Hadrurus obscurus?

[rasputin]

Williams did one in '76 but I can't find it right now.

[Galapoheros]

lol I don't want to hate you, sup with that? I haven't looked at those pdfs yet, I just got an email. OK, any doubt is out of my head now. Some of you knew the ID and I hope people pardon my hammering out some details, it's just that I've seen so many ID mistakes made from not taking a closer look, that I've gotten more skeptical lately. I learned a lot though, thanks for the posts. I just got this info in from a profession/specialist.

"Based on your six photos, it appears this is Hadrurus a. arizonensis,
pale form commonly found in California."

He also mentioned the "crescent" feature.

Man those pdfs are huge, good to know they are there! My cheap dsl was able to handle them though.

[Squid]

Nice pale Arizonensis, mine are all like a dark straw color i know the pallidus is a pale form

[rasputin]

Originally Posted by Galapoheros

"Based on your six photos, it appears this is Hadrurus a. arizonensis,
pale form commonly found in California."

So, Michiel said it's H.a.a "pale form" not H.a.pallidus? You did email Michiel out in the Netherlands, right? Not a Michael in the U.S.? And that thread on the ATSHQ board was a conversation amongst "profession/specialists" and a couple ams.

The Hardudus arizonensis "pale form" is Hadrurus arizonensis pallidus, they are synonymous. <--I'm putting this out there as documented fact beyond question so nobody gets confused. Michiel and I never disagree on anything pertaining to scorps but this is something like a Freudian slip because there is no documented "pale form from California" that is not H.a.p

Rich Ayery can be quoted as saying: "Hadrurus arizonensis pallidus is a color morph of Hadrurus arizonensis." Rich Ayery, if you don't recognize the name, recently documented a new species of Vaejovidae in southern Arizona and that documentation is in this months issue of Dr. Victor Fet's, Euscorpius.

Rich aside, with exception to a few setbacks, I've actually been working on some R&D on Hadrurus arizonensis for a few years but I don't claim to be a "profession/specialists," I'm just a man with a passion for scorpions that goes back 18yrs, with 7yrs collecting and almost 2yrs on the boards.

[Galapoheros]

No, it wasn't the Netherlands guy. Yeah, he's really into it too! I emailed the one that wrote that paper on Hadrurus trichobothria, I wanted to go to the source. And no, he never said it "wasn't" pallidus, seems like a nice person.

[rasputin]

Michael Soleglad?

[Galapoheros]

It's possible he wouldn't want me to post his comments from an email, very informal, so I was trying to avoid typing his name but no big deal, I was being too careful I think. Yeah exposing some background like you did in a previous post sure helps a lot. But even so, I've seen very experienced people make a fairly fundamental mistakes before. Because most of us are strangers to each other on the net, and depending on the topic, I think it's best to be a little skeptical, dig a little more. I should set up my profile myself, I never have done it. I was just now wondering, does a person have to earn the title "scorpiologist" to be considered a "professional" in the academic world? I've heard some "enthusiasts"(some people hate that word!) call themselves "experts" and not professionals, that would make some sense if that's the case.

[rasputin]

Interesting that you bring up such a point/question - the answer is another slew of questions but for the sake of keeping it concise...Who taught the first teacher to teach?

I too talked to Soleglad and don't believe that he would mind that we post his words to put the matter to official rest:

Originally Posted by Michael Soleglad

Believe it or not, you are both correct. Yes, the pale form of H. arizonensis found in California was broken off into a subspecies, H. a. pallidus, by Williams (1970). So you are correct. However, in 2001, Fet et al. (I have attached the paper) concluded that this pale form is only a color phase based on ZERO differences in 16s DNA analysis from dark forms from Arizona. So, the name is now H. a. arizonensis, being distinguished from Williams' (1970) Baja subspecies H. a. austrinus ---I.e., pallidus having been synonymized.

Also pointed out in this paper is that coloration and its patterns found on the anterior area of the carapace and the mesosoma are NOT important phylogenetically, ONLY the pattern that occurs in the interocular area is consistent and follows species level diagnostics --- which is consistent with the DNA result --- note, both dark and pale forms of H. a. arizonensis have the same crescent pattern.

Michael

I uploaded the attached PDF to my Google Documents and made it available for download, it's out of the 2001 edition of Scorpions, in Memoriam Gary A. Polis:
Phylogeny of the "hirstus" group of the genus Hadrurus Thorell, 1876 based on morphology and mitochondrial DNA (Scorpiones: Iuridae)