February 15, 2019

*****

NEW HAIRSTREAK BUTTERFLY
It's been awhile since a new butterfly was added to our Yucatan Butterfly Identification page. It's not that I've stopped looking, just that I don't find new species to add. Until this week, that is.

As I stepped from the garden an usually tiny, blackish butterfly on the ground spread his wings for about a second, displaying a flash of bright, powder-blue. When the wings returned to their normal position folded together atop the butterfly's abdomen, all I could see was a black butterfly. It wasn't until I scooped the little being into my hand -- it seemed stunned or somehow unable to fly -- and took a closer look, that some colorful details showed up, shown at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215hs.jpg

Those hairlike items at the butterfly's rear end, at the image's left side, tell us that this is a species of that group of small butterflies known as hairstreaks, members of the Gossamer-Wing Butterfly Family, the Lycaenidae, the Hairstreak Subfamily, the Theclinae . The hairs serve to make the rear end look like the butterfly's head, the hairs suggesting antennae. If you look closely at markings near the hairs' bases, they're arranged like markings on the head. Predators may attack the rear end, then, for if the head is destroyed the rest of the body will be easier to handle.

I knew that volunteer identifier Bea in snow-clogged, frozen-up Ontario would be happy to try her hand on this one, and she was. Within minutes of receiving the photograph she wrote back giving the names of two species that look like ours, both said to occur in southern Mexico. However, only one of the species is listed on a list of butterfly species found in the Yucatán, compiled by Rodriguez, Villalobos and del Carmen Pozo de la Tijera, and that's BRANGAS NEORA, the Widespread Brangas, widely distributed from Mexico to southern Brazil.

Pictures of the Widespread Brangas found on the Internet show individuals with markings just like ours, but with the wing undersurface background color much lighter than our nearly black one.

Very little information is available on this species, just a few pictures and some locations where it's been collected. Maybe someday someone will be pleased to learn that in early February in the northern Yucatan an exceptionally black-winged form of the little Brangas neora can be seen.

*****

SYNEDRELLA BY THE WALL
On the north side of the stone wall beside the garden, thus in the shade, a foot-tall, bug-eaten weed bore cluttered clusters of yellow flowers so small they were hardly noticeable, shown at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215sn.jpg

Up close, the flowers proved to be of the composite type, with petal-like ray flowers surrounding an "eye' of crammed-together, cylindrical disc flowers, thus a member of the huge Composite/Aster/Sunflower Family, the Asteraceae. But this plant's composite heads were so irregularly composed, with such short ray flowers and so few disc flowers, that at first glance it was hard to recognize the structure, as seen at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215so.jpg

A side view of a composite head, though, shows the head subtended by green bracts, just as a composite head is supposed to be, at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215sp.jpg

And if any further proof is needed of the plant's membership in the Composite Family, by breaking open an almost-matured head, the one-seeded, cypsela-type fruits show themselves to be topped with sharp, upward-pointing, spiny "awns" similar to those atop such quintessential Composite-Family members as the sticktights, genus Bidens, as shown at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215sq.jpg

In that picture you might be able to make out that within the head the fruits are separated from one another by thin, green, scale-like structures, or phyllaries.

All these features and a few more lead us to the name SYNEDRELLA NODIFLORA, whose English name sometimes is given as Synedrella. The name Synedrella is derived from the Greek synedros, meaning "placed together," referring to the crowding of the small flowering heads. Synedrella is native to the American tropics, where it occurs throughout, but as a weed has invaded every tropical country on Earth where its habitat is provided. Sometimes it turns up in Florida, where the online Flora of North America says that it seems to be introduced recurrently, but probably doesn't persist.

You could hardly imagine a more raggedy, humble-looking little weed, but I did see some tiny bugs looking snug and prosperous among the flowers, and I suspect certain finch-type birds able to deal with the fruits' sharp awns will be glad to have the nourishment provided by the seeds.

Also, I read that in Ghana certain communities have used Synedrella medicinally to treat epilepsy. This encouraged research by Patrick Amoateng and others, whose results were published in a 2012 edition of the Journal of Pharmacy & BioAllied Sciences. It was found that extracts from the entire plant "significantly reduced the latencies to myolonic jerks and seizures as well as seizure duration and the percentage severity."

In other words, lab results support the traditional use of the plant for treating epilepsy.

*****

A LENTICEL-INDUCING FUNGUS?
Lenticels are little wart-like growths on woody stems that behave like slits in the bark where gases can be interchanged between the twig's internal tissue and the atmosphere. They're like tiny windows helping the tree to breathe. Now take a look at the lenticel situation on the multiple trunks of a Limestone Senna tree, Senna racemosa right outside my hut door, at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215li.jpg

First, the trunks are splotchy with what I assume to be lichen populations. Notice that some splotches are wartier than others. The warts are lenticels. A close-up of a splotch with what appears to be old, well-formed lenticels and smaller, newly forming ones is shown at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215lj.jpg

And even closer look at the lenticels, showing the slits through which air exchange takes place, is seen at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215lk.jpg

In that picture, notice that between the lenticels there's a smooth, somewhat shiny or waxy-looking greenish surface, which I assume to be the lichen, or maybe simply the fungus.

