Heads up: Some or all of the identifications affected by this split may have been replaced with identifications of Probole. This happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the output taxa. Review identifications of Probole amicaria 502385

Taxonomic Split 136686 (Committed on 01-10-2024)

Schmidt & McGuinness in Pohl & Nanz (2023) maintain 3 Probole species in North America north of Mexico: P. amicaria, P. alienaria, and P. nepiasaria. In iNaturalist taxonomy, they were previously treated as a single species P. amicaria, based on unpublished work by Tomon (2007), which proposed treating them so. However, other published works suggest that there are at least two species in this complex. The species limits are currently unresolved, and reliable diagnosis to species awaits publication of further study. See discussion below from Chris Schmidt (neoarctia).

This taxon split without atlases will reinstate the species P. alienaria and P. nepiasaria as species separate from P. amicaria. Then it will uprank identifications of P. amicaria to the genus Probole, as species-rank identification is not currently reliable.

Pohl & Nanz (2023): http://www.wedgefoundation.org/MONA2.asp

Tomon (2007): https://catalog.libraries.psu.edu/catalog/5809991

MPG: https://mothphotographersgroup.msstate.edu/species.php?phylo=911269 and other species pages

See also other references below.

Added by treichard on December 23, 2023 02:49 PM | Committed by treichard on January 10, 2024
split into


@neoarctia @hughmcguinness What's your advice for placing Probole records to the 3 species you list in the 2023 checklist? Are ranges known well enough that some records in regions with only one species could be placed automatically by range alone without manual reidentification of many of the records? Is the best way to identify photo records of the 3 species the way Forbes presents in his Lepidoptera of NY & Neighboring States Part II p. 96, using forewing patterns?

Posted by treichard 4 months ago

The taxonomy of the genus is unresolved and until new taxonomic information is published, it remains in limbo. It's not really feasable to reliably ID any to speciesl level at this point, yet there are almost certainly mutiple species.

In the new checklist we maintained the three previously recognized species because a) the results of Tomon (2007) were never published so the taxonomic changes proposed therein should not be treated as valid (and iNat should not have lumped all three species under amicaria), and b) there is enough evidence from geographically focused studies to indicate that there are probably at least two species (as discssued in Handfield's "Papillons du Quebec" and in our "Checklist of Alberta Lepidoptera").

Handfield, L. 1999. Le guide des papillons du Québec, version scientifique. Broquet, Boucherville. 982
Pohl GR, Anweiler GG, Schmidt BC, Kondla NG. 2010. An annotated list of the Lepidoptera of Alberta, Canada. ZooKeys 38: 1-549.
doi: 10.3897/zookeys.38.383

Posted by neoarctia 4 months ago

@neoarctia Thanks for clarifying the current status of Probole taxonomy. In iNaturalist's taxonomy, the two species that were made synonyms of P. amicaria need to be reinstated as species taxa. And identifications of P. amicaria need to be upranked to the genus. I've revised the text of this taxon change. Is there anything else you'd suggest to say or do before I commit this change? Thanks!

Posted by treichard 4 months ago

That looks good, thanks Tim. Note the spelling of Tomon, rather than Timon.

Posted by neoarctia 4 months ago

Thanks, I've fixed my typo on Tomon.

Posted by treichard 4 months ago

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments