|
Weevil
News |
No. 30 |
4 pp. |
24. September 2005 |
ISSN 1615-3472
|
|
|
Stüben P.E.
& F. Bahr (2005):
Illustrated Key of the Cryptorhynchinae of
Middle-Europe. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Cryptorhynchinae) - Weevil News: http://www.curci.de/Inhalt.html,
No. 30: 4 pp., CURCULIO-Institute: Mönchengladbach. (ISSN 1615-3472). |
|||||
Illustrated
Key of the Cryptorhynchinae of Middle-Europe
(Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Cryptorhynchinae)
by
Peter E. Stüben, Mönchengladbach, & Friedhelm Bahr, Viersen
Abstract
For the first time a subfamily
of Curculionidae, the Central European species of Cryptorhynchinae, are
accounted in a pictorial key. In the introduction the advantage of such a
pictorial key is presented and discussed under the “primacy of scientific
illustrations in identification works”.
Key words
Curculionidae, Cryptorhynchinae,
Acalles, Kyklioacalles, Onyxacalles, Echinodera, Ruteria, Gasterocercus,
Camptorhinus, Cryptorhynchus, Acallocrates, pictorial key,
Middle-Europe
Zusammenfassung
Erstmalig wird eine Unterfamilie
der Curculionidae, die Arten der Cryptorhynchinae, für Mitteleuropa in einem
Bilderschlüssel dargestellt. In einer Einleitung werden die Vorteile eines
solchen Bilderschlüssels unter dem „Primat der wissenschaftlichen Illustration
in Bestimmungswerken“ vorgestellt und diskutiert.
The
primacy of scientific illustrations in identification works
by
Peter E. Stüben
The scientific illustration can’t be stopped in the era of digital revolution in entomology, too. In 1981/1983, when the weevil volumes of the “Käfer Mitteleuropas” (FHL) were published, the often very vague and “±“ unspecific descriptions had priority in the diagnoses. [Freude / Harde / Lohse 1981, 1983] The few outline drawings received little attention, concerning accuracy and recognizability - often they were regarded as tiresome accessories.
Hence, a sure and reliable identification of the Central European Cryptorhynchinae was nearly impossible without the attendant work of A. & F. Solari [Solari A. & F. 1907], A. Hoffmann [Hoffmann 1958], G. Tempère & J. Péricart [Tempère G & J. Péricart (1989] and L. Dieckmann [Dieckmann 1982]. This can be attributed mainly to two circumstances.
1. Where conventional keys don’t allow a quick and specific identification, but call for the ‘art of the right interpretation’ of the user, there scientists have lost sight of the most important goal: The scientifically didactic reduction to the essentials. And who among us may study the first descriptions and differential diagnoses from the offprints with attention, kindly sent from the colleagues ? Who does’nt enjoy the more expressive pen-and-ink drawings in the past, allowing a sure identification of the specimens? And who doesn’t sometimes agree with the cliché, that a well-done table for comparisons is worth more than all descriptions in the world ?
So, in the digital era a Copernican change begins to emerge: Up to now one assumed that the reliable identification of the actual animals should be a function of the text, but from now on one should examine whether scientific illustration, detail and habitus illustrations allow us by far a better recognization of the actual insects. Where digital photography is the method of first choice, the classical print-media are strongly limited ‘physically’. Whereas there we have often only 1-2 illustrations, accompanying the ‘scientific text’, we now have often dozens of illustrations, allowing a quick visual grasp - without many words! Interactive on a data carrier or in the internet, such pictorial keys should allow the for effective determination mainly visually: >From the overall impression (habitus) of an insect over its details to the differentially diagnostical comparison of the distinguishing characters. (It is presupposed here, that the ‘dichotomous key’ is conceptually and methodologically superior to all other alternative keys.)
In presenting the ‘Illustrated Key of the Cryptorhynchinae of Middle-Europe’ we aim to stimulate experiments with the primacy of digital scientific illustrations. Layout and composition of pictures to tables are as important for the quick identification as the habitus or detail photo itself. But not everything is possible non-verbally, - not yet! Following the maxim, that the best (though not the phylogenetically correct) identification key will allow the fastest and surest determination, the goal remains a direct comparison of pictures: To see via microscope, what the digital illustration on the screen contains, is without dissolving projections and corresponding programmes, without computer tomographies and biometrical data not yet possible at present for automatic species recognization.
