DF se) 2) Fats unr Se Ht 7 A 84 7 pres : as sn me *) Svan ‘sine Lie aay 8 Te Wass ee Le Se + RG eae Aro Path ont wha d baee i a ‘: ori ie pens i iN a Basten hea’ re ’ 3 ai ; ‘ SANTA RRNA Bede h oem aay 9 fy Bai vey | Ta) terete we Ae ee a Pie ba dar eae TO $2 he ne i. "I a Gite a ae Sc Ee Rsaanaa “ss 27 gues ees e ASet ae tee tea ht ©} STR maya Ee ae ; bed eae rhea hom a es Pres a tee Ri Sa patie ere DeD ee Tiecs Base see *eaence SMistgeans 3 pede dee Che =: pa Botnet Ry Be tw & abet 4 , 7 bile yh a haehiyeae too Fe ee aay ‘Se9 5m aghue a * 4 oN hed Pel hems same Ne Site pigt i id an? ital ies iteaets Sars > BH oad Waser age Seb Sees 3 ty y + hagas ot deta TY sthee eas atlas ot F Po oh Bove » Barres: oes! tte’ C Sera ys ron ae 3 sats: sy ae hades a %, * Veey: y Leni beggin 2 sratys ase eee Ly ieee - ey ore hed etfen yl yes 2 } iy hee str te apiqess yae : 3 aalsag aaett bs eee a ties aes, pe mee dit ead has ®, eyed - Ci “ard EECET 7 7S ge oe bear it ae rad ed: oe aS he ee te Tis is pele eee ee oy wah “3 yobs he part Ts er fy ee Seis he my PS Sea YLa Bthee Can at Hi to is Pere pet ens +) Wii hh ais rar et) =a Hee eye i ape ae 8 a 13-52) ee ae * wo LAA ete Wk berg raat gitiat Saisie Pits 2G wot se fy tees Ne se TF ue 2s Bad ad ee! oe iendode ae tere pidaceeds ft Stysay t= ie ’ ” bo-qree re eS Rae 4, per rr tere eee path eerie: le i “s ih % i sigs ’ AwEne s ny RT ed fete sabes ieee wre ? 4 pets pa brio fitaes ee TT Cae aes ata tee tert - 9 ae a eae ate Une ce m . ey tbe rer et igok . “a pay * Levies a ing tye ee eee were sPiewtls iene 6 es sgt ee edirt pan dads, i bo peat 2] he Je te hs feats phe. ’ ates \v ne hE ne gee are Oy Tae in Jeaive ise yee age al Sig le ge heal ete hi veto h ‘ Ves att SEN: ‘ ii ‘ etree wi att Ui otOs a . at ’ it sheathd on ay Me sn woud aly Recreate : ie ” A hs eh } rhs He “ ON aM) atesusithe ae ss 3; dats ote Wa eat iit ei ys, io PY ye ties Mee af te t ‘ Put ee; 3 iti ‘ tau ate ahr ” be Ney i i! i r " ts Preis De siden é ‘ “HS ds Rew + tds ere oe we te i t fe) Bg , f Volume 30 1976 Number 1 r~ ; i £ ro Me | LS PF OURNAL “, eka i F ¢ sa 7 Ent. of the LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Published quarterly by THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Publié par LA SOCIETE DES LEPIDOPTERISTES Herausgegeben von DER GESELLSCHAFT DER LEPIDOPTEROLOGEN Publicado por LA SOCIEDAD DE LOS LEPIDOPTERISTAS a woe ca PE SSS : = : — . Pr ANT AN < = YY yes; il ‘iN iN \ SS i lie NTA i \ My a}, Ta > \ ey vA ory a \ \ \ \ N ~Lenanies FZ 22 April 1976 THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY EXECUTIVE COUNCIL RonaLp W. Honcess, President S. S. Nicouay, President-elect Oxar H. H. Mie.xe, Vice President Donatp R. Davis, Ist Vice President Joun M. Sniper, Treasurer Witu1aM Hovanirz, Vice President Lee D. MILLER, Secretary Members at large (three year terms): D. C. Fercuson (1975) J. T. Brewer (1976) C. V. CovELL, Jr. (1976) R. O. KENDALL (1975) K. S. Brown (1976) D. F. Harpwick (1977) J. A. Powetxi (1975) K. W. Puiie (1976) J. B. Zecier (1977) The object of the Lepidopterists’ Society, which was formed in May, 1947 and formally constituted in December, 1950, is “to promote the science of lepidopterology in all its branches, .... to issue a periodical and other publications on Lepidoptera, to facilitate the exchange of specimens and ideas by both the professional worker and the amateur in the field; to secure cooperation in all measures” directed towards these aims. Membership in the Society is open to all persons interested in the study of Lepidoptera. All members receive the Journal and the News of the Lepidopterists’ Society. Institutions may subscribe to the Journal but may not become members. Prospective members should send to the Treasurer full dues for the current year, together with their full name, address, and special lepidopterological interests. In alternate years a list of members of the Society is issued, with addresses and special interests. There are four numbers in each volume of the Journal, scheduled for February, May, August and November, and six numbers of the News each year. Active members—annual dues $13.00 Student members—annual dues $10.00 Sustaining members—annual dues $20.00 Life members—single sum $150.00 Institutional subscriptions—annual $18.00 Send remittances, payable to The Lepidopterists’ Society, and address changes to: John M. Snider, 3520 Mulldae Ave., San Pedro, Calif. 90732 U.S.A. Memoirs of the Lepidopterists’ Society, No. 1 (Feb. 1964) A SYNONYMIC LIST OF THE NEARCTIC RHOPALOCERA by Cyrit F. pos Passos Price: Society members, $5.00 U.S.; non-members, $7.50 U.S. Paper covers, revisions of the Melitaeinae and Lycaenidae supplied separately. Order: Mail to Charles V. Covell, Jr., Memoirs Editor, Department of Biology, Uni- versity of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40208, U.S.A. The Lepidopterists’ Society is a non-profit, scientific organization. The known office of publication is 1041 New Hampshire St., Lawrence, Kansas 66044. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A. 66044. JOURNAL OF Tue LeEpPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY t Volume 30 1976 Number 1 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 1975— TO MY FELLOW AMATEURS ANDRE BLANCHARD P. O. Box 20304, Houston, Texas 77025 The title of Dr. Rindge’s Presidential Address to the twelfth annual meeting of the Pacific Coast Section at San Diego, California (1965) was: “The Importance of Collecting—Now’. In it he explained that we were —we still are of course—in a losing race against the spread of civilization and concomitant destruction of breeding grounds for Lepidoptera. His address was a plea for immediate and intensive collecting of butterflies and moths. I am sure that few professionals needed such a reminder but I hope that many amateurs listened and followed his advice. Yet, and in full agreement with everything that he said, I would like to add my two cents worth of comments to Dr. Rindge’s appeal. The number of amateurs interested in moths is disproportionately smaller than that of those interested in butterflies, yet there are many times more species of moths than of butterflies. If there are, say, ten times more species of moths and ten times less people interested in them, this is a deficiency factor of one hundred against the moths. In such a situation it is indeed very likely that many, many species of moths will disappear from the earth before they are seen by a single taxonomist. How can we hope to redress such an imbalance? By showing that study- ing moths can be more rewarding because there is a lot more to be discovered about them. Before I go any further, let me tell you that I am very much aware of the fact that we do not have enough collectors even of butterflies, that we would like to have several times more of them. Nothing that I am going to say should be interpreted as an attempt to dissuade anybody from collecting butterflies: my ambition is only to convince some ama- teurs to work on moths in parallel with butterflies and to kindle an inter- est in moths in some neophytes. JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY bo Most of us come to lepidopterology for the pleasure of assembling a beautiful collection. We may differ as to how geographically extensive it will be or as to which groups of Lepidoptera will be included, but I think that nearly all of us start that way. Let me tell you, between parentheses that, from my contacts with many professionals, I have come to the conclusion that most of them are dyed in the wool amateurs who have found a way of getting paid for doing what they would gladly do, at their own expense, if they could afford to do so. However, many of us amateurs can not be happy for long, with collect- ing Lepidoptera the way others collect postage stamps. Mere collecting of course is all right and quite satisfying for many, but those who gradu- ate to the studying stage find their hobby considerably more satisfying. The key words are studying, doing research, and as there is immensely more that is unknown and unexplored among the Heterocera, the chances of hitting on something new are considerably better with moths than with butterflies. Where is the amateur who is not thrilled when he discovers something new like a wide extension of range, a new food- plant, a new detail of a life history or a species new to Science? Moths, just because they are not overall as pretty as most butterflies, reserve their rewards for those who study them a little more deeply. Lepidopterology is a wonderful science in which you do not need to be an expert—as you would have to be in Mathematics, Physics or Biology for instance—to do some simple, simple but useful research. A good point of moths is that they are rather easy to collect: this is not the place to explain how, but I rather like my method which con- sists of setting the traps at sunset, going to sleep, and gathering the loot at daybreak. The only disadvantage of this method is that you miss the day flying species and those which come only at bait. Moths, of course, are divided in Macroheterocera and Microheterocera. Both groups are replete with discoveries waiting to be made, but the micros are even more so. One of the most promising avenues to discovery is through rearing of larvae: rearing and careful field observations are research at its best, and this type of activity requires only very inexpensive equipment. When you come to think that in some good size genera, the larva or the food- plant of not a single species is known, you realize that by rearing all the larvae that you can procure, you stand a more than even chance of dis- covering from time to time something well worth your trouble. Good records of everything should of course be maintained, some larvae and pupae preserved by pickling or dehydrating. There was a time, late in the nineteenth and early in this twentieth centuries when entomologists vied for the description of new species. VoLUME 30, NuMBER 1 3 Today, it sometimes seems that they need an excuse to do so, unless it is in the course of a group revision. These group revisions, however, which have become their main activity, bring forth amazing results: hardly any genus is revised without recognizing several new species which had been overlooked, or splitting the genus into two or more genera. In any case, these group revisions necessitate bringing together, and making available to the reviser, all the material available in all the museums and the private collections. If you have any material available in the genus being revised, this is your chance of contributing something valuable which will, of course be fully acknowledged. I have already mentioned that the micros are even less well under- stood than the macros. This, really is an understatement: some groups of micros are so poorly known that it is almost useless to request identi- fication of specimens: more than half return with at most a genus name. These are orphan groups and you do not have to go very far down the check list of micros to find such groups: the Epipaschiines—a subfamily of the Pyralids—are a good example. I have assiduously collected them, prepared male and female genitalia and discovered that they are too similar to be of much help, on top of that several species look alike and there is some sexual dimorphism. I may be wrong but I am inclined to think that this is, in part at least, why these groups have been left alone and that, in cases like that, the success of a revision and the willingness of a potential reviser to tackle the job depend on the availability of good, long reared series of specimens with preserved larvae, pupae, eggs and careful records of everything including foodplants. Professionals will take care of all this for economically important species, but we, amateurs, could and should do it for all kinds of species. These would be wonderful projects for young amateurs. I say young, because the fruition of their efforts may come only after several years of routine and not immediately rewarding work. But would not the result be worth the effort? Will my plea bring forth the hoped for response? Not if I merely urge the amateurs to go ahead blindly into a world unfamiliar to most of them. This is where I turn to the professionals and tell them: we want. we need your help! I wonder if one of you “Pros” would come forth, prepare for us and publish in the Journal a clear and easy guide to the moths and particularly the micros. I do not mean something as complete and forbidding as Forbes’ key in Volume One of his “Lepidoptera of New York and Neighboring States,” but a summary of the most easily observed characters of the different families and—where possible—subfamilies, well illustrated with sketches showing palpi, antennae, wing shapes, types of maculation, etc. This, in my opinion, is the most helpful tool that the professional could give the amateur. 4 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY I directed my address to “My Fellow Amateurs” because I meant it as a plea to some of them, who may not realize that the study of the moth, less glamorous perhaps than the study of the butterfly, is in the long run more rewarding. But, to the enthusiasm of the amateur, let the professional add the support of his knowledge. Let him give us the guide we need, let him stake out the road to lead us into the strange but wonderful world of the humble moth. CAPTURE OF A HYBRID LIMENITIS ARTHEMIS ASTYANAX) X L. ARCHIPPUS (NYMPHALIDAE) IN SOUTHERN GEORGIA On 22 September 1974 a recently emerged male hybrid between Limenitis arthe- mis astyanax (Fabricius) and L. archippus (Cramer) (form rudidus Strecker) was captured near Fort Jackson, Savannah, Chatham Co., Georgia. Limenitis archippus was abundant in the area, but L. a. astyanax was not observed. The specimen (Fig. 1) is presently in the author's collection. Platt & Greenfield (1971, J. Lepid. Soc. 25: 278-284) reported the capture of a similar interspecific hybrid in North Carolina and listed 12 previously known records of such hybrids. An additional North Carolina specimen was reported by Green- field & Platt (1974, J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 72-75). The individual captured at Savannah and the two from North Carolina are apparently the only known records of this form from the southeastern U.S.A. RicuHArp T. Arsocast, 114 Monica Blvd., Savannah, Georgia 31406. Fig. 1. Male L. arthemis astyanax ~% L. archippus collected near Fort Jackson, Savannah, Georgia, on 22 September 1974 Jobin In, 1h Arbogast. Left: dorsal surface; right: ventral surface. VoLUME 30, NuMBER 1 5 NEW HESPERIIDAE RECORDS FOR TEXAS AND THE UNITED STATES WitutiamM W. McGuire P.O. Box 29884, San Antonio, Texas 78229 AND MicHAEL A. RICKARD 4628 Oakdale, Bellaire, Texas 77401 The Rio Grande Valley of Texas, located in the extreme southern section of the state and encompassing areas of essentially neotropical habitat, offers a unique opportunity for the study of Lepidoptera in the U.S.A. The authors have had the good fortune to collect this area rather frequently during the past several years and during that time some inter- esting and important new records of Hesperiidae have been obtained. During 1972-1974 specimens of several rare Hesperiidae, previously known in the U.S.A. from only a few examples, were taken: Aguna asander (Hewitson), Aguna claxon Evans, Typhedanus undulatus (Hew- itson), Polythrix mexicanus Freeman, Proteides mercurius (Fabricius), Urbanus doryssus Swainson, Panoquina fusina evansi (Freeman), As- traptes gilberti Freeman, Carrhenes canescens (R. Felder), Gorgythion begga pyralina (Moschler) and Lerema ancillaris liris Evans. In addition 12 species of Hesperiidae were taken that represent apparent new U.S.A. records, another that is at least a new Texas record, and two others that substantiate previous but litle known Texas records. Nomenclature and arrangement follows that of fvans (1952, 1953, 1955) and determina- tions, unless otherwise indicated, were made by Rickard. Epargyreus exadeus cruza Evans. Fig. 1. McGuire collected 1 2 in McAllen, Hidalgo County on 18 October 1973 as it fed on blossoms of Queen’s Crown, Antigonon leptopus H. and A. (Polygonaceae). Previous records for this species are confusing: Holland (1931), p. 330, listed E. exadeus (Cramer) as “a straggler in southern California, New Mexico and Arizona.’ However, Evans (1952) stated that what Holland illustrated was E. exadeus cruza rather than exadeus exadeus (Cramer), and noted other distribution for cruza as Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Salvador, Costa Rica, and Panama (transitional to exadeus exadeus). This is the first known record of this skipper for Texas. Aguna metophis (Latreille). Fig. 2. Rickard took a worn @ in Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, Hidalgo County, 6 September 1969, det. H. A. Freeman. Other Texas records include Mission, Hidalgo County, 10 September 1972, 1 Q (Roy O. Kendall); Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge, Hidalgo County, 10 and 27 October 1973, 1 ¢ each date (Rickard); Loop 374 west of Mission, Hidalgo County, 18 October 1973, 1 &, and 19 October 1973, 1 @ (McGuire) and 26 6 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY S Figs. 1-5. 1, Epargyreus exadeus cruza Evans, 9, ventral, McAllen, Texas, 18 October 1973; F 28 mm. 2, Aguna metophis (Latreille), 9, ventral, Loop 374, Mission, Texas, 19 October 1973; F 23 mm, tail 10 mm. 3, Codatractus alcaeus alcaeus (Godman & Salvin), 2, ventral, McAllen, 19 October 1973; F 26 mm. 4, Urbanus pronta Evans, 6, ventral, Ciudad Victoria, Tamaulipas, Mexico, 24 De- cember 1973; F 23 mm, tail 5 mm. 5, Urbanus esmeraldus Butler, ¢, ventral, McAllen, 18 August 1972; F 20 mm, tail 10 mm. October 1973, 1 ¢@ (Rickard); Galveston, Galveston County, 7 August 1973, a worn @ (McGuire). Distribution noted by Evans (1952) includes Mexico, Nicar- agua, Panama, Venezuala, Matto Grosso and South Brazil. Codatractus alceaus alceaus (Godman & Salvin). Fig. 3. The first record for this species in Texas was given by Freeman (1951) as a single specimen from the Davis Mountains, no data. A single worn specimen was collected and reported VoLUME 30, NUMBER | 74 10 Figs. 6-10. Astraptes egregius egregius Butler, 2, dorsal, Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, Texas, 18 October 1973; F 24 mm. 7, Astraptes alardus latia Evans, ¢, ventral, San Fernando, Tamaulipas, Mexico, 23 October 1973; F 28 mm. 8, Achalarus jalapus (Plotz), ¢, ventral, Sullivan City, Texas, 31 July 1972; F 25 mm. 9, Bolla clytius (Godman & Salvin), ¢, dorsal, Abrams, Texas, 18 October 1973; F 15 mm. 10, Sostrata bifasciata nordica Evans, é&, dorsal, Bentsen-Rio Grande State Park, 26 October 1973; F 15 mm. by J. Richard Heitzman (1970) from Boca Chica, Cameron County, 27 June 1968. On 19 October 1973 McGuire collected 1 ¢ at Penitas and 1 @ at McAllen, both Hidalgo County. Obviously uncommon in Texas, it is at times abundant at Ciudad Valles, San Luis Potosi, Mexico (H. A. Freeman, pers. comm.) which is about 500 8 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY mi south of the Texas border and was recorded by Evans (1952) from Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica, as well as Mexico. Urbanus pronta Evans. Fig. 4. Rickard took a @ along a railroad track near Madero, Hidalgo County on 19 October 1969. It was visiting blossoms of Lantana horrida H. B. K. It was papered as U. proteus (Linnaeus) and the true identity not discovered by the author until September 1973. Previous distribution records are from throughout Mexico and Central America south to Paraguay (Evans, 1952). Urbanus esmeraldus Butler. Fig. 5. A single specimen of this species was found by McGuire among his Urbanus material following Rickard’s discovery of U. pronta. The specimen is a fresh 6, collected 18 August 1972 at McAllen. This species is rather widespread from Mexico south to Paraguay (Evans, 1952) and at times rather common in southern Tamaulipas, Mexico, within 350 mi of the Texas border. Astraptes egregius egregius Butler. Fig. 6. A @ was taken by McGuire, 18 October 1973 in Bentsen State Park. The usual habitat of this species is central Mexico south to the Amazons (Evans, 1952) and this record, as confirmed by Mr. H. A. Freeman, represents a significant range extension as well as a new United States record. Astraptes alardus latia Evans. Fig. 7. Rickard took three specimens in 1973: Bentsen State Park, 16 June (1 worn 2) and 10 October (1 fair 9), and Santa Ana Refuge, 1 September (1 fresh ¢). All were collected in wooded areas as they rested under large leaves. This distinctive Astraptes has been recorded from Central America and Colombia by Evans (1952), and found rarely by McGuire in Ta- maulipas, Mexico, within 200 mi of Texas. Achalarus jalapus (Plotz). Fig. 8. A fresh ¢ was taken by McGuire, 31 July 1972 near Sullivan City in western Hidalgo County. Roy O. Kendall collected (and det.) 1 2 on 8 September 1972 and 1. 4 on 9 September 1972 in Mission, Hidalgo County. In 1973, Rickard took 2 ¢ 6 at McAllen, 23 September and 20 October, and John B. Vernon collected 1 @ at the same location on the latter date. This species has probably been often confused with the more common A. toxeus (Plotz), from which it can be distinguished by the presence of the lobed hindwing in jalapus. Recorded by Evans (1952) from Mexico (Jalapa; Granahl; Guada- lajara), Guatemala, Honduras and Columbia, it is not uncommon 300 mi south of Texas (McGuire). Bolla clytius (Godman & Salvin). Fig. 9. On 18 October 1973 McGuire collected 2 64 and 1 2 southwest of Mission near the village of Abrams, Hidalgo County; these were all taken along a wooded canal as they visited Aster blossoms. Determi- nation of these specimens prompted the authors to contact Mr. J. W. Tilden, who had previously reported Bolla brennus from the Rio Grande Valley (Tilden, 1971) and ask that he recheck his Bolla specimens. This was done and Tilden confirmed his earlier determination of B. brennus, thus establishing the presence of two species of Bolla in Texas and the U.S.A. Evans (1953) records this species from only Mexico and Honduras. Sostrata bifasciata nordica Evans. Fig. 10. Rickard took 2 ¢ 8 in Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park on 26 October 1973. They were patrolling small patches of light in a wooded area late in the afternoon. This species has also been found rather commonly by McGuire in the Ciudad Victoria area of Mexico, and is recorded from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica by Evans (1953). Heliopetes arsalte arsalte (Linnaeus). Fig. 11. McGuire collected a pair of fresh specimens at Boca Chica, east of Brownsville, Cameron County, late in the evening of 20 October 1973; both were flying about in open chaparral in company with Heliopetes laviana (Hewitson) and H. macaira (Reakirt). McGuire had previously collected this species within 200 mi of the Texas border, near Ciudad Victoria; vans (1953) lists distribution throughout Mexico, Central and South America, and Trinidad. VoLuME 30, NuMBER 1 9 15 Figs. 11-15. 11, Heliopetes arsalte arsalte (Linnaeus), 2, ventral, Boca Chica, Texas, 20 October 1973; F 16 mm. 12, Pirwna microsticta (Godman), 2, ventral, Sullivan City, 20 October 1973; F 10 mm. 13, Corticea corticea corticea (Pl6tz), ¢, dorsal, Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, 3 September 1972; F 12 mm. 14, Rhinthon osca (Plotz), ¢, dorsal, Loop 374, Mission, 20 October 1973; F 21 mm. 15, Conga chydaea (Butler), ¢, dorsal, Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, 15 July 1972; F 14 mm. Piruna microsticta (Godman). Fig. 12. Evans (1955) recorded 1 ¢ from Texas as well as specimens from Mexico. Holland (1931), p. 361 noted the species as occurring in northern Mexico and “reported as having been taken in Arizona near the Mexican border.” After finding specimens in arrid terrain in southern Tamau- lipas, Mexico, a search of similar habitat near Sullivan City, Hidalgo County, led to McGuire’s capture of 1 2 on 20 October 1973, which reinforces Evans’ earlier record for Texas. Corticea corticea corticea (Plétz). Fig. 13. We have taken a number of examples of this rather common Mexican species to date. Rickard collected 1 ¢ at Madero on 4 November 1973 and 2 @@ in Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, 16 December 1973. A subsequent search of the authors’ collections turned up addi- tional records: Bentsen State Park, 3 September 1972, McGuire (1 ¢) and Santa 10 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Ana National Wildlife Refuge, 9 November 1968, Rickard (1 ¢, 1 9). These speci- mens had been mislabeled Nastra julia (Freeman). The obscure appearance and superficial resemblance to N. julia has doubtless caused other collectors to overlook or mislabel corticea. The species in widely distributed throughout Mexico, Central America and South America as far south as Argentina (Evans, 1955). Rhinthon osca (Plétz). Fig. 14. Rickard captured a fresh Q in a wooded area along Loop 374 west of Mission, Hidalgo County, on 20 October 1973; he collected a second @ in good condition south of Mission near the village of Madera, Hidalgo County, 26 October 1973 as it visited blossoms of Eupatorium odoratum L. Pre- viously, R. osca has been considered a subspecies of the Antillean R. cubana Herrich-Schaffer), but the authors are advised by H. A. Freeman (pers. comm.) that it should be accorded specific status. McGuire has previously collected specimens as far north as Ciudad Mante, Tamaulipas, Mexico, and Evans (1955) notes distribution from Mexico south to Ecuador. Conga chydaea (Butler). Fig. 15. McGuire collected specimens in Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park on 15 July 1972 (1 ¢, 1 @) and 2 September 1972 (1 6); Rickard collected 2 92 on 25 October 1973 as they visited blossoms of Queen’s Crown along a canal in McAllen. This species is relatively common in Mexico to the south of Ciudad Mante, and noted by Evans (1955) to be recorded as far south as Argentina. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Interpretations and Exhibits Branch, for per- mits making possible Lepidoptera research in Santa Ana National Wild- life Refuge and Bentsen-Ric Grande Valley State Park, respectively. Additionally, the authors wish to thank the personnel at Santa Ana and Bentsen for their assistance and cooperation; Mr. H. A. Freeman for confirming determinations, rendering advice and clarifying certain points relative to these Hesperiidae; Mr. Roy O. Kendall for his continuing support and aid in the ongoing study of Texas Rhopalocera and _ his critical review of this manuscript; and to Dr. C. E. Hall of the University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas for the photographs used in this article. LITERATURE CITED Evans, W. H. 1952. A catalogue of the American Hesperiidae indicating the classi- fication and nomenclature adopted in the British Museum. Part II. Pyrginae, Sec. 1, London: British Museum, 178 p., pls. 10-25. - 1953. A catalogue of the American Hesperiidae indicating the classifica- tion and nomenclature adopted in the British Museum. Part ITI. Pyrginae, Sec. 2, London: British Museum, 246 p., pls. 26-53. = 1955. A catalogue of the American Hesperiidae indicating the classifica- tion and nomenclature adopted in the British Museum. Part IV. Hesperiinae and Megathyminae. London: British Museum, 449 p., pls. 54-88. FREEMAN, H. A. 1951. Ecological and systematic study of the Hesperiidae of Texas. So. Meth. Univ. Studies, 6: 1-64. VoLuME 30, NuMBER 1 LE HeirzMan, J. R. 1970. A new U.S. butterfly record and a migration of Eunica monima in Texas (Nymphalidae). Mid-Continent Lepid. Series, 12: 10-11. Ho.tuanp, W. J. 1931. The butterfly book. Rev. ed. New York: Doubleday Doran and Co., Inc., 424 p., 77 pls. TitpEn, J. W. 1971. Aguna claxon (Hesperiidae) new to the United States. J. Lepid. SOG.2 25 PABST HAPALIA NIGRISTRIATALIS A SYNONYM OF UDEA ANGUSTALIS (PYRALIDAE: PYRAUSTINAE) In my recent paper on the Udea angustalis group (Munroe, 1974, Can. Ent. 106: 139-142), I did not consider Hapalia nigristriatalis Hampson (1918, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 9(2): 395), described from a single male from San Antonio, Colombia, collected by Palmer. Examination of a photograph of the holotype, made by me at the British Museum (Natural History) in 1958 (Fig. 1), shows that H. nigristriatalis should be transferred to Udea Guenée, 1844, where it becomes Udea nigristriatalis (Hampson), new combination, and falls as a synonym of Udea angustalis (Dognin, 1905), already known to range from southern Mexico to Bolivia. EucENE Munroe. Biosystematics Research Institute, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 5 Fig. 1. Hapalia nigristriatalis Hampson, 1918, holotype, male, San Antonio, West Colombia, Palmer, British Museum (Natural History). Black and white print from Kodachrome transparency. Wingspan of specimen 22 mm. The type-label was made by Hampson before he began to use the name Hapalia Hiibner for the collective genus he had for many years called Pionea Guenée. 12 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY A NEW SUBSPECIES OF ARGYREUS HYPERBIUS (NYMPHALIDAE) FROM NEW GUINEA Curis SAMSON Saruman, St. Giles in the Wood, Beckley, E. Sussex, England Argyreus hyperbius niugini Samson, subsp. nov. Male. Forewing length: 37-45 mm. Dorsal surface: Margins well defined, particularly those of the hindwings which, when combined with broad submarginals, produce a wide band. In addition to black bar of hindwing discal cell, there are remnants of another on discocellulars. Ventral surface: Constant character appears to be the absence of silver spot which, in nominate subspecies and majority of others, is present in dark postbasal area of hindwing cell. Absence of such spot also characterised in the Australian subspecies: inconstans Butler. Female. Forewing length: 35-48 mm. Dorsal surface: Extensive charcoal-blue band, bisecting forewing; black bars in cell are pronounced. White bar in space 4, plus spot therein usually inferior. Hindwing submarginal bands broad, moreso than those of male. Ventral surface: Markings well defined on fore- and hindwings; broad hindwing submarginals. As in male, silver spot absent in dark area of hindwing cell. Holotype. Male: New Guinea, Nondug] (Central Highlands), 5,500 ft., October 16, 1950. Coll. by Wm. Brandt (E. J. L. Hallstrom). Forewing length, 43 mm. Allotype. Female: same as holotype, but November 1950. Forewing length, 45 mm. The above primary types are in the Australian National Insect Collection, Can- berna vA. Cor: Paratypes. 