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#821389
Northern Spur-throat Grasshopper male in Fundy National Park - Melanoplus borealis - male

Northern Spur-throat Grasshopper male in Fundy National Park - Melanoplus borealis - Male
Near HQ, Fundy National Park, Albert County, New Brunswick, Canada
June 20, 2013
As per the literature and visible identifying features such as the cerci, length of tegmina, the absence of banding on the femora and the shape of the subgenital plate, I would say this is a "classic male" of the species. I found this image buried in stuff I took earlier in the summer, before I was paying closer attention to features, thinking I was photographing yet another Melanoplus femurrubrum.

Images of this individual: tag all
Northern Spur-throat Grasshopper male in Fundy National Park - Melanoplus borealis - male Northern Spur-throat Grasshopper male in Fundy National Park - Melanoplus borealis - male

This one bothers me some
It looks a lot like M. femurrubrum, but the cerci are an odd shape for that species. The subgenital plant looks more like that of M. femurrubrum than M. borealis, but just a bit "off" (and it varies a lot in M. borealis). I've wondered for a long time if M. borealis and M. femurrubrum might exchange genes on accasion - not enough to be one species, but enough to confuse us a little as to which is which. Mostly they are easy if you have a male, but this one is funny looking (or, maybe I haven't seen enough M. borealis yet?).

 
I have added an image...
I don't know if this helps at all, but do compare with and perhaps the angle of view is different enough to help with shape perception? Also, the individuals I mostly saw at this site had considerably shorter wings than what I am used to seeing in Melanoplus femurrubrum. Moreover, when I look at the illustrations of the cerci in Vickery and Kevan (1985), the shape of the cerci do indeed fit better for borealis than femurrubrum for this specimen, but it is not a perfect fit. As for the subgenital plate, I wish I had an angle which showed that better.

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