# Will the real Devils Flower Mantis please stand up?



## JayzunBoget (May 16, 2008)

Anyone particularly familiar with this species? I got in 3 nymphs referred to as Devils Flower Mantis to the pet store that I work at. I was expecting Idolomantis diabolica, but I am also seeing Blepharopsis mendica referred to as the Devils Flower Mantis. I am going to contact my source, but she is several times removed from the actual breeder so I am not particularly hopeful, there.

Anyone know any hints on how to differentiate these species at the nymph stage?

Here are a few pics;


----------



## hibiscusmile (May 16, 2008)

Yea it's the B M. not the idol


----------



## JayzunBoget (May 16, 2008)

hibiscusmile said:


> Yea it's the B M. not the idol


Darn, I was hoping for the diabolica!!


----------



## macro junkie (May 16, 2008)

devil






giant devil






devil






giant devil


----------



## Birdfly (May 16, 2008)

_Blepheropsis_ were always commonly known as the thistle mantis and _Idolomantis_ as the African devil flower mantis.

Its getting harder to rely on common names as they can be pulled from the air or misinterpreted so easily, some species of mantis share certain names or aspects of a common name and some species have a few, cant go wrong with the scientific name apart from spelling


----------



## Morpheus uk (May 16, 2008)

In other words [SIZE=18pt]DONT USE COMMON NAMES[/SIZE]

lol, they only allow for ###### ups :lol:


----------



## Orin (May 16, 2008)

Birdfly said:


> cant go wrong with the scientific name apart from spelling


Except that people also use the wrong scientific name for things as well... :blink: 

B.mendica was selling under the name devil's flower mantis before idolomantis simply because it was the only one available and someone apparently liked the name, never heard of thistle mantis and wasn't idolomantis just devil mantis anyway? More importantly if one were any connoisseur of names neither should include flower in their common name since their not Hymenopodidae.


----------



## Christian (May 17, 2008)

No, this is wrong.

"Flower" is not only applied to members of the Hymenopodidae.

In fact, the common name for _Idolomantis diabolica_ was "devil's flower" for over 110 years. No "devil's flower *mantis*" no "*giant* devil's flower", just "devil's flower". The name originates from the fact that in those days the startling display had been mistaken for a flower mimic to attract insects. This is the reason for the name "devil's flower".

90 years later, mantids had been in culture for several decades then and _I. diabolica_ was still not available, some jerk (I know the name of) invented the name "Lesser devil's flower" for _B. mendica_ in order to make them more "sexy" and sell them better. _B. mendica_ is the closest living relative of _I. diabolica_, nevertheless the name was a rather bad choice, as _B. mendica_ has nothing of a devil's flower. This name was applied to _I. diabolica_ for obvious reasons, all which are lacked by _B. mendica,_ whether closely related or not.

In English speaking countries the story got even worse, as _B. mendica_ was sold there shortly after as "devil's flower mantis", a name that includes two important changes: "Lesser" was ommitted and "mantis" added. I tried several times to explain that the name is wrong, but it was, and still is, like fighting against windmills. Once the name was in the heads of the people, most of which didn't know the history of it or even didn't know _I. diabolica_ as such at that time, the name proved impossible to be wiped out. The real problem arose when we finally managed to establish _I. diabolica_ in stock, and it also became available in England. The real common name "devil's flower" was already wrongly preoccupied by _B. mendica_ and now something of a confusion arose. As the "common name illness" is mostly endemic to English speaking countries (you find a common name for almost everything, one worse than another), it didn't last long until someone introduced "giant" to the common name ("giant" in the common name is always sexy, and sells better) "devil's flower mantis" and so at moment there is the following situation: _B. mendica_ is named "devil's flower mantis" without justification, and _Idolomantis diabolica_ has that unruly "giant" in the common name, instead of being named simply "devil's flower" as it should be.

Well, what can be done? It would be simple, if people took advices. It won't be the first time noone considers what I write, so that part could be named: "everyone gets what he deserves". On the other hand, this is a good example that you just shouldn't use common names at all...


----------



## Kruszakus (May 17, 2008)

Why bother with those idiotic names? They cause too much confusion - better stick to one name.


----------



## Birdfly (May 17, 2008)

Orin said:


> Except that people also use the wrong scientific name for things as well... :blink: B.mendica was selling under the name devil's flower mantis before idolomantis simply because it was the only one available and someone apparently liked the name, never heard of thistle mantis and wasn't idolomantis just devil mantis anyway? More importantly if one were any connoisseur of names neither should include flower in their common name since their not Hymenopodidae.


Well were only human but i think it is still a better way and the likelyhood of a mistake is much less  people are mostly put off with pronounciation.

Here in the uk its always been "Thistle mantis" for _Blepheropsis_ i can remember about 20 years ago other names like lesser/devils flower mantis starting to appear with it, some one once described it to me as a "pacer" mantis because of the similarity in the colour of the green &amp; white sweets called pacers ?

The "devil flower" as Christian says was the first common name for _Idolomantis _ that i can remember but even back then people added bits on and what not and soon it was also known as the "African devil flower" (were i've got it from) and so on until Giant clicking devil eyed flower pacer leaf blower mantis...  