6 ¢ 4,5 29, Daulo Pass, Eastern Highlands District, New Guinea, 8,000 ft., August 1971 (2 646, 3 @@ to British Museum [Natural History]; 2 é é to American Museum of Natural History; 2 ¢ 6, 2 2 retained by author). Also in the British Museum (Natural History): 1 9, Br. New Guinea, Foothills between Kikori R. & Purari R. (J. P. de Verteuil); 3 ¢ 4, Watut R. to Buiang, west- side of Herzog Mts., 3,200-5,400 ft., early 1928 (A. F. Eichhorn); 4 ¢ 6, Saiko, Bubu R., Upp. Waria R. Sept., Beg. October, 5,500 ft., 1936; 2 4 en es) oe Zageheme, Cromwell Mts., East Finisterre Range, 20 VI to 7 VIL31, 4800’ (F. Shaw Meyer); 1 8, same as above, but 16 VII.31. Retained by author: 1 3, 1 2, New ae Western Highlands, Kandep, 8,000-8,500 ft., 23.1.61 to 14.2.62, W. W. Brandt. Further material of this subspecies collected by Wm. Brandt in New Guinea, now in the Australian National Insect Collection: 5 @ é, 2 99, Western High- lands, Kandep, 8,000-8,500 ft., 23.1.61 to 14.2.62; 6 646, 1 9, Kedama Range, Mt. Kaindi, 6,500 ft., 24.2.1952, Sir Edward Hallstrom; 8 ¢ 6, 4 92, Nondugl (Central Highlands), 5,500 ft., 1950, Sir Edward Hallstrom (dates range from Sept. 24 to Dec. 12); 3 44, Western Highlands, Mt. Hagen Valley, Keltiga, 5,600 ft., 28.9 to 25.10.1961; 1 2, Western Highlands, Jimi River, 4,700 ft., 16.7 to 21.9.1961; 1 6, Telefomin (Eliptamin), 4,500-5,500 ft., 19 June to 14 Sept. 1958. The Rijksmuseum at Leiden, Nederlands, possess at least 2 males of A. hyperbius niugini from Irian Jaya (formerly Dutch New Guinea and VoLUME 30, NuMBER 1 13 Fig. 1. Argyreus hyperbius niugini. A, holotype (male) and allotype (female); B, ventral surfaces of same. West Irian), i.e., Paniai, 14 & 15.X1I.1939. This locality is now known as Enaratoli and lies to the east of Wissel Lakes, at approximately 5700’. In the British Museum (Natural History) there is a female A. hyperbius subspecies labelled: Dutch N. Guinea, Kobotil, O. Kaba (BM 1922- 165). This appears to be within the known variation of A. hyperbius javanica Oberthur, and is a dark, well marked example. I am unable to locate any examples from the Moluccas or intermediate islands, but A. hyperbius subspecies reappear in the west in the Sunda Islands, Java and Sumatra, Sulawesi (formerly Celebes) and through India to Abys- sinia. I have seen males and females of A. h. niugini from the Central and Northern Districts of Papua, and according to Ray Straatman (pers. comm., 1973): “. . . the species flies in open areas (grassland) at alti- tudes from 1500 to 3000 metres and is most common at about 2000 to 3000 metres.” D’Abrera (1971, p. 210) records the Australian subspecies, A. h. inconstans as occurring also in New Guinea and possibly Papua. All specimens that I have observed from Papua New Guinea are quite 14 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY ~~ DJAYAPURA Sar VANIMO Sie. = we ALEXANDER = @® NTS Ss - _S RABAUL < Bae c= ee ‘ 2 = = MARKHAM R. WATUT R. & HERZOG MTS. Be sak GOODENOUGH 6% FERGUSSON Fig. 2. Map of Papua New Guinea (excluding Manus, New Ireland, Woodlark and Bougainville) indicating main ranges and localities for paratypes and primary type material. separable from those in Australia which, to the best of my knowledge, are restricted to that area. Thus, we record the new subspecies from mainland Papua New Guinea and Irian Jaya. The life-history of A, h. niugini is probably similar to that of the nominate subspecies from North India, the larvae feeding on Violaceae; indeed, the early stages of A. hyperbius from Japan are well illustrated and documented in Shir6zu & Hara (1960, p. 31). As noted from the material examined, many specimens cf A. h. niugini were collected by William Brandt, including the primary types; thus, I think it only fitting to include some notes on this accomplished naturalist: William Brandt came to Australia from Sweden about 1949 and was employed by the late Sir Edward Hallstrom to collect butterflies for him in New Guinea. For five years Brandt built up an impressive collection of Lepidoptera, primarily from Papua and New Guinea, and mainly of the larger species. In 1955 Hallstrom lost interest in his collection of butterflies and donated it to the Australian Government, whereupon it became part of the Division of Entomology, C.S.I.R.O. at Canberra. From 1955 until his retirement about 1969, Brandt continued to collect VoLuME 30, NuMBER 1 15 mainly Lepidoptera in New Guinea, New Britain, New Ireland, New Hebrides, Solomons and many of the smaller New Guinea islands. In this work he was financed largely by the Bishop Museum, Hawaii; during the latter period the Lepidoptera continued to come to the Aus- tralian National Insect Collection, while the other insects went to the Bishop Museum. Brandt collected for a total of about 15 years in New Guinea, the last three or four years before his retirement being spent working on the Collection in Australia or, for about two years, working on New Guinea Lepidoptera at the British Museum ( Natural History ). During the period when Brandt was collecting for Hallstrom, the latter insisted that the data labels bore his name, as well as the actual collector. Hallstrom was very interested in New Guinea and set up an Experimental Livestock Station at Nondugl, the type locality for the new subspecies herein described. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful for the help afforded me by Paul E. Smart (Saruman Museum) and T. G. Howarth (British Museum), both of whom allowed me access to useful material and much valued advice; also to Dr. R. de Jong (Rijksmuseum, Nederlands) and H. J. Balcliffe (Royal Geographical Society, England). Special thanks are extended to Dr. Ian F. B. Com- mon (C.S.I.R.O., Canberra, Australia) for supplying much useful data, plus specimen material for primary and paratypic designation. LITERATURE CITED D’Asrera, B. 1971. Butterflies of the Australian Region. Lansdowne, Melboume. 415 p. Hemmiunc, F. 1967. The generic names of the butterflies and their type-species (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera). Bull. British Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Ent., Suppl. 9. 509 p. McCussyy, C. 1971. Australian butterflies. Nelson, Melbourne. 206 p. Serrz, A. 1927. The macrolepidoptera of the world. Vol. 9. Stuttgart. SHmrozu, T. & A. Hara. 1960. Early Stages of Japanese Butterflies in Colour. Vol. 2. Hoikuscha, Osaka. 148 p. 16 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY CALLOPHRYS ERYPHON (LYCAENIDAE) IN MAINE WakrkREN J. KIEL P. O. Box #2, Whitefield, New Hampshire 03598 On the basis of several specimens of a large, boldly marked Callophrys recently examined and determined by Mr. J. D. Lafontaine and Mr. Harry K. Clench, Callophrys (Incisalia) eryphon (Boisduval) is here reported to be established in a small acid bog located in western Maine. Clench (in Ehrlich & Ehrlich, 1961) summarizes the eastern range of C. eryphon as “eastward to Rockies, Nebraska and northern Manitoba.” Klots (1951) does not include C. eryphon as occurring east of the Great Plains, nor is it mentioned in his list of casual species. In the past decade however, the species has been discovered to occur much farther east. Recent eastward records include Port Hope, Ontario ( Riotte, 1967); Pine Co. (Masters, 1972) and Cook Co. (Huber, 1966), Minnesota; and Chippewa and Luce counties, eastern upper peninsula of Michigan (Nielsen, 1966). The recent Maine checklist (Brower, 1974) contains no mention of C. eryphon. The bog, Black Spruce—sphagnum heath, is roughly 3-5 acres in extent, and is located adjacent to state Rt. 16, east of the Maine-New Hampshire border, approximately 6 mi. S of Wilsons Mills, near the confluence of the Diamond and Magalloway rivers. The area is approxi- mately 1,260 ft. in elevation and surrounded by low mountains. The bog supports a rather dense growth of Black Spruce (Picea mariana), Tamarack (Larix laricina) and other typical associate plants, e.g., Labra- dor Tea (Ledum groenlandicum), Rhodora (Rhododendron canadense ), laurel (Kalmia sp.), Bog Rosemary (Andromeda glaucophylla), various other heaths, grasses and sedges. From early to mid-June OEneis jutta Hubner occurs here, along with an unusually productive colony of Callophrys augustinus augustinus (Westwood), and the proliferation of flowering plants attract a variety of other Canadian Zone butterflies in the late spring. Ease of access has made the area a popular collecting spot with numerous New England entomologists. During two trips to the bog on 8 and 9 June 1974, a good series of C. eryphon was taken, both sexes being fairly common. A number of these were later positively identified by Mr. Lafontaine and Mr. Clench. A small series of the same catch was also deposited in the Dartmouth College Museum Collection. Phe presence of Callophrys eryphon this far east raises a number of VoLUME 30, NuMBER | LZ questions concerning (1) sympatry with C. niphon clarki Freeman, (2) significance of the bog environment and (3) larval food plant. I recently re-examined the series of C. eryphon now in the Dartmouth College Collection to check the possible inclusion of C. niphon. All specimens in the series (7 males, 4 females in fresh to slightly worn con- dition) appear to be eryphon, suggesting that at least within the bog contines, niphon does not occur. Locally, however, C. niphon is generally common, usually in association with pine woods and occasionally exhibit- ing local outbreaks (Grey, 1967). The observed association of this C. eryphon colony with a bog needs further clarification. It may be merely apparent, being presently known only from this one locality, and may display other habitat preferences if and when other colonies are uncovered. It should be noted that the Bog Elfin, C. lanoraieensis Sheppard, well known from large bogs of north central Maine, does not occur here. Various endemic pines are listed as food plants for C. eryphon in the Western montane regions. Other pines are recorded in the east for C. niphon: Klots (1951) suggests “probably only ‘hard’ pines, i.e. vir- giniana, rigida, etc., not White Pine (P. strobus)”, although Ferguson (1954) does not rule out the possibility of this latter species. The com- mon native pines appear to be almost wholly lacking at the Wilsons Mills locale, therefore, it appears possible that something entirely differ- ent, perhaps one of the spruces could serve as the host. Nearly all of the C. eryphon collected were taken on or near young Black Spruce, the butterflies often alighting on the fresh terminal growth. McGugan (1958) includes White Spruce (Picea glauca) as a larval collection source for C. niphon clarki, suggesting spruce as an alternate choice for both but- terflies. Clearly, however, the matter will remain in question until fur- ther observations and life history work can be conducted. The discovery of Callophrys eryphon in the east will doubtless generate continued intensive searches for additional colonies of this “western” butterfly. Collectors having specimens of northern New England niphon should check their material carefully and forward any suspect examples along with data to Mr. Clench for determination. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Sincere thanks are extended to Mr. J. Donald Lafontaine, Biosys- tematics Research Institute, Ottawa, and to Mr. Harry K. Clench, Carne- gie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, for species determination, and, especially to the latter, for helpful comments and suggestions and criticism of the manuscript. Thanks are also due Mr. Paul S. Miliotis, 18 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Dunstable, Mass., for originally raising the question of the true identity of the Maine specimens and for checking the botanical names; to Mr. Donald J. Lennox, Jefferson, N. H., for initial introduction to the bog and helpful discussions relating to host plant possibilities; and to Mr. Richard E. Gray, Dartmouth College Museum, Hanover, Nae. for permitting me to examine material in the collection of that institution. LITERATURE CITED Brower, A. E. 1974. A list of the Lepidoptera of Maine—Part 1, the Macrolepi- doptera. Life Sci. Agric. Exp. Sta., Univ. Maine at Orono. 136 p., Oemligs.; 1 map. EHRLICH, ». R., & A. H. Eueticu. 1961. How to know the butterflies. William C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 262 p., 525 figs. Fercuson, D. C. 1954. The Lepidoptera of Nova Scotia. Proc. Nova Scotian Inst. Sci, 23(3). 37> pnt ses. 16) pls, 1 map: Grey, L. P. 1967. Maine in Season Summary. NEWS Lepid. Soc. No. 3, p. 14. Huser, R. L. (compiler). [1966.] Minnesota 1965 annual butterfly summary. ILI p., hectographed. Knots, A. B. 1951. A field guide to the butterflies of North America, East of the Great Plains. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 349 p., 40 pls. Masters, J. H. 1972. Butterfly records for three northeast Minnesota counties Aitkin, Carlton, and Pine Counties. Bull. Assoc. Minn. Ent. 5(2): 19-26. McGucan, B. M. (compiler). 1958. Forest Lepidoptera of Canada recorded by the Forest Insect Survey, Vol. I—Papilionidae to Arctiidae. Forest Biology Division, Canada Dept. of Agriculture. 76 p., 46 figs. NietsEN, M. C. 1966. Occurrence of Callophrys eryphon (Lycaenidae) in Michigan. J. Lepid. Soc. 20: 41-42. Riorre, J. C. E. 1967. New and corrected butterfly records for Ontario and for Canada. J. Lepid. Soc. 21: 135-137. MATHILDANA NEWMANELLA (OECOPHORIDAE) IN ARKANSAS Through the courtesy of H. N. Greenbaum (Department of Entomology, University of Arkansas), I recently have been able to examine moths collected with a Malaise trap set up 24 hours a day in Fayetteville, Washington Co., Arkansas. Among the moths collected 22-26 May 1975 were two females of Mathildana newmanella (Clemens). Hodges in his recent revision of the North American Oecophoridae (1974, Moths Amer. North of Mex., Fasc. 6.2: 122), reported this moth, originally described from Virginia, as occurring from Quebec to North Carolina and extending west only to southern Ohio. The new record from western Arkansas considerably extends the known range of M. newmanella, and, with the range of the deciduous forests ending only a little farther west, this may be near the western limits of its distribution. M. newmanella may be a diurnal flier, as are related species such as Esperia sulphurella (Fabricius ). Joun B. Heppner, Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611. (Florida Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Series No. 5954. ) VoLuME 30, NuMBER | 19 NOTES OF MARYLAND LEPIDOPTERA. 5. A NEW SUBSPECIES OF POANES MASSASOIT (HESPERIIDAE) WILLIAM A. ANDERSEN 220 Melanchton Avenue, Lutherville, Maryland 21093 AND ROBERT S. SIMMONS 1305 Light St., Baltimore, Maryland 21230 On 19 June 1962, one of us (WAA) captured two unusual specimens of Poanes massasoit Scudder in New Bridge, Dorchester County, Mary- land. Upon seeing these specimens and learning of their origin, Sim- mons suggested that they might be representatives of a new subspecies, and further collecting trips were planned. On 12 July 1962, 28 additional specimens were collected from the same locality, and all were noted to differ considerably from both P. m. massasoit Scudder and P. m. hughi Clark, the previously described northeastern subspecies. Our collections contain many examples of P. m. hughi Clark from northcentral Maryland including its type locality. Morphological com- parisons of our eastern shore specimens with those of P. m. hughi and P. m. massasoit indicate that important taxonomic differences exist be- tween the three entities. A distributional study reveals that our new specimens (Figs. 1-10) represent the most southeastern end of a cline, in which P. m. massasoit is the most northerly taxon, with hughi repre- senting an intergrade between our new subspecies and P. m. massasoit. The apparent differences noted as one studies the cline from north to south are that the specimens become somewhat larger and there is a progressive loss of areas of yellow scales, especially on the underside of the hindwing of both sexes and on the upper surface of the wings of the female. In this study we will make comparisons with P. m. hughi alone as Clark (1932) has already very adequately compared P. m. massasoit and P. m. hughi. We name this new subspecies after our late, good friend Franklyn H. Chermock, who plied us with specimens, good humor and many inter- esting stories about collecting and collectors. Poanes massasoit chermocki Andersen and Simmons new subspecies Figs. 1-4, 9-10 Holotype. Male: Forewing length 14.7 mm. Upper surface, forewing: plain, unmarked, color dark, blackish brown with faint mahogany irridescence. Upper surface, hindwing: same as forewing. 20) JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Under surface, forewing: dark brown generally with slightly lighter brown scales at apical area and just inside costal and outer margins. Three small, sub- apical, yellow-brown spots at costal margin in spaces between veins R-3 and R-4, R-4 and R-5, and R-5 and M-1. Under surface, hindwing: tan at outer margins, brown centrally. Five yellow, submarginal spots arranged in a rough semicircle paralleling outer margin. A small yellow spot also in discal cell. Between this spot and two of the submarginal spots is a well-defined area of tan scales. Allotype. Female: Forewing length 16.0 mm. Upper surface, forewing: ground color is the same as in male. Three subapical yellow spots extending in a line inward from costal margin. In postmedian area between veins M-2 and M-3, and and M-3 and Cu-1 are two larger yellow spots, the lower one squarish. Upper surface, hindwing: same as in male. In rare specimen, only a faint suggestion of one yellow spot in postmedian area. Under surface, forewing: as in male except with addition of two postmedian spots corresponding to those of upper surface. Under surface, hindwing: same as in male. Type localities. Holotype: New Bridge, Dorchester County, Maryland, June 19, 1962. Allotype: same locality, July 6, 1963. The types are deposited in the U. S. National Museum, Washington, D.C. Male and female paratypes will be deposited in the American Museum of Natural History, New York and in the Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Differences between P. m. chermocki and P. m. hughi 1. The most striking difference is in the under surface of the hindwing where the extensive yellow marking (extending from the discal cell outward to include the submarginal yellow band) of hughi is reduced to the narrow yellow submarginal, roughly semi-circular band of individual spots of chermocki. 2. The maculation of the chermocki female is much reduced on the upper surfaces, so that in half the specimens the forewing is immaculate on the upper surface. 3. The size of chermocki is somewhat larger, averaging about 0.5 mm larger per forewing. Discussion The locality of New Bridge, Dorchester County, is in the southernmost section of the eastern shore of the Chesapeake Bay, 80 miles due south of the nearest known colony of P. m. hughi in Cecil County. Cecil County is the northernmost county on the eastern shore of Maryland. It is divided between coastal plain in its southern portion and piedmont in its northern. The specimens of P. m. hughi from Cecil County were > _ Figs. I-10. Poanes massasoit subspecies from Maryland. Left side dorsal sur- faces; right, ventral surfaces. 1-4, P. m. chermocki (subsp. nov.), New Bridge, Dorchester County: (1 & 2) holotype, male, 19 June 1962; (3 & 4) allotype, female, 6 July 1963. 5-8, P. m. hughi: (5 & 6) male, Towson, Baltimore County, 3 July 1954; (7 & 8) female, Beltsville, Prince Georges County, 20 July 1967. 9-10, P. m. chermocki, form “suffusa”, New Bridge, Dorchester County, 6 July 1963. 21 VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 Tcm 22 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY collected in the piedmont area. Much collecting on Maryland's eastern shore coastal plain between the two areas has not produced any closer colonies. This deme in Dorchester County is thus geographically some- what isolated from the nearest population of P. m. hughi and at the present time this population represents the only one known to us from this region. The specimens of P. m. chermocki are rather homogeneous in their maculation and size as compared with P. m. hughi populations. The under surface of the hindwings of specimens of chermocki are strikingly similar and there is only slight variation in the spots of the upper surfaces in the female. In our hughi specimens, on the other hand, the upper surfaces of the female vary from being spotted on both wings to some having none on either wing, this being in agreement with Clark’s description of his subspecies. The underside of the hind wing is similarly varied. Clark (1932) himself described one specimen from Beltsville, Maryland, which is very like chermocki and he pictured another such specimen in the frontispiece of his Butterflies of Virginia (Clark & Clark, 1951). We note that in our collections of hughi from north central Mary- land forms similar to chermocki occur at a rate of approximately 4 per cent. The form “suffusa” also occurs in this new subspecies. In our series its incidence is about the same as in hughi, i.e., 1 in 10. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors are greatly indebted to Dr. Austin P. Platt of the Univer- sity of Maryland, Baltimore County, who not only photographed the specimens and helped make up the plate but also read the manuscript and made helpful criticisms and suggestions. We also thank William F. Andersen who developed and printed the photographs. LITERATURE CITED Crark, A. H. 1932. The butterflies of the District of Columbia and vicinity. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 157. 337 + ix p. Crark, A. H. & L. F. Ciarx. 1951. The butterflies of Virginia. Smithsonian Misc. Coll. 116, No. 7. 239 + vii p. VoLUME 30, NuMBER 1 23 NOTES ON THE LIFE CYCLE AND NATURAL HISTORY OF BUTTERFLIES OF EL SALVADOR. VII. ARCHAEOPREPONA DEMOPHON CENTRALIS (NYMPHALIDAE) ALBERTO MuysHONDT 101 Avenida Norte #322, San Salvador, El Salvador During August 1971, one of my sons found a strange-looking larva on a very small unknown shrub in a ravine near the city of San Salvador. The larva unfortunately died before pupating due to the lack of food. We could not identify the shrub because it was not in flower, and our efforts to substitute other similar plants for food were unsuccessful. Two years later, we found a female Archaeoprepona demophon centralis Fruhstor- fer (Charaxinae) ovipositing on a larger flowering shrub and were able to rear the species to adult. The larvae were the same as the single specimen collected in 1971. Since that time we have reared the species several times. The rearing was done inside transparent plastic bags. The larvae were kept supplied with fresh leaves of the foodplant. The plastic bags were cleaned daily of excess moisture and excreta. Shortly before pupation, the larvae were transferred to a wooden box with mosquito-net windows. The adults emerged in the same box. Measurements of the different instars were recorded, and photographs were taken of all developmental stages. Some specimens of the early stages and exuvia were preserved in alcohol. These will be sent to the American Museum of Natural History, New York. The adults were determined by Dr. A. H. B. Rydon, the foodplant by Dr. D. Burch, University of South Florida. lane GyYcLEe Egg (Figs. 1, 2). White, spherical but for slightly flattened base, smooth, no visible sculpturing at 15 magnification, 2.5 mm diameter. When ready to hatch in 6 days, head and body marks visible through eggshell. First instar larva (Fig. 4). General color pale brown. Head roundish, naked, with a dark brown M mark on front. Naked body thickens from head to 2nd abdominal segment, then narrows caudad, terminates in two short tails. Promi- nence on dorsal meson of 3rd thoracic segment, another subdorsally on each side of 2nd abdominal segment directly above corresponding spiraculum. Thoracic segments with fine, dark brown lines. Abdominal segments darker brown dorsally. Anal prolegs smaller than others. Thoracic spiraculum larger than abdominals. Second abdominal spiraculum very high, completely out of line from others, except that 8th abdominal spiraculum also slightly higher. Grows from 4-10 mm in 13 days. Second instar larva (Fig. 5). Head with same aspect as in first instar except for one short horn on each epicranial apex. Body also as in first instar except dorsal hump more noticeable and tails longer and straight. Grows to 14 mm in § days. 24 JourRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Rae Figs. 1-6. Archaeoprepona demophon centralis. 1, Egg showing characteristic M on larval head, width about 2.5 mm; 2, egg showing dorsal markings of the larval body; 3, egg parasitied by larvae of an unknown Chalcididae; 4, first instar larva, about 6 mm long, on resting perch; 5, second instar larva, about 14 mm long, baring a vein; 6, third instar larva, about 27 mm long. Third instar larva (Fig. 6). Same general colors as earlier. Head with longer horns; appearance of small, blunt, lateral projections below and behind horns. Mesal projection on 3rd thoracic segment and subdorsal ones on 2nd abdominal segment very pronounced. Dark brown line separating dorsal darker area from paler sub- spiracular area which is criss-crossed by faint brown lines as is the thoracic zone. Caudal projections longer, still straight. Grows to 30 mm in 8 days. Fourth instar larva (Fig. 7). Head and horns covered by small tubercles, pro- ducing a coarse aspect; lateral projections more noticeable. Body color darker, mostly over supraspiracular and dorsal areas, darker slanting lines. Appearance of tiny, bright blue spots along spiracular zone, around mesal prominence on 3rd thoracic segment and on longer, slightly crooked tails. Grows to 48 mm in 13 days. Fifth instar larva (Figs. 8, 9). Head and horns much rougher, lateral projections quite noticeable. Body color brown on thoracic segments and subspiracularly on VoLuME 30, NuMBER 1 D5 Figs. 7-11. Archaeoprepona demophon centralis. 7, Fourth instar larva crawling, about 45 mm long; 8, fifth instar larva recently moulted, about 50 mm long; 9 detail of head of fifth instar larva; 10, prepupa in typical resting position, about 72 mm long; 11, prepupa ready to pupate, notice placement of tails. 9 abdominal segments. Dark brown triangle dorsally covering area limited by 3 very prominent projections on 3rd thoracic and 2nd abdominal segments. Dorsa of remaining segments from spiracular line to meson, paler brown with darker brown slanting bands. Tails dark brown with yellow spots, very long and crooked. Profusion of tiny, bright blue spots on tails, along spiracular line and around thoracic prominence. Prolegs very thick. Grows to 70-80 mm in 18 days. Prepupa (Figs. 10, 11). Drastic color change. Head and body green, darker on head, thoracic prominence and along spiracular line from 6th—9th abdominal seg- ments. Blue spots still visible. Pupa (Figs. 12-14). Bluish-green with scattered whitish, irregular spots; head bifid with points yellowish. Spiracula light brown surrounded by white ovals. Prior to adult emergence becomes very dark gray, some adult colors visible through cuticle. Lateral view: ventral profile only slightly convex; dorsal profile widens gradually from green cremaster to 5th abdominal segment, then the 4th forms a distinct hump, then narorws gradually to bifid head. Dorsal and ventral aspect: lateral profile widens smoothly from cremaster to wingcases, at thoracic level, then 26 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Figs. 12-18. Archaeoprepona demophon centralis. 12, Pupa, ventral aspect, about 12 mm long; 13, pupa, lateral aspect; 14, pupa, dorsal aspect; 15-18, sequence show- ing emergence of adult male. narrows abruptly to head. Measurements: 42 mm long, 18 mm laterally, and 20 mm dorso-ventrally at widest points. Adult (Figs. 19-22). Males and females shaped similarly. Forewing with faintly convex costal margin forming a rounded apex, concave outer margin to rounded tornus, straight inner margin. Hindwing with convex costal margin, strong humeral lobe, rounded outer angle continuing with rounded outer margin to VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 27 * * £5 Ries % # Figs. 19-22. Archaeoprepona demophon centralis. 