Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Calendar

TaxonomyBrowseInfoImagesLinksBooksData
Photo#292185
Mountain Ladybird - Hippodamia quinquesignata

Mountain Ladybird - Hippodamia quinquesignata
Columbia Icefields, Jasper NP, Alberta, Canada
June 21, 2009
Elevation: 2100m~ above sea level. Found on sign in Columbia Icefields.
Currently researching identity.

Moved

how about H. quiquesignata?
This looks exactly, I mean exactly, like Figure 127 in Chapin's 1946 Hippodamia monograph,(1) which Gordon refers to as his source for most of the Hippodamia figures and in fact for much of the Hippodamia information in general:

"The genus was revised by Chapin (1946) and I have essentially followed his classification except for the elimination of a few subspecific names and the addition of a key to species" p. 706

"Chapin also included illustrations of almost all the dorsal color variations of species of Hippodamia; and his paper should be consulted for these because I have included only illustrations of the basic patterns." - p. 707

None of Chapin's illustrations of any subspecies of H. glacialis (plate 12), including the nominate subspecies, look like this individual. I'm not sure what Gordon based his Fig. 599 (c) image of H. g. lecontei on - which does look very much like this individual - there's nothing very like it in Chapin's figures of that subspecies.

But, now that I've gone on and on about what it isn't, I'll reiterate that this individual is a perfect match for Chapin's first illustration of H. quinquesignata - the nominate subspecies, in fact - and the range also matches.

 
I'm ok with that
It fits Gordon's range map better. And if we went with the statement that they are externally inseparable, then I suppose we can't be "wrong" here either.

Moved
Moved from Hippodamia moesta bowditchi.

Response posted on your H. sinuata as requested.

Moved
Moved from Ladybird Beetles.

size?
appears to be either Hippodamia oregonensis (4-5mm) or H. moesta bowditchi (6-7.5mm). I'd lean toward bowditchi, given the completely black posterior lateral pronotal margin. But it sounds like H. oregonesis is found a bit further north (into Banff NP) than H. m. bowditchi. Both can have the traces of convergent spots just visible on yours. Very nice lady!

 
Uh
can't really help there. I would compare its size to a 7-spotted ladybird. I had a picture of it on my finger in which it appeared slightly smaller than a picture of a 7-spotted on the same finger a week ago. I really really should keep those shots.

 
H. m. bowditchi
ok, suggest we go with H. m. bowditchi, as that's what it keyed to originally.

 
Question
I have recieved an e-mail recently by someone who is certain this is either the 5-spot or the Glacial ladybird. I sent this e-mail before I posted it on here. He says its impossible to tell without dissection.

 
re-key
Ok, I re-ran this one through Gordon's key, and while it appears to still key well to H. moesta bowditchi, it really doesn't match Gordon's figures for that species/subspecies as well as it matches H. glacials lecontei. So I'll agree this is most likely not H. m. bowditchi.

Gordon's key couplet 23 is a bit confusing to me. Leading to H. glacialis and H. quinquesignata, it states "elytron with maculae reduced, if confluent, only narrowly so (except lecontei in east central CA)". To me, that appears to require light, non-confluent maculae, at least in Alberta. But if we say the cuplet is incorrect, or I'm reading so, then H. glacialis lecontei or H. quinquesignata are possible, and as your friend stated "impossible to tell without dissection" (of a male). However, from Gordon's illustrations, it appears that only H. g. lecontei is anywhere close to the heavy markings seen in this ladybird.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

 
In case you are intrested
the person who said about this was John Acorn.

 
Would you mind checking these for me?
I thought they were H. sinuata but am unsure how to separate them from other H. with any certainty.


Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.