Flower mantis is a very broad spectrum it doesnt just encompass members of just one Family, the Hymenopodidae! as i understand it it was loosely coined for any mantis that mimicked a flower or could/would use a flower as an ambush point ? which is a lot.

With out going to far of topic, Christian have you got a more precise description of what a "flower" mantis is ?


----------



## Christian (May 17, 2008)

Well, the term "flower mantis" was, of course, invented by humans and has, in his regular usage, no taxonomic and just a low ecological value. It is applied to those species which mimic a flower and/or use flowers as perch sites - or, more precisely, to those species people *think* of they *should* sit on flowers. In fact, it is a rather vague definition, as the usual suspects do well without any flower or blossom if necessary and, on the other hand, some mantids which perch reguarly on flowers are not patterned flower-like. Most animals just don't do the stuff that humans think they have to do.

More accurately, the term applies just to the Hymenopodinae. If used like this, it has some taxonomic value. Nevertheless, "devil's flower" has not the meaning of the actual use of the term "flower mantis". As I stated before, there is no "mantis" contained in "devil's flower". It is of no importance in this respect if the term "flower mantis" is restricted to the Hymenopodinae or not, neither concerning the meaning nor the spelling.


----------



## Birdfly (May 17, 2008)

Thanks, thats as much as i understand it


----------



## Orin (May 18, 2008)

Christian said:


> several decades then and _I. diabolica_ was still not available, some jerk (I know the name of) invented the name "Lesser devil's flower" for _B. mendica_


 It's strange you remember the story that way, the German guy who sold all those B. mendica oothecae was selling them under the wrong scientific name as I.diabolica, reportedly a mistake, and the buyers were pretty unhappy when they found out they didn't have the right animal. The pilfered common name was after the fact.What's your source for the 110 year old devil's flower name?

I imagine you know that technically you can't have a possessive in a common name.


----------



## Christian (May 18, 2008)

I ommitted that story, but it was the same guy who later even sold _B. mendica_ as _I. diabolica_. We should not go into further detail, as a forum isn't a good place for such hearsay. But we both know who was meant.  

_I. diabolica_ was described 1869 by Saussure. Later, Sharp (1899) launched the story about the flower-mimicking posture and "invented" a new way to catch prey for _I. diabolica_. The interesting part in that old work was that he never saw a living specimen and just got a dead one sent together with some notes by another observer. The observer described the startling display but obviously didn't recognize is as that what it was - instead Sharp thought after reading the note that the insect assumes this posture in order to catch insects.

This story was the only one known about this species for decades and several authors relied on this article. Even when three authors (Carpenter 1921, Varley 1939 and Burtt 1943) described the real reason for this posture and even noticed the stridulation, the story of the flower mimic rested in literature for a long time. I even found it in an actual Zoology book from 1996. Sometime after 1900 the name "devil's flower" has appeared in his German version (named "Teufelsblume") and was later regularly found in some dictionaries from the 1920ies and 1930ies. I deduced from this chronology that it was not before Sharp's article (who later also worked on an article on _G. gongylodes_, which resulted from observed specimens in India and, consequently, was better) that the common name devil's flower was used, even though the species was figured in colors before in Westwood's catalogue of 1889. It is not important if the common name was known for exactly 110, 100 or 90 years, it is just important that is has a rather long history lasting about a century.

I have to admit that, although I don't really like common names, most of the first old ones possessed an elegance lacked by most of the ones given nowadays. "Devil's flower", "Wandering Violin" (in German) and "Indian Rose Mantis" (in English), respectively, or "Crowned Mantis" (for _H. coronatus_) represent a generation of vernicular names which had a story and a reason (even if based on a legend) and a sound/spelling which is not longer found today. For those who worked with mantids and were active before the I-Net age, those names sounded like some distant phantastic idea, like adventure and they set up dreams of those creatures in our heads. Nothing like this is found today - in a time when everyone expects everything for nothing and every creature is degraded to something one can make money with. The respect we had and still have for these creatures may have something to do with our breeding success. However, those times may have been harder with respect of the gain of information, on the other hand most information was first-hand. The internet doesn't really make things easier. People think it does, but in fact you get unfiltered info which is complete bull***t in 80-90% of all cases. The ability to distinguish the one from the other is something that, I fear, is not shared by everyone. Returning to mantids, the only reliable info is still found in journals and books. The internet is, regarding mantids, just a second- and third-hand trash can.


----------



## Rob Byatt (May 19, 2008)

Christian said:


> most of the first old ones possessed an elegance lacked by most of the ones given nowadays........represent a generation of vernicular names which had a story and a reason (even if based on a legend) and a sound/spelling which is not longer found today. Nothing like this is found today - in a time when everyone expects everything for nothing and every creature is degraded to something one can make money with. The respect we had and still have for these creatures may have something to do with our breeding success.