19, Adult male, dorsal view, wingspan about 82 mm; 20, adult female, dorsal view, wingspan about 103 mm; 21, adult male, ventral view; 22, adult female, ventral view. rounded anal angle, rounded inner margin with a fold. Dorsal ground color of forewing dull black in males, dark brown in females, with a greenish-blue iridescent isosceles triangle from median area of wing with base on mid-inner margin; 2 small subapical, bluish spots. Hindwing with small basal, black triangle and _ broad, greenish-blue iridescent band from mid-costal margin ending in a point near inner margin, close to anal angle; this band with definite pale blue tinge along basal border. Inner fold and thin border along ccstal margin, pale gray. Males with black brush of hairs near base of hindwing. Ventrally, dominant color pale brown with complicated pattern of darker brown areas and thin black lines; along outer margin of hindwing a row of small “eyes” with light blue pupils. Antennae and eyes black, proboscis orange. Dorsal and ventral surfaces of body concolorous with corresponding wing surfaces. Wing span 80 mm in males, up to 105 mm in females. Total developmental time for this species 85 days. NATURAL HISTORY The females of Archaeoprepona demophon centralis deposit their eggs singly on the lower surfaces of the mature leaves of a shrub determined by Dr. D. Burch to be at least very close to Malpighia glabra L. (Mal- pighiaceae). The pure white egg is quite visible against the dark green leaf. JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY i) (©) The newly hatched larva completely consumes the eggshell, leaving only the shiny base on the leaf, and stays for one day without further feeding. It then moves to the tip of the leaf and nibbles around the central vein, baring it and affixing to it small, frass pellets woven with silk until the vein is prolonged beyond the leaf limits. Pieces of leaf tissue hung from short lengths of silk are added to the resultant perch. This is used as a resting perch during the day where the small larva is very inconspicuous among the dried bits of leaf. It is abandoned by the larva only momentarily to feed at dawn or dusk. First, second and third instar larvae use a perch. If the leaf is consumed during this period, another perch is made on a second leaf, and in some cases, a third. From the fourth through fifth instars, the larva wanders about the plant, but usually stays motionless during the day resting on a twig, head and tail hanging at the sides, giving the dorsal anterior part of the body a rep- tilian appearance (i.e., head of small snake or lizard) with the promi- nences on the second abdominal segment resembling the eyes and the mesal prominence on the third thoracic segment, the snout. The effect is enhanced by the crawl of the larva which imitates an inquiring snake head. The mesal prominence on the third thoracic segment is retractile; when touched it almost disappears. The prepupal larva becomes green and very inconspicuous, blending with the green foliage. At this time, the larva wanders for two days searching for a suitable pupation site which may be on the same food- plant. Once the site has been chosen, usually a twig, the larva weaves a silk pad girdling the twig, reinforcing the twig’s attachment to the shrub. The anal prolegs are then applied to the pad, the tails are positioned on either side of the twig, and the larva hangs incurved ven- trally with its head almost touching the anal prolegs. It hangs thus for two additional days. The pupa is also very cryptic due to its green color which matches the foliage. It is very passive, but when roughly handled it reacts by swinging laterally and then returning to the vertical position. The pupal color changes to very dark gray shortly before the adult emerges. Some of the adult colors are actually visible through the pupal cuticle before emergence occurs. The adult emerges rapidly and hangs from the smoky gray pupal cuticle while expanding its wings and ejecting the meconium (Figs. 15- 18). The adult is ready to fly in about 25 minutes. The adults of A. demophon centralis, like most Charaxinae, are strong, swift fliers, producing an audible rustling noise at short distance. They usually keep to tree-tops and come to the ground only to feed on fer- VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 29 menting fruits (e.g., mangoes and guayabas) or vertebrate excrement. Both sexes are lured easily to baits of fermented banana. They also feed on sap oozing from tree wounds. The male exhibits a strong territorial behavior and perches on its chosen tree, chasing vigorously any tres- passing butterfly. The female flies at lower levels, mostly when ready to oviposit. We have observed A. demophon centralis most frequently around wooded coffee plantations from 600-1200 m elevation. The foodplant, Malpighia glabra L. (?), is found most commonly in wooded ravines within the flight range of the adult. It is a small shrub with perennial, opposite, stipulate, ovate leaves and pinkish flowers with characteristic dentate petals arranged in cymes. The fruit is a red drupe when mature with up to 3 carpels. It was observed that the eggs of A. demophon centralis are very often parasitized by Chalcididae wasps (Fig. 3), and the very young larvae are preyed upon by spiders. Discussion Species belonging to the genus Archaeoprepona, prior to its establish- ment by Fruhstorfer in 1916, were placed in the genus Prepona Boisduval (Hemming, 1967). The type species for Archaeoprepona was designated as demophon Linneaus. Le Moult (1932) chose to ignore Fruhstorfer’s genus and established the invalid synonym Pseudoprepona with demo- phon again as the type species. Some modern authors (e.g., Descimon, et al., 1973) consider Archaeoprepona to be a subgenus of Prepona. Basic differences in the adults: black hair tufts on the hindwing of Archaeoprepona, against the honey-colored tufts of Prepona and the male genitalic differences and antennal colorations as noted by Fruhstorfer (1916) consistently correspond to morphological differences during the larval and pupal stages. The data pertaining to the immature stages are found in a number of sources. Included are the descriptions of the early stages made by Miller (1886) of Archaeoprepona amphimachus Fabri- cius, A. catachlora Staudinger, A. demophon extincta Staudinger (all un- der the generic name Prepona) and Prepona laertes Hiibner. Lichy’s (1933) description of the early stages of Prepona omphale guatemalensis Le Moult and that of P. omphale octavia Fruhstorfer by Muyshondt (1973a) also are important sources. In addition to the above life history of Archaeoprepona demophon centralis, another study that will soon be published on a yet, undetermined species of Archaeoprepona is taken into consideration. All the descriptions of the mentioned Prepona species show that the two horns on the head are fused and appear as a single epicranial pro- 30 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY jection. The Archaeoprepona species have two distinct horns, one on each epicranial apex plus a shorter horn below and behind each large epi- cranial horn. The general habitus of the larvae of both groups is similar except Prepona species lack the median dorsal prominence on the third thoracic segment which is present in all known Archaeoprepona larvae. Prepona larvae do not show the drastic color change when entering the prepupal stage which we noticed in rearing Archaeoprepona demophon centralis and the undetermined A. sp. Miiller’s (1886) descriptions make no mention of prepupal color changes. The pupae of Prepona gradually are humped dorsally while Archaeoprepona species show a very pro- nounced hump on the fourth abdominal segment. Also the pupae of Prepona have orange, irregular spots; these are white in Archaeoprepona pupae. All these differences favor the concept of two genera, but the many similarities, including behavioral patterns, indicate that both genera belong under the same immediate higher classification. On the same basis it also is very evident that these genera are closely related to the Zaretis-Siderone complex (Rydon, 1971; Muyshondt, 1973b and ms. in prep.). These facts seem to be in agreement with Rydon’s treatment of the Charaxidae (with family status) which, in addition to other sub- families that include Old World genera, separates the American genera into three subfamilies: Preponinae (Prepona, Archaeoprepona, Agrias, Anaeomorpha and Noreppa), Zaretidinae (Coenophlebia, Zaretis and Siderone) and Anaeinae (Fountainea, Hypna, Anaea, Polygrapha, Con- sul, Cymatogramma and Memphis) with Zaretidinae being the link be- tween Preponinae and Anaeinae. Some authors have tried to prove close phylogenetic relations between the Charaxinae and other groups, e.g., Limenitinae (Reuter, 1896; Miiller, 1886). According to Fruhstorfer (1924), Hahnel thought there was an affinity between Prepona and the Apaturinae. If the consensus is fol- lowed that the more reliable morphological characters to determine phylogenetic relationships are those which resist, to a greater degree, changes induced by selection, and these are the characters of the early stages (Brower, et al., 1963), it appears that neither the Limenitinae nor the Apaturinae show much in common with the Charaxinae, nor with any other group of the Nymphalidae. Rydon (1971) may be right in assign- ing family status, as other authors have also done, to the Charaxinae. The smooth, spherical eggs (flattened base and micropylar area or not), the spineless (Dornenlossen of Miiller [1886]) larvae and the peculiar pupae of this group have nothing in common with either the very sculp- tured (pineapple-like) eggs, the odd-looking, spine-covered larvae or the VoLuME 30, NuMBER 1 31 pupae with characteristic projections of the Limenitinae. In a series of future articles observations on the local Adelpha (Limenitinae) will emphasize this point. The spherically ribbed eggs and the flattened pupae of the Apaturinae do not have much in common with the Charaxinae either. It is true that the Charaxinae show some behavioral similarities with other nymphalids (e.g., the making of resting perches during the larval stage, adult feeding of fermenting fruit, etc.), but this might very well be the result of selective forces producing independently convergent successful strategies in species otherwise distantly related as is the case in many color similarities between species forming Mullerian mimicry complexes. It frequently happens that during the larval stage of a given species (e.g., Morpho peleides Kollar, Dione moneta Hiibner, various Apatura spp. and Smyrna blomfildia [Fabricius] in particular), or during the pupal stage (e.g., Opsiphanes tamarindi Felder, O. cassina Felder, Zaretis itys [Cramer], and Anaea eurypyle [C. & R. Felder] ), there are very noticeable differences in coloration even though during the early stages there should be less chance for diversification. There are also dif- ferences of this sort in the adults of the same species, even coming from the same brood. We once obtained three adult males of Morpho peleides hyacinthus Butler, with four “eyes” on the ventral side of the forewing while another 18 specimens, males and females, only had three as is common. All 21 specimens were from eggs deposited by the same female on the same date in our insectary. They were fed their normal foodplants and were kept under identical conditions until adult emergence. Le Moult’s (1932) opinion was that species of Prepona and Archaeoprepona are less variable than their near relatives, the Agrias, and have stable external characteristics. According to Dr. Descimon (pers. comm.), the numerous new species and subspecies that Le Moult named on the basis of external characteristics has caused great confusion. Vane-Wright (1974) thought many of Le Moult’s taxonomic conclusions were unsound because he “split” many previously accepted species on little evidence. Much “lumping” and “splitting” has been done in the past without having enough data to form sound conclusions. It is important that more investigations on the early stages of the neotropical Rhopalocera be conducted so that systematists can use the results to establish a more accurate scheme of classification. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to express our gratitude to Dr. A. B. Klots for encouraging us to publish the results of our studies and to Dr. G. L. Godfrey for read- 32 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY ing, criticising and suggesting improvements for our article. We espe- cially thank Dr. A. H. B. Rydon and Dr. H. Descimon, Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, for supplying us with a wealth of reference material and Dr. L. D. Miller for sending Vane-Wright’s publication on Prepona. Special mention is due to my children: Orlando, who first found the larva of the species reported in this study; Marilynn, who first saw the ovi- positing female; and the youngest member of the team, Pierre, who obtained many other eggs and carefully fed the larvae during their long developmental time. LITERATURE CITED Brower, L. P., J. Vz. Brower, & C. T. Cortins. 1963. Experimental studies of mimicry. 7. Relative palatability and Miullerian mimicry among neotropical butterflies of the subfamily Heliconiinae. Zoologica (New York) 48: 65-84. Descimon, H., J. M. bE Matcut, & J. R. StorFEL. 1973. Contribution a l’étude des Nymphalides neotropicales. Description de trois nouveaux Prepona mexicains. Alexanor 8: 155-159. FruustorFer, H. 1924. Genus Prepona Byd., p. 550-566. In A. Seitz (ed.), The macrolepidoptera of the world. Vol. 5. Stuttgart. Hemminc, F. 1967. The generic names of the butterflies and their type-species. (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera). Bull. British Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Entomology. Suppl. 9. 509 p. Le Mou tt, E. 1932. Etudes sur les Prepona. Nov. Entomol., fasc. 2. Licny, R. 1933. Observations biologiques sur les différents états de Prepona omphale s/sp. guatemalensis Le Moult. (Lép., Nymph.). Nov. Entomol., fasc. 3. Mutter, W. 1886. Sidamerikanische Nymphalidenraupen. Versuch eines natiir- lichen Systems der Nymphliden. Zool. Jahrb. Zeitschr. Syst., Geogr., Biol. der Thiere 1: 417-678. Muysuonpt, A. 1973a. Notes on the life cycle and natural history of butterflies of El] Salvador. I. Prepona omphale octavia (Nymphalidae). J. Lepid. Soc. 27: 210-219. . 1973b. Notes on the life cycle and natural history of butterflies of El Salvador. II. Anaea (Zaretis) itys. (Nymphalidae). J. Lepid. Soc. 27: 294-302. Reuter, E. 1896. Uber die Palpen der Rhopalocera. Helsingfors. Rypon, A. H. B. 1971. The systematics of the Charaxidae (Lepidoptera: Nympha- loidea). Ent. Rec. J. Var. 83: 219-233, 283-287, 310-316, 336-341, 384-388. VaNE-Wricut, R. I. 1974. Eugene Le Moult’s Prepona types (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidea, Charaxinae). Bull. Allyn Mus. 21: 1-10. VoLUME 30, NUMBER | 33 NEW CATOCALA OF NORTH AMERICA (NOCTUIDAE) A. E. BROWER 8 Hospital Street, Augusta, Maine 04330 All but one of these species fall in our two most difficult groups of the small Catocala—the crataegi group in the East and the andromache group in the West, though when we really know the early stages of all species, further division may be indicated. I have spent a great amount of time and work mounting specimens, preparing genitalia and studying these genitalia to arrive at only indefinite characters based on structure on which to separate the species. The adults vary throughout their range and in some local areas noticeably different specimens occur. The great need is for adequate material of eggs, larvae and pupae of all species to be available for comparison, and in the adults, a series from many scattered places in its range. Larval descriptions in the crataegi group are tenuous or non-existent, and nothing seems to have been pub- lished on the early stages of any of the andromache group, except cheli- donia Grote. With probably the greatest series in existence of these species and closely related ones before me, I believe all of the following proposed species warrant the title new species, when a series is closely studied. For many years specimens of the andromache group have been sought by two experienced workers, J. W. Johnson and Erich Walter, and several females of each of several species have been confined for eggs, without securing an egg. The series of specimens have been possible only through the generous help of collectors and the institution named in connection with types. Unless otherwise stated all types remain in the author's collection at present. Catocala texarkana Brower new species (Fig. 1) The forewing is of a light uniform gray, somewhat darker basally, and along the inner margin, the basal area in the fold toward the transverse anterior line with definite ribbing. The median area from costa to inner margin or to fold is conspicu- ously whitish, with a segment of a median line to the reniform usually present, and some darker shading between the reniform and transverse posterior line. The lines are narrow, brownish black, with a few short teeth or rounded bows; the _ basal half-line is faint with an outward angle and a rounded bow to its end; the t.a. line is heavy black, with additional black shading basally, of short zig-zags to the fold, thence toothed inward and then somewhat outwardly bowed to inner margin; the t.p. line is fine, scarcely toothed except for the short two large teeth, thence an inward arc to the blacker horizontal segment in the fold, thence bowed outward to the inner margin; and subreniform usually separate, irregular, small; the grayer reniform rather small, upright, set out by an irregular, conspicuous white border: 34 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY beyond the t.p. line a variable brown band is present, followed by a faint white subterminal line; a terminal line of shallow crescents; from the large teeth of the t.p. a dark dash to below the apex. The hindwing is orangish yellow; the outer band moderate, leaving a small yellowish to orangish apex, and is usually broken before anal end, swollen toward the upper end and again in the M:Cu area; this bends and extends to the base of the wing. Beneath, the hindwing repeats the upperside, except paler; the forewing is as usual. The species texarkana is most readily separated from other species of the crataegi group, when, with its form bridwelli, it is compared with them in series. I name this form bridwelli (Fig. 2) after L. H. Bridwell who reared from Crataegus many specimens of both forms. The type 6 of bridwelli, Forestburg, Texas, 1200 ft., 13 May 1939. In addition 32 specimens have been set aside as this form. It is characterized by a much blacker basal area including a heavy black t.a. line, some becoming browner and grayer toward the base. The types have the lighter gray median area continued to the inner margin, but many of this form have the inner margin darker, in an extension of the basal area. Holotype. ¢, Forestburg, Texas, 1200 ft., 10-12 May, 1940, L. H. Bridwell, probably reared from larvae beaten from Crataegus. Allotype. @ ditto, 13 May, 1939, reared from Crataegus. Paratypes. 40 ¢ and 42 9; Forestburg, Texas, 12 ¢, 15 9, May 1939, mostly reared; Forestburg, May 1940, 28 ¢ and 25 9; Lincoln Co., Arkansas, May 3 and 4, 1938, 29; all L. H. Bridwell. From other localities I have the following: a ¢ labelled “Texas”, W. N. Tallant collection; a 2 College Station, Texas, April 19, 1929; a ¢ Churchill Bridge, Brazoria Co., Texas, 3-V-1968 (A. and M. E. Blanchard); all three too poor to include in the types. The Blanchard’s showed me the Churchill Bridge collecting locality when I visited Houston. Expanse (part reared) of a series of each: ¢ 41 mm.; 2 43 mm. Catocala lincolnana Brower new species (Fig. 3) Lincolnana is a simply marked species, brownish gray on basal, apical, and anal areas, and along inner margin beyond transverse anterior line; the remainder light gray with some brown. The basal half-line is evident, the transverse anterior line is heavy, black, of short zig-zags, nearly straight and oblique to the inner margin; the reniform, a small upright oval, fringed with white; the subreniform irregular, rather large, and separate; the transverse posterior line is fine, shortly toothed, largely transverse to the fold, when a long inward segment carries it to near the t.a. line. The subterminal line of lighter short hastae is evident, the terminal line of short bars scarcely evident. The hindwing above is as usual in the Crataegus-feeders, with a larger orangey apical area, a large oval black spot before the anal angle; the median band a bit narrow and extending to the base; this pattern repeated below on the hind wing and the usual pattern beneath on the forewing. Expanse: ¢ 47 mm. Holotype. ¢, Lincoln Co., Arkansas, 1 June 1937, L. H. Bridwell. Type in author’s collection. Catocala johnsoniana Brower new species (Fig. 6) The ground color of the forewings is ashy gray with prominent black lines. Beyond the transverse anterior line, from the costa a darker oblique shade passes across the reniform and on to the transverse posterior line above the subreniform; VotumMeE 30, NuMBER 1 35 Figs. 1-6. Catocala species. 1, Catocala texarkana, Forestburg, Texas, 10-12 May 1940, ¢, holotype; 2, C. texarkana form bridwelli, Forestburg, Texas, 13 May 1939, §; 3, C. lincolnana, Lincoln Co., Ark., 1 June 1937, ¢, holotype; 4, C. erichi, Green Valley Creek, San Bermardino Mts., Calif., ex ovum, 19 May 1966, ¢, holotype; 5, C. californiensis, Valyermo, Los Angeles Co., Calif., 27 June 1957, 3. holotype; 6, C. johnsonana, Kernville, Kem Co., Calif., 17 June 1965, ¢, holotype. beyond and above the reniform a less defined paler blotch extends to the t.p. line. The basal half-line is black and transverse; the t.a. line is heavy and black, nearly straight to Cus, then curved and tapered to A:, thence obliquely outward to inner margin. The basal dash is present. The t.p. line extends outward on R, then barely toothed to most outward point, thence with three short acute teeth to the loop forming the small pale subreniform (open, closed, or disconnected), thence strongly curved to A:, and nearly direct to the inner margin. The subterminal line is whiter gray, the terminal line of connected crescents. The fringes are gray. The medium-sized inconspicuous reniform is commonly darker-centered and out- lined by paler scales. The hindwing above is orangish yellow, the outer black band well developed with an apical patch of ground color, usually a small spot broken off before the anal angle; median black band narrowed, with an outward bulge on R and a second one Mz to Cuz, little tapered, usually but little turned inward and ending bluntly. Beneath, the forewing is pale yellow with the usual dark and light areas; the hind wing orangish yellow; the outer black band medium 36 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY width, with small apical area of ground color, usually unbroken. The median band rather narrow, oblique, nearly even, until Mz, when set out more than width of band, soon narrowed, the very end of the terminal portion turned toward inner margin, and ending abruptly. Expanse: ¢ 49.5 mm.; 9 52 mm. Holotype. ¢, Kernville, Kern Co., Calif., 17 June 1965 (Erich Walter). Allotype. ¢@, Kern River Canyon, Kern Co., Calif., 29 May, 1954 (Wm. A. Rees). Paratypes. 5 &, 1 @: Kern Canyon, Kern Co., Calif., elevation 2800 ft., 29 May, 1954 ¢ (C. A. Hill); Kernville, Kern Co., Calif., 2500 ft., 16 June 1965 4, 21 June 1965 2 ¢ (Erich Walter); 18 June 1966 ¢ (J. W. Johnson and E. Walter); Hughes Lake, Los Angeles Co., Calif., 23 June 1971 2. Holotypes and paratypes collection A. E. Brower. Allotype and part of paratypes returned to Natural History Museum, Los Angeles. Catocala californiensis Brower new species (Fig. 5) The ground color of the forewings is ashy gray, varying from light to brownish gray, with a broad lighter band from costa beyond the transverse anterior line to the subreniform, and including a still whiter gray subreniform; with a black shade from mid-costa over reniform to strongly inbowed transverse posterior line, which has short stout teeth on M; and M2 with a short tooth inward on the fold. The lines are heavy black, especially the transverse anterior line, which is nearly straight to the fold; the t.a. set out by a paler gray basal edging, the t.p. less so by an outer paler line; the basal half-line black, somewhat jagged; the basal dash absent; a more or less evident subterminal band of lighter sagittate marks; the terminal black scalloped band is usually continuous; the fringes gray. The hind- wing above has the inner black band narrow, nearly straight, swollen outward from Ms to Cur, then greatly attenuated and sharply angled inward toward the inner margin; the outer band of moderate width, usually broken before anal end, and with a yellow patch before apex. Beneath, both wings are much paler, the forewing with the usual pattern, and the hind wing a duplication of the upper side. Expanse: ¢ 46 mm.; 2 47.5 mm. Holotype. ¢, Ranch two and one half miles south-southwest of Valyermo, Los Angeles Co., Calif., 4800 ft., 27 June 1957 (Noel McFarland). © Allotype. 92, Pinyon Flats, Santa Rosa Mts., Calif., 10 July, 1967, ultra-violet light, (J. W. Johnson and Erich Walter). Paratypes. 10 ¢, 11 9: near Acton, Mint Canyon, Los Angeles Co., Calif., 3 June 1950 g (Chas. A. Hill); Tujunga, Los Angeles Co., Calif., 26 June 1940 9 (C. Henne); ranch two and one half miles south-southwest of Valyermo, Los Angeles Co., Calif., 4800 ft., 26 June 1957, 3 ¢, 3 9, and 1 July 1964 @ at black light (Noel McFarland); nine miles southeast of Pearblossom, Los Angeles Co., Calif., 27 June 1947 g (Noel McFarland); Pinyon Flats, Calif. [Santa Rosa Mts.], 5 July 1970 6, 16 July 1967 ? (the last two J. W. Johnson handwriting ); Pinyon Flats, Santa Rosa Mts., Calif., 4000 ft., 3 July 1970 6, 10 July 1967-2 6,1 9, 11 July 1967 1 ¢,3 Q, ultra-violet light, 16 July 1969 6, 18 July 1968 2 ?, ultra-violet light (J. W. Johnson and Erich Walter ) Catocala erichi Brower new species (Fig. 4) The forewings are black, tinged with brown, apearing more or less overscaled with somewhat smaller white scales with a bluish sheen, best developed in the median area. Basal half-line of black inner, and white outer lines; transverse anterior line, strongly zig-zag of white inner and black outer portions, appearing black on VoLuME 30, NuMBER | 37 both sides; before and somewhat below the reniform is a striking white patch, and another in the median area between the inward bulge of the transverse posterior line and the subterminal line; the apical area is brownish black, and from it to the outer angle the margin is variably gray and white; the reniform is rather large, upright, irregular, vague, partially outlined with black and may be more so outside with white; the subreniform is usually separate, lighter with brownish overshading; the transverse posterior line is short-toothed, largely transverse, black inside, white outside; the subterminal line, of short broad white chevrons, is prominent; the terminal line is of short bars or shallow crescents; terminal dark crescents form a more or less continuous line at the base of the fringe. On some the black obscures all except the two white patches and the subterminal line. The hind- wings are deep red with strong black bands, with white to pink margined apices; the median black band more or less abruptly ending or greatly contracted with the narrowed end turned upward, with long black hair near base of wing. Beneath, on forewing the wings are much paler with the bands as usual, and on _ hind- wing a paler reproduction of the upper side. During separated years broods of this species were reared from eggs and with caught specimens form an unusually similar series of specimens, well separated from francisca Hy. Edwards, and from the more northern complex of mariana, Hy. Edwards, edwardsi Kusnezov and, eldo- radensis Beutenmiiller. Larvae of erichi (named for the chief collector), two broods, lost in the last instar the dark brown patch on the abdominal hump, while larvae of francisca kept their patch. Expanse (nearly all reared); ¢ 66 mm.; 2 68 mm. Holotype. ¢, emerged 19 May 1966, reared by J. W. Johnson, ova Green Valley Creek, San Bernardino Mts., Calif., 7000 ft., Aug. 1965 (E. Walter). Allotype. @, San Bernardino Mts., Calif., 7000 ft., reared by J. W. Johnson, emerged May 1971, ova by E. Walter summer of 1970. Paratypes. 11 ¢, 8 @: Green Valley Creek, San Bemardino Mts., Calif., 7000 ft., ova from female August 1965 by Erich Walter, reared by J. W. Johnson and Erich Walter, adults emerged May 18 until June 21, 1966, 4 6, 3 @. Of a second lot of ova, summer of 1970, by Erich Walter, reared by both Johnson and Walter in 1971, 4 ¢, 3 2 emerged late June to July 27; Hathaway Creek, near Barton Flats, San Bernardino Mts., Calif., 2 August 1940 ¢ (C. Henne); Camp O-ongo, near Running Springs, San Bernardino Mts., Calif., 28-31 August 1967 @ (C. L. Hogue). Types at present in my collection, paratypes returned to Natural History Museum, Los Angeles, J. W. Johnson and Erich Walter. 38 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY A CHECKLIST OF THE BUTTERFLIES OF GRANT COUNTY, NEW MEXICO AND VICINITY? CiirForD D. FERRIS” College of Engineering, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071 Little has been published on the butterflies of New Mexico, although the type localities for several species lie in the northern and western portions of the state. Early collecting by H. Skinner and J. Woodgate and later collecting by A. B. Klots forms the basis for much of what we know about its butterfly fauna. Collecting in recent years by D. Cowper, R. Holland and M. E. Toliver has expanded our knowledge. Williams (1914), Hubbard (1965), Toliver (1971) and Holland (1974) have published papers which treat limited geographic areas within New Mexico. Since 1965, the author has collected actively in the southwestern por- tion of the state, primarily in Grant County, with some additional collect- ing in Catron, northern Hidalgo, Luna and western Sierra counties. The area so defined comprises a fairly uniform faunistic region. Although records are available from the Peloncillo Mts. in Hidalgo Co., they are not included as another faunistic region is involved. Hubbard’s paper lists butterflies from the Pinos Altos Mts. which lie in Grant Co. His list of 52 species, which excludes the Hesperioidea, represents only a part of the 157 confirmed species in the current study. A checklist of the presently known species appears in a subsequent section of this paper. Localities Most of the collecting was in various areas of the Gila National Forest, on several ranches and with scattered collecting in the desert areas south and southwest of Silver City. The primary forest collecting sites in- clude: the Burro Mts. south of Silver City; the Black Range east of Silver City; Cherry Creek Canyon (Pinos Altos Mts.), Signal Peak and Lake Roberts north of Silver City; and the Mogollon Mts., especially the Willow Creek area, in Catron Co. Sonoran desert localities include: along the Gila River, especially in the vicinity of Red Rock; along State Road 90 between Lordsburg and Silver City; vicinity of Faywood Hot Springs and City of Rocks State Park; and Hachita. | Published with the approval of the Director, Wyoming Agricultural Experiment Station, as Journal Article no. JA 713. ; * Research Associate, Allyn Museum of Entomology, Sarasota, Florida; Museum Associate, Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, Los Angeles, Calif. VoLUME 30, NuMBER Il 39 Vegetation types of the region are quite varied. Collecting sites in the Mogollon Mts. are generally open Canadian Zone meadows associ- ated with live streams, usually a ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Laws. ) and willow (Salix sp.) association containing a variety of grasses, herbs and shrubs. The Black Range and sites north of Silver City are generally Transition Zone associations with ponderosa pine, pinyon pine (Pinus monophylla Torr. & Frem.), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga taxifolia var. glauca [Mayr] Sudw.) and aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) at the higher elevations, and at lower elevations a variety of deciduous trees and shrubs including Acer, Alnus, Celtis, Cercocarpus, Crataegus, Prunus, Populus sp. (cottonwood), Rhus, Salix and Platanus wrightii S. Wats. Grasses and herbs abound, especially near permanent water. Canadian Zone vegetation occurs at higher elevations, especially on Signal Peak 9000’. The Burros Mts. are covered primarily with pinyon pine, alligator juniper (Juniperus deppeana Steud.) and Emory Oak (Quercus emoryi Torr.); several other species of oak are also present. Acacia greggii Gray, Chilopsis linearis (Cav.) Sweet. and Prosopis juliflora (Swartz) DC. occur at lower elevations. Principal vegetation types in the desert areas include grasses, Acacia, Agave, Chilopsis, Prosopis, Yucca and various cacti. Cottonwood, hackberry (Celtis sp.) and other deciduous trees are associated with riparian areas, and outcroppings of oak are common. Annual rainfall in the Silver City area averages 0.406 meters. The principal moisture occurs in the months January—March, July—October, with the heaviest precipitation during the summer months. July is usually the wettest month and May the driest. The mean temperature is 12.67°C with average highs and lows of 28.55°C and -4.83°C respec- tively. Specific collecting sites with alphabetic codes are given below. In several cases where only one or two records are from a locality, no code is used and the localities are clearly shown on the maps (Figs. 1 & 2). Either the code letters or the locality name appears on the maps. CATRON COUNTY. Whitewater Creek and Catwalk area near Glenwood 4800’ (CA); Datil ca. 7000’ (D); Gila Cliff Dwellings and EE Canyon 5600-6100’ (EE); Frisco Hot Springs 4500’ (FS); Glenwood 4700’ (G@); Gila Wilderness Area (varying elevations) (GW); Gilita Creek 7800-8000’ (GK); Little Creek and Gila River Junction 5750 (LC); Luna 7000’ (LN); Mogollon 6600’ (M); Pleasanton 4600’ (P); Pie Town ca. 8100’ (PT); Quemado Lake 7200’ (QL); Reserve ca. 5800’ (R); Silver Creek, crossing at State Road 78 8560’ (SK); SS Basin T10S, RI5W, S21 7600’ (SS); Willow Creek (camp area) 1800’ (WC). GRANT COUNTY. Ancheta Canyon 5800-6400’ (AC); Ash Spring Canyon 6700-6900’ (ASC); Bayard 5880’ (B); Black Canyon Camp 7000’ (BC); Bill Evans Lake 4700’ (BE): Burro Mountains (Homestead Road and USFS 851) ca. 6650’ (BM); Bear Mountain 6500-7000’ and Bear Mtn. Ranch 6250’ (BR); 40 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Cliff 4500’ (C); Copperas Canyon 6000-7400’ (CC); Cherry Creek Canyon and McMillen Canyon 6700-7300’ (CCC); Cottonwood Canyon 6300’ (CN); Dry Gallinas Canyon 6800’ (DGC); East Canyon, Black Range 7400’ (EC); USFS 152, Black Range (varying elevations) (F); Ft. Bayard, E. of Silver City 6000- 6200’ (FB); Faywood Hot Springs 5000’ and City of Rocks State Park 5200’ (FH); Fierro 6600’ (FI); Gallinas Canyon area, Black Range 6800-7000’ (GC); Gold Gultch 5800-5900’ (GG); Gila River near Gila 4250’ (GR); East Fork of Gila River ca. 6000’ (GRE); Hachita 4100’ (H); Hachita Mountains 4800-6000’ (HM); Iron Creek Camp, Black Range 7100’ (IC); Kneeling Nun Vista, Black Range 6990’ (KN); Kwilleylekia Ruins 4550’ (KR); Lower Gallinas Canyon 6400-6800’ (LGC); Lake Roberts 6000’ (LR); L-S Mesa, north of Silver City, USFS 853 6200-6500’ (LS); Little Walnut Creek 6600’ (LW); Mule Creek area, Jupe Means Ranch 5800-6300’ (MC); Mill Creek Canyon 6800-7100’ (MI); Mogollon Creek 4640’ (MK); Moon Ranch 5200’ and Buckhorn 4800’ (MR); Pinos Altos 7000’ (PA); Pine Cienega 6500’ (PC); Ricolite Canyon near Red Rock 4200’ (RC); Red Rock 4000’ (RR); Sherman 5600’ (S); SA Canyon, Gila Wilderness Area 6800-7400’ (SA); Silver City 5900-6100’ (SC); Sapillo Creek 5800-6200’ (SE); San Lorenzo 5800’ (SL); Skate’s Canyon 6600’ (SN); Soldier Canyon 6300’ (SO); Signal Peak 8000-9000’ (SP); State Road 90, milepost xx between Silver City and Lords- burg (SR-xx); Santa Rita 6500’ (ST); Tyrone 5700-5800’ (T); Thunderbird Camp (1 mi. N) 6500’ (TC); Upper Gallinas Canyon 7000’ (UGC); Vanadium 5950’ (V); White Signal (vicinity) 6000’ (WS). HIDALGO COUNTY. Animas 4300’ (A); Animas Valley 4700-5100’ (north- south) (AN); Deming ca. 3000’ (DM); Lordsburg (vicinity) 4240’ (L). LUNA COUNTY. Columbus (vicinity ) 4000’ (CO). SIERRA COUNTY. Emory Pass area 8200’ (EP); Kingston 6250’ (K). Checklist In the list of species which follows, the counties and localities are noted as well as the months in which specimens have been taken. Additional comments are appended when applicable. Excepting the Hesperioidea, the order of families generally follows that proposed by Ehrlich & Ehrlich (1961). Subfamilies are not designated (Hesperioidea excepted) and genera are listed alphabetically according to recent revisionary work. Relative abundance is not noted, as this is strongly seasonal ( year-to- year variation) and is affected by climatic conditions. Single specimen records are noted. Several collectors have kindly supplied records which are so designated: (HA) Bruce Harris, (H) Richard Holland, (R) Kilian Roever, (T) Michael Toliver, (Z) Dale A. Zimmerman. William Baltosser provided the Gila Wilderness records (GW). MEGATHYMIDAE Agathymus aryxna (Dyar). Grant Co.: HM; CCC, WS (Z); T (R, T). Hidalgo Co.: AN (T). July, immatures in Agave palmeri Engelm.; salle in October. Agathymus neumoegeni (Edwards). Catron Co.: M (R). Grant Co.: PA; CCC ies (R). August—-October, immatures in Agave parryi Engelm.; adults a ctoper. Megathymus coloradensis navajo Skinner. Catron Co.: GW; D, M, Pi RGRoe Grant Co.: UGC; 7 mi. N of SC (Z); CG IG MG, ST, Ts Ws (R). Aoaleye VOLUME 30, NUMBER 1] ARIZONA Road County Line sta Nat! Forest Boundary ee Ruiverr Fig. 1. Collecting sites in Catron Co., New Mexico. HESPERIDAE-PYRGINAE 4] CATRON Miles -#—_____++—_____ O /O 20 Autochton cellus (Boisduval & LeConte). Catron Co.: EE (Z) Grant Co. CCC, SP. July. Celotes nessus (Edwards). Catron Co.: CA (Z). Grant Co.; RR. May. Cogia caicus moschus (Edwards). Catron Co.: G. April. One specimen. 