#ladybird

🆔:

Ladybug = Scarce Seven-Spot Ladybird (with bonus aphids)

Caterpillar = Monarch Butterfly (larva)

Dragonfly = Roseate Skimmer

34 ladybugs. Beetles of New England and their kind. 1895.

People have some very strange views on ladybirds, particularly invasive ones, and I do feel the need to clear some of them up

Ladybirds are in the family Coccinellidae. Every single species in that family can be referred to as a ladybird (or ladybug, lady beetle, whatever you use. Point being, they are all in the same group)

The reason I clarify that is because of these guys. These are Harmonia axyridis, commonly known as harlequin ladybirds, Asian ladybirds or Asian lady beetles. They are invasive in Europe and North America and, as you can see, are extremely variably in their patterning (some people seem to think they're generally more orange than other ladybirds when that really isn't the case). I have seen a significant number of people use that last name in the specific form of "these are not ladybirds, they're Asian lady beetles". They are, in fact, both. Common names are just like that sometimes

This statement also usually comes with the assumption that 7 spot ladybirds (Coccinella septempunctata) are the 'real' ladybirds. In Europe, these are the most common native species but far from the only one. In North America, they are common but they are also invasive, just like harlequins. Invasive status is region specific and these species aren't harming the environment in their native ranges

7 spot ladybird

Harlequins are considered invasive due to their impact on populations of native insects. However, even their wikipedia page is spreading very strange ideas about this

These are not remotely related to them being invasive. These are minor inconveniences to humans which do not concern native species in the slightest. A species being annoying to you does not make it invasive. I have seen some of this same logic applied to mosquitoes when they are also a large family of insects with native species practically everywhere but Antarctica, and it is incredibly unhelpful. An invasive species is one that has been introduced to somewhere outside of its native range and is having a negative ecological impact, no more and no less. They are not there of their own accord (in the case of both of these ladybird species, they were intentionally introduced as biological control for aphids) and they are not 'evil' for being in the wrong place, even if they do have to be dealt with

Regarding dealing with them, I personally do not trust the general public to accurately discern an invasive species from a native one, especially with ones as variable as ladybirds. Individual people squishing insects have very little impact on overall populations, particularly when they are as well established as these. I would rather people leave all of them alone to be dealt with by actual experts than risk killing native species in the process

As for the actual claims about the grievances harlequins cause humans, they tend to be posed as unique to them when they really aren't. Many ladybirds are mildly toxic, which is why they have bright colouration to warn predators that they won't taste good. Many ladybirds will reflex bleed as a defence strategy (bleeding out of their joints to provide a taste of their toxic blood). Many ladybirds are capable of biting people and harlequins just seem to do so at a slightly higher rate. None of these cause any real harm unless you happen to be allergic

And now for a quick fire round of funny claims from the notes of this post that I'm not dignifying with a real debunk I just find them hilarious