BRN 9-2 (uncompressed) - Flipbook - Page 35
Basic assumption wrong? Not a stink bug? Perhaps.
In due course I found an online presentation about ÒEggs of
Pentatomidae found in the Eastern USA". Fascinating and
mostly overwhelming. My grasping at straws was proving
unproductive, not that I would give up. No I would continue
to ignore barrel shaped v. spherical egg shape for quite
some time.
Step Three: How about the egg laying habit (covering both
sides of one leaf) or the host plant? Maybe someone has
done something on this somewhere, but darn hard to Þnd if
they did. Several stink bug species seemed to be quite
cosmopolitan; when it comes to host plants some include
the Littleleaf Sumac.
Step Four: How about the population? There are not many
masses of eggs visible, two groupings in roughly a hundred
yards of wash. Given the small number of eggs that
represents and some level of mortality, the hillsides are
probably not overrun with this species. Not much help
there.
Step Five: Real research? I continue to monitor them but
even if I Þnd nymphs I doubt there is a way of getting to
species (not willing to put in the time/effort to collect and try
to raise them).
Step Six. Smile and give up. I have concluded that I am
stuck with unidentiÞed photos.
Having reached this despicable state of affairs I mused
about an article in Nature (wouldnÕt anyone?) by Laurie
Udesky, 22 July 2025. In ÒResearchers value null results, but
struggle to publish themÓ she notes that a survey conducted
by Springer Nature (released on that same day) indicated
that although researchers valued null results (an experimental hypothesis was not supported, for instance) they
rarely sought to publish those results: Ò69% didnÕt think null
results would be accepted for publication; 52% didnÕt know
which journals would consider publishing research with null
results; 19% worried that their institution or funder wouldnÕt
cover publishing costs; and 21% were concerned that theyÕd
be viewed negatively by their peers. . . Of the 1,228
respondents who were able to publish their null results, 39%
said that the process helped to inspire a new hypothesis or
methodology and 28% said it prevented the duplication of
unnecessary research.Ó
which appears to be quite common. However, an observation on BugGuide which purports to (possibly) be an egg of
this species does not match well. Nor, for that matter, do the
images by Whitney Cranshaw at Colorado State University.
So let us dismiss this common species as a possibility.
Step Eight. Time for a digression. (I have problems with
focus.) Gordon Berman sent two photos of unidentiÞed
eggs on a tuft of grass which he cut and laid on some lichen
to take a photo - so again very small. One of these photos,
with an enlarged detail, appears on the next page. In any
sort of normal world I would have thrown up my hands and
said ÒI have not a clueÓ. But if normal implies something
static the world is not that. I had been looking at a lot of
stink bug eggs as part of my search. And GordonÕs photos
certainly looked like those of Chlorochroa ligata. See Mike
QuinnÕs BugGuide observation, below, from 27 March 2009
in Travis County, Texas. (Shown below under a Creative
Commons license.) A bit of (probable) success snatched
from failure. On the other hand, they donÕt look anything
like Òmy eggsÓ.
Inspired by greater minds, I thought it okay to publish my
own null results.
But then, James Von Loh (one of the knowledge keepers I
reached out to in my quest) came up with some suggestions
after querying iNaturalist. iNaturalist suggested some
speciÞc stink bug species and some species of moth.
Step Seven. Stop smiling. Is UhlerÕs Stink Bug, Chlorochroa
uhleri (StŒl, 1872), a possibility? The iNaturalist match with
this species appears to be based on an observation from
Southern California in July 2025 which depicts an egg mass.
After consulting with the observer this avenue of
exploration does not appear productive.
There are observations of other members of this genus in
our general area, including Chlorochroa ligata (Say, 1832)
34
