# Hatchling, L1, First Instar???



## Precious (Sep 3, 2007)

I did a topic search, looked everywhere and if the answer to my question is out there I can't find it. I read about hatchlings and then references to L1, L2. Well, logic would follow that if there is a hatchling then L1 refers to the first moult. So an L1 nymph has moulted only once, prior to that it is a hatchling. Is that the case? Or, is an L1 nymph a hatchling that hasn't moulted and an L2 is a nymph that has moulted once. Confused yet? What does the L stand for? First instar? And is the first instar the stage of development before or after the first moult? I know this is basic info but I can't get it straight, so help me out brainiacs!


----------



## Andrew (Sep 3, 2007)

It hatches. Its L1. It molts. Its L2. It molts again. Its L3. And so on. Technically they molt as they hatch, but we don't really count that one. Although some people do. Its a little ridiculous if you ask me.

L stands for larval instar or something. We should be using I(instar) instead of L. Makes more sense that way.


----------



## Precious (Sep 3, 2007)

Finallly. The light reaches through the darkness! Thank you soooooo much. Seems silly, but can you see how a virgin (one who has not successfully kept animals classified insecta through an entire life cycle, flies don't count) would wonder about that. Thanks again, have a great day!


----------



## Andrew (Sep 3, 2007)

No problem. Glad you understand.


----------



## OGIGA (Sep 3, 2007)

Everybody asks this and they can never find a satisfying answer using the search feature. We need to make a sticky.


----------



## Precious (Sep 3, 2007)

A sticky is a great idea! It's basic information, but even when you understand it there can be confusion as to qualifying the information. A sticky might serve to clarify once and for all. Does anyone know if other members of Insecta classification are referred to using L1, L2 as well, does it vary in Europe or Asia? Curiouser and curiouser!


----------



## Andrew (Sep 3, 2007)

Its often used for pretty much any insect that molts.

What do you mean by "does it vary"?


----------



## Precious (Sep 3, 2007)

As with metrics, the sciences use metrics wherever you are. Do bug people in other developed countries use L1 to represent first instar or something else? Is it universal? No big deal, just wondering if I might see it written yet another way.


----------



## Andrew (Sep 3, 2007)

Its pretty much universal, although some people use "I" instead of "L".


----------



## Rob Byatt (Sep 4, 2007)

In English speaking countries we SHOULD use the suffix 'instar'.

'L' is the abbreviation of Larven/_others_ (correct me if wrong Christian), a German word.

'L' is only used in these countries because the people that import the mantids from none English speaking countries DO NOT understand the meaning of 'L'.

Instar has been used for centuries by English speaking people; look in ANY respected entomological book and I guarantee that you will see NO reference to the prefix 'L'.

I'll get off my soap box now :roll:

Rob.


----------



## OGIGA (Sep 4, 2007)

> Its pretty much universal, although some people use "I" instead of "L".


I've never seen anybody here use the "I" prefix...


----------



## Precious (Sep 4, 2007)

Thanks Rob. I've had experience with butterlies/moths and of course, maggots, and larvae is always referred in terms of instar. I've only seen one site that used "I" as opposed to "L" but my experience is primarily with US references. So much of this science, as with all, is disputed. As I'm sure you know, there is disagreement in all areas of taxonomy. It just depends on who you're talking to.

I couldn't nail down if a hatchling is a hatchling or, what is commonly reffered to on this site, an L1 and the answer eluded me on the internet. I get it now.


----------



## Christian (Sep 5, 2007)

Now, as I said at least three times, the German abbreviation "L" means "larval instar", NOT "larva". It is not used for adults/imagines or pupae.

The term L (plus a number) is not an entomologist one. It is used by hobbyists because it is shorter than the scientific term "first/second/etc. instar larva/nymph".

In mantids there is some confusion regarding the terminus of hatchlings: because of the embryonal cuticle some authors have used L2 for a hatchling, pretending that the ecclosion molt should be counted. It is just an envelope, though, protecting the larva during hatching, so hatschlings are indeed L1.

Regards,

Christian


----------



## yen_saw (Sep 5, 2007)

Think i need to use instar more often, i am just get use to the L term and being lazy  never too late to start i guess :wink:


----------



## Hypoponera (Sep 5, 2007)

Maybe we should consider using "N" for nymphal rather then "L" for larval. After all, mantids have nymphs, not larva.


----------



## Rob Byatt (Sep 6, 2007)

> Maybe we should consider using "N" for nymphal rather then "L" for larval. After all, mantids have nymphs, not larva.


Nope :roll: :wink: Nymphal stages already have a term - instars :wink:

The prefix 'L' is perfectly fine as an abbreviation; in Germany, France, etc.


----------



## Christian (Sep 6, 2007)

Hi.

We will not change the term anyway, it has established already. You can use what you want as long as you know what is meant by the "L".

If paurometabolous larval stages have to be called nymphs is to a certain extent a matter of interpretation. There is some difference between the continents regarding the strength of this term. Nymph may be more correct, larva is not completely wrong, though.


----------



## Rob Byatt (Sep 6, 2007)

> We will not change the term anyway, it has established already. You can use what you want as long as you know what is meant by the "L".


I hope you know I don't mean for that to happen, mearly for instar to be used in its correct language ? It would be absurd to suggest you change to instar.



> If *paurometabolous* larval stages have to be called nymphs is to a certain extent a matter of interpretation. There is some difference between the continents regarding the strength of this term. Nymph may be more correct, larva is not completely wrong, though.


I'm not sure if things have changed or if it is an error in translation, but are you refering to hemimetabolous insects ?

Wait a minute.....these terms are synonymous :wink:

Isoptera, Heteroptera and Homoptera are regarded as hemimetabolous. Snodgrass (1954) calls these groups ametabolous or *paurometabolous*. (adapted from Chapman, 1972).

You learn something new everyday


----------



## Precious (Sep 6, 2007)

> > We will not change the term anyway, it has established already. You can use what you want as long as you know what is meant by the "L".
> 
> 
> I hope you know I don't mean for that to happen, mearly for instar to be used in its correct language ? It would be absurd to suggest you change to instar.
> ...


I thought paurometabolous insects were within the category hemimetabolous. The whole imcomplete life cycle throws me. It's egg to nymph, no larvae the way us lay persons expect. I think we may just be dicing the onion too thinly. What do I know, I'm but a lowly dental hygienist.


----------

