Sharon: And then he built a cocoon...which is actually a chrysalis...
Yup, I learned that night that butterflies don't make cocoons. Who knew? Sharon knew. Who does make cocoons? Moths do! So, the another thing that a naturalist mama will do is find wildlife, bring it home, and actually not kill it cause she knows what the hell she's doing. She knows, for instance, that the cercropia moth caterpillar, once hooked on specific type of leaf, will not eat anything else. So, though it's meant aquiring that leaf on trips to a specific Pin Cherry tree at the nature center where she works, she's dutifully kept the terrarium (yup, we've got a couple) supplied. About a month ago, Lucy got to experience the joy of watching a Monarch caterpillar become a butterfly (got to release it and watch it fly away, no less). Tonight, these plump little cercropias began spinning the silk that will be their home over the winter.
Here's a shot from the pseudo-macro of my digital cam. Spinning end kind of obscured in darkness, but curving around below. He/she/it's been going at it all night long.
Posts
8 comments:
Good for him, and good stuff generally.
I also did not know the distinction between moss and butterfly homes. Is there a functional or physical difference between them or is it simply that they are different creatures? I could probably find this out in wikipedia, but....
Ooh. Contention.
Wikipedia IMPLIES that moths also make chrysales, but sometimes protect those with cocoons.
"With moths, sometimes the chrysalis is itself contained in a protective silk case called a cocoon."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysalis
Obviously wikipedia is often wrong, so I await clarification from the experts.
More.
The division of Lepidopterans into moths and butterflies is a popular taxonomy, not a scientific one.
Hmm...according to what I have learned from Sharon, there is a definite scientific difference between moths & butterflies. A big part of it has to do with the cocoon/chrysalis thing.
Moths actually SPIN a cocoon, almost like a spider web, to encase themselves
Butterflies have a chrysalis INSIDE them. The act of "getting into the cocoon" is simply the shedding of their exterior layer.
Not sure how scientific or rule of thumb this is, but I also believe that most moths overwinter in their cocoon, whereas butterflies emerge after a couple of weeks in their chrysalis.
ALSO...easy way to tell if you're looking at moth or butterfly Moths tend to hold their wings open when they land. Butterflies close their wings.
More from wiki, this time simply about Lepidoptera.
Characteristics of Lepidoptera
Lepidopterans undergo complete metamorphosis going through a four-stage life cycle of egg - larva / caterpillar - pupa/chrysalis -imago/adult. The larvae have 3 pairs of true legs and additional prolegs. They can be confused with the larvae of sawflies. Lepidopteran larvae can be differentiated by the presence of crochets on the prolegs which are absent in the symphyta. Adults have two pairs of membranous wings covered by minute scales, and the mouth parts adapted for sucking nectar. Adults have a prominent proboscis formed by modified maxillary galeae.
See also and difference between a butterfly and a moth.
That text is:
A common classification of the Lepidoptera involves their differentiation into butterflies and moths. This separation is not officially recognized by taxonomists since the moths are an artificial group, defined only as everything in the order that is not a butterfly. Butterflies, on the other hand, are a natural monophyletic group, often given the name 'Rhopalocera'.
More:
Taxonomically, the folk category of butterfly usually comprises the combination of the lepidopteran superfamilies Papilionoidea and the Hesperioidea, while the remaining groups are usually called moths.
This seems to lay it out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_between_a_butterfly_and_a_moth
To summarize:
Moths just aren't sexy enough.
Sounds like bullshit if you ask me. By process of deduction alone, you're left with something that requires its own family or order or whatever.
It's like saying biologists don't recognize the gender of "female," because it was just an arbitrary distinction to accomodate anyone that doesn't fit into the category of "male.
Take it up with the lepidopterists.
Post a Comment