2. We are in the middle of a change of paradigm. And it is fundamental - not only what concerns the primacy of scientific illustration in first descriptions and differential diagnoses (keys). The digital publications have the outstanding property to go far beyond the possibilities of print-media; this is of basic significance and consequence for the scientific process: Through an accelerated scientific process of learning and discussion (‘trial and error’) where false facts and findings intervene in the progress of theories and hypotheses and were put for discussion - ad infinitum - once again in ‘pictures and words’.
Who hasn’t already gotten angry about the FHL volumes and the numerous supplements on his desk ? And who hasn’t sometimes implied that the ‘neolithic’ announcements of the editors and publishing houses is only out of economic interest, when they repeatedly said that the next supplement volume would be followed surely by a further one ? The digital medium doesn’t know similar anachronistic games, that stop the process of learning - for whatever reasons. Taxonomic-systematic catalogues, faunistic surveys and of course identification keys belong in the internet or on media that can be reproduced easily and without any problems - and not carved into neolithic steles or (maximizing the profit) between covers on paper - as if they were made for eternity.
So, the following identification key for the - up to now - difficult Central European Cryptorhynchinae is thought to be a request for collaboration. Someone will take exception to the fact, that we followed the arbitrary geo-entomologic arrangement of the FHL - as if we should know (and our Acalles species) where exactly this ‘Central Europe’ is situated (that is why we didn’t consider some ‘commuters from across the border’). Other people will not believe our detailed pictures by comparison with their completely de-scaled Acalles specimens and ask for better illustrations. And others will criticize fiercely our even generously shaded distribution maps (maps with spots are didactic nonsense in identification works!); because they sieved the species from leaf-litter already in the nineties 100 km further on (but have not been able up to now, to forward the data to us). Finally we will add perhaps even in the next months some more species to the 25 from 9 genera, that are presented here for the first time - the FHL only ‘knows’ 5 genera until now. (But everything may turn out quite differently: Who knows, what will be tomorrow between ‘climatic change’ - most of Cryptorhynchinae are unable to fly - and colleagues who make efforts to decrease species numbers by synonymization.)
In entomological science there is no standstill, and even the Cryptorhynchinae, often staying in cataleptic motionlessness move from time to time. So everything is in a state of flux: The researching subject and the explored object. Even the collector is badly advised, to use immobile pin areas and labels for his collection boxes instead of ‘Units’ (species system boxes).
This change from unique ‘historical publications’ sometimes enduring for generations of entomologists (e.g. the last extensive revision of the West Palaearctic species of the genus Acalles by the Solari-brothers was published in 1907) to an extremely dynamic and modern ‘age of worldwide scientific communication’ demands for a quicker access to information. Digital catalogues, indices and keys for identification become indispensable instruments of a useful documentation of the enormous amount of information gathered. And the advantage for authors, readers, scientists and collectors is obvious: Only the species, that can be identified, that are well-known, may be loved and conserved !
- Cryptorhynchinae ! Why not ?*
Acknowledgment
For friendly help to translate the text I express my thanks to Peter Sprick and Mark Russell. But my thanks is also offered to my friend Friedhelm Bahr: Without his pioneering success in the digital photography everything would have remained an utopian dream.
Much approval and criticism please direct to the authors:
Dr. Peter E. Stüben
CURCULIO-Institute
Hauweg 62, D- 41066 Mönchengladbach, Germany
E-Mail: P.Stueben@t-online.de
Friedhelm Bahr
Heinz-Luhnen-Straße 20
D- 41751 Viersen
E-Mail: Fried.Bahr@t-online.de
References
Dieckmann L. (1982): Acalles-Studien (Col., Curculionidae). - Entomologische Nachrichten und Berichte, 26 (5): 195-209.
Freude, H. ; Harde, K. & Lohse, G.H. (1981 / 1983): Die Käfer Mitteleuropas, Bd. 10 + 11:, Krefeld.
Hoffmann A. (1958): Coléoptères Curculionides (Troisième Partie). - Faune de France 62: 1210-1839; Paris.
Solari A. & F. (1907): Studii sugli Acalles. - Annali Mus. civ. Stor. nat. Giacomo Doria, 3 (Ser. 3): 479-551; Genova.
Tempère G & J. Péricart (1989): Coléoptères Curculionidae, 4. Partie. - Faune de France 74: 536p., Paris.
Dieser Beitrag erschien zuerst in "COLEO - Arbeiten und Berichte aus der Coleopterologie", Band 6 (2005) 16-25 (http://www.coleo.de/arbeiten.html). Die WEEVIL NEWS – Redaktion im CURCULIO-Institut bedankt sich bei COLEO e.V. für die Überlassung der Rechte an diesem Artikel und den wissenschaflichen Abbildungen!