On the Internet I searched on the key words "lenticel inducing lichen" and came up with a research paper entitled A new species of the lenticel fungal genus Claviradulomyces (Ostropales) from the Brazilian Atlantic forest tree Xylopia sericea (Annonaceae). That paper refers to a fungus, not a lichen, but lichens are composite life forms composed of a species of fungus very intimately associated with a species of alga, and/or a cyanobacterium, and often encrusted with a yeast-type fungus. Lichen scientific names are based on the fungus species providing the lichen's form, so possibly the publication is referring to a lichen.

The fungus species documented inducing lenticels on the trunk of the tree Xylopia sericea was Claviradulomyces xylopiae. The host tree, Xylopia sericea, belongs to the Annona Family. Our Limestone Senna tree is a member of the Bean Family. I could find no reference to the fungus encouraging lenticels on other tree species than Xylopia sericea.

However, about 10m from our Limestone Senna there's a young Sapranthus campechianus tree in the same Annona Family as the Brazilian Xylopia sericea mentioned in the paper, so I looked for lichen splotches with oversized lenticels on its bark. I found what's shown at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215lm.jpg

Lenticels within the dark splotch are more developed than on the surrounding grayish bark. Not only that, but on a Red Persimmon tree, Diospyros anisandra, in yet another family, and standing only about 5m from the Limestone Senna, I found what's shown at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215ll.jpg

In fact, in our arid, limestone-karst environment, many tree species in various families display splotchy bark, and I find lenticel development often varying from splotch to splotch on many trees. I don't understand why more literature on the matter isn't showing up on the Internet. Am I noticing something not well known to science?

Whatever the case, in this entry I've repeated certain key words often enough that maybe someday a researcher will make contact with more information, and be glad to have our pictures and information.

*****

BREADNUT TREE'S MALE FLOWERS
At https://www.backyardnature.net/chiapas/artocarp.htm we've looked at a Breadnut tree bearing immature fruits. Breadnut trees, as is typical of the Fig Family to which they belong, bear unisexual flowers. Their large, spherical, spiky fruits are technically called "syncarps," because they're composed of the matured pistils of 1500-2000 female flowers. Each spine on a fruit represents a single female flower, so what we think of as the big Breadnut fruit is actually a collection of many hundreds of fruits.

Last October during my camping trip in Chiapas, on the entry road to Palenque National Park, a Breadnut tree turned up bearing not only spiky fruits but also a long, yellow item dangling from a branch's tip, shown at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215ac.jpg

The yellow thing is about 25cm long (10inches). Up close it became apparent what it was, as seen at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215ad.jpg

It's a flowering head of what must be tens of thousands of closely packed male flowers, each flower bearing just one stamen. In the picture small, native bees are collecting pollen from the masses of anthers.

One wonders why the male flowering head is so large and conspicuous. Is so much pollen really needed, and must it be presented in such a spectacular manner? On the Internet there's an interesting paper entitled "A Flower in Fruit’s Clothing that offers some insight. It describes how a certain kind of gall midge, an insect that damages fruits by laying eggs in them, is attracted to such conspicuous heads of male flowers -- which appear before the fruits ripen -- thus being deflected from depositing eggs in the fruits.

******

USING A PORTABLE WATER FILTER
Last October when I was camping in northern Guatemala's Rosario National Park, no drinkable water was available except as bottled water in the nearest town. However, inside the park there was a little lake with fish in the clear water. I didn't think the water was polluted, but certainly it had microorganisms such as tiny amoebas that can make you very sick. Since getting to town required a long walk, I was glad I'd brought along my portable water filter, which you can see set up for producing potable water directly from the lake at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215fi.jpg

The plastic bottle below the filter is from my last store-bought water supply. You can see the entire filter taken apart to dry after pumping the water at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/19/190215fj.jpg

In that picture the end of the plastic tube that's positioned in the water to be filtered is affixed with a little metal coil that both adds weight to hold the tube in the water, and to retain a plug of spongy "inlet foam," which accomplishes the first filtering, keeping out floating leaves, aquatic insects and the like.

The tube conducts water to the red "pump head" with its black handle. The pump head does no filtering, just fits securely atop the cylindrical, black, plastic "housing" at the picture's left. The fitting must be secure because as the handle is pumped, considerable water pressure is created inside the housing. The main filter is the cylindrical, pale-orange "ceramic element" in the picture's center. This fits inside the housing. The black, plastic, screw-on cover shown above the ceramic element screws onto the housing's base, and also must be secure enough to withstand the water pressure inside the housing.

As the pump handle is worked, water from the source is fed around the ceramic element, not into it. Water pressure forces the pumped water into the ceramic element, which contains microscope pores. Particles larger than the pores stay on the ceramic element's surface. Water reaching the ceramic element's hollow interior contains nothing larger than the pores' diameter, which is 0.2 microns, or 0.0002mm.

