Off on a field trip to Costa Rica

A most exotic version of chili con carne! Have you tried it?abe: I suppose I need to spoil the joke by pointing out that you misspelled ChileEdited by Faith, : No reason given.

Thanks.

That is what I would expect - moving into areas\ecologies they are already adapted to as the climate changes. Specialists would have more difficulty in finding similar habitats, so generalists would most likely be seen first.Enjoyps -- waiting for pictures ... pps -- the blue double underlined stuff appears to be something my new computer thinks everybody needs ... ad links to insanity ... I'll need to find how to turn it off.

OK, here is a shot of the otter on Bear Creek. I am posting this shot because there is an out of focus, flying dragonfly in the frame, Libellula saturata. I think this shot is a little sharper and better framed. I went out and got some pond water this morning along with some small organisms to feed my nymphs, before they eat each other. So I need to get busy with that and then out to several ponds to check for Tramea onusta, the dragonfly we found in southern OR last Wednesday. It has been spotted at a pond only a dozen miles from here so if I can find it today it will be another new county record.

This is a stream species, Progomphus borealis at Bear Creek, CA. This species is in family Gomphidae and they are all called Clubtails because the segments near the end of the abdomen are swollen, in some species very swollen. Note also that the eyes are separated. Almost all of the species in this family are stream specialists.The Gomphids are a highly evolved group. By highly evolved, I mean there have been very many speciation events, so many that they really defy classification using the old standard Order, Suborder, Family, Subfamily, Genus and species. Cladistics works much better and the Gomphidae are going through a major revision right now, based on a combination of genetics and morphology.This is a really fun time to be a biologist because the technologies of DNA sequencing and computer databases are allowing us to have the clearest understanding of the evolutionary history of the groups of organisms we are studying. I have been searching for this species in Oregon for many, many years without success. The type locality is Oregon (the locality that the specimen was collected in that was used for the original species description), but it was described when it was the Oregon Territory, which included Oregon, Washington and Idaho. It has been found fairly close to the Oregon border and I have searched many rivers that look like good habitat, but so far nada.Edited by Tanypteryx, : No reason given.Edited by Tanypteryx, : spelling

The shadows of the wings? That's pretty impressive photography.

Thank you. I did it all with my Brownie.

This first shot shows how smoky it was while we were collecting and the light had a very weird quality because of the smoke. On the left is what I would call a conglomerate made up of many kinds of rock in a solid matrix. Next a bit closer. This seems to be made up of stream processed sand, gravel, pebbles along with much larger rocks. Some of the embedded rocks seem to be fine-grained mudstone and sandstone. Some of the larger rocks also seem to have occlusions of iron oxide. Hanging out at EvC and reading the geology topics has infected me with a compulsion to photograph rocks where ever I go. There are a series of pools formed by rock dams and the only water that is flowing in the stream are small trickles through narrow notches eroded in the dams. The pools are quite picturesque and deep enough to swim in. This is a rather popular swimming area on hot afternoons.Looking at maps of the Rocky Fire (the largest wildfire in CA right now) it looks like the eastern edge of the fireline is along Bear Creek, so the vegetation in these shots may be gone by now.

Thanks, Tanypteryx, those rocks are really, really beautiful. At first glance, fault related breccias.Having an opinion on rocks found on another continent (or in this case between continents), without ever looking at them in real life, can be a career-killer for any geologist, though.Edited by Pressie, : Added fault-related to breccias

Most of the time I so not seem to even see damselflies in the field, but I managed to get close to this female Argia translata. The black spheroids on the thorax are parasitic mites.

You do amazing photography! Thanks for sharing.

Yes, your photography is excellent!! You must have a really exceptional camera to capture such detail so close up.I am always amazed at how delicate and intricate dragonfly/damselfly wings are and this specimen is an incredible example of that!! It's hard to get an idea of the size of it though - what about 6 - 7 cm long?HBD

Thank you for you kind words. Thank you. Well, I like to think my camera is a pretty good one. It is older now, but has been my dream camera. It is a Nikon D700 12 megapixel with a full frame sensor. It was one of Nikon's first full frame digitals. It is a fairly low noise sensor which also make it very nice for night photography.The lens I used for that shot was a Sigma 180mm macro with a 2x teleconverter. It is a really sharp lens and with this setup it allows me to shoot without getting too close and spooking the subject. This lens died on the Costa Rica trip, so I was unhappy about that. Luckily, this is always something I worry about so I had 2 spare macro lenses with me. A very high resolution 200mm Micro-Nikkor and rare 70-180mm Micro-Nikkor. I shot most of the trip with the 200mm which made me sharpen up my game.I have worried so much about my camera dying on a trip that I bought a second D700 body before they quit making them. Nikon and Canon both make some amazing cameras and there are now a lot with sensors that are around 24 megapixels and Nikon has two that have 36 megapixels. One problem though for photographers shooting macro is the need for more depth of field. As magnification increases depth of field at a given aperture become shallower. To increase depth of field you need to use a smaller and smaller aperture, but smaller apertures cause increased diffraction which destroys sharpness. Diffraction becomes more pronounced in images as the pixel density of the sensor increases. It turns out that my 12-megapixel sensor is just about optimum for my style of photography. I hate photos of dragonflies where the depth of field is really shallow and the wings are completely out of focus. My whole life has been a quest for ultra high-resolution high depth of field images of insects. Sometimes it works.ABE: Sorry I forgot, the damselfly is about 5 cm long.ABE2: I wanted to add, that for better or worse I influenced 2 of my best friends to get the Nikon D700 also. They both shoot with the 105mm Micro-Nikkor lens, which may be the sharpest lens in the world. They both get extraordinary fine detail, that when we zoom in on it, shows things we never suspected before (details about how mating actually works, etc.). The shorter focal length means they have to be even closer to their subjects, but they have both really honed their stalking skills. The other 2 people that I routinely travel with both shoot Canons with Sigma 180mm macro lenses. All 5 of us travel together and continuously compare photographic results and help each other improve our work. Edited by Tanypteryx, : added subject length.Edited by Tanypteryx, : ABE2

Looked around the web trying to get some balance in the state of the art to wrap my head around. Maybe I'm just too easily impressed but I cannot help being effusive here.Damn, Tany, you do good work. This stuff is top of class.

I agree. I'm awed by his photography, while not having a clue whether it really is something special or not. I've never seen such clear perfect pictures of tiny things, which of course means nothing since they may be common as dust for all I know. I suspect not, though, I suspect we're looking at world class stuff.