1. Troutnut Forum
›
2. Specimen Discussion
›
3. Anyone know your western Drunella species?

Which one is this? It's from a south-central Alaskan river.

doddsii???

Beautiful Western green drake, Jason. Nice job with the point-and-shoot!

Konchu, is there any relatively easy way to distinguish between the duns of doddsii and those of grandis? I've read that the middle and rear femora are narrower in the nymphs of grandis and its subspecies when compared to the rather consistent width of doddsii femora. Can this difference be detected in the duns? (I'm asking because Eastern D. lata duns seem to have relatively fat forefemora, reflecting the nymphs in a subtle, but detectable way.)

Duns are always a bit of a crap-shoot. And really, one shouldn't even try with females [I won't go any further with this statement, as both my wife and sister are in the room].

That being said, however, my *guess* about Jason's photo, made whilst I was sitting squarely on my keister at home, was based on the short tails. I seem to remember seeing shorter tails on doddsii than on grandis and its questionable subspecies, or on one of the other common western Drunella, coloradensis. Flavilinea tends to be a less robust dun or spinner, at least in the very few winged specimens I've seen. Pelosa is much less common and also not so robust.

The size and shape of femora might be different between Drunella species in the dun stage, but I can't say for sure without checking specimens. Often, it is the case that remnants of some nymphal characteristics can be seen on the duns.

Thanks, Konchu. I won't touch your great line about the females of the species, but I can't resist biting on the "questionable subspecies" comment. More distinctions without a difference?

PS--Don't most freshly emerged duns have rather limp, somewhat shortish (?) tails?

good point about the tails. not sure how much change takes place in their length, to be honest. are you making a case for grandis, rather than doddsii?

Not at all, Konchu. My experience with Western Drunella is nil, so I'm just trying to learn a little more about them. Now, about those questionable subspecies . . . . ;)

Honestly, I learned awhile back that I don't know what I'm talking about more than half the time I open my mouth or touch the keyboard. When I think I know what I'm talking about, Mother Nature throws a curve.

I say questionable on the subspp of Drunella simply because I haven't been able to sort it all out yet. Questionable doesn't mean invalid; it just means I think it is something that should be viewed critically, with some skepticism, to try and sort out.

Gonzo, you've made me think about some things I hadn't spent much time considering before, so thanks.

Looks like we've succeeded into turning this thread into yet another very public private discussion. :)

Konchu, you battle-scarred old lumper you, I hope you don't mind my efforts to draw every bit of knowledge out of you that I can. An initiate to the perplexing world of entomology/taxonomy could easily get the impression that the Linnaean system is just a clever scam to keep entomologists busy and fly fishers guessing! :) Seriously, I truly appreciate your honesty and humility, and I can identify with everything that you said. I really value your willingness to participate here.


Yeah, as Roger has pointed out before, I seem to have a knack for that. One would think that at my age I would have learned a little more discretion. But nooo . . . . :)

Those are the best kind!

Konchu-

Were you able to see something in the photos that would rule out its being Drunella grandis grandis?

At this point, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of this being D. grandis.


Here's a scary thought: are those lateral filaments shorter than the middle one? Can't quite tell in some of the images.

I doubt it, but if so, Jason would likely have noticed. However, if you are concerned whether or not the lateral filaments were shorter than the terminal filament, does that mean you aren't yet entirely comfortable ruling out Caudatella?

awful chunky for Caudatella, but the generally golden color with darker underparts reminds me of some that don't have the lateral tails all that much shorter than the median one.

...what am i doing wasting all this time on a female dun??????????

Perhaps practicing for retirement? :)

:) :) Konchu, see what happens when you put question marks behind your IDs? If only you'd said "It's doddsii, dammit!" . . . . (Of course, you are too honest and too much of a scientist to do that.)

Geez Gonzo, the next thing we'll hear is, don't pick on "poor Konchu":):)

I see how far honesty gets me.

Well, Roger, I seem to recall someone recently referring to you as "poor Roger." I'm afraid that poor Konchu--just like the rest of us--probably gets what he deserves for posting here. :)

Best,
Poor Gonzo

Gentlemen:

I'm going to dig out a photo of a similar dun I have from Henry's Fork of the Snake about 20 years ago. It may be doddsii but it sure looks a lot like the Rosey Green Drake (that's what the locals called them years ago) of the Fork...grandis...but once again it's a female...no other comments needed.

tight lines and big trout

gene
www.flyfisher.com