Thread by @BugQuestions

So...this is an interesting question, and answering it gives us a chance to see how scientific names are created, why they change over time, and why they change over time.

The moth named in this article is actually Resapamea stipata.

bugguide.net/node/view/2035…

#DeepDive

https://twitter.com/farmdogag/status/1018467327300521984

Resapamea stipata isn't one of the big corn pests that we're used to seeing, and I actually had to do some serious digging to find any agriculture information.

It's a very rare pest of corn; only found when corn is grown alongside its host by accident.

lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewconten…

Normally, Resapamea grows by feeding on the roots of cordgrass...but will eat corn if it gets onto a plant by accident early in the season.

It's host is now being investigated as a potential source of biofuels, and this moth is one of the pest species because it feeds on roots.

A lot of the time, when you see a scientific name, it's divided into two parts.

1.) Genus-the group of insects most closely related to this insect
2.) Species-within that group, this particular insect's unique name

However the newspaper article added a third word, 'Morr'

This is a third part of the name, one which is typically left out.

In this case, 'Morr' is short for H.K. Morrison, an early entomologist who described this species in 1875.

Once you know the name, and the author, the next place to stop is to find a list called a 'checklist'.

A checklist is simply a list of names and information about classification.

Thankfully, most checklists are easy to search because many are online nowadays.

It turns out that, in this species, the names were changed because there was a similar group of moths in Europe which appear to not be very closely related.

The reasons for the redefinition are given in a book on this group in 2005.

The sorts of books which describe these reclassifications are more or less specialized textbooks. Small printing, and used only by specialists in these specific groups...and this is an area that I (@Stylopidae) am only tangentially familiar with.

nhbs.com/noctuidae-euro…

In science, a lot of what we do is really a sort of history. To keep things straight, we need to look back at why some things were grouped one way and see if that classification still makes sense based on what we know today.

A lot of times, when we take into account all of what we know about the biology of the group, the original classification no longer makes sense...so we need to change it based on what we know.

Scientific names are all about keeping things as straight and as specific as possible.

This is more or less a history of the insect in that article, and why it's so hard to find information about it.

At one point, we thought it may become an important pest...but it never ended up becoming an economic problem like many closely related moths.

R. stipata was never a problem in corn, but agriculture is always changing. Different plants are being grown for different purposes, and we need to track what may pop up when we try to grow new crops.

In the biofuels world, R. stipata is a potential pest we need to monitor.

The entomologists who describe new species, and keep track of these changes, are really our front-line defense against new pests.

They're the ones who can ID stuff like this, and let us know what bugs may be potential problems in the long run.

This area of science may be very obscure, and hard to really see the reasons why we keep things like massive insect collections, but it's also very important because agricultural researchers like me would be blind without them!