The famous nocturnal Hex hatch of the Midwest (and a few other lucky locations) stirs to the surface mythically large brown trout that only touch streamers for the rest of the year.
"The Paraleptophlebia hatches are the seasonal Waterloo of most anglers, for without fine tippets and tiny flies an empty basket is assured."
Yes, the Paraleps can come about the same time as the tricaudatus, but don't start as early I think. And I think they were a mid-morning deal where tricaudatus has more of an afternoon peak. (Here in the rockies we're not supoosed to don't have the early P adoptiva, although last spring I found a single youngish nymph that my key would only take it to adoptiva -by gills if I remember right. Wish I'd pickled it and had it properly ID'd.
Anyway, back east I found the Paraleps emerged from slower currents and siltier substrates -often along stream edges. Whereas tricaudatus spilled out of the riffles. They could mix of course in certain places, but one could find one predominant if you wanted to (and I did bc I wanted to know each better), by focusing on key habitat.
Fly patterns could be identical really, although I had my own, esp for the nymphs. In fact, I'm still using some P adoptiva mimic parachutes (more a dun gray) during Baetis activity.
...and believe at emergence time they migrate to the siltier shorelines to emerge -similar to what McCaffertum and Stenacron will do.
I've never seen a school of Paraleps, but water fertility might have prevented that (?)
I guess I'm under the impression that Paraleps (at least adoptiva) preferred/required quieter water to emerge from.
MaCaffertium and Stenacron esp, I found in large numbers at emergence time in shoreline eddies alongside riffles.
Anyway...matters little without having it pickled in a jar for others to see.
As to K & C, unfortunately many of the characters listed are dubious at best and largely unreliable for making determinations to the specific level. Some of them are just flat out wrong. For this genus, gill morphology is a glaring example. You were right to be baffled.;)
I have a photo, a slide I used in my teaching,
I can't tell on your nymph there, but are you running the P tail fibers along the top of the abdomen?
... that Baetis & the Little Mahoganies were mixed in together,...
Ach! Disgusting. I thought that book was too good to be true. No one can cover all that ground, esp dealing with taxonomically complicated creatures like aquatic inverts.
I really miss the Cornell entomology library.
It's too bad that the various entomological societies and academic institutions have their papers locked up. Restricting membership and charging $25 a paper to "rent" one online for a year is a ridiculous business model. Laypeople serious about aquatic entomology would have to spend tens of thousands of dollars for access to the important papers, even if they were allowed to "join". They would make a lot more money if they simply charged dues ($100, $200?) for annual membership in a new lay affiliate category, not to mention opening up fertile ground for soliciting new donations. Knowledge (and therefore interest) would be far more widespread. Ah, but they're scientists not marketing experts.
Yes. Unfortunate for the public. Seems counter to need for general scientific literacy in the world. I don't know the business side of it. I remember it was expensive to get published in a scientific journal -opposite to regular magazines.