I agree,; common names should be extracted from the scientific name where possible (Latin/Greek influences etc.) and not because some guy that bought it from a breeder thinks it looks like a Giraffe or a boxer  

I'm still trying to figure out why _Phyllocrania paradoxa_ is called the Ghost mantis :blink:


----------



## Morpheus uk (May 19, 2008)

Because it blends into the environment and becomes invisible lol XD


----------



## jarek (May 19, 2008)

Morpheus uk said:


> Because it blends into the environment and becomes invisible lol XD


i saw a mantis for the first time in slovakia on some meadow and at first I thought it was just moving grass


----------



## MantidLord (May 20, 2008)

I FIGURED IT OUT!!! The reason why Christian is so smart, is because he's 120 YEARS OLD!!!  ]lol

Thanks for the info. I'll try myself to become more familiar with scientific names. I can only remember a few &lt;_&lt; But I'll continue memorizing!


----------



## Christian (May 21, 2008)

:lol:


----------



## MantidLord (May 23, 2008)

Christian said:


> :lol:


...So does that mean it's true...? :mellow: (He's a deity) :lol:


----------



## nympho (May 25, 2008)

'idolomantis diabolica' is such a fantastic* name, why use anything else.  

*1 imaginative or fanciful; remote from reality • of extraordinary size or degree • (of a shape or design) bizarre or exotic; seeming more appropriate to a fairy tale than to reality or practical use 2 informal extraordinarily good or attractive


----------



## MantidLord (May 25, 2008)

I like the definition from the dictionary part. :lol: I agree though (I thought I. diabolica was its common name cause it sounds so cool). I mean, diabolica/*diabolical**? Connection maybe?

*of or relating characteristics from the *devil*.

Devil, duh...Devil's flower.


----------



## nympho (May 25, 2008)

MantidLord said:


> I like the definition from the dictionary part. :lol: I agree though (I thought I. diabolica was its common name cause it sounds so cool). I mean, diabolica/*diabolical**? Connection maybe? *of or relating characteristics from the *devil*.
> 
> Devil, duh...Devil's flower.


well, there certainly diabolically expensive. :lol:


----------



## MantidLord (May 25, 2008)

nympho said:


> well, there certainly diabolically expensive. :lol:


lol, I wouldn't know :lol: I'm afraid to try them (even if they were offered to me for free).


----------



## nympho (May 26, 2008)

MantidLord said:


> lol, I wouldn't know :lol: I'm afraid to try them (even if they were offered to me for free).


yeah, they can be tricky- dropping while final shedding and foot damage problems made mine fail - which i didnt anticipate (wrong cage materials) exacerbated by their sloooooooow growth and therefore the length of time to develop problems. just get the cage and feeding conditions dead right by copying others who have suceeded then they are pretty easy, so no reason to be scared -esp if theyre free :lol:


----------



## macro junkie (May 26, 2008)

Pre subadult male - Blepharopsis mendicaNot sure why its eyes are like that..When i got them at 4th instar they allready looked like that.Dont seem to be dping them any harm so far.


----------



## ghostmantis84 (Jul 3, 2008)

Thats a lucjy escape when i bought my Ghost mnatis the guy at the shop said it was a idlo...it wasnt until i got home that i found out what it really was lol


----------



## idolomantis (Jul 3, 2008)

the title reminds me of a song by eminem: slim shady :lol:


----------



## macro junkie (Jul 3, 2008)

Blepharopsis mendica presub adult male






Idolomantis Diabolica subadult female


----------



## MANTIS DUDE (Jul 4, 2008)

MantidLord said:


> ...So does that mean it's true...? :mellow: (He's a deity) :lol:


I realy dont know

.


----------



## MANTIS DUDE (Jul 4, 2008)

macro junkie said:


> Pre subadult male - Blepharopsis mendicaNot sure why its eyes are like that..When i got them at 4th instar they allready looked like that.Dont seem to be dping them any harm so far.


Even though i love mantids soooo much, :wub: they can look a little scary close up. h34r:


----------



## Termite48 (Sep 22, 2011)

Again, as a "Johnny come lately" to the hobby and to this thread about common names and the confusion that is present have an observation. Because we people who are in some way or another involved with mantids, are often lazy or don't have the opportunity to read real books, have become reliant on the internet. I cannot ascribe to Christian's statement in posting #14 and the last 3+ lines where he says that the internet has "complete bull...t in 80-90% of cases. This simply is extending one too far from his range of knowledge and expertise. The internet does in fact make many things easier from getting a recipe for a great pie, to finding a source for a new tool one would like to buy. Fortunately for us, Christian has posted here some awesome and valuable information that we should know and use if we are to get better at this hobby of keeping mantids,

I try to use the scientific names because I was at one time a Biology major in the Universities I attended many years ago. In those days it would have been absurd to believe that I would be trading with someone in Eastern Europe to acquire rare mantids that are native to Africa. Is someone could have known the future and told me this would be true in 2011, I would have promoted this person to go check in at the Camarillo State Mental facility (now defunct) which later, in some circles became "Hotel California" according to some experts. I like having the ability to acquiring insects from all over the world. I hope to learn from the many posts that are left here in this Forum on a daily basis. Some are experiences, some are just plain facts, some is bunk, and some is opinion. As we read and learn, we can separate the B.S. from the good stuff. Thank you all who post thoughtfully and those who sincerely share their knowledge. Take care!


----------

