Troutnut.com Fly Fishing for Trout Home
User Password
or register.
Scientific name search:

> > >>>>My 6 million dollar Stenonema / Maccaffertium question.<<<<

BrookymanJanuary 11th, 2013, 3:20 am
Banned
Posts: 797
My 6 million dollar Stenonema / Maccaffertium question.

This whole question is to be considered as a hypothetical situation.

It has taken me awhile to consider how to ask this very complicated question. It is my hopes that I have found the right words so as not to upset anything!!! but still make the question valid. So here we go.

In past discussions here there have been several “professional” statements that could easily be regarded as possible future changes to the Stenonema group. I will say no names or threads. The statements that were made can leave one to assume that in the future some of the Maccaffertium changes from Stenonema, MAY in fact come back to being Stenonema based on the DNA work being done, that is showing or not showing validity to the past revisions made.

Remember we are hypothetical here.

First off let me say that I personally to the best of my knowledge completely agree with the changes in the group to Maccaffertium. An example being fuscum to vicarium. The difference is so minor that they should be viewed as the same basic species. I personally do not have a problem with this, even though it does throw off the angling world from the historical stand point.

To the best of my understanding one of the more important “KEYS” in the establishment of any species into the Maccafferium genus, is the gill structures being ones that have truncated gills from 1-6 with the anal ribs, fibrils, and the 7th gill being thread like with no trachea and fringed with setae.

The last Stenonema standing has “rounded gills” from 1-6, with fibrils, and the 7th being thread like with trachea and setae. Stenacron has gills that terminate to a point from 1-6 with fibrils, and the 7th gill having no trachea and no setae on the fringes.

Again I have no problems with these past changes to this point.

Now for my 6 million dollar question.


With that being said ”””IF”””” there is to be revisions in the future regarding the validity of species in the Maccaffertium genus based on the DNA work. How will it be possible to return any species to Stenonema when the gill sanctions are in place to stipulate genus. By the standards we have in place it is now impossible to return any Maccaffertium species to Stenonema based on this major KEY credential requirement being GILLS.

I guess this really only would apply if any revisions were to ever happen.

I have no intention of raising any hackles here, it is just a observation.

Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
CrepuscularJanuary 11th, 2013, 7:46 am
Boiling Springs, PA

Posts: 919
Wouldn't the Stenonema fermoratumjust come out at a species level designation? The keys would show Stenonema as having either truncated or rounded gills like they used to, but that would only work if all of the Mccaffertium were to be reinstated as Stenonema. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
MartinlfJanuary 11th, 2013, 10:41 am
Moderator
Palmyra PA

Posts: 2968
Yikes! ;>
"He spread them a yard and a half. 'And every one that got away is this big.'"

--Fred Chappell
EntomanJanuary 11th, 2013, 6:32 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Yikes! is right.:)

So we don't go too deep into the weeds here and cross everybody's eyes, the easiest way to discuss Mack's excellent question is to clear up a little misunderstanding about taxonomy that's easy to fall into. Classification concepts aren't just formulated on shared characters but also on where & when those characters were acquired from their ancestral heritage. The tree of life has many forks, branches, stems, twigs, and leaves. If the leaf in this analogy is a species, how do we differentiate it from other leaves that look very similar? The differences lie in the twig, stem, branch from which it emanates. That's what DNA science really helps with.

A bat has wings and flies, is it a bird? I remember Mellville's "Moby-Dick" having a long detailed diatribe in it about the argument among taxonomists of the day over whether or not a whale was a fish. Whether this argument was actually raging at the time or whether it was simply a literary device, I don't know. But again the point is, shared morphological characters are only helpful at developing an understanding of a classification concept if we understand how they relate to other characters and where/when along the journey from trunk to leaf they were acquired. Sometimes different branches can develop leaves that look remarkably similar. Case in point - An Isonychia bicolor (Leadwing Coachman) is a large and very fast swimmer nymph one would think closely related to Gray Drakes and Baetis. In reality, it is actually more closely related to the flatheaded clingers of the Heptageniidae, and they don't swim worth a damn.:)