42 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY C. hippalus hippalus (Edwards). Hidalgo Co.: AN (T). August. Epargyreus clarus huachuca (Dixon). Catron Co.; GW Grant Co.: CCC, EC, IC; SC (Z). May-July. Erynnis brizo burgessi (Skinner). Grant Co.: ASC, CCC, EC, F, FB, IC, LS, LW. March—May, July. E. funeralis (Scudder & Burgess). Grant Co.: BM, CCC, F, MC, SP, SR-26. April— May, August-September. E. icelus (Scudder & Burgess). Catron Co.: SK, WC and vicinity (R). June. E. meridanus meridanus Bell. Catron Co.: G, W of M. Grant Co.: FB, MC. April, August. E. pacuvius pacuvius (Lintner). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CCC, LW, PA. March, May—June, August. E. (persius) fredericki H. A. Freeman. Catron Co.: G, LN. Grant Co.: CCC, MC, SA, UGC. March—May, August. E. telemachus Burns. Catron Co.: G, GW Grant Co.: ASC, BM, BR, CCC, EC, F, GC, IC, LGC, LW, SP. March—June. E. tristus tatius (Edwards). Catron Co.: G, GW. Grant Co.: BM, MC. July— August. Pholisora catullus (Fabricius). Catron Co.: G. Grant Co.: B, FH, T. August. Pyrgus communis complex. P. c. communis and P. c. albescens are synchronic and sympatric in some areas. They are widespread in all life zones and are found wherever members of the Malvaceae grow. Males may be positively identified by their genitalia. Only partial records are listed below. P. c. albescens Plotz. Catron Co.: G, LC, P, WC. Grant Co.: AC, BC, BM, CCC, MC, SL, SO, TC, WC. June—October. P. c. communis (Grote). Catron Co.: WC. Grant Co.: EC, IC, LS, MC, UGC. May-June, August, October. P. scriptura (Boisduval). Catron Co.: G. March. This species is bivoltine in many areas. I have not yet found the summer brood in Catron/Grant Co. P. xanthus Edwards. Catron Co.: 3 m. E of M (H); WC area (R). April, June. Staphylos ceos (Edwards). Catron Co.: G. Grant Co.: GR, RR. Hidalgo Co.: AN (T). April-May, July—August. Thorybes pylades (Scudder). Grant Co.: AC, BM, CCC, F, LS, MC, TC. Sierra Co.: EP. May—August. Timochares ruptifasciatus (Plétz). Grant Co.: LW (Z). One specimen on 20-ix-63. Zestusa dorus (Edwards). Grant Co.: CCC, EC, IC. April-May. HESPERUDAE-HESPERIINAE Amblyscirtes aenus ssp. Catron Co.: CA (R). Grant Co.: CC: CCC, GR, Mimbres Canyon (Mimbres River) (R). May-July. The southwestern race of A. aenus, which probably represents an undescribed subspecies, is easily confused with A. cassus. Both occur in Grant and Catron Co. They are genitalic distinct entities. In aenus, the uncus has two distinct processes on each side and the valva is relatively blunt with the distal end straight up; in cassus, the uncus has one distinct and finely tapered process on each side with only a suggestion of the second process, and the distal end of the valva is quite pointed and somewhat recurved. The ventral surface of the forewings exhibits considerably more orange-fulvous color in cassus than in aenus. The dorsal surface spots in cassus are entirely orange-fulvous while they are cream to barely fulvous in aenus. A. cassus Edwards. Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CC, CCC, SP, UGG win August. A. eos (Edwards). Grant Co.: LS, MC. August. VoLuME 30, NuMBER | 43 CATRON =o) yo}|0004 x \ - WC... SNe Pleasanton \3. SIERRA e Cook's Pk. 8408 ARIZONA Reeiebirg = Columbus MEXICO Fig. 2. Collecting sites in Grant Co. and surrounding areas, New Mexico . Note: Fig. 2 is to the same scale and uses the same legends as Fig. 1. A. exoteria ( Herrich-Schaffer ). Catron Co.: GW Grant Co.: ASC. July. A. nereus (Edwards). Grant Co.: CCC, GRE, (R). July—August. A. oslari (Skinner). Catron Co.: CA (R). Grant Co.: MC (R). May—June. A. phylace (Edwards). Grant Co.: TC. July. A. simius Edwards. Grant Co.: LS, MC, SR-26, TC. July—August. 44 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Atalopedes campestris (Boisduval). Grant Co.: IC. May. Atrytonopsis deva (Edwards). Catron Co.: G. Grant Co.: CC, CCC. April-June. A. lunus (Edwards). Grant Co.: LS. August. A. pittacus (Edwards). Catron Co.: G. Grant Co.: BR, CCC. March—June. A. python (Edwards). Grant Co.: CC; SC (Z). June. A. vierecki (Skinner). Grant Co.: BM, CCC, GG, LS, MC; SC (Z). May—June. Copaeodes aurantica (Hewitson). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: BE, BM, CN, MC, PC, RR; C, SC, T (Z). April—October. Euphyes vestris vestris (Boisduval). Catron Co.: EE. Grant Co.: CCC. June-July. The correct subspecific name to apply to Rocky Mountain vestris is in doubt. Coastal California vestris are larger and lighter in color than inland western vestris. Hesperia harpalus susanae Miller. Catron Co.: GW, WC. July—August. H. pahaska pahaska Leussler. Catron Co.: FS. Grant Co.: BM, LS, MR, SE, SP, V. May-June, September—October. Specimens from SW Hidalgo Co. are referable to H. p. williamsi Lindsay. Grant Co. specimens seem to be nominate pahaska. H. uncas uncas Edwards. Grant Co.: AC, LS, MC, MR, SC, SR-26. July—Septem- ber. Intergrading with H. u. lasus (Edwards) occurs. H. viridis (Edwards). Catron Co.: WC Grant Co.: BR, CC. June-August. H. woodgatei (Williams). Catron Co.: FS. Grant Co.: MR, TC. July, September-— October. Oarisma edwardsii (Barnes). Grant Co.: DGC. August. O. garita (Reakirt). Catron Co.: WC and vicinity, LN (R). June-July. Ochlodes snowi (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW, WC. July—August. Piruna pirus (Edwards). Catron Co.: SK (R). Grant Co.: GR (R). June. P. polingii (Barnes). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CCC, IC. Early July, August. Possibly bivoltine. Poanes taxiles taxiles (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW, LC, SK. Grant Co.: CCC, DGC, LGC, IC, SP. Sierra Co.: EP. July-August. Polites themistocles (Latreille). Catron Co.: LN, GK (R). June-July. Stinga morrisom (Edwards). Grant Co.: LGC. April. Yvretta carus (Edwards). Grant Co.: MC. August. Two species have been collected in the Peloncillo Mountains which may occur elsewhere in Hidalgo Co. or in Grant Co.: Amblyscirtes texanae Bell; Hesperia pahaska williamsi Lindsay (T). Hylephila phyleus (Drury) ought to be common in gardens in the Silver City area, but I know of only one record of a specimen ex- tracted from a car radiator on 30-viii-64 (HA). The vehicle was reported to have come from the Gila Wilderness Area, which means that the specimen came from northern Grant or southern Catron Co. In August, 1970, I saw a large pyrgine- like skipper nectaring at desert willow along the banks of the Gila River south of Red Rock, Grant Co. Because of its position, it was not possible to net it. It exhibited large white hyaline spots on the forewings and appeared to be one of the following: Polygonus leo arizonensis (Skinner), Codatractus arizonensis ( Skin- ner), Pyrrhopyge araxes arizonae (Godman & Salvin). The latter was quite common at the time in southern Arizona. P. 1. arizonensis has been taken in the vicinity of Alamagordo, Otero Co. (H). PAPILIONIDAE Battus philenor philenor (Linnaeus). Catron Co.: GW, P. Grant Co.: FH, MC, SC, SO, RR. June-September. I have sighted numerous adults flying across desert roads in many areas of Grant Co. Papilio bairdii bairdii Kdwards. Catron Co.: G. A single female of typical Cali- VoLuME 30, NUMBER 1 45 fornia bairdii phenotype, 8—vi-66. Hubbard lists a questionable record from the Pinos Altos Mtns., Grant Co. See comments under P. polyxenes. P. cresphontes cresphontes Cramer. Grant Co.: BM, CCC, SC, WS vicinity (Z). Tune—August. P. multicaudata (Peale MS.) Kirby. Catron Co.: GW, SK; G (Z). Grant Co.: CCC, EC, IC, LGC, LS, SP; BM, RR (Z). Grant-Hidalgo Co. line on State Road 90. March, May—August. P. polyxenes complex. Possibly all polyxenes-like specimens from the area should be referred to this species. Three specimens have been taken which in facies resemble P. rudkini clarki Chermock & Chermock, based upon comparison with paratypes of clarki. These are from Grant Co.: LR, 11—viii-68, a fresh male; RR, 3—vi-73, two females. P. polyxenes asterius Stoll. Grant Co.: H, LR, LGC, LS; SC, SP (Z). May, August. The subspecific name asterius has been applied, but specimens from Grant Co. are rather different from eastern asterius. P. rutulus arizonensis Edwards. Catron Co.: G, GW. Grant Co.: CCC, EC, SP. May-—June. PIERIDAE Appias drusilla poeyi (Butler). Grant Co.: SC (Z). One specimen on 24-vi-71. Anthocharis sara inghami Cunder. Catron Co.: CA, G, GW, LC. Grant Co.: ASC, CCG, GR, LGC, LW, RR, UGG; C, SC (Z). March-April. Colias alexandra ssp. Catron Co.: GW, SK, WC. June, August. See discussion of this subspecies in Ferris (1973). C. eurytheme Boisduval. Catron Co.: G, GW, LC, P, SK, WC. Grant Co.: BM, CCC, H, IC, LS, MC, RR, SP. Hidalgo Co.: L; 20 mi. S of H (Z). March— September. C. philodice eriphyle Edwards. Grant Co.: C, GR, SC (Z). April, September, November. Es Colias (Zerene) cesonia (Stoll). Catron Co.: GW, LC. Grant Co.: AC, MK, SC; 5 mi. S of C, 8 mi. W of SC (Z); CCC, IC (T). March, June—November. Euchloe hyantis lotta (Beutenmiiller). Grant Co.; CCC, GR, SP. March, May. Eurema mexicana (Boisduval). Grant Co.: BR, CCC, CN, FB, LGC, SC, SP. Hidalgo Co.: L. April—October. E. nicippe (Cramer). Catron Co.: G, P. Grant Co.: CCC, FH, H, LGC, MC, RR, SR-26. Hidalgo Co.: L. March-September. Common and widespread. Nathalis iole Boisduval. Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: B, BM, CCC, IC, LGC, LS; 6 mi. E of SC (Z). April—September. Neophasia menapia menapia (Felder & Felder). Catron Co.: GW; WC (Z). Grant Co.: CCC, SP; PA (Z). July. Associated with ponderosa pine. Phoebis agarithe agarithe (Boisduval). Catron Co.: P. Single female on 22-viii-71. P. sennae eubule (Linnaeus). Catron Co.: G, GW, P. Grant Co.: C, FH, LS, RR, SC, ST. Hidalgo Co.: L. August-September. P. sennae marcellina (Cramer). Grant Co.: A, AN, UGC; BM (Z); CCC, IC (T). Luna Co.: CO. April, August-September. Pieris napi mogollon Burdick. Catron Co.: GW, SK, WC. May, August. P. protodice protodice (Boisduval & LeConte). Catron Co.: GW, LC, WC. Grant oie COC ECVE. EB. 1G: sLS 2MC. PC; RR, SP: EW;.T,, SG (4). Hidalgo Co.: L. Luna Co.: 20 mi. S of DM (Z). March-April, form vernalis Edwards; June—September. P. rapae (Linnaeus). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: B; SC (Z). March-April, June, October. P. sisymbrii elivata (Barnes & Benjamin). Catron Co.: CA. Grant Co.: CCC, EC, F, GC, GR, IC, LW, UGC; SC (Z). March—May. 46 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY RIODINIDAE Apodemia mormo nr. mejicanus (Behr). Catron Co.: CA (Z). Grant Co.: BE, BM, LS: CCC, SC (Z). Hidalgo Co.: SR-11. May-June, August. A. nais (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CCC, MI, PA. June-July. A. palmerii palmerii (Edwards). Catron Co.: FS. Grant Co.: GR, RR. Hidalgo Co.: L. Luna Co.: DM. June, August-September. Calephelis nemesis nemesis (Edwards). Grant Co.: RR. Single fresh male on 18- vi-72. Emesis zela cleis (Edwards). Catron Co.: CA, GW. May. LYCAENIDAE Atlides halesus halesus (Cramer). Grant Co.: AC, BM, BR, S, SR-26; 9 mi. S of C, SC (Z). Luna Co.: Cook’s Peak summit (Z). March-April, August— September. Brephidium exilis exilis (Boisduval). Grant Co.: FH, KR, RR, SP, T; MK, SC (Z). June—October. Callophrys (Callophrys) apama apama (Edwards). Grant Co.: CCC. June-July. Callophrys (Incisalia) augustinus annetteae (dos Passos). Grant Co.: LGC, LS; SC (Z). April-June. C. eryphon eryphon (Boisduval). Catron Co.: LN, SK, WC (R). Grant Co.: IC (R). May-June. Callophrys (Mitoura) siva siva (Edwards). Catron Co.: EE, GW. Grant Co.: BM, CC, CCC, FB, FI, GC, LS; SC (Z). April-July. C. spinetorum (Hewitson). Catron Co.: GW, WC. Grant Co.: CCC, F, IC; SP (Z). May-June. Celastrina argiolus cinerea (Edwards). Catron Co.: G, GW, SK, WC. Grant Co.: BM, CCC, IC, PC, RR, SN, SP; SC (Z). March—October. Erora quaderna sanfordi dos Passos. Grant Co.: BR, CCC, LGC. February—May. Euristrymon ontario ilavia (Beutenmiiller). Grant Co.: BM, MC. May-June. Everes amyntula herri (Grinnell). Catron Co.: EE, GW, SK. Grant Co.: CCC, EC, F, IC, SP; SC (Z). Hidalgo Co.: AN. April-May, August. Glaucopsyche lygdamus arizonensis McDunnough. Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CCC, F, SP. April—May. Hemiargus ceraunus gyas (Edwards). Catron Co.; EE, G. Grant Co.: AC, SR-26. Hidalgo Co.: L. June—August. H. isola alce (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW, LC. Grant Co.: AC, BC, BM, CCC, EC, FH, LS, MC, RR, SC, SE, T. Hidalgo Co.: L. Sierra Co.: EP. April— December. Hypaurotis crysalus (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW; CA (Z). Grant Co.: SP. July, September. Leptotes marina ( Reakirt). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: BM, FH, IC, RR, SR-20; CCC, SC (Z). Hidalgo Co.: L. April-September. A widely distributed species. Lycaeides melissa nr. pseudosamuelis Nabokov. Catron Co.: GW, LC, LN. Grant Co.: LR, SA. August-September. Specimens are phenotypic pseudosamuelis. Lycaena arota schellbachi Tilden. Catron Co.: SK. August. Ministrymon ines (Edwards). Grant Co.: BM. One female on 24—v-75. M. leda (Edwards). Grant Co.: BM, RR; CCC (Z). May-June. Phacostrymon alcestis oslari (Dyar). Grant Co.: SR—20. July. Plebejus (Icaricia) acmon texanus Goodpasture. Catron Co.: G, GW, LC, WC. Grant Co.: AC, BM, CCC, F, FH, GC, IC, LS, MC, PC, SN, SP, SR=26.5¢; SC (Z). Hidalgo Co.: L. Sierra Co.: EP. April—October. P. icarioides buchholzi dos Passos. Grant Co.: CCEeSP itme: Plebejus (Plebejus) saepiolus nr. gertschi dos Passos. Catron Co.: SK, WC and vicinity (R). June. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 | Shijimiaeoides battoides centralis (Barnes & McDunnough). Grant Co.: LGC. One fresh male on 8—viii-75. Genitalia checked to verify species. See Shields (1974) for generic discussion. S. rita rita (Barnes & McDunnough). Grant Co.: AC, BM, SC, SR-26, T. Hidalgo Co.: AN, SR-13 (T). August. Strymon melinus franki Field. Catron Ce.: GW, LN. Grant Co.: BC, BM, CCC, F, GR, MC, RR, SC, SE, SN, T. Hidalgo Co.: L. April—October. LIBYTHEIDAE Libytheana bachmanii ssp. Catron Co.: FS. Grant Co.: FH, GR, MK, RR; SC (Z). March, August-September, November. In a series of specimens from this region, individuals can be assigned to both bachmanii (Kirtland) and _ larvata (Strecker). NYMPHALIDAE Agraulis vanillae incarnata (Riley). Grant Co.: SC. July-August. Scarce. Anaea andria andria Scudder. Catron Co.: EE, G. Grant Co.: BM, CCC, GR, RR, SR-26; MK, SC, 6 mi. W of SC, T (Z). Grant-Hidalgo Co. line along State Road 90. March—April, August-September. Asterocampa celtis montis (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: FH, GR. Sierra Co.: K. June, August-September. Chlosyne gabbii sabina (Wright). Catron Co.: G. Grant Co.: CCC, IC, LGC, SA; SC (Z). March—May, July. C. lacinia crocale (Edwards). Catron Co.: G, GW. Grant Co.: B, BR, CCC, FB, FH, GR, KR, MC; SC, WS (Z). Hidalgo Co.: L. Sierra Co.: K. April, June, August-September. All specimens are referred to crocale, although individuals may be selected from a large series which are phenotypic adjutrix Scudder, nigrescens (Cockerell) and rufescens (Cockerell). This region probably forms a blend-zone for the Texas adjutrix and the Arizona White Mtns. crocale. C. nycteis drusius (Edwards). Catron Co.: SK. June. Cynthia annabella Field. Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CCC, V; SC, T (Z). August—October. C. cardui (Linnaeus). Catron Co.: WC. Grant Co.: BM, CCC, F, LS, MC, SC, WS; 5 mi. S of C (Z). Hidalgo Co.: AN (T). March—September. C. virginiensis (Drury). Catron Co.: GW, SK. Grant Co.: BM, CCC, F, IC, LR, SP; SC (Z). Hidalgo Co.: AN (T). April-June, August—October. Danaus gilippus strigosus (Bates). Catron Co.: G, GW. Grant Co.: CCC, FH, GR, MC, RR; 5 mi. S of C, SC (Z). Hidalgo Co.: L. May—September. D. plexippus plexippus (Linnaeus). Catron Co.: GW, LC. Grant Co.: C, FB, BEE MGs SC; R26, S: BM. lOvmi Sof C,.5 mi W of SG, LT CZ). June— September. Dymasia dymas dymas (Edwards). Grant Co.: RR. May-June, September. Euphydryas anicia alena Barnes & Benjamin. Catron Co.: CA. Grant Co.: 5-6 mi. NW of SC (Z). March—April. Euptoieta claudia (Cramer). Catron Co.: GW, P, SK, WC. Grant Co.: AC, BM, Beco He. it KH. LS MC RRO SP. I: SC (7%). Hidalgo Co.:A. April October. Widespread and common in all life zones. Limenitis archippus obsoleta Edwards. Grant Co.: C (Z). Hidalgo Co.: L. July- September. L. astyanax arizonensis Edwards. Catron Co.: GW, LC, SK. Grant Co.: CCC, LGC, MI; SC (Z). June—-September, November. L. weidemeyerii angustifascia Perkins & Perkins. Catron Co.: GW, Sk, WC. Grant Co.: BC, CCC, IC, LGC; C (Z). June-August. 48 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Limenitis (Adelpha) bredowii eulalia (Doubleday). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CCC, LS, MI, SC; 6 mi. SW of T (Z). May—September, November. Nymphalis antiopa (Linnaeus). Catron Co.: GW, WC. Grant Co.: B, BM, CCC, LGC; SC (Z). April—-September. N. californica californica (Boisduval). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CCC; SP (Z). March, June—July, October. N. milberti furcillata (Say). Catron Co.: GW, WC. August. Phyciodes campestris camillus Edwards. Catron Co.: G, GW, LC, WC. Grant Co.: H. Hidalgo Co.: L. August-September. P. mylitta arizonensis Bauer. Catron Co.: LN, SK. Grant Co.: BM, C, CCC, DGC, SA, UGC. Sierra Co.: EP. March-September. See Howe (1975) for nomencla- ture. P. picta picta Edwards. Catron Co.: G, LC, LN. Grant Co.: H, SA. Hidalgo Co.: L. May, August-September. P. tharos (Drury). Catron Co.: G. Grant Co.: C, GR, KR. August-September. Several distinct forms are commonly collected, including distincta Bauer. Phyciodes (Anthanassa) texana texana (Edwards). Grant Co.:; CCC, RR. May-— June. Poladryas minuta arachne (Edwards). Catron Co.: WC. Grant Co.: CCC, IC, SP. June-August. See Scott (1974) for nomenclature. Polygonia interrogationis (Fabricius). Grant Co.: SC. One specimen on 3-xi-62; 6 mi. S of C. One specimen on 10-x-63 (Z). P. satyrus (Edwards). Catron Co.: WC. Grant Co.: CCC, IC, SP; SC (Z). May— August. P. zephyrus (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW, SK, WC. Grant Co.: SP (Z). One specimen on 30—vi-74; May, August in Catron Co. Precis lavinia coenia (Hibner). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: BM, GR, KR, LGC; CCC, SC (Z). June-August, October. One male was taken at the Gila River locality on 10-viii-75 which is very close to nigrosuffusa (Barnes & McDun- nough ). Speyeria atlantis nausicaa (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW, SK, WC. Grant Co.: CC, CCC, IC, SP. May—August. S. nokomis nitocris (Edwards). Catron Co.: LC, WC. August-September. Texola elada perse (Edwards). Grant Co.: BE, GR, RR. May-June, August. Thessalia alma (Strecker). Catron Co.: GW, SS. Grant Co.: BM; 3 mi. N of WS (Z). June-July, September. Thessalia theona thekla (Edwards). Grant Co.: BM, BR, CCG) “ECReSGawvs: Hidalgo Co.: AN (T). May—June, August, October. Vanessa atalanta rubria (Fruhstorfer). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: F B: SG. (7): Hidalgo Co.: A. June—September. SATYRIDAE Cercyonis meadii ssp. Catron Co.: M (R) Grant Co.: MC (R). August. Intensive searching for this species during August, 1975 in both Catron and Grant Cos. failed to produce a single specimen. Cercyonis oetus charon (Edwards). Catron Co.: GW, WC. July—August. Cyllopsis pertepida dorothea (Nabokov). Grant Co.: BM, BR, FB) SNe e@ars: SC; CCC, 3 mi. N of WS (Z). Sierra Co.: EP. June—September. See Miller (1974) for nomenclature and additional comments. Gyrocheilus patrobas tritonia (Edwards). Catron Co.: M (Z). Grant Co.: CCC, IB, UGC, Sierra Co.: EP. September—October. Megisto rubricata cheneyorum (R. L. Chermock). Catron Co.: GW. Grant Co.: CCC, FB, LGC; SC (Z). June-August. See Miller (1976). Neominois ridingsii ssp. Catron Co.: SS. One fresh male on 17—vi-72: VoLuME 30, NuMBER | 49 Oeneis alberta daura (Strecker). Catron Co.: Crest Trail off State Road 78 (R). June. Asterocampa leilia leilia (Edwards) and Eurema proterpia (Fabricius) have been taken in the Peloncillo Mountains and may stray into the Silver City area. On 23-viii-73, D. A. Zimmerman saw a specimen of Heliconius charitonius vasquezae Comstock & Brown at the north edge of the Western New Mexico University campus. The specimen was not captured, but Zimmerman is quite familiar with the species as he has collected it in Florida and the Neotropics. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to thank Michael E. Toliver and Richard Holland, both of Albuquerque, New Mexico, for providing records and comment- ing critically concerning the first draft of this paper. Bruce Harris, Clear Lake, South Dakota, Kilian Roever, Phoenix, Arizona, and Dr. Dale A. Zimmerman, Silver City, New Mexico kindly provided many additional records. Dr. John P. Hubbard, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe and William Baltosser, Silver City, generously provided records from the latter’s collecting trips into the Gila Wilderness Area during 1975. Special thanks are due the author's cousin, Ralph A. Fisher, Jr., who lives in the Silver City area. He made a major contribution to the paper by collecting specimens over a ten-year period. Many of the early spring and late fall records are a result of his efforts. He also provided elevation data and other information used in the paper. LITERATURE CITED EuRuicH, P. R., & A. H. Exriicu. 1961. How to know the butterflies. W. C. Brown, Dubuque. 262 p. + vii. Ferris, C. D. 1973. A revision of the Colias alexandra complex (Pieridae) aided by ultraviolet reflectance photography with designation of a new subspecies. J. Lepid. Soc. 27: 57-73. Ho.uanp, R. 1974. Butterflies of six central New Mexico mountains, with notes on Callophrys (Sandia) macfarlandi (Lycaenidae). J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 38-52. Howe, W. H. (Eprror). 1975. The butterflies of North America. Doubleday & Co., New York. 633 + xiii p., 97 plates. Husparp, J. P. 1965. Some butterflies of the Pinos Altos Mountains, New Mexico. J. Lepid. Soc. 19: 231-232. Minter, L. D. 1974. Revision of the Euptychiini (Satyridae), 2. Cyllopsis R. Felder. Bull. Allyn Mus. Ent. No. 20. 98 p. . 1976. Revision of the Euptychiini (Satyridae), 3. Megisto Hiibner. Bull. Allyn Mus. Ent. No. 33. 23 p. Scott, J. A. 1974. Adult behavior and population biology of Poladryas minuta, and the relationship of the Texas and Colorado populations. Pan Pacif. Ent. 50: 9-22. SHIELDS, O. 1974. Studies on North American Philotes (Lycaenidae). Bull. Allyn Mus. Ent. No. 19. 10 p. Touriver, M. E. 1971. Preliminary notes on the butterflies of Roosevelt County, New Mexico. J. Lepid. Soc. 25: 213-214. WituraMs, R. C., Jr. 1914. One hundred butterflies from the Jamez [sic] Moun- tains New Mexico (Lepid.), with notes and descriptions of a new species. Ent. News 25: 263-268. 50 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY BIOLOGY AND TAXONOMY OF THREE GALL FORMING SPECIES OF EPIBLEMA (OLETHREUTIDAE) WILLIAM E. MILLER North Central Forest Experiment Station, Forest Service, USDA, St. Paul, Minnesota 55108. Epiblema Hibn. in North America comprises 39 species, mostly named over a half century ago (Brown, 1973). Natural history information is available for fewer than 10 species and consists chiefly of host and para- site records. Studies of several species received impetus during 1920-50 because of their superficial resemblance to introduced lepidopterans and their role as alternate hosts of parasites. These interests are exemplified respectively by Thompson (1928) and Bobb (1942), the latter citing related literature. As far as known, Epiblema feed on Compositae; the late instar larvae bore in the stems. The three species treated in this paper produce rudimentary galls. Besides reviewing taxonomy, this paper augments natural history knowledge of scudderianum (Clem.) and gives new information about desertanum (Zell.) and discretivanum (Heinr.). It reports hosts, maps geographic records, describes feeding patterns and galls, outlines seasonal life histories, and integrates the literature on the genus. Taxonomy The following review identifies the species treated. It is abbreviated to primary citations. I examined all types. Epiblema scudderianum (Clemens) (Fig. 1) Hedya scudderiana Clemens (1860, p. 358) (Type in Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, illustrated by Miller (1973) ). Euryptychia saligneana Clemens (1865, p. 141) (Possible type in British Museum (Natural History) (Miller, 1973) ). Paedisca affusana Zeller (1876, p. 307) (Lectotype designated here, “Zeller Coll. Walsingham Collection . . .; Paedisca affusana Z. Il, 307 fig. 38 Am. Sept. Rssl . . .; Type; B. M. 2 Genitalia slide No. 5738,” British Museum (Natural History), left forewing and distal part of right forewing missing, hindwing length 8.0 mm). Epiblema desertanum (Zeller) (Fig. 2) Paedisca desertana Zeller (1876, p. 306) (Lectotype designated here, “Dallas, Tex. Boll; Type 14338; Paedisca desertana Z.; . . . Lectotype des. W. E. Miller,” Museum of Comparative Zoology, 4, forewing length 8.0 mm). VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 Bik an Figs. 1-3. Wings of Epiblema. 1, scudderianum ¢, Ottawa Co., Michigan, fore- wing 8.0 mm; 2, desertanum 6, Ingham Co., Michigan, forewing 8.0 mm; 3, discre- tivanum 9, Chatham Co., Georgia, forewing 6.5 mm. Epiblema discretivanum (Heinrich) (Fig. 3) Eucosma discretivana Heinrich (1921, p. 823) (Type No. 23743, National Museum of Natural History ). Forewing patterns of scudderianum (Fig. 1) and desertanum (Fig. 2) scarcely vary while that of discretivanum (Fig. 3) varies without regard to sex in degree of shading, particularly in basal and mid-dorsal areas. Size of adults is shown by the following forewing length ranges: scudderianum, 7.0-10.5 mm (136 examples not sexed); desertanum 7.0- §.5 mm (25); and discretivanum, 5.5-7.5 mm (37). Male genitalia are illustrated by Heinrich (1923) and female genitalia and wings by Brown (O73 Hosts Except as noted, host records refer to identified adults that developed naturally on the indicated plant species. Plant specimens were diagnosed or verified by E. C. Leonard, National Herbarium; J. H. Beaman, Michi- gan State University; and Harmon Runnels, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center. Hosts of scudderianum in decreasing order of observation frequency were the Canada goldenrod complex, Solidago altissima L.