The 'Scarce Seven Spotted Ladybird' Thread!

[Jason Green]

Hi all,

This is a thread for any news or sightings of the Scarce Seven Spotted Ladybird. I've never seen one before, though it is certainly one I'd travel across London to see!

Feel free to add to this thread - it may be a way of collating good information that will enable those of us wanting to see one, find them

Similar threads:
Scarce Seven-spot Ladybird?

Images:


Take cake,

Jason

[JRsbugs]

Thanks Jason, good idea! Now we can get down to business....

You (and others) may rightly have your views on this, but I prefer evidence. Evidence starts with white patches behind all legs 'in my view', give me evidence that the 7-spot has those as well and I may consider that.

You have posted some pics to show what they should look like, but as you have already stated there are variations in all creatures.

Here's a pic on the Ladybird-survey which looks much different!

UK Ladybird Survey - Species Description

Now, I have read on a scientific site that C. magnifica is present with the Formica rufa group.

IngentaConnect Adaptations of Coccinella magnifica Redtenbacher, a Myrmecophilou...

If that is correct, and why it should not be I don't know, then that group includes:

Formica aquilonia
Formica lugubris
Formica pratensis
Formica rufa

as listed on Wikipedia.

Formica rufa group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As mentioned by Jason (Claxton) on page 31 of the other thread:

The Ladybirds of Surrey by Roger D.Hawkins has just one record of C.magnifica away from Formica rufa ,here it was seen with the aphids tended by Formica sanguinea,

So that's another species, Formica sanguinea.

Now take a look at Formica lugubris.... I have pics of one which looks rather like this, and I should add "if that is correct" in case someone jumps on me.

File:Formica cf lugubris 4.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NOW check on BWARS where these ants should be. I say should because I think Stuart would tell you that some are old records, and apart from that many are under-recorded. Such as in Lincolnshire!

Look at for example Formica rufa, there's a record near the Humber, another south to the Wash. well, um, I'm midway between those two!

Distribution Maps

As mentioned before, I have many species not mentioned anywhere, including a first for Lincolnshire moth record Ectoedemia quinquella and the rare in Lincolnshire Luffia ferchaultella.

Why have I found these when no-one else has been able to? Because I spend hours looking at my wall, my tree, my Ivy, my anything! I also have a lens capable of taking good enough pics of them! How many people do that? Very few! OK hate me if you will, but truth is truth.

There is also the shape of the white patch on the pronotum which is supposed to be more rounded in the Scarce, looking at some of my ordinary 7-spots they do have a more square shape or don't have the upward curve towards the middle but they vary a little. I do think my suspect one has an rounded upward curve, but the angle is not the best to view it.

Google Translate

What I now need to do is to establish exactly which ants I have, but not just now as it's late.

Janet

[JRsbugs]

Here's a link to where it all started, you missed it out Jason!

http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...ct-day-31.html

[JRsbugs]

I have read the thread you linked to Jason, a couple of interesting points there which are very important!

First, Paul Mabbot has stated:

The critical difference is an underside feature

Meaning of course the white under the legs.

Puddin4brains (Arp) who knows a lot, also stated:

People from France told me that they occasionally find it away from ants, so it's probably not strictly bound to them but obviously has a great advantage over other species when it remains in their vicinity (?)

I would like to know why then these important factors have been so easily dismissed in favour of opinions....

[Jason Claxton]

Here is another award winning shot(cough )of C.magnifica with its "Hatchback rear" profile .Cheers Jason.

[Jenny W]

Sorry to butt in on a thread that I'm not involved in, but I've been reading this on both this thread and the other one and I just thought that it would be worth pointing out that if records (especially potentially important ones like this) are going to be claimed and/or submitted to county recorders/NBN etc. then the recorder really must be prepared to take specimens for ID. As we all know, many many species of insects cannot be given a 100% definite ID on a photo alone. It would save so much argument and frustration as seen on this thread

That's my viewpoint as someone who does a lot of recording of various taxa. I hope I don't stir things up with this, I honestly don't mean to!

