bagheera Posted February 21, 2016 Share Posted February 21, 2016 Hello, I am new to this forum. I'm an evolutionary ecologist, and used to working on living organisms, but this is so well-preserved it might as well be alive! What I'm nearly sure you're looking at is a fossilized pupating butterfly (chrysalis). You can see the silk lines it attached to the leaf, as well as much of the leaf itself. This would be what one would call a "pre-pupa", but it's already starting to look very chrysalis-ish. It certainly looks papilionid, perhaps lycaenid based on size and morphology? What strikes me is both the rarity and incredible beauty of this find if it is what I think it is. Any thoughts?? Is this the only chrysalis known in the fossil record? It's from Baltic amber, straight from the mines to an collector's hands (and now my own.) Looking forward to replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarrodB Posted February 21, 2016 Share Posted February 21, 2016 That's a very cool piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagheera Posted February 22, 2016 Author Share Posted February 22, 2016 Do you think it's really a butterfly chrysalis from ca. 50 Mya? It seems like a practical joke, but there's no joker and I do love butterflies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 a lot of the extremely amazing amber finds have been faked... just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagheera Posted February 22, 2016 Author Share Posted February 22, 2016 The piece is genuine: its collector got it from bulk-mined raw amber and he personally polishes them. It was sold under the suspicion that it most likely was an air bubble, and the rest of the propery IDed inclusions from his collection are excellent quality (and certainly real). I even know the village name where the mine is. I'm wondering if having studied butterflies skewed me towards spotting it. Does anyone know of any other true butterfly pupae? It seems like this might be one of the oldest (Miocene) pieces of some pretty rare group of fossils...and I can't imagine anything better-preserved than this thing(?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagheera Posted February 22, 2016 Author Share Posted February 22, 2016 (Last post before any replies, sorry:) What I'm wondering if whether the pupa is likely butterfly. The age and authenticity are both confirmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 It may be a pupa or exuvia, but I would be cautious about concluding that it is that of a butterfly. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckmerlin Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 (edited) Hi Bagheera very interesting specimen thaks for posting I found this link to a pdf showing that there have been other pupa/exuvia found in amber it describes the pupal exuvia of an anelid case bearing moth in amber from Bitterfield Amber (Eocene) http://www.palmuc.de/bspg/images/pdf/zitteliana55/3_fischer.pdf hope this is of interest to you Best regard Chris Edited February 22, 2016 by ckmerlin 1 "A man who stares at a rock must have a lot on his mind... or nothing at all' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagheera Posted February 22, 2016 Author Share Posted February 22, 2016 Thanks, these are great resources. The pupation is not quite fully complete, and it doesn't seem to be a case but rather the uneclosed pupa itself. What's interesting is that it's attached itself with silk to a leaf at both ends, and looks very much like a butterfly late-stage pre pupa just transitioning to full pupa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 I think checking with lepidopterists familiar with the Northern European region could shed some expert opinion on the inclusion. Adding to the previous notes of caution, taking a seller's word (in a market with so many manufactured pieces) as to the provenance of a specimen, without other verification, carries a significant risk of inaccuracy. The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now