1

Topic: Moth aggregates 2 - Common and Lesser Common Rustic

The UKSI has two version of the Common Rustic agg.:
Mesapamea secalis agg. - Common Rustic agg.
Mesapamea secalis/didyma - Common/Lesser Rustic

Personally I'd prefer there to be only one version of this agg. in the UKSI, but which should it be?

I believe I'm right in saying that Mesapamea remmi is not thought to be a separate species any more, so I think it would be better to use "Mesapamea secalis/didyma" in preference to "Mesapamea secalis agg.", but I'm aware that MapMate uses "Mesapamea secalis agg.".

What do others think? Should we stick to "Mesapamea secalis agg.", or use the more informative "Mesapamea secalis/didyma"?

Martin Harvey
Biological Records Centre
CEH Wallingford

2

Re: Moth aggregates 2 - Common and Lesser Common Rustic

If Remm's is not considered a species anymore but a hybrid of the other two using secalis/didyma might lead to more confusion!

-----------------
Teresa Frost | Wetland Bird Survey National Organiser | BTO
Other hat  | National Forum for Biological Recording Council
(Old hats  | NBN Board, ALERC Board, CBDC, KMBRC)

3

Re: Moth aggregates 2 - Common and Lesser Common Rustic

I'm watching this keenly, as an unbiased observer :)

Chris Raper, Manager of the UK Species Inventory, Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity,
Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD.  (tel: 020 7942 5894)
also Tachinid Recording Scheme (http://tachinidae.org.uk/)

4

Re: Moth aggregates 2 - Common and Lesser Common Rustic

Just bumping this up - is there a formal decision on Remm's? I note it's missing from the new Lep checklist. If it's the case that it has been decided to be a hybrid, should Mesapamea remmi be sunk as a synonym of (a newly created) Mesapamea didyma x secalis?

Onto the original question - I prefer Mesapamea secalis agg. but I don't really mind as long as there is only one (my reasoning being that you wouldn't list out the included species for a >2 species agg)! Oh, and some consistency across all taxa would be nice...!

Also, Chris the common name of Mesapamea secalis agg. on the Recorder 3 list is Common Rustic - it should be Common Rustic agg.

Charlie Barnes
Information Officer
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership

5

Re: Moth aggregates 2 - Common and Lesser Common Rustic

My vote would be in agreement with Charlie - Mesapamea secalis agg.

Steve

Steve J. McWilliam
www.rECOrd-LRC.co.uk
www.stevemcwilliam.co.uk/guitar/

6

Re: Moth aggregates 2 - Common and Lesser Common Rustic

Mesapamea remmi is a hybrid of secalis x didyma confirmed by DNA (per Agassiz et al).

Les

Les Evans-Hill
Senior Data Officer, National Moth Recording Scheme

7

Re: Moth aggregates 2 - Common and Lesser Common Rustic

Hmm, to me "Mesapamea secalis agg." could contain secalis, didyma or remmi(?) ... but secalis/didyma is fairly explicit as just those species. Do we have any more thoughts on whether the system needs changing?

Chris Raper, Manager of the UK Species Inventory, Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity,
Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD.  (tel: 020 7942 5894)
also Tachinid Recording Scheme (http://tachinidae.org.uk/)