I appreciate all of these Apantesis updates. Most of the IDs were based on old 2008/2009 email conversations with Chris, so I can only imagine what's new in the last 10 years. Good to see new information in sorting this group out.

I also wanted to thank you for creating the combo page for this group. It looks great.

This is Apantesis phalerata. The two spots on the collar rule out A. nais, and the hindwings rule out vittata and carlotta, so I feel it's safe to call this A. phelerata.

Thanks!

Since I gave an ID opinion of this in May I've been really digging into the eastern/central Apantesis species. There's definitely some conflicting literature out there, and there has been a fair amount of confusion even amongst various experts in the past.

Long story short, the spots on the patagia are simply not reliable in distinguishing between phalerata/carlotta/vittata. And the red HW with the thick black border seems to be more common in vittata than in phalerata. The bottom line is that examination of genitalia is the only means to separate this species group. This could actually be a vittata, but I don't see a problem leaving it here for the meantime since it represents phalerata as well according to the literature. If I find out differently I'll update again.

into a species group instead of a species. If it turns out that they really can't be separated by image, we would suggest lumping all the identical looking species together in a species group.

It may be worth adding a vittata/nais/carlotta/phalerata species group, but not at the exclusion of having the individual species pages - I'd still keep those. In the west, vittata and nais aren't really an issue and I think carlotta and phalerata may be reasonably separated by image.

The issue in the east is a little tougher. I'm talking with a few people and doing some research to see about the deep red HW in vittata and phalerata. I believe at one time, phalerata was even considered a form of vittata, but the deep red HW variation was (and may still be) considered A. vittata form 'radians.' So the taxonomy has been all over the place with these.

Honestly, I'm finding it difficult to even separate vittata/nais/carlotta by genitalia because each species even has variations of the aedeagus (although the uncus is fairly distinct in each and helps in ID). Fortunately, male phalerata has a very distinctive valve that doesn't require dissection to view. I believe I'm only seeing vittata, nais and phalerata here. But so far, in my very limited sampling, the superficial differences (patagia, costal margin, etc.) have been accurate - but that obviously doesn't even come close to universal acceptance. I'm also not sure why form 'radians' fell into disuse.

But I'll definitely keep updating as I obtain more info. For now, I think we can hold off on the species group node a little longer, but it may end up being best for the eastern/central Apantesis.

It would be worth adding a vittata/nais/carlotta/phalerata page. Many of Bugguide's pictures are a complex.