www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

Here are a few problematic Erebias from Italy. Hopefully someone (Padfield ? ) can help me with them.

The first three I'm assuming are Erebia medusa. They were flying everywhere whenever we were above ~1500 m. Naturally there is no way to tell whether some of them where for example E. oemes.







The next species is probably Erebia ottomanus. I saw two strange ones on the first trip to Monte Baldo, so I returned another day. This the better picture of it. They were flying in a bit difficult place, if I may say.



The last one is the most difficult for me. It was quite small and flew above Madonna di Campiglio at ~1900-2100m. I'm torn between E. epiphron and E. melampus, but it could be something else as well.



Any help is appreciated!

JKT,

1) The difference between medusa and oeme is the underside of the club tips...black for oeme and pale brown for medusa.

2) Not 100% but it looks right with my books and it was in the right location ( Monte Baldo)

3) my book says melampus, Lesser Mountain Ringlet, is only found in the alps. Is that where this was taken? It also says the orange spot in cell 4 of the hind wing should be displaced, which this is not, so maybe this leans the argument toward epiphron, Mountain Ringlet.

Hope that helps,

Martin.

V6GTO wrote:The difference between medusa and oeme is the underside of the club tips...black for oeme and pale brown for medusa.

Exactly. For the photographed ones something can be said, but... However, I'm not entirely sure about the ID even that far, so confirmation would be nice.

The problem with Erebia ringlets is that since there is generally no interbreeding between populations on even quite close mountains, there are dozens of different races and forms of each species. That's my excuse, anyway.

Working backwards, to me the last one is classic melampus and has no epiphron about it. It seems to be right on the edge of the distribution of melampus (but although Google Earth seemed to know where your location was it didn't want to tell me, so I can't be sure). Anyway, if I saw that I wouldn't hesitate to call it melampus.

The second one is almost certainly ottomana, since this species is recorded from Monte Baldo (race benacencis, according to Tolman) and as a rule not more than one species of brassy ringlet flies in any one place (though I think I've found an exception in the Pyrenees, at a site where I've seen cassioides and hispania). The well marked uns of your butterfly match the description of benacencis in Tolman. In principle, according to Kudrna, both calcaria and cassioides fly in the general region. The uns are too dark for calcaria and nothing like the cassioides in my region.

Funnily enough, the first butterfly is the one that surprises me most. Around me (1200m) medusa stopped flying about three weeks ago and right now oeme is flying everywhere above 1500m. From the wings, your butterflies look very good for oeme but the antennae do seem to cry out medusa. I have never seen pale like this on oeme - they have very black antennae around me - so I am inclined to agree with your medusa conclusion. Nothing about the wings actually rules out medusa, but it is very different from those near me.

That's the best I can do, I'm afraid! But well done on the ottomana! I must visit Monte Baldo!!

Guy

padfield wrote:Working backwards, to me the last one is classic melampus and has no epiphron about it. It seems to be right on the edge of the distribution of melampus (but although Google Earth seemed to know where your location was it didn't want to tell me, so I can't be sure). Anyway, if I saw that I wouldn't hesitate to call it melampus.

Then E. melampus it is. The place is roughly 80 km north of Riva del Garda, which is at the northern shore of Lake Garda.

padfield wrote:The second one is almost certainly ottomana, since this species is recorded from Monte Baldo (race benacencis, according to Tolman) and as a rule not more than one species of brassy ringlet flies in any one place.

Good to know - even with your possible exception!

padfield wrote:The well marked uns of your butterfly match the description of benacencis in Tolman.

The topside matches that form too, but I did not get a picture of it.

padfield wrote:Funnily enough, the first butterfly is the one that surprises me most. Around me (1200m) medusa stopped flying about three weeks ago and right now oeme is flying everywhere above 1500m.

End of flight three weeks ago is a bit much. On the other hand I was a bit higher and that was the week I saw them most. The weather had also been relatively cold, which is a factor. On the second week they were mostly quite worn.

padfield wrote:Nothing about the wings actually rules out medusa, but it is very different from those near me.

There is plenty of variation to account for that as you mentioned.

padfield wrote:That's the best I can do, I'm afraid! But well done on the ottomana! I must visit Monte Baldo!!

Thanks! That was quite well done. The genus may be difficult for anyone, but without any experience on most of those species and no real touch on times and habitats it is a nightmare.

Walking down from the M. Baldo through the forest seemed also a pretty good way to meet with L. achine. For about 500 m (vertical) it was everywhere. More than one visible most of the time. Just so you'd know...

Another good way to see achine is to nip down to my local woods.



That was yesterday. It's a great butterfly but almost impossible to get close to, having very sensitive ears!! And when it is disturbed it tends to go off in a sulk and sit high in a tree.

Guy

So you've already gotten the better pictures.

My experience was that they flew all over me, but didn't land. And the few times they did, the mirror slap scared them away before the exposure was made.


Oh well, if the weather improves, I might try to find B. titania on monday or tuesday before heading north to Lappland.

For tit frit undersides you need cloudy weather with bright spells. As soon as the sun disappears they sit down and wait patiently, with their wings folded on their backs. In sunny weather they bask and fly.

This was taken in cloud, as you can probably tell:



Guy

Then the weather might be just fine.

BTW, you seem to be missing B. thore. I saw a couple (and got a picture as well, but it's not edited yet) above M. di Campiglio. The height was about 1800 m. If you visit Monte Baldo, that place is a good stop as well.

By one of those strange coincidences, Matt Rowlings suggested going into Italy today, and we found medusa flying reasonably commonly at one location. I was able to examine the antennae close up and there is no doubt about the identity. Here is one individual:



Not so different from yours, apart from the quality of the picture!!

Other treats for the day were Hungarian glider and large chequered skipper:






... but no thore... That's for another day!

Guy

PS - And I got this poor shot of epiphron too, also in North Italy, which I suspect will reassure you yours is melampus! Look particularly at the shape of the hindwing.



Guy

Excellent shots Guy! Could you please send me high-res versions of the Large Chequered Skipper so that I can include them on the main species pages - we need more photos of them! Thanks.

Cheers,

- Pete

padfield wrote:Look particularly at the shape of the hindwing.

Got it! You got there a couple of species I'm missing...

You seem to have your focus in the wrong place with a couple of those. What are you using? Then again, so it in many of mine - helps to take enough.

I use a point-and-click Canon compact. At its best it is perfectly adequate for web pictures, which is the main purpose of my shots, but it will never compare to an expensive camera. Frankly, I'm staggered by the quality of the pictures contributors to this site take. One day, maybe, I'll be able to afford something bigger...

Guy

padfield wrote:I use a point-and-click Canon compact.

I was afraid of that. The underside of Chequered is fine as it has plenty of contrast, but the Erebia is clearly focused on the background. If you are certain of that happening, you might move the camera back a bit after autofocus. Such sure cases are probably rare, though.