-canadensis L.; tall goldenrod, S. gigantea Ait.; early blooming goldenrod, S. juncea Ait.; elm leaved goldenrod, S. ulmifolia Muhl.; and prairie goldenrod, S. nemoralis Ait. I reared moths from an unidentified host in Florida which was likely camphor weed, Heterotheca subaxillaris (Lam.) Britt. & Rusby, a host noted on museum specimens from Florida and Texas. I observed typical galls on Aster ericoides L. in northern Ohio but did not succeed in rearing adults. I found desertanum only on the grass leaved goldenrod, Solidago 52 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY » sraminifolia (.) Salisb. This goldenrod often occurred on the same sites as one or more of those above; both scudderianum and desertanum sometimes occurred at such sites. Epiblema discretivanum occurred mostly on groundsel-tree, Baccharis halimifolia L., but I reared adults also from narrow leaved groundsel, B. angustifolia Michx., and B. glomeruliflora Pers. Geographic Distribution Three types of locality records appear in Fig. 4: (1) where I reared adults that were subsequently identified, (2) where museum specimens that I verified were collected (museums included National Museum of Natural History, Canadian National Collection, and American Museum of Natural History), and (3) where I observed galls only. The map shows gall-only records where there were gaps in the first two types of records. Only one map symbol appears where two or more for the same species were close enough to overlap. Records for scudderianum occur from Maine south to Florida and west to North Dakota and Texas. Those for desertanum occur through practically the same area while those for discretivanum are confined to the coastal plain from Georgia and Florida to Texas (Fig. 4). Larval Feeding Pattern Between hatching and entering stems, scudderianum larvae evidently fed at host tips. This was inferred from several series of observations typified by the following example. In mid-July, I examined 25 Solidago altissima-canadensis plants with incipient galls in a field in southern Michigan. The tip of every plant had been mined by a small insect no longer present. In the same field on the same date, I examined another 25 plants that had mined tips. Of this group, 16 had incipient scud- derianum galls; larvae on the remaining nine plants probably did not survive to start galls. Limited observations suggest similar pre-gall feed- ing by desertanum. I did not observe discretivanum for pre-gall feeding. A total of 85 incipient scudderianum galls which I examined in June and July in Ohio, Maryland, and Michigan had one and usually two small openings between the gall chamber and outside. One Opening was gradually enlarged throughout the summer whereas the other usually was not. I assume the latter to be the passage by which the larva entered the stem. It was often located just above a leaf attachment. The en- larged opening served as a hatch through which the larva periodically ejected debris, mostly frass. The debris hatch was covered with silk when not in use. Some entry passages may have been converted to debris VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 53 100 200 300 mi == ——— = 161 322 483 km Fig. 4. Distribution of records for Epiblema scudderianum (circles), desertanum (squares), and discretivanum (triangles). Solid symbols signify reared adults; half open symbols, museum specimens; full-open, galls. hatches. I observed ejection of debris from galls brought indoors; frass intercepted by leaves beneath galls is a common sight in the field. Kellicott (1878) also reported ejection of debris by scudderianum. Debris hatches were usually located in the lower half of scudderianum galls. After larvae became full-grown and ceased to feed and excrete, they permanently sealed debris hatches with a dark brown noncellular material probably of larval origin. Such plugs were closely fitted and when removed looked somewhat like train wheels. Debris hatches and plugs occurred in desertanum and discretivanum galls but were located in the upper half of galls. No entry passages 54 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Fig. 5. Galls of Epiblema discretivanum on Baccharis halimifolia. Left, sectioned to show larval tunnel and moth exit. Right, intact. Fig. 6. Upper stem of flowering Solidago altissima-canadensis. Left, normal plant. Right, branched plant infested by Epiblema scudderianum. Gall is visible near center of the segment of stem shown. separate from debris hatches were identified in either species, the entry passages probably having been converted to debris hatches. Apparently due to host reaction, scudderianum and desertanum galls occasionally ruptured, exposing the larval feeding chamber. Counts in Maryland in mid-July showed 7 of 25 scudderianum and 9 of 48 desert- anum galls in various stages of rupture. Several larvae were continuing their feeding in adjacent parts of the same stems. Stem tunnels of larvae that pupated ranged in length as follows: scudderianum, 3.2-5.0 cm (16 observations); desertanum, 4.5-4.7 cm (2); and discretivanum, 2.1-3.3 cm (24). Mature larvae excavated moth exit tunnels in the upper half of galls, leaving only a thin layer of plant tissue. They spun silken funnels that guided the emerging insect into the exit. Moth exits were completed by all three species before winter. The gall of discretivanum (Fig. 5) is similar in appearance and gross structure to the other two galls; that of scudderianum has been illustrated often and is shown together with desertanum galls by Miller (1963). VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 55 Infestation by scudderianum was often accompanied by branching of host plants late in the summer (Fig. 6). Seasonal History Scudderianum flew in May and June in northern localities. At a light near an old field in southern Michigan, I caught 30 moths between May 25 and June 21 during two years of observations. In northern Ohio during one year of observation, 6 moths emerged within the above dates from galls held in an outdoor insectary. In Maryland during one year of observation, 4 moths emerged between April 30 and May 12 from galls in an outdoor insectary. In studying galls of Gnorimoschema gallaesoli- daginis (Riley) (Miller, 1963), I obtained one moth of Epiblema scudderianum during the above periods. I made one observation concerning the flight period of desertanum: on June 26 in Maryland, 13 galls had protruding empty pupal cases and two had live pupae. I made no comparable observations on discretiv- anum. The earliest dates I observed incipient scudderianum galls were June 20 in Maryland and June 24 in northern Ohio; desertanum galls, July 19 in Maryland. All three species overwinter in galls as mature larvae. The earliest dates I observed scudderianum pupae were April 11 in Maryland, May 7 in northern Ohio, and May 22 in southern Michigan; desertanum pupae, May 24 in southern Michigan. DiscussION AND CONCLUSIONS Type examination and fixation confirms and formalizes identities and synonymies of the three species. The synonyms were proposed by Fer- nald (1882) as well as Heinrich (1923); it is uncertain whether Fernald saw all types but certain that Heinrich did not. Adults of the three species are recognizable from forewing pattern despite the variability in discretivanum. Larvae of some Epiblema are characterized by MacKay (1959) and pupae of two are included in Mosher’s (1916) classification. Eggs of Epiblema strenuanum (Wlkr.) E. carolinanum (Wlshm.), and E. otiosanum (Clem.) are known (Peterson, 1965; Thompson, 1928; Decker, 1932). Scudderianum, associated with four genera of hosts, has more known hosts than any North American Epiblema. It has often been reported from the Canada goldenrod complex. The five host species reported here, representing two genera, appear to be new records. Ellis (1925) listed Bidens frondosa as a frequent host, and two other genera observed once by him as hosts, referring to scudderianum as the bidens borer. One 56 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY wonders if he confused scudderianum with the true bidens borer, otio- sanum, but he stated correctly that his insect was univoltine whereas otio- sanum is multivoltine (Decker, 1932). Desertanum has only one known host in the North; its host or hosts in the South, where Solidago gramini- folia does not occur (Fermald, 1950), are unknown. Thus far, discreti- vanum is known only from the three species of Baccharis listed in this paper. Heinrich (1921) said it formed a gall on “wild myrtle” which Bottimer (1926) identified as B. halimifolia. All three Epiblema studied appear confined to eastern North America. Distributions of scudderianum and discretivanum and their most frequent hosts closely coincide; the same is true for desertanum in the North. Discretivanum likely occurs in the West Indies and other Caribbean areas because its hosts are there (Small, 1933). Riley (1883) stated that scudderianum, in one of several alternate feeding patterns, fed first on tips and later formed galls. Kellicott (1882) confirmed gall forming but not tip feeding. Riley mixed species and even genera of goldenrod-feeding olethreutids in his observations. Whether he observed true scudderianum tip feeding is uncertain. Pre- gall tip mining by scudderianum and desertanum may represent an early feeding mode characteristic of other olethreutid larvae (MacKay, 1963). Similar feeding has been reported in otiosanum (Decker, 1932), caro- linanum (Thompson, 1928) and tripartitanum (Zell.) (Bottimer, 1926). Early debate abcut whether scudderianum induced gall formation arose in part by scudderianum moths apparently emerging from Gnori- moschema galls (Kellicott, 1882). Judd (1951) as well as I observed the same phenomenon. Old galls of these two gall makers can be confused. On the other hand, scudderianum larvae whose galls rupture might find their way into Gnorimoschema galls just as some otiosanum larvae wander to new sites before overwintering (Decker, 1932). In contrast to linear stem boring, scudderianum, desertanum and dis- cretivanum concentrate their feeding within a short length of stem. Maximum stem swelling seems to be associated with the point of maxi- mum internal feeding. After scudderianum larvae form their chambers, cambial activity is greatly accelerated. Tissues internal to the cambium are grazed (Blum, 1953). Ejection of debris is essential where feeding is intensified in a small area. Branch proliferation due to scudderianum has counterparts in hosts of strenuanum (Crawford, 1933) and caro- linanum (Thompson, 1928). North American Epiblema with known biologies overwinter as mature larvae. Scudderianum and desertanum are apparently univoltine in the North. In Ontario over several years, Brodie (1909) observed scudder- VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 BF ianum moths flying between June 12 and July 1, two weeks later than I observed in southern Michigan. Moth flight, gall formation, and pupa- tion appear to be earlier in Maryland than in the Midwest. Galls of all three species observed in this study persist for a year or longer after their makers leave and many are used as homes by other arthropods (Miller, 1966). LITERATURE CITED Bium, J. L. 1953. Vascular development in three common goldenrod galls. Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Lett. 38: 23-34. Boss, M. L. 1942. Parasites of the oriental fruit moth and of certain weed-infesting larvae. Va. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 79. 23 p. Borrmenr, L. J. 1926. Notes on some Lepidoptera from eastern Texas. J. Agr. Res. 33: 797-819. Bropiz, W. 1909. Lepidopterous galls collected in the vicinity of Toronto—No. 2. Can. Ent. 41: 73-76. Brown, R. S. 1973. Phylogenetic systematics: Its application to the genus Epiblema (Lepidoptera). M.S. Thesis, Univ. of Arkansas. 179 p. CLEMENS, B. 1860. Contributions to American lepidopterology. No. 6. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1860: 345-362. 1865. North American micro-lepidoptera. Proc. Ent. Soc. Philadelphia 5: 133-147. Crawrorp, A. W. 1933. Glypta rufiscutellaris Cresson, an ichneumonid larval para- site of the oriental fruit moth. New York Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 217. 29 p. Decker, G. C. 1932. Biology of the bidens borer, Epiblema otiosana (Clemens ) (Lepidoptera, Olethreutidae). J. New York Ent. Soc. 40: 503-509. Exuis, W. O. 1925. Some lepidopterous larvae resembling the European corn borer. WeeNerokes, o0: 117-192. FERNALD, C. H. 1882. A synonymical catalog of the described Tortricidae of North America north of Mexico. Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc. 10: 1-64. FERNALD, M. L. 1950. Gray’s manual of botany. 8th ed. American Book Co., New York. 1632 p. Hernricu, C. 1921. Some Lepidoptera likely to be confused with the pink bollworm. J. Agr. Res. 20: 807-836. . 1923. Revision of the North American moths of the subfamily Eucosminae of the family Olethreutidae. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 123. 298 p. Jupp, W. W. 1951. Hymenoptera and an inquiline moth reared from the goldenrod gall caused by Gnorimoschema gallaesolidaginis Riley (Lepidoptera). Proc. Nova Scotia Inst. Sci. 22(4): 1-7. Ketuicotr, D. S. 1878. <A new gall moth, and notes on larvae of other gall moths. Can. Ent. 10: 201-204. . 1882. Is Paedisca scudderiana a gall-maker? Can. Ent. 14: 161-163. MacKay, M. R. 1959. Larvae of the North American Olethreutidae (Lepidoptera ). Can. Ent. 91, Suppl. 10. 338 p. 1963. Evolution and adaptation of larval characters in the Tortricidae. Gan. Ent: 95: 1321-1344. Mitter, W. E. 1963. The goldenrod gall moth Gnorimoschema_ gallaesolidaginis (Riley) and its parasites in Ohio. Ohio J. Sci. 63: 65-75. 1966. Spiders in old insect galls on goldenrod. Ohio J. Sci. 66: 618-619. Mirter, W. E. 1973. Clemens types of Olethreutinae (Lepidoptera, Tortricidae ). Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc. 99: 205-234. 58 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Mosuer, E. 1916. A classification of the Lepidoptera based on characters of the pupa. Bull. Ill. Lab. Nat. Hist. 12(2): 17-160. Peterson, A. 1965. Some eggs of moths among the Olethreutidae and Tortricidae (Lepidoptera). Fla. Ent. 48: 1-8. Ritey, C. V. 1883. Notes on Paedisca scudderiana. Amer. Nat. 17: 1069-1070. SMALL, J. K. 1933. Manual of the southeastern flora. Published by the author, New York. 1554 p. Tuompson, R. W. 1928. The golden-glow borer (Epiblema carolinana Walsingham ). Ann. Rep. Ent. Soc. Ontario, 58, 1927, p. 73-75. ZeLLER, P. C. 1876. Beitrage zur Kenntniss der nordamericanischen Nachtfalter, besonders der Microlepidopteren. III. Verh. Zool.-bot. Ges. Wien 25: 205-360. A POSSIBLE SOURCE OF MORTALITY IN PAPILIO TROILUS (PAPILIONIDAE) POPULATIONS IN EASTERN TEXAS While collecting Papilio troilus (L.) eggs in the vicinity of the Hardin town dump in Hardin Co., Texas, on 21 March 1972, several trails of leaf-cutter worker ants were observed carrying pieces of leaves to their nests presumably for culture medium for their fungal “gardens” (Creighton, 1950, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard Univ. 104: 325-329). These ants were kindly determined by Dr. Wm. L. Brown, Jr. to be Atta texana (Buckley). One of the small shrubs which was rapidly being defoliated of its succulent spring growth of leaves was Sassafras albidum (Nutt.), which was also the main plant species being utilized for oviposition by P. troilus. While looking at one particular sassafras plant I was able to rescue a troilus egg on an excised leaf section that was actually being carted off down the stem by an ant and three more eggs on leaves certainly destined for the same outcome. The probable fate would have been death, but the proximate source of mortality could have been any of several, including desiccation, predation by ants, or fungal attack of either eggs or larvae. These eggs and the resulting larvae were instead reared through to P. troilus adults on Sassafras albidum in Ithaca, New York. Specimens of P. troilus and Atta texana from these Hardin County populations have been deposited in The Cornell University Collection: Lot 1023, sublot 13b. J. Mark Scriser, Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 59 MIGRATION OF BUTTERFLIES ALONG THE GULF COAST OF NORTHERN FLORIDA F, A. URQUHART AND N. R. URQUHART Life Sciences, Scarborough College, University of Toronto, West Hill, Ontario, Canada MIC 1A7 For the past five years (1970-75) we have been making an intensive study of the Gulf Coast migrations of the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus plexippus [L.]) with special reference to the main migration route along the coast of northern Florida. Most of our observations and alar tagging have been conducted in the vicinity of Apalachee Bay at St. Marks Lighthouse, Wakulla Beach, Shell Point, and Live Oak Point. Although the migrants pass through this area during the latter part of October, the peak period of abundance has been consistently between October 20-25. Prior to October 20 and after October 25, relatively few migrants were recorded, although stragglers continued to pass through the area as late as mid-January. On one or two days during this brief period, a peak movement occurs involving countless thousands of indi- viduals. The results of this study, as they pertain specifically to the monarch butterfly, will be presented at a later date. In the present paper we report that along with the monarchs were three other species of migrating Lepidoptera, namely, Agraulis vanillae (L.), Urbanus proteus (L.) and Phoebis sennae eubule (L.). Each of these species occurred in great numbers during the migrating period, and, during the free-flight period (non-feeding) they all moved in a definite westerly direction, following the coastline. The cloudless Sulphur, Phoebis sennae eubule, a well documented migratory species ( Williams, 1930, 1958), was observed migrating north- ward from the open ocean toward land at Live Oak Point. On reaching land, these migrants altered direction abruptly and followed a west direction. This band of migrants, extending 200’ across, flew in an end- less procession within a few centimeters of the water and, on land, close to the vegetation; only an occasional specimen moved toward the flower- ing goldenrod to feed. An average of 480 migrants per minute passed the observation point. The gulf fritillary, Agraulis vanillae, has been reported as a migrant by many authors, as listed by Williams (1930, 1958). As this species moved along the coast, they fed upon the nectar of Baccharis halimifolia and Solidago puberula. An average of 32 specimens was recorded feeding upon the nectar of each of five B. halimifolia bushes, a plant that grows 60 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Figs. 1-4. Gulf Coast migrants. 1, Danaus p. plexippus; 2, Agraulis vanillae; 3, Phoebis sennae eubule; 4, Urbanus proteus. Many specimens collected were travel- worn, indicating long flights. extensively along the sand dune area of the coast and flowers at the time of the peak migration. On being disturbed, these migrants con- tinued westward, following the coastline. The reports of flight direc- tions, as given by Williams and others for this species, are rather con- fusing since, depending upon the geographic location of the observation, flights might be recorded in every compass direction. This is due, in part, to the southerly flight of migrants, aberrant flights due to topo- graphical influences, motion toward flowering plants, and the presence of non-migrating nomadic breeding populations. We believe that the movement of these migrants is southerly, as mentioned by Harris (1972), but, like the monarch butterfly, has a westward direction on reaching the coastal area. The long-tailed skipper, Urbanus proteus, has been reported by Scud- der (1889) as occurring in numbers, but with no record of flight direc- tions. Williams (1958) records sight observations of a migration to the north in the spring and to the south in the autumn in Florida, but the actual locality in Florida where the observations were made is not given. VoLuME 30, NuMBER 1 61 Although general migration patterns for a given geographic area can be indicated by careful observations for a given geographic area, it is necessary to have accurately recorded observations for many localities to establish a definite flight path. The most definitive method is that of following a marked individual of a moving population by means of individual designations, as shown on the cover of Insektenmigrationem (Annual Report for 1974). In this manner release-recapture lines can be accurately plotted over long distances. For small species, such as Urbanus proteus, one must rely on observations, such as contained in the present paper, and reports from other, preferably widely distributed, localities. LITERATURE CITED Harris, L. H. 1972. Butterflies of Georgia. Univ. of Oklahoma Press. 326 p. INSEKTENMIGRATIONEM. 1974. Germany (53 Bonn, Adenauerallee 150-164). ScuppER, S. H. 1889. Butterflies of eastern U.S.A. and Canada with special refer- ence to the New England States. Cambridge, U.S. WituraMs, C. B. 1930. The migration of butterflies. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh. A473 p. . 1958. Insect migration. Collins, London. 235 p. OCCURRENCE OF LEPTOTES CASSIUS THEONUS (LYCAENIDAE) IN GEORGIA On 29-30 September 1974, I collected 20 males and 6 females of Leptotes cassius theonus (Lucas) on Skidaway Island, Chatham Co., Georgia. This species was not mentioned by Harris (1972, Butterflies of Georgia. University of Oklahoma Press ) and has apparently not heretofore been recorded from Georgia. All the specimens were taken from what appeared to be a well-established colony situated along a short stretch of dirt road just northwest of Priest Landing on the Wilmington River side of the island. Although it was quite abundant in this particular locality, L. c. theonus was nearly overlooked because of its superficial resemblance to Hemiargus ceraunus antibubastus Hiibner, which was equally abundant. It appears likely that careful exploration of Georgia’s coastal islands will reveal the existence of additional L. c. theonus colonies. Ricuarp T. Arsocast, 114 Monica Blvd., Savannah, Georgia 31406. 62 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY NEW HESPERIIDAE RECORDS FOR MEXICO Hucu Avery FREEMAN 1605 Lewis Drive, Garland, Texas 75041 During the past year I have been making concentrated efforts to com- plete a study that I have been making on the Hesperiidae of Mexico. Through research conducted in the American Museum of Natural His- tory, collecting widely over Mexico and determining specimens for various museums and collectors I have found 12 new species and 33 new records of hesperiids from Mexico during that period of time. In this article I will deal only with the new records and in a separate article the new species. PYRGINAE Tarsoctenus praecia (Hewitson, 1857) Type locality. Santarem, Brazil. Distribution. Lower Amazon River, Para, Brazil. There is a specimen in the American Museum of Natural History labelled, Mexico. Drephalys dumeril (Uatreille, 1824) Type locality. Uncertain. Distribution. The British Museum contains specimens of this species from the following locations: Panama, Venezuela, Br. Guiana, Surinam, Fr. Guiana, Ecuador (La Chima) and Brazil (Bahia, Maranham, Joinville). I have seven males of this species in my collection from Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico, collected during July, August, September and October, 1968-71, all obtained from E. C. Welling. Drephalys oria Evans, 1952 Type locality. Honduras. Distribution. There are two males and a female from Honduras in the British Museum. There is a male in the American Museum of Natural History from Rancho San Carlos, Oaxaca, Mexico, collected March 12, 1969 by Peter Hubbell, and there is a male in my collection with the same data. Aguna aurunce (Hewitson, 1867) Type locality. Amazons. Distribution. The British Museum contains specimens of this species from the following locations: Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Trini- dad, Br. Guiana, Fr. Guiana, Peru (Tarapote), Upper Amazons (Teffe, Itaituba, Obidos ) and Para, Brazil. I have a male in my collection from Tenosique, Tabasco, Mexico, August 24, 1962, collected by E. C. Welling. Zestusa staudingeri (Mabille, 1888 ) Type locality. Guatemala. Distribution. There are no specimens of this species in the British Museum or VoLuUME 30, NuMBER | 63 American Museum of Natural History. I have 21 specimens in my collection from Rancho Belen, 20 km south of San Christobal, Chiapas, Mexico, collected during March by Robert Wind. Ridens philia Evans, 1952 Type locality. Colombia, Cauca, Juntas: M. de Mathan: end 1897-8. Distribution. Colombia (Cauca, R. Dagua). I have 21 males and three females in my collection from Sta. Rosa, Comitan, Chiapas and Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico, collected by E. C. Welling and T. Escalante during March, August, Sep- tember and October, 1965-69. Astraptes fulgor Hayward, 1938 Type locality. Argentina. Distribution. The British Museum has one male with no locality data. I have in my collection two males and a female from Rancho San Carlos, Oaxaca, Mexico, August 1968. I have examined two males of this species from Campeche, Campeche, Mexico, November 15, 1967, collected by H. L. King. Astraptes tucuti Williams, 1927 Type locality. Panama. Distribution. Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Colombia, Peru (Chanchamayo, Ucayali), Bolivia and Brazil. I have a male from Tenosique, Tabasco, Mexico, September 13, 1962, collected by E. C. Welling, and a male from Rancho Dos Amatos, Veracruz, Mexico, August 1969, collected by Peter Hubbell. Astraptes samson Evans, 1952 Type locality. Colombia. Distribution. Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Br. Guiana, Fr. Guiana, Ecuador (Paramba), Peru (Inambari, Huancabamba), Bolivia (Reyes) and Amazons (St. Paulo d’Olivenca to Para). There is a male in the American Museum of Natural History from Presidio, Veracruz, Mexico, Sep- tember 1940. I have two males in my collection from Muste, Chiapas, Mexico, August and September, 1968, collected by E. C. Welling. Calliades zeutus (Moschler, 1878) Type locality. Colombia. Distribution. Panama, Br. Guiana, Upper Amazons (Iquitos) and Bolivia ( Buena- vista). There is a male in my collection and one in the collection of E. C. Welling from X-Can, Quintana Roo, Mexico, June 25, 1967, collected by E. C. Welling. Thorybes albosuffusa Freeman, 1943 Type locality. Fort Davis, Texas. Distribution. This species is found over the Big Bend section of Texas. I have a female from 1 mile south of Cedritos, Coahuila, Mexico, June 23, 1957, and there is a specimen in the American Museum of Natural History from Colima, Mexico. Bungalotis erythus (Cramer, 1775) Type locality. Surinam. Distribution. Honduras, Nicaragua, Colombia, Fr. Guiana, Br. Guiana and Brazil 64 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY (Para, Maranham). I have examined a specimen from E. C. Welling that he collected at X-Can, Quintana Roo, Mexico, July 10, 1967. Bungalotis astylos (Cramer, 1780) Type locality. Surinam. Distribution. Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Trinidad, Br. Guiana, Fr. Guiana, Ecuador, Peru (Amazones, Carabaya, Chanchamayo, Rentema Falls), Upper Amazons (Ega) and Brazil (Para, Manaos, Matto Grosso, Rio, Petro- polis). There are two males in the American Museum of Natural History from Presi- dio, Veracruz, Mexico, July 1939 and July 1941 (C. C. Hoffman). Dyscophellus ramon Evans, 1952 Type locality. Bugaba, Panama. Distribution. Honduras, Panama and “Peru.” There is a female in the American Museum of Natural History from Presidio, Veracruz, Mexico, July 1941 (C. C. Hoffman ). Nascus broteas (Cramer, 1780) Type locality. Surinam. Distribution. Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Trinidad, Fr. Guiana, Ecuador (La Chima, Paramba), Peru (Amazons), Upper Amazons (Ega, St. Paulo d’Olivenca), Brazil (Para, Espirito Santo) and Paraguay. I have a specimen from Tenosique, Tabasco, Mexico, August 24, 1962, collected by E. C. Welling. Gindanes brontinus Godman & Salvin, 1895 Type locality. Nicaragua. Distribution. Nicaragua. E. C. Welling collected two males of this species at Piste, Yucatan, Mexico, July. I have one specimen and he has the other. Pythonides assecla Mabille, 1883 Type locality. “E. Brazil.” Distribution. Honduras, Nicaragua, Colombia, Br. Guiana, Fr. Guiana, Upper Amazon, Peru (Chanchamayo, Tarapote). In material received from E. C. Welling for determination, there were three females of this species from Mexico, two from Tenosique, Tabasco, August, and September 1962 and one from X-Can, Quintana Roo, July 2, 1965. Ebrietas livius (Mabille, 1897) Type locality. Bolivia. Distribution. Ecuador (Loja, Rio Numbala), Peru (La Merced, Rio Tabaconas), Bolivia (Yungas) and Bahia. There is a specimen in my collection from Tenosique, Tabasco, Mexico, September 17, 1962, collected by E. C. Welling. Pyrgus oileus orcus (Stoll, 1780) Type locality. Surinam. Distribution. Common from Costa Rica to South America. There are three males of this apparent subspecies from Tapachula, Chiapas, Mexico, August 21, 1949 (Ik. G. Smyth) in the Los Angeles County Museum. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1] 65 HESPERINAE Synapte puma Evans, 1955 Type locality. Balboa, Panama. Distribution. Panama. I have in my collection 19 males and two females of this species from Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico, collected from March to October, 1968-69 (E. C. Welling). Thargella caura (Plotz, 1882 ) Type locality. Surinam. Distribution. Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Venezuela, Trinidad, Br. Guiana, Fr. Guiana, Bolivia (Santa Cruz), Amazons (Nauta to Para) and Bahia. In specimens received for identification from E. C. Welling there was a male of this species from Tenosique, Tabasco, Mexico, August 12, 1962, in poor condition, and I have a female from Orizaba, Veracruz, Mexico, May 1907 (C. C. Hoffman) which belongs to the American Museum of Natural History. Lerema lumina ( Herrich-Schaffer, 1869 ) Type locality. Uncertain. Distribution. Guatamala, Costa Rica, Panama and Colombia. I have three males of this species in my collection collected by Robert Wind at San Carlos, Chiapas, Mexico, July 2, 1969. Onophas columbaria ( Herrich-Schaffer, 1870) Type locality. Brazil. Distribution. Panama, Colombia, Trinidad, Br. Guiana, Surinam, Fr. Guiana, Ecuador (La Chima, Paramba), Bolivia (Buenavista), Amazons (Teffe-Para) and Bahia. I examined a female specimen of this species collected by H. L. King at Kabah Ruins, Yucatan, Mexico, November 17, 1967. Turesis theste Godman, 1901 Type locality. Costa Rica. Distribution. Apparently very rare as the British Museum has only the type, and there are no specimens in the American Museum of Natural History. E. C. Welling sent me two males of this species for determination. He collected them at Tenosique, Tabasco, Mexico, August 17, 1962. Vertica grandipuncta (Mabille, 1883) Type locality. Para, Brazil. Distribution. Br. Guiana, Ecuador (Ambato), Upper Amazons (Pebas, Tonantins, Santarem, Tapajos), Brazil (Para). I received two males of this species from E. C. Welling for determination. They were collected at Tenosique, Tabasco, Mexico, August 24 and 27, 1962. Talides alternata Bell, 1941 Type locality. Santa Catharina. Distribution. Guatemala, Costa Rica, Colombia, Venezuela, Surinam, Ecuador (Balzapamba), Peru (Chanchamayo, Chiriamayo), Para and Novo Friborgo. I have in my collection three males and two females of this species collected at 66 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico, during August and October, 1968-69, by E. C. Welling. Telles arcalaus (Stoll, 1782 ) Type locality. Surinam. Distribution. Honduras, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Trinidad, Br. Guiana, Fr. Guiana, Peru (Rio Colorado) and Amazons (Para, St. Paulo d’Olivenca). There is a male specimen of this species in the American Museum of Natural History labelled “Ochls north Mexico,” with no other data. Carystoides orbius Godman, 1901 Type locality. Nicaragua. Distribution. Nicaragua, Trinidad, Br. Guiana, Fr. Guiana, Surinam, Ecuador (Canalos, Rio Bobonaza), Upper Amazons and Para. In specimens received from E. C. Welling there was a male of this species collected at Tenosique, Tabasco, Mexico, September 4, 1962. Mellana balsa freemani Steinhauser, 1974 Type locality. Santa Tecla, El Salvador. Distribution. Santa Tecla, El Salvador, June, July and October. Sayaaxche, El Peten, Guatemala, August 10, 1963 (E. C. Welling). I have in my collection four males from Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico, July and August, 1969 and 1971 (E. C. Welling ). Mellana tecla Steinhauser, 1974 Type locality. Santa Tecla, E] Salvador. Distribution. Santa Tecla, Tamanique, E] Salvador. I have in my collection 18 males of this species from Muste, Chiapas, Mexico, July 1968 (E. C. Welling) and five males from Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico, July and August, 1969 and 1971 (E. C. Welling). Panoquina panoquinoides (Skinner, 1891) Type locality. Florida. Distribution. Florida, Texas, Cayman Island, Tobago and Pernambuco. I have a male and a female of this species in my collection from Progreso, Yucatan, Mexico, October 6, 1971 (E. C. Welling). Xeniades pteras Godman, 1900 Type locality. Panama. Distribution. Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia (St. Marta) and Venezuela. I have a male and female of this species in my collection from Muste, Chiapas, Mexico, collected October 22, 1968, by E. C. Welling. Saliana hewitsoni Riley, 1926 Type locality. Upper Amazons. Distribution. Panama, Colombia, Ecuador (Paramba, La Chima, Zamora), Peru (Moyabamba), Bolivia (Reyes, Buenavista) and Amazons (Nauta, Para). Dr. W. W. McGuire brought a female specimen of this species here for me to determine VoLUME 30, NuMBER 1] 67 which he had received from Peter Hubbell. The specimen was collected at Cate- maco, Veracruz, Mexico, November 15, 1973 by Sr. Abraham Ramirez. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This research was made possible by a grant from the National Geo- graphic Society. 68 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY GENERAL NOTES RANGE EXTENSIONS OF CALLOPHRYS FOTIS, C. POLIOS, COLIAS ALEXANDRA AND EREBIA CALLIAS (LYCAENIDAE, PIERIDAE AND SATYRIDAE) Until 1971, Callophrys (Incisalia) fotis schryveri (Cross) was known only from Colorado and southern Wyoming (Ferris & Stanford, J. Lepid. Soc. 24: 256-266). In 1971 and 1972, it was collected in numbers by S. Kohler in the vicinity of Missoula, Missoula Co., Montana. Voucher specimens are deposited in the collection of S. Kohler and the author. Ferris & Fisher (1973, J. Lepid. Soc. 27: 112-118) discussed the distribution of Callophrys (Incisalia) polios (Cook & Watson) in North America. At that time, polios was unknown from the Great Plains region. It was recorded from eastern Minnesota and Wisconsin, and northeastern Illinois. Eastern limits for the subspecies obscurus Ferris & Fisher included Missoula Co., Montana; the Black Hills, South Dakota; Albany Co., Wyoming; and south along the Colorado Front Range. In May 1973, T. McCabe collected C. polios obscurus in the Killdeer Mts., Dunn Co., North Dakota, a locality several hundred miles north and east of the nearest known locality of this subspecies. Voucher specimens are deposited in the collection of T. McCabe and the author. In his revision of the Colias alexandra complex, Ferris (1973, J. Lepid. Soc. 27: 57-73) listed no records south of the United States-Mexico border. Colias alexandra harfordii H. Edwards has now been collected at several localities in Baja California (state) in the Sierra San Pedro Martir (Holland, 1972, J. Res. Lepid. 11: 147-160; H. Real, in litt.). Since my paper on Erebia callias Edwards appeared (Ferris, 1974, J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 230-236), a number of new Colorado records for this insect have been sent to me by R. E. Stanford and D. Cowper from the following counties: Boulder, Gilpin, Gunnison, Ouray, Pitkin, Rio Grande and San Juan. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank the following for providing distribution records: D. Cowper, J. D. Eff, R. Holland, S. Kohler, T. L. McCabe, H. G. Real and R. E. Stanford. This note is published with the approval of the Director, Wyoming Agricultural Experiment Station, as Journal Article JA 722. Cuirrorp D. Ferris, College of Engineering, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071. (Research Associate, Allyn Museum of Entomology, Sarasota, Florida; Museum Associate, Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, Los Angeles, California. ) AMBLYSCIRTES BELLI (HESPERIIDAE): A NEW RECORD FOR KENTUCKY On July 26, 1969, between 1500 and 1600 I collected a single Amblyscirtes belli lreeman (@) that was resting on a leaf in a wooded area of Chickasaw Park in Louisville, Jefferson Co., Kentucky. Determination was tentatively made by C. V. Covell, Jr. of the University of Louisville and confirmed by Mr. H. A. Freeman of Garland, Texas. This species has not been reported for Kentucky (Covell, 1974, J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 253-256), the nearest known record being in Pope Co., Illinois (Irwin & Downey, 1973, Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv. Biol. Notes No. 81: 1-60). Ricard A, Henperson, 2609 Welsford Way, Louisville, Kentucky 40222. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 1 69 FACTORS AFFECTING THE OCCURRENCE OF MELANIS PIXE (RIODINIDAE) IN EXTREME SOUTHERN TEXAS The lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas has a varied lepidopteran fauna including many neotropical forms that reach their northernmost points in this area. One of the least known of these is Melanis (= Lemnax = Lymnas) pixe pixe (Boisduval), Riodinidae. This medium-size butterfly (wingspan about 3.5 cm) has a velvet-black ground color with an apical yellow spot on each forewing. A single basal spot on each wing and six marginal spots on the hindwings are an intense scarlet color. This species is neither illustrated nor mentioned in any of the standard American butterfly guides, i.e., Holland, Klots, Ehrlich & Ehrlich, or dos Passos. An illus- tration of M. gynaeceas Godm. & Salv., which may be an extreme version of M. pixe, may be found in Biologia-Centrali-Americana (Godman & Salvin, 1882: v. 38, pl. 110, fig. 3). Despite previous collections of this M. pixe in the Brownsville (Cameron Co., Texas) area (summarized below), the present report is believed to be the first published note on U.S. records of this species. The northernmost published record of this butterfly that I could find was in the state of Veracruz (Hoffman, 1940, Am. Inst. Biol. Mex. 11(2): 639~-739), at least 420 km south of Brownsville. L. E. Gilbert (pers. comm.) has observed pixe at Cd. Mante, Tamaulipas, 380 km south of Brownsville. In June, July and August of 1961, I observed this species in Brownsville. Larvae were found and reared to imago feeding on an introduced ornamental, guamuchil, Pithecellobium dulce (Roxb.) Benth. This leguminous shrub is native to Mexico and through Central America to Colombia and Venezuela (Little & Wadsworth, 1964, Common Trees of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, Agric. Handbook 249, U.S.D.A.). Adult M. pixe are very poor fliers and are often seen hovering around the host plant. Their flight pattern is suggestive of many of the warning-colored day-flying moths. Melanis pixe was first reported from the U.S. on 21 March 1956 by O. O. Stout in Brownsville. (This and the following records are from the files of R. O. Kendall.) Field collections of M. pixe occurred from 1957-1961; none were subsequently reported until the late 1960’s, when C. A. Kendall sighted one. All U.S. records to date are from Brownsville. I saw no further specimens after the superabundance in 1961. Possibly, the absence of M. pixe in 1962 and subsequent years resulted from the effects of the catastrophic freeze of 9-12 January 1962. Brownsville reported a low temperature of 19°F (12 January), the coldest since 1899. Massive damage to citrus groves and substantial damage to native vegetation resulted. This freeze undoubtedly was the most destructive to native wildlife and vegetation recorded (Heitzman, 1962, J. Lepid. Soc. 16: 249-150; James, 1963, Southwest. Nat. 8: 45—46.). The first reported occurrence of M. pixe in the Brownsville area corresponded with one of the warmest periods on record in the same area. No severe freezes were recorded from 1952-1961 (lowest temperature 29°F); no freezing temperatures were recorded from 1954-1958, inclusive. The warm vears of the mid-1960’s again per- mitted the occurrence of M. pixe in the lower Rio Grande Valley. Many butterflies of northern Mexico are found in southern Texas, but only under certain environmental conditions (Gilbert, 1969, J. Lepid. Soc. 23: 177-185). Popu- lations of M. pixe may be completely eliminated by these severe freezes and must disperse from Mexico; on the other hand, populations may simply be so low in numbers and local in nature that detection is unlikely. A puzzle yet to be solved is determination of the native larval foodplant of M. pixe. Adults flying around Pithecellobium dulce showed no attraction behavior toward Texas ebony, P. flexicaule (Benth.) Coult., a common tree in southern Texas; M. pixe larvae have never been found on this species. A specimen of Texas 70 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY ebony was less than 10 m from the smaller P. dulce that supported M. pixe larvae. Pithecellobium dulce has been reported common around Cd. Victoria, Tamaulipas (Robert Runyon, botanical voucher sheet 777, Univ. Texas at Austin Herbarium), 320 km south of Brownsville. There possibly has never been a native foodplant for M. pixe in the Brownsville area. Thus, M. pixe may have occurred in southern Texas only since the introduction of guamuchil. ACKNOWLEDGMENT I wish to thank R. O. Kendall for information on previous sightings of this species. RaymMonp W. Neck, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, John H. Reagan Build- ing, Austin, Texas 78701. NEW FOODPLANT AND OVIPOSITION RECORDS FOR BATTUS PHILENOR (PAPILIONIDAE) Battus philenor (1..) feeds on several species in the plant family Aristolochiaceae. In the central and southern Appalachian regions of the eastern U.S.A., Aristolochia serpentaria L, is a predominant native foodplant species (Scudder, 1889, The butter- flies of the eastern U.S. and Canada, 2: 1219-1364; Holland, 1898, The butterfly book, Doubleday, Doran & Co. New York; Forbes, 1960, Comell Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta. Memoir #371). The northern range limits of Battus philenor probably are extended by feeding upon the introduced ornamental Aristolochia sipho L’Her or Asarum spp. In Texas, Kendall (1964, J. Lepid. Soc. 18: 129-157, and pers. comm. ) reports only Aristolochia longiflora (Engelm. & Gray). Here we report feeding and oviposition by B. philesor on Aristolochia serpentaria and A. reticulata (Nutt.) in eastern Texas. These observations apparently represent new foodplant records for the state of Texas and the U.S.A., respectively. During a collecting trip to the “Big Thicket” region of eastern Texas in late March, 1972, eggs and larvae of first through third instars of the pipevine swallow- tail, Battus philenor, were found upon the small perennial Aristolochia reticulata in a longleaf pine forest near Camp Waluta, approximately 6 mi. NW of Silsbee between routes 92 and 69 in Hardin County. In addition, several females were seen ovi- positing on these plants. Another trip during the following spring to the same area yielded similar observations. From 8 April 1973 through 13 April 1973, eggs, larvae of various instars and ovipositing females were abundant upon the A. reticulata (Fig. 1). Eggs were laid most frequently in groups of two, three or four per plant, though the number laid by an individual female on any one occasion ranged from one to seven per plant. While following one particular female engaged in the characteristic ‘ovipositional searching’ flight between 12:25 and 13:00 hours on 12 April 1973, oviposition was observed upon Aristolochia serpentaria. Although A. reticulata plants were more abundant, none were selected by this female for oviposition, or even approached. Three A. serpentaria plants were supplied with one, three and two eggs respectively. Although A. serpentaria is not apparently a widespread hostplant for Battus philenor in Texas, it is more common in other states to the northeast. Aristolochia reticulata, however, has not to our knowledge ever been reported as a foodplant of B. philenor. The explanation for the intensive use of A. reticulata in the Waluta site and the absence of records elsewhere probably stems from the fact that A. reticulata has a relatively restricted range. It is found in the humus of sandy soils of pine-hardwoods or pine savannahs only in eastern Texas, southwestern Arkansas VoLUME 30, NuMBER 1 ck Fig. 1. Battus philenor female ovipositing upon Aristolochia reticulata 12 April 1973 in a long leaf pine savannah near Silsbee, Hardin County, Texas. and northwestern Louisiana (Pfeifer, 1966, Ann. Mo. Bot. Gdn. 53: 115-196; Correll & Johnston, 1970, Manual of the vascular plants of Texas, Texas Research Foundation). Specimens of Aristolochia reticulata have been deposited in the Bailey Hortorium at Cornell University. Battus philenor individuals which were found and reared upon the A. reticulata have been deposited in the Cornell Collection (Lot 1023; sublot 18). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks are extended to Geraldine Watson for identification of the two plant species, but most especially for her enthusiastic and valuable guidance in locating the many beautiful and priceless portions of the Big Thicket region of eastern Texas which were appropriate for our studies. The travel expenses were borne by N. S. F. Grant # GB 33398. J. Mark ScripeR AND Pau P. FEENy. Department of Entomology, Cornell Uni- versity, Ithaca, New York 14853. —~l bo OURNAL OF THE 3 E LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY BOOK REVIEW THE SWALLOWTAIL BUTTERFLIES OF NortH AMmeEricA, by Hamilton A. Tyler. 1975. Naturegraph Publishers, Healdsburg, Ca. vii + 192 p., illus. + 16 plates. Price $5.95 (U.S.) paperback, $9.95 cloth. This book is a pleasant blending of the scientific and popular knowledge of the North American swallowtail butterflies. The geographic region encompassed extends from the arctic into the North American faunal region of Mexico and to the southern political boundary of that country. The author has chosen to include neotropical species as well as an aid to visitors to Mexico. The format is of a convenient, almost field guide size. There is a wealth of information presented in a rather informal manner. The usual taxonomic treatment appears with keys, wing venation diagrams, etc., but also included are biogeographical data, evolutionary speculations, mimicry, hilltopping, hybridization experiments and other interesting items. There is extensive information on distribution, food plants and immatures. A nice feature, not seen in many scientific books, is a discussion of the origin of the scientific names used to describe the members of the supergenus Papilio. The author divides the swallowtails into the four genera: Papilio, Eurytides, Parides and Battus. These are then subdivided into species groups within each genus forming the basis for the book chapters. The genera Parnassius and Baronia are given only brief treatment as they are not true swallowtails. For each species, the various subspecies and forms are discussed, and information is provided such that similar appearing species may be differentiated. Data are then presented for habitat, flight period, food plants, early stages and distribution. Interspersed throughout the text are line drawings of ova, larva and pupa. There are two sets of color plates which are composed of water color renditions of the principal species and many of the subspecies discussed in the text. The plates are certainly adequate and many present rather natural portrayals of the imagines. A “color errata” noting color registration shifts to be corrected in subsequent printings is included. There are three indices: a general index, an index of swallowtail names and an index of larval food plants. A “selected” bibliography appears at the end of the book which, while perhaps selected, presents in four pages a reasonably comprehensive treatment. The informal style may aggrevate some workers, but I found it quite refreshing. The book is certainly current and cites ongoing and incompleted taxonomic and breeding studies. Generally it appeared free from typographical errors. The only criticism that I would offer is the lack of inclusion of authority names when the scientific names of plants are listed. A few food plant omissions were noted, but these are of minor consequence. It would have been helpful if the undersides of all of the members of the Old World swallowtail group (machaon-polyxenes-bairdii, etc.) had been figured, as in many cases, the ventral surfaces contain the necessary diagnostic characters for reliable species separation. This book is a useful addition to the library and should appeal to the amateur and serious collector alike as an informative and ready reference. Currorp D. Ferris, Bioengineering Program, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071. EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE JOURNAL GeorceE L. Goprrey, Editor Illinois Natural History Survey, Natural Resources Building Urbana, Illinois 61801 U.S.A. Witu1AM H. ALxen, Associate Editor James G. STERNBURG, Associate Editor NOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS Contributions to the Journal may deal with any aspect of the collection and study of Lepidoptera. Contributors should prepare manuscripts according to the following instructions. Text: Manuscripts should be submitted in duplicate, and must be typewritten, entirely double-spaced, employing wide margins, on one side only of white, 8% x 11 inch paper. Titles should be explicit and descriptive of the article’s: content, including the family name of the subject, but must be kept as short as possible. The first men- tion of a plant or animal in the text should include the full scientific name, with authors of zoological names. Insect measurements should be given in metric units; times should be given in terms of the 24-hour clock (e.g. 0930, not 9:30 AM). Underline only where italics are intended. References to footnotes should be num- bered consecutively, and the footnotes typed on a separate sheet. Literature Cited: References in the text of articles should be given as, Sheppard (1959) or (Sheppard, 1959, 196la, 1961b) and all must be listed alphabetically under the heading LireRaTurE Crrep, in the following format: SHepparD, P. M. 1959. Natural selection and heredity. 2nd. ed. Hutchinson, London. 209 p. 196la. Some contributions to population genetics resulting from the study of the Lepidoptera. Adv. Genet. 10: 165-216. In the case of general notes, references should be given in the text as, Sheppard (1961, Adv. Genet. 10: 165-216) or (Sheppard 1961, Sym. Roy. Entomol. Soc. London 1: 23-30). Illustrations: All photographs and drawings should be mounted on stiff, white backing, arranged in the desired format, allowing (with particular regard to lettering ) for reduction to their final width (usually 4% inches). Illustrations larger than 81% x 11 inches are not acceptable and should be reduced photographically to that size or smaller. The author’s name, figure numbers as cited in the text, and an indication of the aricle’s title should be printed on the back of each mounted plate. Figures, both line drawings and halftones (photographs), should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals. The term “plate” should not be employed. Figure legends must be typewritten, double-spaced, on a separate sheet (not attached to the illustrations ), headed ExpLANATION OF FicurEs, with a separate paragraph devoted to each page of illustrations. : Tables: Tables should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals. Headings for tables should not be capitalized. Tabular material should be kept to a minimum and must be typed on separate sheets, and placed following the main text, with the approximate desired position indicated in the text. Vertical rules should be avoided. Proofs: The edited manuscript and galley proofs will be mailed to the author for correction of printer's errors. Excessive author's changes at this time will be charged to authors at the rate of 75¢ per line. A purchase order for reprints will accompany the proofs. Page Charges: Authors with grant or institutional funds are requested to pay a charge of $27.50 per printed page (including tabular and black-and-white illustrative material) for articles up to 20 pages in length. This charge may be waived in the case of authors who have no grant or institutional funding, as it is not intended that any author should pay this charge from personal funds. However, all authors will be requested to pay this charge for material in excess of 20 printed pages. Address all correspondence relating to the Journal to the editor. Material not intended for permanent record, such as current events and notices, should be sent to the editor of the News: Ron Leuschner, 1900 John Street, Manhattan Beach, California 90266. ALLEN PRESS, INC. eg rso LAWRENCE, KANSAS USA CONTENTS PRESIDENTAL AppRESS 1975—To My FrLttow Amateurs. André Blanchard) 003 BO ONO SRS Seen New HEsPeRUDAE RECORDS FOR TEXAS AND THE UNITED STATES. William W. McGuire and Michael A. Rickard A New SupspEcies OF ARGYREUS HYPERBIUS (NYMPHALIDAE) FROM New Guinea. Chris Samson CALLOPHRYS ERYPHON ( LYCAENIDAE) IN Marne. Warren J. Kiel Nores OF MARYLAND LEPIDOPTERA. 5. A NEw SuBSPECIES OF POANES MASSASOIT (HeEspERuDAE). William A. Andersen and Robert S. Simmons NOTES ON THE LIFE CYCLE AND NATURAL History OF BUTTERFLIES OF Ex SALvapor. VII. ARCHAEOPREPONA DEMOPHON CENTRALIS (NymMpHALDAE). Alberto Muyshondt New CATOCALA oF NortH AMERICA (Noctumae). A. E. Brower __ A CHECKLIST OF THE BUTTERFLIES OF GRANT County, NEw Mexico AND Vicinity. Clifford D. Ferris BioLoGy AND TAXONOMY OF THREE GALL FORMING SPECIES OF EPIBLEMA (OLETHREUTIDAE). William E. Miller MIGRATION OF BUTTERFLIES ALONG THE GULF COAST OF NORTHERN Fioriwa. F. A. Urquhart and N. R. Urquhart New HEspreruparE Recorps ror Mexico. Hugh Avery Freeman GENERAL NOTES Capture of a hybrid Limenitis arthemis astyanax < L. archippus (Nym- phalidae) in southern Georgia. Richard T. Arbogast _._________ Hapalia nigristriatalis a synonym of Udea angustalis (Pyralidae: Pyraus- tinae).: Eugene Maaro@: i010 Mathildana newmanella (Oecophoridae ) in Arkansas. John B. Heppner __. A possible source of mortality in Papilio troilus (Papilionidae) populations in eastern Texas,’ J. Mark Seriber02 0 ee Occurrence of Leptotes cassius theonus (Lycaenidae) in Georgia. Richard Ts APOC dsG NN SA UU Range extensions of Callophrys fotis, C. polios, Colias alexandra and Erebia callias (Lycaenidae, Pieridae and Satyridae). Clifford D. Ferris __ Amblyscirtes belli (Hesperiidae): A new record for Kentucky. Richard Aly SHR TSOR OL NI i Ce UNO ML Factors affecting the occurrence of Melanis pixe (Riodinidae) in extreme southern Texas, Raymond W. Neck 0k New foodplant and oviposition records for Battus philenor ( Papilionidae). J: Mark Scriber and Paul P. Péeny 0 ee BOOwK Pee ee a een ea 1 CI OL A 12 19 i Volume 30 1976 Number 2 JOURNAL of the LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Published quarterly by THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Publié par LA SOCIETE DES LEPIDOPTERISTES Herausgegeben von DER GESELLSCHAFT DER LEPIDOPTEROLOGEN Publicado por LA SOCIEDAD DE LOS LEPIDOPTERISTAS ¢. hodges 12 July 1976 THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY EXECUTIVE COUNCIL RonaLp W. Honcss, President S. S. Nicoxay, President-elect Ouar H. H. Mic.kz, Vice President Donatp R. Davis, Ist Vice President Joun M. SnwwER, Treasurer WiLL1AM Hovanitz, Vice President Ler D. MILLER, Secretary Members at large (three year terms): D. C. Fercuson (1975) J. T. BREwer (1976) C. V. CovELL, Jr. (1976) R. O. KENDALL (1975) K. S. Brown (1976) D. F. Harpwick (1977) J. A. Powrett (1975) K. W. Purp (1976) J. B. Zrecier - (1977) The object of the Lepidopterists’ Society, which was formed in May, 1947 and formally constituted in December, 1950, is “to promote the science of lepidopterology in all its branches, . . . . to issue a periodical and other publications on Lepidoptera, to facilitate the exchange of specimens and ideas by both the professional worker and the amateur in the field; to secure cooperation in all measures” directed towards these aims. Membership in the Society is open to all persons interested in the study of Lepidoptera. All members receive the Journal and the News of the Lepidopterists’ Society. Institutions may subscribe to the Journal but may not become members. Prospective members should send to the Treasurer full dues for the current year, together with their full name, address, and special lepidopterological interests. In alternate years a list of members of the Society is issued, with addresses and special interests. There are four numbers in each volume of the Journal, scheduled for February, May, August and November, and six numbers of the News each year. Active members—annual dues $13.00 Student members—annual dues $10.00 Sustaining members—annual dues $20.00 Life members—single sum $150.00 Institutional subscriptions——annual $18.00 Send remittances, payable to The Lepidopterists’ Society, and address changes to: John M. Snider, 3520 Mulldae Ave., San Pedro, Calif. 90732 U.S.A. Memoirs of the Lepidopterists’ Society, No. 1 (Feb. 1964) A SYNONYMIC LIST OF THE NEARCTIC RHOPALOCERA by Cyrit F. pos Passos Price: Society members, $5.00 U.S.; non-members, $7.50 U.S. Paper covers, revisions of the Melitaeinae and Lycaenidae supplied separately. Order: Mail to Charles V. Covell, Jr., Memoirs Editor, Department of Biology, Uni- versity of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40208, U.S.A. The Lepidopterists’ Society is a non-profit, scientific organization. The known office of publication is 1041 New Hampshire St., Lawrence, Kansas 66044. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A. 66044. JouRNAL OF Tue LeprIpopreRIstTs’ SOCIETY Volume 30 1976 Number 2 A STUDY OF THE PENINSULAR FLORIDA POPULATIONS OF THE MONARCH BUTTERFLY (DANAUS P. PLEXIPPUS; DANAIDAE) F. A. URQUHART AND N. R. URQUHART Scarborough College, University of Toronto, West Hill, Ontario, Canada M1C 1A7 A number of contradictory reports have been published concerning the presence or absence of the monarch butterfly (Danaus p. plexippus (L.) ) in the peninsular part of Florida (hereafter referred to as Peninsular Florida and being that portion of the State between Latitude 30°N-24°N) throughout the year. Some published reports indicate that the monarch butterfly is absent during the summer months while others report the presence of this species throughout the year (Urquhart, 1960). Brower (1961) reported breeding populations in January and throughout the spring and summer months (March through August). To clarify this situation, since it forms an integral part of our complete investigation of the movements of this species throughout North America, a continuous study of the populations in Peninsular Florida was com- menced in 1968 and carried out through 1973. The results of this six year study program are here presented. PROCEDURE With the active cooperation of our research associates (Urquhart, 1960) living in Florida, together with a number of field expeditions, a program of field observations, collecting of larvae, tagging of imagoes and recording of larval stages of development was set up in the following areas (Fig. 1): Area I (Orlando); Area II (Temple Terrace, Lithia, Palmetto, Bradenton, Sarasota); Area III (Fort Lauderdale, North Miami Beach, Homestead ). Observations were made on the presence of imagoes and species of milkweed (Asclepias) at Area IV (Key Vaca and adjacent 74 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Fig. 1. Research areas: (I (Orlando); II (Temple Terrace, Lithia, Palmetto, Bradenton, Sarasota); III (Fort Lauderdale, North Miami Beach, Homestead); IV (Key Vaca); BR (area studied by Brower at Highland Hammock State Park, Lake Childs, Old Venus, 22 mi. SW Clewiston ). Keys). Larvae collected were reared (outdoors) to the imago stage and alar tagged (Urquhart, 1960) and released. A specimen alar tagged and liberated at a particular time and later recaptured at some other place gave information as to the direction flown, distance travelled and the time interval involved. In addition, the total number of specimens tagged was recorded as well as the total of recap- tures, in order to ascertain whether or not, in terms of percentage of recaptures, there was any significant movement within a given population. VOLUME 30, NUMBER 2 15 RESULTS Flight of Imagoes During the autumnal migration, the majority of females in a moving population are in a state of ovarian dormancy (Urquhart, 1960). A small percentage of females, however, mate prior to moving southward or, in some cases, during the movement, and are capable of laying fertilized eggs on the milkweed plants of various species along the route of migra- tion ( Urquhart, 1960). It has been found that if these ovipositing females are kept under laboratory conditions, they will continue to lay their full complement of eggs. The female offspring, if maintained in the labora- tory, do not enter a state of ovarian dormancy and hence will mate and lay viable eggs. Thus, a population of monarchs may be maintained in the laboratory throughout the year ( Urquhart & Stegner, 1966). If, on the other hand, a female that is in the state of ovarian dormancy is held in the laboratory under ambient conditions, ovipositing does not take place nor do eggs develop in the ovaries, even after a period of five months. However, females in ovarian dormancy that were collected from the overwintering sites in California (Monterey) in January and held under ambient laboratory conditions developed eggs in the last week of February and laid viable eggs in March (Urquhart, 1960). As yet no significant research has been carried out as to the factors involved in initiating or depressing ovarian dormancy, although light period is sus- pected. Thus, a migrating population of monarch butterflies includes some gravid females and some in ovarian dormancy. In a particular area, such as Florida, one will encounter a population in which some of the individuals are part of a migrating population and capable of laying viable eggs; others may be in a state of ovarian dormancy and will con- tinue their migration southward without ovipositing; while still others may be the offspring of ovipositing migrants, thus giving rise to what might be considered a “resident population.” As a result of the alar tagging program, which has been carried out in North America over the past 24 years, the release-recapture records indi- cate that a few migrants from eastern Canada and the eastern United States travel through Peninsular Florida (Fig. 2). One alar tagged migrant released in Grafton, Ontario, Canada was recaptured in Miami, Florida having flown south, a distance of 1223 mi. Another migrant alar tagged in Binghamton, New York was recaptured at Miami, Florida having flown south southwest, a distance of 1114 mi. A third migrant tagged at Port Hope, Ontario, Canada was recaptured in Havana, Cuba having flown south a distance of 1403 mi. A specimen tagged at Anna Maria, Florida in research Area II was recaptured in Miami, having flown 76 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY — =_— | | e ee | | | | i] | | vy | | he r | 32 See ee | I | | \ | aS C) \| SK \| a | << | “Sd ~ SQ ¢- | | | | | | | . 1 oe a Fig. 2. Long distance migration records (release-recapture lines): (A) Miller Key to Kingsville, Texas; (B) Port Hope, Ontario, Canada to Havana, Cuba; (C) Anna Maria to Miami; (D) Grafton, Ontario, Canada to Miami; (E.) Binghamton, New York to Miami. southeast a distance of 195 mi. A migrant alar tagged at Miller Key in Area II was recaptured in Kingsville, Texas having flown a distance west- ward of 860 mi. All of these distances are measured as straight lines between the point of release and that of recapture. The actual route taken is, of course, not known. Although two long flight records are reported for specimens alar tagged in Area II, most of the recaptures were for shorter distances and flights were in various directions (Fig. 3; Table 1). Of a total of 4146 specimens tagged in Peninsular Florida, only 39 VoLuME 30, NuMBER 2 77 Fig. 3. Release-recapture lines for specimens tagged in Area II showing move- ment away from the area at various times of the year and the number of tagged specimens that were recaptured close to the site of tagging—indicated by a circle with enclosed number. 