[Jason Claxton]

Jenny I also agree that records should only be submitted with 100% certainty,and I have to admit that with Janets photos and probably with most others, that I would not be happy for a record to be submitted solely on a photo I.D.This is when a voucher specimen becomes necessary.And I do admit that from time to time that I have deposited insects for this purpose.

[bonitin]

Originally Posted by Jason Claxton

Jenny I also agree that records should only be submitted with 100% certainty,and I have to admit that with Janets photos and probably with most others, that I would not be happy for a record to be submitted solely on a photo I.D.This is when a voucher specimen becomes necessary.

and..in the other thread;

Originally Posted by Jason Claxton

I do agree that from the pattern of the spots underneath that it is a Scarce 7-spot though,interesting indeed Janet

I wonder if anyone can show us an example of a common 7-spot with these white patches behind the legs..
There is no doubt Janets picture has it!

[tristanba]

Originally Posted by JRsbugs

Thanks Jason, good idea! Now we can get down to business....

You (and others) may rightly have your views on this, but I prefer evidence. Evidence starts with white patches behind all legs 'in my view', give me evidence that the 7-spot has those as well and I may consider that.

You have posted some pics to show what they should look like, but as you have already stated there are variations in all creatures.

Here's a pic on the Ladybird-survey which looks much different!

UK Ladybird Survey - Species Description

Now, I have read on a scientific site that C. magnifica is present with the Formica rufa group.

IngentaConnect Adaptations of Coccinella magnifica Redtenbacher, a Myrmecophilou...

If that is correct, and why it should not be I don't know, then that group includes:

Formica aquilonia
Formica lugubris
Formica pratensis
Formica rufa

as listed on Wikipedia.

Formica rufa group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As mentioned by Jason (Claxton) on page 31 of the other thread:



So that's another species, Formica sanguinea.

Now take a look at Formica lugubris.... I have pics of one which looks rather like this, and I should add "if that is correct" in case someone jumps on me.

File:Formica cf lugubris 4.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NOW check on BWARS where these ants should be. I say should because I think Stuart would tell you that some are old records, and apart from that many are under-recorded. Such as in Lincolnshire!

Look at for example Formica rufa, there's a record near the Humber, another south to the Wash. well, um, I'm midway between those two!

Distribution Maps

As mentioned before, I have many species not mentioned anywhere, including a first for Lincolnshire moth record Ectoedemia quinquella and the rare in Lincolnshire Luffia ferchaultella.

Why have I found these when no-one else has been able to? Because I spend hours looking at my wall, my tree, my Ivy, my anything! I also have a lens capable of taking good enough pics of them! How many people do that? Very few! OK hate me if you will, but truth is truth.

There is also the shape of the white patch on the pronotum which is supposed to be more rounded in the Scarce, looking at some of my ordinary 7-spots they do have a more square shape or don't have the upward curve towards the middle but they vary a little. I do think my suspect one has an rounded upward curve, but the angle is not the best to view it.

Google Translate

What I now need to do is to establish exactly which ants I have, but not just now as it's late.

Janet

Janet, as several have pointed out, it is really is futile to continue this discussion without confirming the identification from a voucher. If you actually collected a specimen, you would not need to resort to such absurdly speculative lines of argument and leaps of faith. I know you are against killing insects in the name of science, so you must accept the limitations imposed by this viewpoint. You cannot have your cake and eat it

[tristanba]

Originally Posted by JRsbugs

As mentioned before, I have many species not mentioned anywhere, including a first for Lincolnshire moth record Ectoedemia quinquella and the rare in Lincolnshire Luffia ferchaultella.

Why have I found these when no-one else has been able to? Because I spend hours looking at my wall, my tree, my Ivy, my anything! I also have a lens capable of taking good enough pics of them! How many people do that? Very few! OK hate me if you will, but truth is truth.

While we all find rarities from time to time, it is not really that surprising since many apparently scarce insects are under-recorded and their distributions are poorly known. Even so, in cases such as this, you must accept the most likely explanation unless you can prove otherwise.