Hopdges 5431 - Fissicrambus quadrinotellus

Moved to Fissicrambus quadrinotellus

Moved from Fissicrambus profanellus.

Tentative ID. See my comments ont he linked image.

… Steve Nanz, 12 May, 2019 - 4:54am

Steve, I just checked my BOLD results. I collected another well marked one last night.

I have two with solid ID's placed in Bold BIN BOLD:AAH5065. Mine are the only public specimens in the BIN but I can tell from the photographs that at least two of the private submissions are from Texas. This specimen is not one of the ones I sent to BOLD. I can post the other two if you wish.

I will dissect the one I caught last night. Do I have to submit a third one for DNA to convince you?

… A. Hendrickson, 22 June, 2019 - 5:24pm

It looks like this is quadrinotellus but I'm not sure how the specimens in the BIN with your barcoded quadrinotellus specimens were identified. There are now eight specimens in the BIN and all appear to be public. As I mentioned on the linked image, they were all identified by either Angela Telfer or yourself and there is no indication that any were dissected. Until we know one of the specimens in the BIN was dissected, I don't think we can be sure of the identification. So yes, if you had a specimen dissected and then sent to BOLD we would have an answer. Alternatively, you could email BOLD and ask them to ask Angela Telfer how she made the determination.

… Steve Nanz, 23 June, 2019 - 4:13am

Steve, I will do both. Funny that last night I could only see my specimens. I am in touch with Angela occasionally and believe she identifies by BIN association. MY ID was made by my own determination of morphology but the species placement was only made AFTER the BOLD Engine ID was determined as a 100% match and solid for both specimens. I have already dissected one but did not keep the specimen. It looks like all of their specimens were collected near San Antonio at only one location.

I compared my F. quadrinotellus to a F. profanellus from Brazos Bend St. Park in Ft. Bend County and there was only a 91.7 correlation, so I must have SOME different species this far West. I also see Fissicrambus in Schulenburg but have never posted them. I had decided that F. profanellus was the best ID. I will try dissecting and comparing one of those specimens to one here - and possibly bar code one. It may be a regional thing,

… A. Hendrickson, 23 June, 2019 - 7:55am