robin

[Robin]

Oops....I mean't north eastern Spain

Robin

[Padfield]

Here are the Swiss votes:

1 & 2 are definitely rosy grizzled skipper.

I like safflower for the next one but prefer cinqfoil (cirsii) for the fourth (without any real confidence, lacking an underside). Size would be a good indicator in this: safflower is visibly huge - much bigger than cinqfoil.

5 has all the characters of safflower, including the wiggly cell bar (not always wiggly, but often a good sign) and of course the huge size.

The next two, of the same butterfly, I would very, very tentatively put as a rather knackered malvoides.

The next two pictures, described as 'shocking', are definitely safflower, showing the difference between a good photo and a useful photo! The white underside hindwing line is unambiguous in the first of these pictures.

Next, safflower and lastly malvae/malvoides.

Guy

[Padfield]

I forgot to mention that the female carthami in the second 'shocking' picture is apparently laying on Potentilla sp. (the correct foodplant group for carthami). If you'd waited and watched you might have seen this:







Guy

[Robin]

Guy,

Thanks for that prompt response,

Best wishes,

Robin

[Roger Gibbons]

Some observations:

No. 4 (3335) looks like a possible Oberthur’s Grizzled Skipper (Pyrgus armoricanus) based on the uph markings, especially the highly arched submarginal series. This is often true for Grizzled Skipper (P. malvae/malvoides), but there are several reasons why I don’t think 3335 is malvae, mainly that it doesn’t look right on wing shape. Rosy Grizzled Skipper (P. onopordi) is also a possibility – 3552 has the faint but highly arched uph markings – but these markings on 3335 seem too strong for onopordi.

I would be inclined to rule out Cinquefoil Skipper (P. cirsii) for several reasons: the uph cell spot is perhaps not quite as solidly rectangular as I would expect for cirsii; the cirsii white post-discal spots in s2/s3 are joined and slightly offset, slightly “sinuous” and these marks on 3335 does not seem quite offset enough; the uph discal mark is usually solid in cirsii but in 3335 it is quite cleft.

It is, in all reality, almost impossible to tell from a worn upperside alone, but I would go for armoricanus if I had to make a guess. It has the “sandy” feel in the upf basal areas that is characteristic of armoricanus but several other Pyrgus will look like this when worn.

Robin’s first two photos illustrate what has been said on these pages many times especially with regard to Pyrgus ID, that having an upper and underside helps enormously. If you just had the upperside photo, you may well guess onopordi with a little confidence, but the underside is conclusive.

I would not be entirely convinced that 2774 is Safflower Skipper (P. carthami); the uph submarginal marks of carthami are usually thin and elongated, making almost a series of exclamation marks (as in 3436), and these don’t look quite right for carthami. The upf markings for carthami are often elongated width-wise and the cell spot is often jagged, although I have seen a lot of carthami this year and they have varied enormously. I would suggest onopordi as the uph marks look too faint for a male armoricanus.

Roger

[Padfield]

Point taken for picture 4 - it is more like armoricanus. The jizz still seems wrong to me, but jizz is misleading in photos.

Do you have an opinion on 6 & 7, Roger - that I put down tentatively as very worn malvoides?

The penultimate picture is entirely within the range of variation for safflower skipper but I agree other things are possible, including rosy. In the field, of course, it is not possible to mistake safflower for rosy because of the size difference (and a glance at the underside smashes any residual doubt).

Guy

[Roger Gibbons]

The width of the unh discal spot in s4/5 looks possible for armoricanus but these marks look similar for both armoricanus and malvae/malvoides, both flat edged internally and sort of uneven anvil-shaped externally. The basal marks, especially the one in s4/5 which looks rather V-shaped, are possible for armoricanus, perhaps stronger than I would expect for malvoides.

The upperside has the look of a worn malvoides and the markings seem a little too strong for armoricanus. The compact wing shape looks good for malvoides and the uph cell mark is almost a thin horizontal band which would certainly suggest malvoides to me. These latter clues to me outweigh the armoricanus inferences and I would agree with your malvoides conclusion, Guy. I actually found that I had very few malvoides underside photos, and many more of armoricanus.

Roger

[Robin]

Thanks Guy & Roger,

Brilliant as ever!!

Robin