The monotypical genus Stenonema, while very similar to Maccaffertium looks to have stemmed from a different "twig" at this point.
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
CrenoJanuary 11th, 2013, 6:54 pm
Grants Pass, OR

Posts: 298
Howdy - being an "outsider" to this discussion and having no real interest in mayflies other than as fish, and caddis, food :-) I have been watching this thread off and on. Informative and great fun. Especially since as an angler I have never really learned the angling nomenclature. Being a taxonomist of a fish food group where the angler has created relatively few common names that the angler believes are distinct at the species level also helps enjoy this thread.

But I thought I would throw in a thought at this point. Is it possible the degree of gill pointedness is the wrong character to use to separate larvae at the the "genus" level? Of course there are lots of other twists on this theme - had a point and lost it, etc. - but the issue seems the same. A long standing morphological character used to separate any taxonomic level can be changed based on accumulated knowledge. And they often do. Keys are not cast in stone.

To paraphrase one of those late, great, presidents - so shallow the mind of a man who can key only one way.
EntomanJanuary 11th, 2013, 7:14 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Is it possible the degree of gill pointedness is the wrong character to use to separate larvae at the the "genus" level?

Good point, Dave. I think that is what Eric was alluding to as well. Luke and Jeff are better able to address this but gill characters aside, I believe it is also supported by phylogenetic evidence among other differences.
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
BrookymanJanuary 11th, 2013, 11:24 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
Hi Kurt and friends.

So my question is somewhat worded right ??? I should have also been
even more stressful regarding other taxonomic keys. However in every
manual I have browsed, and or read the words gills & projection
are constantly stressed in the larval classification for all the genus in this group. From Bednarik & Mccafferty 1979 forward.

In part this question is really only focused on larval.

Webb & Mccafferty 2008 Heptagenia of the world part II

Apex of lamellae of gills 1-6 truncate (Fig. 94); lamellae of gills 7 without trachea (Fig. 95);
maculation of abdominal sterna variable; Nearctic and Central American distribution (Fig. 232)
.......................................................................................................................................... Maccaffertium


Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
BrookymanJanuary 11th, 2013, 11:28 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
Hi Eric
That makes the most sense to me just move the
Stenonema femoratum to Stenonema femoratum LOL :)

Mack :) Sorry I just had to do that.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
BrookymanJanuary 11th, 2013, 11:38 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
hey Kurt

So we don't go too deep into the weeds here

I only use weedless hooks when typing a question :) :) LMAO.

Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
EntomanJanuary 11th, 2013, 11:42 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
So my question is somewhat worded right ???

Well, that can best be determined by knowing if the answers satisfy you!:)
As to what I think your point is about the key couplet, taxonomic work comes first and the dichotomous keys follow. Remember the joke - keys are written by those that don't need them for those that can't use them. The couplets in W & M '08 (or any key) are designed to help others diagnose their specimens. They aren't written as comprehensive lists of the differences between the genera.
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
EntomanJanuary 12th, 2013, 3:47 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Mack -

I think I missed one aspect of your questioning that should be discussed and that was your mention of potential changes regarding Maccaffertium. The most likely scenario is that these will occur within the genus through new species designations and/or synonymy. That is what I believe Luke and Jeff were hinting at in those other threads you mentioned. In the unlikely event that new evidence suggests the genus status is no longer valid, then the outcome would be as Crepuscular and Creno suggested. Since Stenonema would have pride of place due to the rules governing taxonomic nomenclature, that would be the genus name for the Maccaffertium species. I agree with Eric that the difference in gill structure would not be problematic as it would simply be used to differentiate S. femoratum nymphs from the others, probably in the first couplet of a new species key.

What would really cook our noodles is if evidence pointed to one of the species in Maccaffertium different from the original type as still deserving a separate genus.:) What would it be called?
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman
CrepuscularJanuary 12th, 2013, 5:25 pm
Boiling Springs, PA

Posts: 919


What would really cook our noodles is if evidence pointed to one of the species in Maccaffertium different from the original type as still deserving a separate genus.:) What would it be called?