The filter doesn't remove salt from seawater, or water contaminated by runoff from mines or agricultural chemicals. Nor does it remove all viruses, radioactive materials or particles smaller than 0.2microns. When you get down to 0.2microns, however, you're dealing with things at the molecular level and to filter that you need more than a backpacker's hand-filter.

When finished filtering, you must use a small scrubbing pad to lightly scour the ceramic element's surface, because that's where the filtered-out gunk accumulates. Scouring erodes the element, so after a certain number of scourings the element has to be replaced. If you don't scour, before long such high pressure must be built up inside the housing that the hose pops off, which is better than having the handle break, which would be the next event.

The filter is rated as producing about one liter (quart) of filtered water per minute, but I'm a little slower than that, not wanting to break that handle. One ceramic element filters about 2000 liters (quarts) of water and endured 30-60 scrubbings, but that depends on water conditions.

The filter shown in the photos is a Miniworks® EX sold my MSR/ Cascade Designs, Inc. of Seattle, Washington.

On my backpacking trips into the back country I always carry this along. Also, I figure it's good to keep one handy just in case the infrastructure breaks down. I think it would do fine filtering water out of a commode or birdbath, and someday it may come to that for a lot of people.

*****

MICE IN A RED STATE, AND A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT
Eric in Mérida sent along a link to a new article in The Atlantic, by Ed Yong, entitled The Wild Experiment That Showed Evolution in Real Time. Evolutionary scientists established two large, identical enclosures, except that one had dark soil, the other light. Both enclosures were populated with local mice whose individual coats displayed the normal variation of hues. Owls more easily spotted dark-furred mice on light soil, so in the light soil pen more light-furred mice survived to produce offspring; over the generations the average coat color of the whole population drifted toward lighter fur. It was the opposite in the dark-soil pen.

This is exactly what textbooks have been telling us happens for decades. However, the general principles of how evolution works have been so obvious, and so frequently confirmed in the lab, that very seldom have they been tested in the field, which this study did. Also, these researchers went further than usual, identifying the gene responsible for the mice's coat color, plus they figured out how mutations in that gene affected inherited color.

Still, the study basically just ties the knot on a body of insight that's been around for a long time. For me, the most interesting feature of the experiment is that it dealt with evolution, yet took place in Nebraska where roughly a third of the citizens believe that species were created as they are now, and another third believe in evolution, but through God's design.

Recognizing the ticklish situation, when talking to local people the researchers just didn't use the word "evolution." They simply told people what they were doing, and sometimes over some beer shared accounts of what they were seeing. Local folks remained friendly and supportive.

Rowan Barrett, project leader, explained that even though the locals might react negatively to the word "evolution," many people in the area were farmers who understood about inheritance and genetics. Many were hunters well aware of Nature's survival of the fittest. They knew about natural variation, and that a slow deer was easier to shoot than a fast deer. "Inheritance, variation, fitness... all the pieces are there," explained Barrett.

So, if we conduct a mind-experiment in which one enclosure consists of predominantly conservative, religious, red-state people like Nebraskans, and another enclosure is predominantly populated with the kind of people in the blue states, in the long run, citizens in which pen will prove to be best adapted and thus survive longer?

At first I assumed that blue-state people would survive longer because they're more open to new ideas and therefore can evolve new mental adaptations for the changing world. However, remembering Barrett's observation that his red-staters understood the importance of inheritance, variation, and fitness, I contrasted that with the situation among blue-staters. Most people in the more urban blue states, my experience has been, don't have that basic, first-hand experience. And I believe that having personal insight into inheritance, variation and fitness is much more adaptive for sustainable living on Earth than not having them.

But, the mind-experiment didn't stop there. Also my experience is that many red staters let religious doctrine and simplistic political notions affect their judgment and behavior, neutralizing any deep-seated, natural insights they may have. Also, blue staters tend to not live up to their own "progressive" ideals, maybe doing things like driving a hundred miles to buy a basket of apples advertised as organic and locally produced.

After experiments are conducted and data are collected and analyzed, conclusions are stated. When I analyze all the above, and factor in the proven fact that the behavior and thinking of most people can be swayed one way or another by artful propaganda, I come to the conclusion that reality is too tricky and the human mind too vulnerable to too many influences for anyone to be sure about the appropriateness and survivability -- or the "goodness" or "badness" -- of his or her own thinking and behavior.

Also, both the Nebraska and the mind experiment remind me of this: That whatever the soil color you're born onto, what's important is the diversity in the population. Without diversity there can't be competition, and without competition there can be no weeding out of unsustainable ways of being and thinking. And without this weeding out, there can be no adaptive evolution of the population in an ever-changing Universe.

*****

Best wishes to all Newsletter readers,

Jim

All previous Newsletters are archived at https://www.backyardnature.net/n/.