78 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Taste 1. Tagging results showing distances travelled, direction of flight and number of recaptures in each case. Distance Travelled Flight Number of Tagged at (Km ) Direction Recaptures Bradenton 0 0 22, Bradenton 28 WNW 1 Bradenton 13 SSE ) Sarasota 16 N 1 Sarasota 0 0 2 Myakka State Park 0 1) 1 Ft. Lauderdale 0 0 1 Coquina Beach 228 SE 1 Mullett Key 1003 W 1 Anna Maria 24 NNE 1 Palmetto 0 0) 1 Boca Grande Dall NNW IL were recaptured (.94%) even though the tagged specimens were released in well populated areas where the chances of recapture should have been much greater, as has been the case in other parts of North America dur- ing the migrating period (Urquhart, 1960). Presence of Larvae Brower (1961) recorded breeding populations of the monarch butter- fly in the area marked BR (Fig. 1). These observations were made at: Highland Hammock State Park; east side of Lake Childs; Old Venus; and 22 mi. SW of Clewiston, given as the junction of highways 846 and 833. The observations were made during the months of March (25-31), April (2-30), June (15-30), July (7-31), and August (1-4). Brower also reported a breeding populatioin in the same area in January. During the years 1958-1973 inclusive, larvae were collected in the field and reared outdoors, the resulting imagoes alar tagged and released. The number of larvae collected each day was recorded and summated for a particular month. The number of larvae recorded varied for a particular month from one year to another. This was due to the variable activity of the field assistants, the size of the population in any one year and the restricted oviposition of a particular female or females with respect to the number of milkweed plants present. Thus, although a total of 116 larvae were collected in June of 1969, fewer were collected in June of 1970 and 1971. Hence, the data presented in Table 2 and the summation with imagoes in the histogram (Fig. 4) only indicate trends and not accurate field population densities for each year. VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 79 760} 680 510 360 NUMBER OF SPECIMENS COLLECTED Py fe i—) 280 200 120 40 MONTHS Fig. 4. Number of specimens collected during the entire research period for each month. Broken line in January indicating what was possibly the true population figure as explained in the text. Two peaks of abundance are noted. Foodplant The presence of a breeding population of monarch butterflies depends upon the presence of various species of the genus Asclepias, upon which the larvae feed. Of the 21 species of Asclepias listed for Florida (Woodson, 1954), 15 occur in Peninsular Florida, the remainder being reported for the north- TaBLE 2. Number of specimens (larvae and imagoes) collected per month for all years (1968-1973). Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 220 16 17 48 202 122 58 169 198 158 59 92 (208) (88) (78) (177) (269) (155) (112) (87) (142) (358) (706) (118) Total 428 104 95 225 471 277 170 256 340 516 765 210 80 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY ern portion of Florida here referred to as the Panhandle area. Brower (1961) recorded larvae feeding upon 4 species of Asclepias, namely: tuberosa rolfsii, humistrata, tomentosa and curtisii. Of these the most abundant were tuberosa rolfsii and tomentosa, the others recorded as uncommon. In addition to Brower’s records, verticillata, which occurs in rather dry, wooded areas, and lanceolata, found in wet, marshy areas, are of common occurrence throughout Peninsular Florida. The remain- ing species occur as widely scattered plants and are recorded from only a few localities. Unlike some species of Asclepias, such as A. syriaca, which occurs in dense growths, the plants of species found in Peninsular Florida tend to be widely separated from one another. There are some species, such as humistrata and tuberosa, found as flowering plants in home gardens, and much of the data recorded in this paper are based on larvae collected from such plants. Whether or not the larvae of the monarch butterfly will feed on the foliage of all species of Asclepias is not known. Brower (1961) has recorded 4 species upon which larvae were found feeding. Urquhart (1960) has recorded 10 species of which 4 are found in Peninsular Florida (incarnata, tuberosa, tomentosa, curassavica), as well as 3 species of related genera. From the above xecords one may assume, subject to further study, that the larvae of the monarch butterfly will feed on all species of Asclepias. Hence, breeding populations may occur in many areas of Peninsular Florida in addition to those recorded here, so long as tempera- ture permits the survival of both the host plant and the larvae. Discussion Areas of Concentration and Flight Directions It has been well documented that the autumnal migrants follow a northeast to southwest flight direction (Urquhart, 1960). It has also been shown that although small breeding populations may occur south of Lat. 39°N, by far the greatest concentration of summer population build up takes place between Lat. 45°N and Lat. 35°N and east of Long. 100°. This is specifically correlated with the distribution of Asclepias syriaca, a species which, by the nature of its rhizomatous root system, grows in dense clusters often covering many acres of marginal land as well as appearing in considerable abundance along gravel roadways and rail- way lines (Fig. 5). Other species occur in this area of syriaca abundance, such as amplexicaulis, exaltata, tuberosa and verticellata, thus adding to the great abundance of host plants throughout the area indicated. VOLUME 30, NUMBER 2 81 a een SS AN \ ie | we ( | vi a se We aN | cae i ieee eaten N5e- ee Fig. 5. Area of Asclepias abundance (stipled) and direction of monarch migration from this area to the southwest (solid arrow) accounting for the relatively meager migration through Peninsular Florida. Since the line of autumnal migration is from northeast to southwest, as indicated by the arrow in Fig. 5, the majority of the autumnal migrants will tend to by-pass Peninsular Florida. Observations made on a number of field trips to northern Florida, as well as the eastern section of the United States (east of and including the Appalachian Highlands) have definitely indicated this trend. Therefore, relatively few autumnal migrants from the area of most abundant host plants travel down Penin- sular Florida. There will be a certain small number of migrants emanating 82 JourNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY from those areas where species of Asclepias occur in smaller numbers in the south and southeast parts of the continent; together, this constitutes a minority of the autumnal migrants. If the above concept is correct, namely that Peninsular Florida is by- passed, then one would expect to find large numbers of migrants along the Florida Panhandle Gulf coast. This has been found to be the case (Urquhart, 1966). During the autumnal migration countless numbers of monarchs move west along the Gulf coast with great concentrations in the Apalachee Bay area at a time when relatively few specimens can be ob- served in the Gulf coast area of Peninsular Florida. Of those that do enter Peninsular Florida, field observations together with alar tag returns indicate that the movement is south and for the most part along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. If the Peninsular Florida populations move southward one would ex- pect to find migrants in some of the islands of the Gulf of Mexico and, perhaps, in parts of southern Mexico and Central America. As a result of field expeditions to the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico and Guatemala, both larvae and imagoes of the monarch butterfly were collected in the autumnal migration period (Fig. 6). Of the latter, many were definitely migrants as indicated by the colour change and scale loss ( Urquhart, 1960). The situation in these areas is similar in all respects to that found in Florida. It would therefore appear that the small, migrating population of monarch butterflies moving down Peninsular Florida, together with generations resulting from ovipositing migrants, travel via the offshore islands of Florida in the Gulf of Mexico and along the Florida Keys, eventually reaching Cuba. From Cuba, the flight continues from the area of Pinard el Rio to Yucatan, and from there to various parts of southern Mexico and Central America in which migrants in ovarian dormancy, gravid migrants, and generations of larvae and imagoes result- ing from the latter occur (Fig. 6). No large over-wintering concentrations of migrants in dormancy, as reported for California and observed in at least one area of Mexico (ms. in preparation), were located. It is assumed, however, that individuals from Yucatan and Guatemala, as well as other adjacent areas, will, during the vernal migration, travel northeastward, entering Cuba and eventually Florida in the spring and early summer, thus increasing the population of Peninsular Florida during this period. Correlation Between Larval Population and Migrants As pointed out in this paper and previously documented (Urquhart, 1960, 1966), migrant females may be in a physiological state which is VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 83 Fig. 6. Migration route from Peninsular Florida to Cuba and Yucatan. Migrant monarchs and larvae found at Chetumal, Flores, Morales and Guatemala as indicated. In addition to localities indicated in the figure, migrants and larvae were found at Villahermosa, Palenque, Zinacantan, Tuxtla and Oaxaca in the isthmus area of southern Mexico. 84 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY referred to as ovarian dormancy; or they may be capable of ovipositing wherever species of milkweed occur along the southward migratory route. Hence, larvae will occur from late summer (August) to late fall (November) along the migratory route so long as freezing temperatures do not occur, limiting the growth of milkweed (Urquhart, 1960). Ovi- positing migrants reaching Peninsular Florida will oviposit on various species of milkweed and, so long as the temperature is suitable for larval growth and the host plant available, larvae and imagoes may be found throughout the year (Urquhart & Stegner, 1966). Two peaks of monarch abundance (Fig. 4) occur throughout the year, a small peak in April-June and a larger one in August-November. The first peak is correlated with the advent of ovipositing vernal migrants, as discussed previously, and the second and larger peak with the advent of a much larger population of ovipositing autumnal migrants. Correlated with the occurrence of migrants, and hence a larger population of imagoes, is the presence of more abundant food plants as compared to conditions during the winter period. Decreased populations occur in January—March and July-August as the result of the decrease in the num- ber of migrants. The meager population is, however, maintained as a result of the lingering presence of a few migrant stragglers as well as first and second generations resulting from gravid female migrants. The rate of growth of the larvae during the winter period is reduced due in part to the lack of available host plants and partly to the effect of low temperatures lowering the growth rate. Concerning the latter, observations on various field expeditions during periods of low tempera- tures showed that larvae will drop from the host plant and remain on the ground in an inactive state until the return of higher temperatures. Factors Limiting a Large Population in Peninsular Florida Larval response in seeking host plants. Urquhart (1960) indicated, by movement tracings of larvae with respect to the ability of the larvae to locate the host plant when in close proximity to it, that they were unable to locate the host plant except by random movement. Experiments carried out in the field indicated that many larvae, when once dislodged from the host plant, were unable to locate the same plant or a substitute one when the plants were widely separated. As a result of numerous observations on various field trips through Peninsular Florida it is con- cluded that the various species of milkweed plants are widely separated in any growth area. Hence, many larvae would not complete the life cycle in most parts of F pied ~ VotuME 30, NuMBER 2 85 15 13 11 NO. OF SPECIMENS TAGGED it~) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RECAPTURES—WEEKLY INTERVALS Fig. 7. Showing the rapid decrease in recapture of tagged specimens due to emigration from the area of release. Insufficient food supply and competition with other species. Although there are a number of species of milkweed found in Peninsular Florida, there are not sufficient numbers of any one species, or of all species, to support a large population such as occurs in northeastern United States. Also, with the advent of low temperatures, particularly in areas north of the frost line (Lat. 28°N), many species of milkweed will drop their leaves and not resume growth until the following spring: in addition, many species die off during the winter period and resume growth the following spring (Woodson, 1954). 86 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Brower (1962) has hypothesized competition for host plants with Danaus gilippus berenice (Cramer). However, in our six years of inten- sive field studies, during which time many hundreds of monarch larvae were collected and reared for migratory purposes, that were carried out through the entire calendar year in many localities throughout Florida (both Peninsular and Panhandle), there was no evidence of such com- petition. Throughout most of Florida, the larvae of D. g. berenice were scarce, only a few specimens being collected by our field assistants and ourselves, while monarch larvae, in many areas, were quite abundant. It is suggested that the observations of Brower were for a limited area and during a short period of the year during which place and time, D. g. berenice larvae were locally abundant. Imago migration. It has been shown in this paper that relatively few alar tagged specimens were recaptured, even though all were liberated in areas of high human population, as compared to returns for other parts of the continent (Urquhart, 1960); further, that the majority of recap- tures were made during the first two weeks following release with a marked drop in recaptures in the third and fourth weeks and none after six weeks (Fig. 7). From this it is concluded that the imago population does not remain in a given area but like the true migrants move away from the area to the south in the fall and winter and north in spring and early summer. SUMMARY 1. Owing to the southwest pattern of the autumnal migration and the relationship of larvae to the presence of the abundant supply of milk- weed plants in eastern North America, relatively few migrants pass through Peninsular Florida. 2. Female migrants that are in ovarian dormancy together with migrant males move southward or southwestward to Cuba and thence to the Yucatan Peninsula. 3. Gravid migrant females deposit eggs on species of milkweed along the migratory route. 4. Generations resulting from eggs deposited by gravid females move southward and southwestward, as in 2 above; the females in gravid state. 5. As a result of the paucity and scattered nature of the milkweed plants, limiting survival of larvae, together with the advent of low temperatures which prolongs larval growth period and reduces available food plants, and the movement southward of the imagoes, the monarch population in Peninsular Florida remains relatively low throughout the year, VOLUME 30, NUMBER 2 87 6.A definite correlation exists between the number of larvae and imagoes and the autumnal and vernal migrations. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The present investigation is part of a larger research program dealing with the migrations and ecology of the monarch butterfly and sponsored by research grants from the National Research Council of Canada, the National Geographic Society, and the Insect Migration Research Association. LITERATURE CITED Brower, L. P. 1961. Studies on the migration of the monarch butterfly I. Breed- ing populations of Danaus plexippus and D. gilippus berenice in south central Florida. Ecology 42: 76-83. 1962. Evidence for interspecific competition in natural populations of the monarch and queen butterflies, Danaus plexippus and D. gilippus berenice in south central Florida. Ecology 43: 549-552. Urounart, F. A. 1960. The Monarch Butterfly. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto. 361 p. 1966. A study of the migrations of the Gulf Coast populations of the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus L.) in North America. Ann. Zool. Fennici. 3: 82-87. Urouuart, F. A. & R. W. Stecner. 1966. Laboratory techniques for maintaining cultures of the monarch butterfly. J. Res. Lep. 5: 129-136. Woopson, R. E. 1954. The North American species of Asclepias L. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 41: 1-211. 88 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY FUGITIVE COLOR IN THE MALES OF CERTAIN PIERIDAE Harry K. CLENCH Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 In late June 1973 I collected a series of Nathalis iole Boisduval at Nicolls Town, North Andros Island, in the Bahamas. They were spread shortly after my return home and a curious fact was then immediately evident. The small, oval, androconial patch of each of the males, near the base of the costa on the upperside of the hindwing, was bright, vivid orange. In all our other males of N. iole this patch is dull yellow, regardless of whether they came from the West Indies (including New Providence Island in the Bahamas), the United States or Central America. A month or so later Mr. Allan Watson of the British Museum was visiting us and I told him about this odd population. I showed him the series, the first time in several weeks that I had seen the specimens myself. The orange color of the androconial patches seemed to be much duller and less striking at this time than I had remembered it earlier. In late August, two months from when they had been captured, I examined the series once again. The orange color was completely gone, and the speci- mens were all perfectly ordinary-looking N. iole, with the androconial patches the usual dull yellow. I then wrote to two colleagues, Dr. Lee D. Miller and Mr. F. Martin Brown, both of whom live in “iole country,” and described the situation, asking them if they could catch and examine fresh N. iole males to see what color the patches were in their areas. They both reported them to be orange, as they had been in the Andros specimens. In early June 1974 I took additional N. iole in the Bahamas, this time on Grand Bahama Island, at Pine Ridge, 4 mi. NE of Freeport. In July, just over a month since they were captured, the scent patches of the males were orange (although not as bright as I recall them in the Andros series); in August, two months after capture, the orange was gone (a slight trace in one specimen may have remained). Examination of speci- mens under a dissecting microscope in July showed nothing unusual other than a uniform orange tinge to the patch. This color change in the androconial patch of male N. iole had been observed long ago by Gundlach (1881:100). On North Andros in June 1973 I also caught a pair, male and female, of Eurema (Pyrisitia) messalina blakei Maynard. After they had been spread an examination showed that the male (but not the female) had a distinct pink bar on the underside of the forewing, running from near VoLuME 30, NuMBER 2 89 the base distad for about 2/3 of the inner margin, in interspace Cuz-2A. Other E. messalina males in the collection, from the Bahamas, Cuba and and Jamaica, had no pink on any of them. I kept this curiosity in mind when in the Bahamas again in June 1974. On South Andros Island, near Driggs Hill, E. messalina was not uncom- mon and I obtained a series, examining each of them as it was caught. The males all had the pink bar. On my return to Pittsburgh I examined again the now year-old male from North Andros. To my surprise the pink bar had disappeared com- pletely. I had examined this male in April 1974 and am reasonably sure that the pink bar was still present, some 10 months after capture. Exam- ination of my June 1974 specimens in August, two months after capture, showed that of eight males, the patch was absent in two, extremely faint in five, clearly visible in one. When the newer specimens had been spread I examined the males under the dissecting microscope. The scales in the pink area were white and all seemed identical in structure to the scales in the white areas nearby on the wing, except that each one had its distal edge narrowly and sharply bright red, as though it had been dipped in red ink. The situations in the two species are probably related. In both species only males are involved; and in both species the color is fugitive. It may also be significant that the ground color of Eurema messalina is white and the fugitive color of the bar is pink, whereas in Nathalis iole the ground color of the patch is yellow, which would appear orange if combined with pink. In other words, the transient pigment may be red in both, but appear as pink in E. messalina on the white ground, and as orange in N. iole because the patch substrate is yellow. The transient color in N. iole is clearly associated with an androconial patch, a readily seen and morphologically distinct structure. The under- side of the forewing near the inner margin, where the pink bar occurs in E. messalina, is also a common site of androconial structures. It seems at least possible that the pink color transiently indicates an androconial area in that species that otherwise is not characterized by any visible structural modification. If this is indeed the case, then androconial patches or areas may be present in more species than we know. Ordinary visible scent patches are useful taxonomic structures, their presence, location and configuration providing valuable clues to relationships. If less easily visible patches also exist, their attributes could be just as useful once they are made known. Some of them may be transiently visible because of an evanes- cent pigment, as is presumably true of E. messalina. In some species 90 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY such pigments might be even more fugitive than in either of those re- ported here, so examination of males should be made when they are captured or as soon as possible thereafter. It is even conceivable that androconial patches may exist without any ordinarily visible clue whatever, should the transient substance(s) associ- ated with them be unpigmented. Perhaps such patches could be “de- veloped,” by prompt treatment with a suitable reagent that would render the substance visible; or perhaps submicroscopic structural differences exist in the scales, invisible under conventional, magnification but show- ing up, say, in the scanning electron microscope. Transient pigment need not always be associated with androconial areas. Clark & Clark (1951: 87) describe fugitive pink color in the North American pierid, Euchloe olympia Edwards, that may well be non-androconial. They make no mention of the sex of the individuals that show it, but the manner of their description suggests that it may be in both sexes; and the pink is found on wing areas where androconial patches rarely occur (anterior part of the hindwing underside; costal area of the forewing on both surfaces). From the Clarks’ description we cannot yet rule out completely the possibility that the evanescent pink of E. olympia is androconially associated, but it seems unlikely. LITERATURE CITED Criark, A. H. & L. F. Cuarx. 1951. The butterflies of Virginia. Smithsonian Misc. Coll. 116 (7), vii + 239 p., ill. Gunpbiacu, J. 1881. Contribucion a la entomologia Cubana. Habana (G. Montiel). 445 + xii p. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 91 LARVAL MORPH VARIATION IN CHLOSYNE LACINIA (NYMPHALIDAE) RayMonp W. NEcK* Department of Zoology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712 Mature larvae of the patch butterfly, Chlosyne lacinia (Geyer), exhibit striking color polymorphism. First described by T. D. A. Cockerell in Edwards (1893) and illustrated by Neck et al. (1971), the three morphs are as follows: rufa, an all orange or orange-red form; nigra, an all black form; and bicolor, a form basically black as in nigra but with a prominent mid-dorsal row of orange to orange-red blotches whose proximity to each other gives the impression of a stripe. The black pigment is present in the cuticle while the orange pigment is in a deeper layer (hypodermis ) that shows through window-like areas of the cuticle devoid of pigment. Laboratory crosses utilizing adults of known larval phenotypes revealed that the larval color polymorphism involves two unlinked autosomal loci (Neck et al., 1971). At one locus bicolor (B) is dominant to nigra (b). At the second locus rufa (R) is dominant to non-rufa (r). The ruta allele is epistatic to the first locus; no phenotypic expression of the first locus occurs when the rufa allele is present at the second locus. Although there are only three major morphs in this species, a variety of subtypes exists which indicate the influence of genetic modifiers and/or environmental factors. The most common variant is a nigra form with circular light yellow-orange spots of varying intensity at the base of each mid-dorsal spine. This phenotype, named dot, is pictured in Plate 1D of Neck et al. (1971). It may be the same form reported by Cockerell (in Edwards, 1893) and Gorodenski (1969) although the description by Cockerell (“with numerous yellow-white spots”) could possibly refer to the super-dot form described below. Nearly all nigra have a small spot at the base of each mid-dorsal spine. (42 of 50 or 84.0% nigra larvae collected 10 September 1972 at Austin were definitely dot; others had very small dot.) In some individuals it is inconspicuous enough to be unnoticed unless critically examined under a dissecting microscope. In other individuals the dot is so large as to create confusion with the bicolor morph. In most cases the dot of the nigra tends towards yellow whereas the block of the stripe in bicolor is more orange. In addition, a black mid-dorsal line present in those larvae is seen in the bicolor larvae only between the orange spots and 1 Present address: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, John H. Reagan Building, Austin, Texas 78701. 92 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY TABLE 1. Parental larval phenotypes: black x black. Phenotypes of Progeny brood number black dot total 129 84 86 170 DAP) 194 8 . 202 — 273 120 jLIL Val DATA 92 Dil 119 301 50 Dall 71 never in them. In dot nigra this line is seen between and entering the dot, continuing almost to the base of the spine. Super-dot is also a variant of nigra with a yellow-orange spot at the base of each mid-dorsal, medio-dorsal, supra-spiracular and_ infra- spiracular spine. Super-dot also has a spot at the base of paired spines just above each proleg, a spot also present in bicolor and nigra. The more heavily yellowish-pigmented dot larvae also have yellow spots at the base of supra-spiracular spines, but they lack yellow at the base of medio- dorsal spines. A relationship between the dot and super-dot varieties may exist. One larva, collected as fourth instar was an extreme form of dot, i.e., very large spots at the bases of the mid-dorsal spines (but not others). This larva subsequently molted into a fifth instar super-dot form. Although dot larvae would thus appear to have a tendency to produce an abundance of yellowish spots, many dot phenotypes occur in fifth instar larvae. Variation exists in the amount of melanin present in the cuticle. Nigra exhibits definite black and gray forms although intermediates occur that are difficult to place in either category. Dot larvae may be either gray or black, but all super-dot forms observed have been gray. The more evident dot larvae, however, are grays. The more intense pigmenta- tion in the black form tends to cover up the dot, but it can still be observed in most specimens. Therefore, unless the genetic basis involves incomplete dominance or incomplete penetrance of a normally dominant allele, two separate genetic systems are involved. A form of. bicolor exists with extensive melanization which obscures most of the orange. This form is sometimes difficult to distinguish from nigra, particularly in third and, sometimes, fourth instar. Inspection of less heavily mela- nized thoracic segments where the yellow-orange pigment can be seen more readily reveals such larvae as bicolor. Intense melanization is also observed in rufa. Black pigmentation which is normally restricted to the base of various spines and inter-seg- mental membranes may be so intense that it is difficult to differentiate “VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 93 TABLE 2. Parental larval phenotypes: dot x dot. Phenotypes of Progeny brood number black dot total en 455 74 0 74 507B 288 13 301 516 44 15 59 517 72 36 108 559 70 24 94 570 62 0 62 it from nigra. Heavily pigmented rufa may be correctly determined as rufa by orange pigmentation which can be detected in areas around and ventral to spiracles. Also, rufa lacks the mid-dorsal black line present in the non-rufa morphs. A similar darkening appears in Chlosyne harrisii (Scudder) as the normally orange larvae of this species have been ob- served to be “nearly black at maturity, the fulvous being represented merely by a few dots and small spots” (Edwards, 1877). In this case, however, the imago was also strongly melanic; this has not been observed in C. lacinia. Environmental conditions may exert a significant force in production of black, hidden-stripe and heavily melanized rufa forms. These forms are readily seen in laboratory cultures; they are quite rare in field popu- lations. Caterpillars raised under crowded laboratory conditions have been noticed to be generally darker than caterpillars occurring in the wild (see Long, 1952, 1953, and references therein). Cooler temperatures are also known to produce larvae which are more heavily pigmented than larvae reared at warmer temperatures (David & Gardiner, 1962). On the other hand, dot are often seen and super-dot forms have been seen in natural populations. The occurrence of super-dot forms appears to be correlated with large population sizes. Although observations are limited, this may indicate a relaxation of selection pressures as reported for adult phenotype of Melitaea aurinia Rott. (Ford & Ford, 1930). Attempts to determine the genetic basis of these forms have been in- conclusive (Tables 1 and 2). Certain black x black crosses yielded black and dot larvae in 1:1 and 3:1 ratios in addition to some broods highly skewed for black, i.e., very few dot. However, several dot X dot crosses yielded broods with both black and dot larvae and some broods with only black larvae! The genetic basis of these forms is vague and may be highly influenced by environmental conditions as previously reported in the larvae of the arctiid moth Utetheisa pulchella L. (Kettlewell, 1964). Kettlewell (1944) reported results which he interpreted as being due 94 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY to the expression of a gene which is normally buffered in natural con- ditions but is released under artificial laboratory conditions. Major variation within morph classes in some amphibians (Volpe, 1961; Resnick & Jameson, 1963) has been shown to be the result of incomplete pene- trance (variable expressivity) of various genes. CONCLUSION In Chlosyne lacinia genetic modifiers and environmental influences apparently act upon a basic three-phenotype polymorphic system. The result is to modify a genetically discontinuous system of variation into a system of nearly continuous variation. Such continuous variation was described for the larvae of this species by two workers (Koehler, 1927; Comstock, 1927, 1946). LITERATURE CITED Comstock, J. A. 1927. Butterflies of California. Published by author, Los Angeles. 