BugmanPrice Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 Question Orin...If they are such a common species to have (or maybe not; I don't know) then why has nobody identified it yet? Just curious. Hi Eric, Sorry, there's no such thing, there's only: Panchlora nivea OR Panchlora sp. "giant" /P. sp. "viridis" --its' an unidentified species Both are really in demand at the moment but I think bugsincyberspace may have some of one or the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt K Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 Question Orin...If they are such a common species to have (or maybe not; I don't know) then why has nobody identified it yet? Just curious. Sometimes common (or not) in the hobby end does not necessarily mean taxonomists are very motivated to give it an identification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BugmanPrice Posted March 26, 2008 Author Share Posted March 26, 2008 I don't know; it seems kind of silly. I'm willing to bet that cockroach hobbyists are the majority of what is out there for taxonomists. I mean if you take the roach taxonomists of the U.S…. how many of them are not hobbyists. Why doesn’t someone just name it and classify it if it us an unidentified species? Just a thought (sorry for throwing your thread off course). Sometimes common (or not) in the hobby end does not necessarily mean taxonomists are very motivated to give it an identification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allpet Roaches Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 1. There aren't very many cockroach taxonomists. 2. Of that handful of people, I don't know if any living ones specialize in New World genera including Panchlora. 3. The hobby holds minimal interest for taxonomists. Taxonomy is about naming species for posterity, not the love of keeping animals and is not paid for by hobbyists. I believe government grants and university funds are the only real sources of revenue. Even if the hobby were as big as baseball it likely wouldn't fund taxonomy. 4. Giant Panchlora aren't all that common. 5. Read the explanation in the roach book about giant Panchlora, it may never be defintively identified. 6. Specimens were shipped to three different taxonomists (not many more than that exist) over the last seven or so years without an identification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt K Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 What Orin said is what I would have liked to have said! Basically, some roaches won't get a specific identity ever, or at least remain an open-ended topic of conversation. (To the hobbiests' frustration, in some cases.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephyr Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Hmm. If we're the leading cockroach specialists in the world, why don't we give it a name? Maybe Panchlora gigas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BugmanPrice Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 I see, thanks for setting me strait. I think those are all perfectly valid responses to my questions. I just find it kind of perplexing that there are species samples readily available that have been taken and we still don’t have taxonomy workups on them. What’s going on? The science of keeping roaches seems to be far removed from the science behind the roaches themselves (taxonomy, biochemistry, ecology, even down to basic behavior), I would think, off the cuff, that there would be much more crossover. I suppose that’s a basal frustration for most entomologists though, people just don’t care about bugs. It’s unfortunate but it’s a reality. What do I know though; I’m just a young whippersnapper anyhow. Hopefully I will be able to fix that someday though, or attempt too at least. Actually I am meeting with a professor at a university in Arizona to talk about native roaches soon (maybe even some research) so who knows. Maybe in ten, fifteen, twenty years things will start to come together, I mean look at what has happened in the last couple of decades in entomology. It’s all good though, what ever happens it won’t change the fact that there is a love of the hobby to be found by some. 1. There aren't very many cockroach taxonomists. 2. Of that handful of people, I don't know if any living ones specialize in New World genera including Panchlora. 3. The hobby holds minimal interest for taxonomists. Taxonomy is about naming species for posterity, not the love of keeping animals and is not paid for by hobbyists. I believe government grants and university funds are the only real sources of revenue. Even if the hobby were as big as baseball it likely wouldn't fund taxonomy. 4. Giant Panchlora aren't all that common. 5. Read the explanation in the roach book about giant Panchlora, it may never be defintively identified. 6. Specimens were shipped to three different taxonomists (not many more than that exist) over the last seven or so years without an identification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BugmanPrice Posted March 27, 2008 Author Share Posted March 27, 2008 Oh and thanks for reposting in a new thread. I thought about just moving it over and.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allpet Roaches Posted March 28, 2008 Share Posted March 28, 2008 I don't have any copies of the most recent Allpet Roaches book on hand but I think is says there is no real origination/collection data for this species. With so many similar, related species that piece of missing information is a big barrier to identification. Hmm... why don't we give it a name? It almost certainly has a name, we just don't know which species name it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt K Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 Is it a migrant into the U.S. like P.nivea or was it brought in ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allpet Roaches Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 Is it a migrant into the U.S. like P.nivea or was it brought in ? I got a copy and the book doesn't actually explain that the collection location for Panchlora sp. "giant" is unknown (you have to read between the lines which isn't easy). It's reportedly from South America somewhere but may be from the West Indies. It isn't supposed to be found wild anywhere in the US. P. nivea on the other hand was supposedly introduced to the southern US with agriculture a very long time ago and most present culture stock were originally collected in FL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Panchlora are pretty, how big does this "giant" get again? We do seem to know the most about cockroaches. BugmanPrice, is that Phortioeca phosphoroides on your avatar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BugmanPrice Posted March 31, 2008 Author Share Posted March 31, 2008 It's actually some sort of sand roach (Arenivaga?) that I'm studying. It was found in a lizard burrow under a Rhus trilobata (Skunk brush) in a wildlife preserve. I've tracked down an old key that I can use to identify it once it gets here. I was looking for three days for more of them with a colleague of mine (he was actually looking for sidewinders, herpetologists...they don't know what they're missing out on) and all we have to show for it is two nymphs and the dead adult female you see there. Fun stuff I tell ya. BugmanPrice, is that Phortioeca phosphoroides on your avatar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.