Troutnut Forum > Specimen Discussion > Anyone recognize this Drunella?
The Specimen
Drunella tuberculata Mayfly Dun
View 14 PicturesI don't know for sure that this is Drunalla tuberculata, but that's my best guess for now.
It certainly has a different look and much more robust body shape from Drunella lata duns I photographed a couple weeks earlier, so I doubt it's that species. Using distribution records to eliminate other choices narrows this down to Drunella tuberculata or Drunella walkeri.
Markings described for the abdominal sternites (Sternite: The bottom (ventral) part of a single segment on an insect's abdomen.) of the male spinner of Drunella tuberculata are suspiciously similar to those on this female dun. Also, this dun is 9.5mm long (my ruler pic isn't very good, but I'm basing this on measuring the real thing). The size range given in the old Allen & Edmunds keys for walkeri females is 7-8mm, while tuberculata is 9-11mm. For these reasons I'm sticking it in tuberculata for now.
This is the only Drunella mayfly I saw all day. I scooped it off the water as it emerged at around 7pm from a big Catskill tailwater.
View 14 PicturesI don't know for sure that this is Drunalla tuberculata, but that's my best guess for now. It certainly has a different look and much more robust body shape from Drunella lata duns I photographed a couple weeks earlier, so I doubt it's that species. Using distribution records to eliminate other choices narrows this down to Drunella tuberculata or Drunella walkeri.
Markings described for the abdominal sternites (Sternite: The bottom (ventral) part of a single segment on an insect's abdomen.) of the male spinner of Drunella tuberculata are suspiciously similar to those on this female dun. Also, this dun is 9.5mm long (my ruler pic isn't very good, but I'm basing this on measuring the real thing). The size range given in the old Allen & Edmunds keys for walkeri females is 7-8mm, while tuberculata is 9-11mm. For these reasons I'm sticking it in tuberculata for now.
View Full Size
This is the only Drunella mayfly I saw all day. I scooped it off the water as it emerged at around 7pm from a big Catskill tailwater.
Region: Catskills
Collected Jun 1, 2007
Added Jun 8, 2007
The Discussion
| Troutnut | June 8th, 2007, 5:52 pm | |
| Fairbanks, AK Posts: 1115 | I'm a bit puzzled about this one. See the specimen description for details. I know female duns are awful for identification, but this is the only one of its species I could find. Would any of you Ephemerellid experts (Konchu!!) care to take a guess? | |
| Jason Neuswanger The Troutnut | ||
|
These advertisements will disappear if you register. | ||
| GONZO | June 8th, 2007, 6:58 pm | |
| "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 876 | Could be tuberculata, but distinguishing between that and walkeri is something I'll leave in Konchu's capable hands. However, I don't think that the size difference suggested by Allen and Edmunds is valid. | |
| Troutnut | June 8th, 2007, 7:01 pm | |
| Fairbanks, AK Posts: 1115 | I don't think that the size difference suggested by Allen and Edmunds is valid. You're probably right. That's a pretty outdated paper. It's just the best hint I've got to go on for now. | |
| Jason Neuswanger The Troutnut | ||
| GONZO | June 8th, 2007, 8:07 pm | |
| "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 876 | I just reread Konchu's paper on the Drunella revisions, hoping to find something more definitive. It mostly helped to confirm that distinguishing between tuberculata, walkeri, and allegheniensis is very difficult due to variability. I suppose it's appropriate to rule out allegheniensis based on distribution. I also thought that the early hatch date might rule out walkeri, but apparently there can be wide discrepancies between different groups or cohorts even within the species. (And an evening Drunella emergence is something I've only witnessed on the Delaware.) | |
| Konchu | June 9th, 2007, 9:03 am | |
| Indiana Posts: 200 | Too early in the morning to put a species name on that specimen. Walkeri/tuberculata are likely candidates. I'd lean towards walkeri, but I'd never put it in writing on a det label. | |
| Troutnut | June 9th, 2007, 11:19 am | |
| Fairbanks, AK Posts: 1115 | What do you guys think of the protrusion below the right eye on the second picture down? That's an interesting feature in a dun. | |
| Jason Neuswanger The Troutnut | ||
| GONZO | June 9th, 2007, 11:27 am | |
| "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 876 | It appears to have lost its righthand antenna, so I took that protrusion to be the healed remains. Perhaps the damage occurred in an earlier larval stage. | |
| Taxon | June 9th, 2007, 12:32 pm | |
| Mercer Island, WA Posts: 483 | Anyone know on which lifestage(s) and anatomic location(s) the tubercle(s) (for which this species in named) appear(s)? Once Jason got me looking closely at the second photo, I couldn't help but wonder about that interesting midline nodule on top of the head, or perhaps the pronotum. | |
| Roger Rohrbeck www.FlyfishingEntomology.com | ||
| GONZO | June 9th, 2007, 1:22 pm | |
| "Bear Swamp," PA Posts: 876 | Roger, I'm not sure about the etymology of the name, but it may refer to tubercles on the forefemora. These were the tubercles most often referenced in the diagnostics in Konchu's paper. | |
New features!