Exactly, and maybe I didn't stress that part of my response enough. If we are going to play in the hypothetical here, we should take everything into consideration.

Eric
BrookymanJanuary 12th, 2013, 6:20 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
Very true Eric, nature has always played tricks on us. Just when we get it!!! the moment is gone. Einstein said it best [ Everything effects Everything ] nothing is constant nothing stays the same.

Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
BrookymanJanuary 12th, 2013, 6:31 pm
Banned
Posts: 797
Hey Kurt

I can't wait to see the way the Maccaffertium cards are shuffled. Good point I believe that is what they ment, but I can't help myself in wondering if that could ever happen. BTW I read somewhere about a paper called Heptagenia world part III coming soon am I right about that, and did I hear that from you.???

I went sampling today..WOW the water is moving at 5 katrillion miles per hour and 2 feet over my hip wader, and 35 degrees, it was a very mild day, but that water is way to cold on the hands.


Mack.
Banned for threatening another user and then trying to circumvent a kinder "soft" ban with fake accounts
EntomanJanuary 12th, 2013, 9:45 pm
Northern CA & ID

Posts: 2604
Geez, I don't remember. Perhaps you saw it in another thread? Or maybe in a PM from Jeff?

As far as the water being too high and cold, it's probably way too early anyway. Immatures aren't all that usefull for ID's. It's nice to be outdoors and breathe fresh air, though! Heck, I look for any excuse I can...:)
"It's not that I find fishing so important, it's just that I find all other endeavors of Man equally unimportant... And not nearly as much fun!" Robert Traver, Anatomy of a Fisherman

Quick Reply

You have to be logged in to post on the forum. It's this easy:
Username:          Email:

Password:    Confirm Password:

I am at least 13 years old and agree to the rules.

Related Discussions

TitleRepliesLast Reply
Re: The enigma I have
(2 more)

In the Identify This! Board by Brookyman
4Oct 24, 2012
by Entoman
Re: Arcynopteryx
In Isogenoides hansoni Stonefly Nymph by Taxon
3Nov 9, 2011
by Entoman
Re: Maccaffertium name change
In General Discussion by Brookyman
8Jan 1, 2013
by Brookyman
Re: Size Variation in March Browns
In the Identify This! Board by Fishskicano
5May 20, 2009
by GONZO
Re: Grannoms
In Onocosmoecus unicolor Caddisfly Larva by Martinlf
11May 22, 2008
by GONZO
what did you do this winter
(10 more)

In the Photography Board by Brookyman
0
Re: A few bugs from the Kinderhook Creek (NY)
In the Identify This! Board by Agresens
3Jun 27, 2018
by Konchu
Re: lot of these guys
In the Identify This! Board by Brookyman
4Apr 7, 2013
by Brookyman
Acerpenna?
In Male Baetis Mayfly Dun by Entoman
0
Re: Help identifying?
In the Identify This! Board by Doublezz105
3Jul 9, 2007
by Taxon
Most Recent Posts
Re: The Coppler Creek canyon - some nice pics from last fall to help you survive the Apocalypse
In the Photography Board by Jmd123 (Partsman replied)
Re: My wild & crazy Flordia trip part 3: hotel room and other fun stuff
In the Photography Board by Jmd123
Re: I hope all of you doing well!
In General Discussion by Partsman (Jmd123 replied)
Re: Hyrnia operation
In General Discussion by Hunter1
Re: Selecting a reel
In Beginner Help by AllanM83 (Roguerat replied)
Re: Thunder Creek flies
In Fly Tying by Dbinmt (Wbranch replied)
Re: Trout Unlimited, who are they?
In General Discussion by Red_green_h (Rollcast replied)
Re: Furled Leaders
In Gear Talk by Ov10fac (Martinlf replied)
Re: Personal Best Largemouth
In the Photography Board by Summer_doug
Re: My wild and crazy trip to Florida & back while the world went crazy in my "absence"
In the Photography Board by Jmd123