All these presumed Ocola Skippers Panoquina
ocola were photographed in my yard on Lake Worth,
Tarrant County, TX. If they are all ocola, then they demonstrate
how variable that taxon is, and how difficult it is to identify
Purple-washed Skipper P. lucas (typo as leucas;
junior synonym sylvicola) or Hecebolus Skipper P.
hecebola in the field with any degree of confidence (except
for extremes):-
1) This on the early date
of May 22, 2003 (I documented the first County record of Mallow
Scrub-Hairstreak a few yards away later the same day, so conditions
were right for northerwards vagrancy of leps); note the rather
pale yellowish tone, small rounded cell spot, extended
lower point to the largest pale spot, and long narrow white line
in the Cu2 cell:
Digital pics:-
Film (print) pics:-
2) This was June 17, 2003
- the stigma indicates that it is a male. This individual seems
fairly fresh (based upon the condition of the wing fringes) and
has strongly contrasting vhw veins and very strong vhw dot marks
- to me this pattern seems virtually identical to P. lucas
I've seen in photos; also note that the strong evening
sun gave the upperside an exaggerated yellow caste:
- if this is an ocola, then surely lucas is not
firmly identifiable from this type of photo (i.e. upperwing pattern
not fully visible)?
3) This was in my yard area
on August 7, 2001. When I took the photos I assumed it to be one
of the numerous Ocola Skippers Panoquina
ocolathat
had been in my yard for a week or so following a big arrival of
southern butterflies that had already yielded Tarrant County's
third-ever Sickle-winged Skipper Achlyodes
thraso (the second County record had also been
in my yard a month earlier) and the first County record of Soldier Danaus erisimus, plus
many Long-tailed Skippers Urbanus
proteus.
Could this be a lucas? or perhaps even a hecebola
? Sadly I paid it scant attention at the time, being ignorant
of the possibilities... These are the only two images captured.
The popular guide books (and the USGS web site) state that these
two forms can be identified from ocola by the presence
of a clear white mark in the FW cell just above/ahead of the largest
pale patch - but the references do not agree on the shape of this
patch: USGS and Opler in Peterson Eastern Butt. state that hecebola
has a rounded spot while lucas has an elongated
spot; Brock/Kaufman also states that lucas has this
spot elongated - but that hecebola's spot is "flat."
The photos in Brock/Kaufman plus these online pics of hecebolahere
(note how text says cell spots are round, while images show them
elongate!), and here
(this one from Belize) indicate that hecebola's cell spot
is variable in shape and can easily approach that of lucas.
I have no expertise in this area, thus the cautious approach would
be to consider this individual to be a variant ocola -
but this position forces the question: If some ocola can
exhibit an obvious elongated white cell mark, are hecebola
and lucas identifiable from ocola or (each other)
in the the field? keep in mind that (according to the popular
guides) the pattern of the UHW is very variable in all three taxa,
and thus only an extremely well-marked lucas could be deemed
out-of-range for the variation shown by ocola: - and how
would one separate an "elongate spot" hecebola
from a dull/worn lucas?
4) from August 2002:
5) from early June2002:
6) from early June 2003:
7) from mid-June 2003:
8) from early June 2003:
9) from June 11, 2003; this
specimen is in my freezer, available for examination if desired:
