Talk:Heliconius

Needs attention

 * Compact the list. Outcomment and unlink subspecies (we don't usually make subspecies articles) or move them to species articles
 * Status of Laparus and Neruda needs to be clarified - the list assumes that both are valid, the taxobox lists them as synonyms
 * We are not allowed to cite funet directly, but have to defer to its sources. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 11:52, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * List has been compacted. Laparus and Neruda removed as their are considered to be separate genera. Dger (talk) 01:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Laparus
I moved Heliconius doris to Laparus doris as all four references in the list put it there. Dger (talk) 00:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Copyedited
Richard asr (talk) 15:18, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Content Suggestions

 * Under the pupal mating section it is almost implied from what is written that all Heliconius butterflies mate via pupal mating. It might be better to clarify that it is just a large portion, however not a majority. There is about 42% of Heliconius that are involved in pupal mating(Gilbert, 1991). Those that don’t use pupal mating are actually selective for color which contributes to their mimicry success (Llaurens et al., 2014).

Gilbert, L.E. 1991. Biodiversity of a Central American Heliconius community: Pattern, process, and problems. Pp. 403-427 in: Price, P.W., T.M. Lewinsohn, G.W. Fernandes & W.W. Benson. editors. Plant-Animal interactions: Evolutionary ecology in tropical and temperate regions. Wiley, New York. Llaurens V, M Joron, and M. Thery. 2014. Cryptic differences in colour among Mullerian	mimics: how can the visual capacities of predators and prey shape the evolution of wing colours?. J. Evol. Biol. 27:531-540. Devenport.1 (talk) 16:57, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The habitats that Heliconius butterflies are in would be important to add since there is no specific information and only general regions. They are actually located in different areas which effects how the mimicry works. Some can even live in the same area and there habitat only differs by where they nest and sleep. Even though their habitats are very similar and only differ on elevation they can still show different characteristics adapted to those environments.

Mallet J, and L.E. Gilbert. 1994. Why are there so many mimicry rings? Correlations between habitat behavior and mimicry in Heliconius butterflies. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 55:159-180. Devenport.1 (talk) 16:57, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * In the model for evolutionary study tab it might also be important to note that they are also studied based on their convergence for mimicry. Some butterflies, such as Heliconius erato and melpomene have almost identical wing patters but they are very different phylogenetically so it is interesting to study them and the evolutionary mechanisms that made them look so similar in the mimicry.

Hines, H.M., B.A. Counterman, P. Albuquerque de Moura, M.Z. Cardoso, M. Linares, J Mallet, R.D. Reed, C.D. Jiggings, M.R. Kronforst, and W.O. McMillan. 2011. Wing patterning gene redefines the mimetic history of Heliconius butterflies. PNAS. 108,49:19666-19671. Devenport.1 (talk) 16:57, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

–––This article has good information, but I think there are several places to go more in depth. One area is how DNA sequencing supports hybridization in comparison with other speciation hypothesis (such as selection in combination with ancestral polymorphism). I’m adding one sentence that touches on this, but I think it is something to look into. Also, why is hybridization even happening in the first place? How do specifically Heliconius species interact and choose mates? One last thing that could contribute to this article is to talk about how there are different mimicry rings in the same area. This is important, because if the only force creating Mullerian mimicry was predation education cost, it seems likely all the butterflies in one area would look the same. Grady.303 (talk) 18:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Content expansion

 * The possible effects on the ecology of Heliconius due to pupal mating is worth mentioning: increased mimicry within a genus and the influence it might have on deterring other heliconiines from developing a preference for a certain species' host plant.


 * Is it safe to say that some Heliconius exhibit Batesian and Mullerian mimicry at the same time since there is so much pattern convergence between the species and genera?


 * I think it's important to clarify that the type of assortative mating that will decrease genetic relatedness between H. heurippa and its parents is either disassortative, or negative assortative mating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faherty.14 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heliconius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100711132252/http://www.nymphalidae.net/Classification/Heliconiini.htm to http://www.nymphalidae.net/Classification/Heliconiini.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:10, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Article structure
The article has a somewhat piecemeal structure at the moment, and the grouping of sections under 'Model for evolutionary study' (sic) is distinctly curious. There's also no coherent history despite the mention of Bates, nor sufficient citation of that history. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:52, 19 November 2017 (UTC)