In this section, the Midwestern nymphs (#573 & #574) with the dark irregular ventral bars across the anterior portion of the sternites look like Maccaffertium mediopunctatum arwini
(the Midwestern ssp.), but the two Eastern duns (#733 & #765) and the associated shuck (of #765) and nymph (#764) look more like Maccaffertium ithaca
species can have very similar ventral markings in the nymph—dark, sinuate, chevron-shaped bars on many of the sternites and dark lateral marks (sometimes connected to form an inverted U-shaped mark) on segment 9. The Eastern mediopunctatum
subspecies, M. m. mediopunctatum
, has these markings, as does M. ithaca
. Similar markings also appear as a less-common variant marking of M. modestum
(or the M. modestum
species complex). However, these species differ in the length and location of posterolateral projections, leg markings, the appearance of the subs and adults, and size.
Although interpretation of posterolateral projections can be tricky, those projections should help to separate the nymph (and husk) from mediopunctatum
. On mediopunctatum
, projections are usually on segments 3-9, 4-9, or 5-9, and those on 8 and 9 are fairly long. On ithaca
, projections are usually on segments 6-9 or 7-9, and those on 8 and 9 are somewhat shorter (when compared to mediopunctatum
). The twin brown bands on the femora of the nymphs should also help to separate them from modestum
(usually three or four in those species).
The brown posterior margins and median dorsal stripes of the duns (similar to those found in M. vicarium
) are typical of ithaca
. In McDunnough’s original description of mediopunctatum
(1926), he mentions that some of his (paratype) specimens were reared from subimagos, and he describes those subimagos as “quite pale whitish in coloration.”
Size might also be somewhat helpful in distinguishing these specimens from M. m. mediopunctatum
(about 7-10 mm at maturity) and modestum
(about 8-11 mm at maturity). M. ithaca
is about 9-14 mm at maturity. The relatively mature nymph (#764) is at least 11 mm, the female dun (#733) is about 13 mm, and the male dun (#765) is about 11 mm.
When all of these factors are considered, it seems to me that M. ithaca
is a more likely ID for the Eastern specimens. (See Bednarik and McCafferty 1979 and Lewis 1974.) I would suggest the following placement for specimens currently in this section:
female dun: http://www.troutnut.com/specimen/733
male dun: http://www.troutnut.com/specimen/765
M. mediopunctatum arwini
M. mediopunctatum arwini
I notice that while the dun, nymph, and spinner photos on the page are all listed as March Brown (maccaffertium vicarium). While the coloration patterns all seem to follow other March Browns I have seen, I notice that the winged flies pictures all have 2 tails, but the nymphs in the photos have 3. I was under the impression this species was a 2 tailed mayfly. Is the nymph mislabelled?
I just wrote up what I found on the page for this species. I was mildly surprised to see so many of a species I've never seen mentioned in an angling context -- at least a few dozen throughout the evening. They piqued my curiosity.
i know that gray foxs and march browns are classified in the same family but what are the differences ? what is the color differences are both bodies the same color tan ?