334 p. . 1946. A few pests of sunflower in California. Bull. South. Calif. Acad. Sci. 45: 141-144. Davin, W. A. L. & B. O. C. Garpiner. 1962. Observations on the larvae and pupae of Pieris brassicae (L.) in a laboratory culture. Bull. Ent. Res. 53: 417— 436. Epwarps, W. H. 1877. Description of the preparatory stages of Phyciodes harrisii, Scudder. Can. Ent. 9: 165-168. 1893. Notes on a polymorphic butterfly, Synchloe lacinia, Geyer (in Hub. Zutr.), with a description of its preparatory stages. Can. Ent. 25: 286-291. Foro, H. D. & E. B. Forp. 1930. Fluctuations in numbers, and its influence on variation, in Melitaea aurinia, Rott. (Lepidoptera). Trans. Roy. Ent. Soc. London 78: 345-351. Goropenski, S. A. 1969. The genetics of three polymorphic larval color forms of Chlosyne lacinia (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). Genet. Res. 14: 332-336. KETTLEWELL, H. B. D. 1944. Temperature effects on the pupae of Panaxia domi- nula Linn. Proc. S. London Ent. Nat. Hist. Soc. 1943-4: 79-81. 1964. The inherited and environmental contributions to the patterning of Utethesia pulchella L. (Lep.). Entomologist (London) 97: 169-172. KOEHLER, P. 1927. Biologia de Chlosyne Saundersi Pbl. & Hew. Revista Soc. Ent. Argentina 1-2: 3-4. Lone, D. B. 1952. Some problems of polymorphism in insects. Proc. Roy. Ent. Soc. London 27: 99-110. 1953. Effects of population density on larvae of Lepidoptera. Trans. Roy. Ent. Soc. London 104: 543-585. Neck, R. W., G. L. Bus & B. A. DrummMonp. 1971. Epistasis, associated lethals and brood effect in larval color polymorphism of the patch butterfly, Chlosyne lacinia. Heredity 26: 73-84. Resnick, L. EK. & D. L. JAMeson. 1963. Science 142: 1081-1083. VoLrE, E. P.. 1961. 134: 102-104. Color polymorphism in Pacific tree frogs. Variable expressivity of a mutant gene in leopard frog. Science VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 95 PORTABLE OUTDOOR CAGES FOR MATING FEMALE GIANT SILKWORM MOTHS (SATURNIIDAE )' THOMAS A. MILLER * AND WILLIAM J. COOPER ” U. S. Army Medical Bioengineering Research and Development Laboratory, USAMBRDL BLDG 568, Fort Detrick, Maryland 21701 Like many lepidopterists who colonize and study the saturniids, we must find time apart from professional duties and other daily activities to pursue our interest in this family of moths. Therefore, our rearing methods must be both efficient and reliable if we are to accomplish any- thing other than the mere maintenance of colonies. Although most of the saturniid species we have reared can be colonized for many genera- tions without difficulty, we have at times had a particular problem obtain- ing fertile eggs to perpetuate existing colonies or to begin new ones. This problem has been a function largely of limited available time to ensure the mating of females either by hand mating or by the use of indoor cages. For this reason we undertook an evaluation of methods for the routine, unattended mating of female saturniids indigenous to our area. We decided beforehand that the tying out of virgin females and the use of various-size stationary cages or traps (Collins & Weast, 1961; Quesada, 1967; Villiard, 1969) were not suitable to meet our requirements. Our approach, therefore, was to construct and test a series of portable out- door cages that could be substituted locally for tying out or stationary cages and could also be easily transported for use in remote field areas. These cages were designed to minimize or prevent the escape of females placed therein while permitting pheromone-seeking males access for the purpose of copulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS 1973 Studies. The cages used during 1973 were fabricated from heavy- gauge galvanized metal screen (1.27 cm openings). Each cage was cylindrical and contained a series of interior and exterior baffles as shown in Fig. 1. All components were joined by soldering. The cages were spray painted inside and out, in a pattern of brown, green, and black, to camouflage them and minimize the probability of human tamper- ing. We constructed cages of two sizes: (1) small cages with the cylindrical portion 23 cm in height and 23 cm in diameter and (2) 1 The opinions contained herein are the private views of the authors and should not be con- strued as official or reflecting the views of the Department of the Army. 2 Entomologist and Research Chemist, respectively. 96 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY TOP VIEW SIDE VIEW i tease Fig. 1. Diagrammatic wire-screen mating cage: interior baffles (A, B, B’, C); exterior baffles (D, D’); and dead space (E). Side view without exterior baffles shown. large cages with the cylindrical portion 46 cm in height and 38 cm in diameter. The entrance and baffles were approximately proportional to the size of the cage. Additional details of construction are shown in Figs. 2 and 3. The studies during 1973 were conducted at Edgewood Arsenal, Harford Co., Maryland. The saturniid species we used were obtained as diapausing pupae from various sources (Table 1). All pupae were held over winter (1972-1973), during which they were exposed to outdoor temperatures from the time they were obtained until the emergence of adults. Newly emerged virgin females were placed VoLuME 30, NuMBER 2 | 97 Iai ae ages Pe: Pires ws grote agree sensigsenncrtingee ioe Map: * -* £ po ¢ < ; * ee * AS a + * ee pas < ¢ 4 ee ae t ‘ * * a “ ie . ee + or * ca Bete Let be - Fit ee : cae + «€ Ped a: : i + eont ; ’ ei * ‘ 7 : i 1 ee eae * tee is ° * : eee * es ae : 340 O58 Gimp nem caer ene Te ER a aay me w= Tw Ow enw = Figs. 2-3. Wire screen cages used during 1973: 2, front view of cage containing C. promethea female no. 1; 3, angular view of cage containing C. promethea female no. 4. outdoors in mating cages on the day of emergence or on the following day. Small cages containing females of species in which males are day- flying [e.g., Callosamia promethea (Drury )] were placed outdoors in the late afternoon (after 1630 EST) but were not left overnight. Large cages containing females of species in which males are night-flying (i.e., all others in Table 1) were placed outdoors in the late afternoon or early evening, left overnight, and checked the next day between 0700 and 0800 EST or 1200 and 1300 EST. This schedule was used because work requirements precluded activities at other times. Cages were hung from tree branches such that they were about 1.5 m above ground. All females used in the cages were held indoors afterwards and allowed to oviposit so that the fertility of the eggs could be verified. 98 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Taste l. Sources of saturniid moths used in mating-cage studies during 1973 and 1974. Species Source 1973 Studies - Antheraea polyphemus Diapausing pupae purchased from a dealer in fall of 1972. Actias luna Diapausing pupae reared in Harford Co. during summer of 1972. Hyalophora cecropia Diapausing pupae collected in Harford Co. during winter of 1972-1973. Callosamia promethea Diapausing pupae collected in Harford Co. and Portage Co. (Ohio) during winter of 1972-1973. 1974 Studies Hyalophora cecropia Diapausing pupae reared in Harford Co. during summer of 1973. Callosamia promethea Diapausing pupae reared in Harford Co. during summer of 1973; and diapausing pupae collected in Harford Co. and Portage Co. (Ohio) during winter of 1973-1974. 1974 Studies. The design of the cages used during 1974 was based on the previous year’s results, as will be discussed later. We used metal cans to construct tubular cages of two sizes: (1) small cages with a 14 cm length and 10 cm diameter and (2) large cages with a 17 cm length and 15.5 cm diameter. For both sizes, the metal ends of the can were re- moved. One of the open ends was covered with a plastic lid that allowed us to remove and repiace female moths. The other open end was covered with galvanized metal screen, which was soldered into place. For the small cages the screen had diamond-shape openings measuring 1.27 cm on a side (Fig. 4). For the large cages the screen had hexagonal- shape openings measuring 1.5 cm on a side (Fig. 5). To minimize human tampering, these cages were also spray painted in a camouflage pattern of brown, green, and black. The studies during 1974 were conducted at Edgewood Arsenal and Havre de Grace, both in Harford Co., Maryland. The saturniid species we used and their sources are shown in Table 1. The large cages were used for female Hyalophora cecropia (Linnaeus), and the small cages were used for female C. promethea. The procedures for handling the pupae, the schedule for setting out the females in the cages and rechecking them, and verification of the fertility of the eggs were all the same as in the 1973 studies. RESULTS 1973 Studies. During 1973 we used a total of 12 virgin females, repre- senting four saturniid species, to evaluate the wire-screen mating cages VOLUME 30, NuMBER 2 99 ed Figs. 4-5. Tubular cages used during 1974: 4, small cage showing C. promethea female no. 8 on diamond-shape screen; 5, large cage showing H. cecropia female no. 2 on hexagonal-shape screen. (Tables 2 and 3). Each of the two Antheraea polyphemus (Cramer) females attracted a male and mated with no apparent difficulty. Neither of the females moved from their original positions in the cages, even though the first of these did not attract a male until the third night. The first two female Actias luna (Linnaeus) also attracted males and mated without apparent difficulty. The third female of this species escaped from the cage during the first night. This was not totally unexpected, since this particular female was a very excitable individual and had escaped from the cage the previous day while being held indoors. The single female H. cecropia did not attract, or at least did not mate with, 100 JouURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY TABLE 2. Results of studies using various saturniid females in large, wire-screen mating cages. Edgewood Arsenal, Harford Co., Maryland, 1973. Night Date 21 I ] Mal Moths Eggs Reto r En ae nC nee etaered _ Mated Fertile Antheraea polyphemus 1 9-V 10-V 12-V de At, 2 19-V 20-V 20-V + + Actias luna i 15-V 15-V 16-V ae + 2 18-V 19-V 19- 4 bie 3 20-V 21-V — = jo Hyalophora cecropia 1 30-V 31-V 1-Vi? + + 1Female escaped from cage during night of 21-V. ; 2No male attracted outdoors; female mated with reared male that emerged indoors on 31-V. any males during the first night. The cage, containing this female, was brought indoors the following morning and left there until noon. By noon, a male H. cecropia, which had emerged indoors the previous day, entered the mating cage and copulated with the female. With the excep- tion of the one female A. luna that escaped, we obtained large numbers of fertile eggs from each of the foregoing females. The six female C. promethea all attracted males and successfully mated (Table 3). In two cases the males did not enter the cage but mated with the females through the screen. In one case, two males found their way into the cage, although only one of them mated with the female. In another instance we were unable to bring the cage indoors after mating had occurred, and the moths evidently escaped during the night. We obtained Taste 3. Results of studies using Callosamia promethea females in small, wire- screen mating cages. Edgewood Arsenal, Harford Co.., Maryland, 1973. Afternoon F ] Fond F ] M ‘emale Hemale Female 1 Moth Number Emerged in Cage Naa Morea ee | 2-VI 2-VI 3-VI ai i 2 4-VI 4-VI 4-V}! a a 3 4-VI 4-VI 5-VI ae Bi 4 7-VI 8-VI 8-VI +. + 5 7-VI 8-VI 8-VI' + ae 6 8-VI 8-VI 8-VI dk — ‘Male did not enter cage; mated with tarale through screen. *Mated moths left in cage overnight (8-9-VI); both escaped. VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 101 TABLE 4. Results of studies using Hyalophora cecropia females in large tubular mating cages. Edgewood Arsenal (EA) and Havre de Grace (HDG), Harford Co., Maryland, 1974. Night Date HS Female Female Female Male Cage Moths Eggs Number Emerged in Cage Attracted Location Mated Fertile I 8-VI 8-VI —! EA ae ata p) 9-VI 9-VI 10-VI EA i st o 9-VI 9-VI 11-VI HDG + + 4 10-VI 10-VI 11 & 12-VI? EA +. + 5 11-VI 11-VI Ls EA ie zi 6 13-VI 13-VI 14-VI EA + + vl 13-VI 13-VI 13-VI EA ae 4. 8 13-VI 13-VI 14-VI HDG + + 9 15-VI 15-VI 15-VI HDG ++ -- 10 16-VI 16-VI 17-VI HDG -- + GR 17-VI 18-VI 18-VI HDG + + 12, 18-VI 19-VI 19-VI HDG + + 13} 22-VI 22-VI 22-VI HDG 4+ + 14 22-VI 22-VI 22-VI HDG + + 1No male observed; female oviposited night of 11-VI; eggs not fertile. ‘ 2 Female mated with a different male each night; deposited fertile eggs after each mating. 3. No male observed; female oviposited night of 14-VI; eggs fertile. a large number of eggs from five of the female C. promethea. Since the male C. promethea are day-flying, we were able to make observations as they arrived in the area of a caged female. Two or three males were usually attracted to each female, and they flew in apparent random direc- tions until contacting the cage. Once they encountered the cage, they maintained contact and moved in a circular manner around it. Then they either found the entrance or contacted the female as it rested on the outer portion of the cage. On two occasions, as mentioned earlier, the males mated with the females directly through the wire screen. Those males that found the entrance were not particularly aided by the exterior baffle (Fig. 1) because their persistent contact with the cage caused them to fly into the entrance without actually contacting the exterior baffles. 1974 Studies. During 1974 we used 14 female H. cecropia and 10 female C. promethea to evaluate the tubular mating cages (Tables 4 and 5). Thirteen of the female H. cecropia successfully attracted males, mated and deposited fertile eggs (Fig. 6). One female H. cecropia deposited eggs on the wire screen of the cage during the fourth night. No male was observed mated with this female, and the eggs were not fertile. Another female H. cecropia also deposited eggs on the wire screen of the cage during the fourth night, but these eggs proved to be 102 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY — TaBLeE 5. Results of studies using Callosamia promethea females in small tubular mating cages. Edgewood Arsenal (EA) and Havre de Grace (HDG), Harford Co., Maryland, 1974. Afternoon Date ———— Female Female Female Male Cage Moths Eggs Number Emerged in Cage Attracted Location Mated Fertile 1 27-V 28-V 28-V EA + — 2 27-V 28-V 29-V EA + + 3 8-VI 8-VI 8-VI EA a Bie 4 8-VI 8-VI 8-VI EA a Ei 5 9-VI 9-VI 9-VI EA aly Je 6 10-VI 10-VI 10-VI HDG -- “+ Ff 11-VI 11-VI 12-VI EA + + 8 11-VI 11-VI 12-VI EA — + 9 11-VI 12-VI 12-VI HDG + + 10 16-VI 16-VI 16-VI HDG — + fertile even though no male was observed copulating with this female. A third female H. cecropia copulated with two separate males (Fig. 7) during the second and third nights in the cage and deposited fertile eggs after each mating. Each of the 10 female C. promethea (Table 5) attracted a male, mated, and deposited fertile eggs. DIscussION AND CONCLUSIONS The studies conducted during 1973 demonstrated to us that it was possible, through the use of the wire-screen mating cages, to obtain fertile eggs of A. luna, A. polyphemus and C. promethea. The information on the single female H. cecropia, although obtained under indoor con- ditions, demonstrated that a male of this species will enter the cage and mate with a female. The time and effort required during the studies were minimal, even though we used several females of some species to collect data on efficiency. Where a single fertile female would suffice to provide eggs for a colony, the time required would be even less. We found that the schedule required for setting out the cages and rechecking them could be made compatible with working hours. Despite these successes, we recognized certain shortcomings in the design of the wire-screen cages and the requirements for their use. lirst, the virgin female moths can escape, although the frequency of this occurrence appears to be very low because of their general quiescence prior to mating. Second, the cages had to be checked daily because after mating the female moths become active enough: to eventually find their way out of the cage. Because of these shortcomings and the observed ability of C. promethea to copulate through the wire screen, we designed VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 103 Figs. 6-7. Hyalophora cecropia mated pairs during 1974: 6, female no. 6 showing typical copulation through screen; 7, female no. 4 showing copulation with second male and eggs deposited on screen after previous mating. and successfully tested the tubular mating cages the following year. The wire screens used in the tubular mating cages appear to present no bar- rier to copulation when a male arrives at the cage. The tubular mating cages precluded the escape of females and obviated the requirement to recheck them daily. This constituted a definite advantage because our professional duties sometimes required us to be away for several days at a time. It would appear to be possible to set out a caged virgin female and have no requirement to recheck the cage for a week or more. Within this time period, even if the female mated on the first night or day and deposited eggs on the wire screen, we could still return and remove the 104 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY eggs before they hatched. We did not evaluate this concept during 1974, but plan to do so during a subsequent season. In addition, we plan to evaluate the concept of placing developing female pupae (in their original cocoons) in tubular mating cages and leaving them unattended while they emerge, attract males, mate, and deposit eggs on the wire screen. If this technique proves successful, it will permit an even longer period (perhaps two weeks ) between setting out and returning to collect the eggs. With one exception, we did not use these tubular mating cages operationally during 1974, because we had obtained sufficient numbers of fertile eggs during the experiments with H. cecropia and C. promethea. In subsequent seasons, however, we plan to incorporate the use of these cages into our routine system for rearing saturniids. One of the large tubular mating cages was used operationally in south Texas (5 mi. S George West, Live Oak Co., 28-September-74, 0845 CST), where one of us (TAM) set out a virgin female Eupackardia calleta (Westwood). The female was left unattended in the cage, although observations were made from nearby. Seven E. calleta males, which are morning fliers, were attracted within 10 min, and one of them copulated through the wire screen without difficulty. The use of this cage made it possible to easily obtain fertile eggs to colonize this species, and also provided us with data on an additional saturniid species. LITERATURE CITED Cotiins, M. M. & R. D. Weasr. 1961. Wild Silk Moths of the United States. Collins Radio Co., Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 138 p. Quezapa, J. R. 1967. Notes on the biology of Rothschilda Paroma (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae ), with special reference to its control by pupal parasites in El] Salvador. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 60: 595-599. Vituiarp, P. 1969. Moths and How to Rear Them. Funk and Wagnalls, New York: 242 \p: VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 105 LARVAL FOODPLANTS, SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION FOR FIVE SKIPPERS (HESPERIIDAE ) FROM TEXAS! Roy O. KENDALL? Route 4, Box 104-EB, San Antonio, Texas 78228 AND M. A. RickarpD 7003 Bissonnet # 1602, Houston, Texas 77036 Although fairly common at times, Decinea percosius (Godman), Chiomara asychis georgina (Reakirt), Timochares ruptifasciatus (Plotz), Xenophanes trixus (Stoll) and Cabares potrillo (Lucas) are among the most uncommon skippers in collections from Texas. Local larval food- plants in the Gramineae, Malpighiaceae, Malvaceae, and Verbenaceae are given for the first time. Records of specimens collected by others, unless otherwise stated, are from personal correspondence or communica- tion. Biological arrangement follows dos Passos (1964), and botanical arrangement, Gould (1969). Decinea percosius (Godman) 1900 First recorded from the United States by Freeman (1948) who col- lected a ¢ at Brownsville, Cameron Co., Texas, 28 Nov. 47. The following year he and Otto Buchholz collected 50 examples (42 6,8 2) between Brownsville and Southmost, 4 & 7 April 48. So far as we can determine, it was not collected again in Texas until 1969. Based on available data, this species appears to be only a periodic resident of extreme south Texas. In nature, it most likely feeds on broad- bladed grasses. It may have a larval or pupal diapause, or perhaps only a retarded immature development during winter months. Three broods are indicated. First adults emerge in late March and early April. The 2nd brood appears from late June to early July, and the 3rd from mid- October to late November. Peak emergences are in early April, late June, and early November. Rearing records. At a spot near Southmost, SE of Brownsville, Rickard col- lected 19, 8 Nov. 69. The following day at the same spot, he collected 1 ¢, 1 9, and Kendall took 3 2. On 10 Nov. at this location Kendall collected + more 1 Contribution No. 313. Bureau of Entomology, Division of Plant Industry, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Gainesville 32602. 2 Research Associate, Florida State Collection of Arthropods, Division of Plant Industry, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 106 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY 2, one of which was demonstating oviposition behavior, and it was kept alive for possible egg production in the lab. Fifty-three eggs were deposited on Steno- taphrum secundatum ( Walt.) Kuntze, GRAMINEAE: 10 Noy. (8), 14 Nov. (13), 15 Nov. (10), 16 Nov. (3), and 17 Nov. (19). Some eggs were preserved, and the remaining eggs started hatching the morning of 21 Nov. A few hatched each morning thereafter for about 10 days. First instar larvae readily ate S. secundatum. Most of the larvae died, however, in 2nd instar and the remainder in the 3rd instar. The exact cause of death was undetermined, but climatic conditions were suspect. Humidity in the lower Rio Grande Valley is very high, especially at night. In the rearing facility at San Antonio it was relatively low. At the same Southmost location on 4 April 70, Rickard collected 7 additional specimens (5 ¢, 2 @). From one confined female, about 20 eggs were obtained on ryegrass, Lolium perenne L., GRAMINEAE. After one day the 2 was placed in a killing jar and kept as a cabinet specimen. Eggs hatched 15-16 April and readily ate L. perenne. On 25 April 70 Rickard gave Kendall two of these larvae, one of which was in process of molting. Because the grass blade had dried around the larva, some difficulty was experienced in completing the molt; it died later and was preserved. The remaining larva, 2nd instar when received, ate L. perenne, S. secundatum and Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. It molted on 8, 15 & 25 May and pupated 16 June. A 2 emerged about 0645 CDT 26 June 70. It was interesting to note that a formal tent or shelter was not constructed by the larva until it was fully mature. At this time it remained head down in the shelter pending final defecation after which it pupated head up. It was also noted that feeding was largely at night. The remaining larvae kept by Rickard were switched to Johnsongrass, Sorghum halepense (1) Pers., GRAMINEAE, and all died during pupation, probably from malnutrition. These were reared in Houston, Texas where the relative humidity is comparable to that of the lower Rio Grande Valley area. Other Texas records. Cameron Co.: Brownsville and vicinity: J. R. Heitzman found it fairly common during the period 19 June-1 July 69; Joseph F. Doyle III, collected 1 6, 18 June 70; Rickard collected 3 6, 1 9, 21 March and 4 4, 5 April 70; Kendall saw one 22 Oct. 72. Hipatco Co.: Relampago, Rickard collected 2 ¢, 18 Oct., 2 6,1 9, 19 Oct. and 1 4, 30 Oct. 71. Chiomara asychis georgina (Reakirt) 1868 First recorded for the United States by Skinner (1901); collected by Irvin Runyeon from southern California to the Arizona border. It is well established in Cameron and Hidalgo counties of southern Texas and ranges up the coast to Harris Co. and inward to Bexar Co. Three and possibly 4 broods are indicated. There appears to be an immature semi-diapause during January and February even though adults have been collected in each month of the year except February; the known larval foodplant is deciduous. Rearing records. While collecting in Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park (B-RGVSP), Hidalgo Co., 29 Aug. 69, Rickard observed a female ovipositing on the foliage of Malpighia glabra L., MaLpicHIACKAE. Examination of the plant dis- closed 2 larvae in leaf shelters, one was lost, the other produced a @ on 25 Sept 69. Kendall collected a larva feeding on this plant in Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge (SANWR), Hidalgo Co., 13 Noy. 71; it pupated 6 Dec. but died before emergence. On 11 Sept. 72 at McAllen, he collected another larva; it pupated 20 VoLuME 30, NuMBER 2 107 Sept. and a Q emerged 29 Sept. 72. The larva of this species may feed on other Malpighiaceae such as Thryallis angustifolia (Benth.) Kuntze found in Bexar Co., and Janusia gracilis Gray found in far western Texas, New Mexico and Arizona over which area the insect ranges. Other Texas records. BEXAR Co.: Roy W. Quillin, Cibolo River in NE Bexar Co., 1 §, 21 Aug. 60; at his home in San Antonio, 1 ¢, 19 Aug. 65. CAMERON Co.: H. A. Freeman (1951), Brownsville, June and Aug. Roy O. & C. A. Kendall, Brownsville, 1 ¢, 3 April 57; 1 9, 4 Dec. 64; 1 ¢, 29 Oct. 65; 1 9, 25 Nov. 66; Harlingen, 5 ¢, 2 2, 20 Oct. 65. J. W. Tilden, Brownsville and vicinity, 4, 17-19 @ermGow 4m. WwW of Boca Chica, 2 6; 26 Oct. 63; nr. Brownsville, 1 ¢, 1 9, 13 Nov. 63. Joseph F. Doyle III, Brownsville, 1 9, 21 Dec. 67. M. A. Rickard, Brownsville, 2 ¢, 2 Sept. 67; several on 17, 18 and 31 Aug. 69; 1 ¢, 7 Sept. 69; 2mometG Ock, 69:2 9, 9 Nov. 69; | 2, 4 April 70; 1 6, 17 Aug. 70.. Harris Co:: John B. Vernon, Houston, 1 ¢, 23 Oct. 71. Hmatco Co.: H. A. Freeman (1951), Pharr, March—June and Aug.—Dec. Roy O. & C. A. Kendall, B-RGVSP, 4 ¢,1 2, 2IeNove 62.) Madero, 1 9, 11 Jan. 72; SANWR, 1 ¢, 14 Jan. 72; Mission, 1- 3, 12 Sept. 72; McAllen, 1 ¢, 22 Oct. 72. J. W. Tilden, B-RGVSP, 1 ¢, 10 Nov. 63; SANWR, 1 ¢, 11 Nov. 63. Fay H. Karpuleon, nr. McAllen, 1 ¢, ? Dec. 65. J. R. Heitzman, SANWR, several, 21 & 24 June 66. M. A. Rickard, SANWR, 1 ¢, 1 9, oaAueo7; Lic. 5 Oct. 68;-1 2, 6 Oct. 68; 2 2,4 July 69; 1 36, 26 July 69; 1 ¢, Se wmenO-eomo sl, May 70: 26, 1 9,18 Aug: 70: 1 6, 12\Sept. 70; 1 @, 15 icine 29 Oct. 71; 1 6, 31 Oct. 71; B-RGVSP, several, 15;.16, 17, 24, 25, 29 & 30 Aug. 69 and 6 Sept. 69; 1 ¢, 14 Aug. 71; Madero, several, 25 Oct. 69; 1 2,9 Nov 69. KiLEBERG Co.: Roy O. & C. A. Kendall, nr. Kingsville, 1 ¢, 23 Aug. 64. Live Oax Co.: E. M. & S.F. Perkins, nr. Lake Corpus Christi State Park (LCCSP), 1 ¢, 10 Nov. 62._M. A. Rickard, hwy. 9 nr. Mathis, 1 @, 9 March 69. SAN Patricio Co.: J. W. Tilden (1974), Welder Wildlife Refuge, 1 ¢, 13 Oct. 63 (in ROK coll.); 1 ¢, 2 Nov. 63. J. R. Heitzman, LCCSP, one or more, 16 June 68. Timochares ruptifasciatus (Plotz) 1884 Recorded from the United States for the lst time by Skinner (1901); collected by Irvin Runyeon from southern California to the Arizona border. Its distribution in Texas seems to be restricted to Cameron and Hidalgo counties where it is well established. It has been collected each month except December and only a few times in January and February. Rearing has disclosed a larval diapause. The deciduous local larval foodplant Malpighia glabra L., MALPIGHIACEAE, is grown as an orna- mental in extreme southern Texas where its fruits are prized for making jellies. This explains why Freeman (1951) found the skipper mostly in city flower gardens. Comstock (1953) observed a 2 oviposit on a malpighiaceous vine in Mexico. He reared it through, described and illustrated the egg, last instar larva and pupa. He was unable to identify the larval foodplant except as to family. Rearing records. At Brownsville, 10 Nov. 69, Kendall found a single Ist instar larva on juvenile leaves of Malpighia glabra. It had made a rudimentary shelter by cutting and folding over a portion of the tender new leaf. In the lab the larva continued to feed on this plant and pupated 19 Dec. 69; a 2 emerged 11 Jan. 70. Rearing was conducted at laboratory temperatures ranging from 50°— 75° F, a comparable temperature range for outdoor temperatures in Brownsville 108 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY at that time of year. Humidity, however, was not comparable. Two more larvae © were collected on this plant 15 Oct. 71 in SANWR. These were reared in a semi- outdoor environment. They pupated on 7 and 12 Jan. 72, and 2 9 emerged, one on 29 Jan., the other 7 Feb. 72. Kendall revisited SANWR 12 Jan. 72 and found 1 last instar larva; it was preserved. On 8 Sept. 72 he collected a @ at Mission, Hidalgo Co., confined it with M. glabra and obtained 7 eggs, 4 of which were preserved. The remaining eggs hatched 12 Sept. 72. Larvae were placed on a living plant in the lab garden. Only 1 larva could be found when examined 23 Oct. 72; it was brought into the lab where it died 22 Nov. 72. Again 20 Nov. 73, 3 mi. E of Harlingen, Cameron Co., Kendall collected 2 larvae eating M. glabra. These were sleeved on a living plant in the lab garden on 1 Dec. 73. Upon return- ing from an extended field trip 5 March 74, examination showed one larva had died, the other had just pupated; a ¢ emerged 18 March 74. Rickard collected a pupa 22 March 70 on M. glabra in B-RGVSP; a 2 emerged 30 March 70. Other Texas records. CAMERON Co.: H. A. Freeman (1951), Brownsville, 1 3, 1 9, 29 Aug. 44. J. W. Tilden (1974), Brownsville, 1 ¢, 19 Oct. 72. Rickard, Brownsville, 2 6, 14 Aug. 69; 1 ¢, 18 Oct. 69; 1 2, 19 Oct. 69; 1 ¢, 21 March 70; 1 6, 23 March 70; 1 6, 4 April 70; 2 9, 5 April 70; 1 Oli Amen ier 19 Oct. 71. Roy O. & C. A. Kendall, Brownsville, 1 ¢, 19 Oct. 72; 1 9, 22 Oct. 72. Hmatco Co.: H. A. Freeman (1951), Pharr, 1 9, 30 Aug. 44; 3 ¢, 21 Oct. 44; 1 9, 25 Aug. 46. Rickard, B-RGVSP, 1 9, 24 Aug. 69; 1 6, 6 Sept. 69; Madero, 1 g, 19 Oct. 69; SANWR, 1 9, 17 May 70; 1 6, 15 Aug. 71. W. W. McGuire, Mission, several, 3 & 4 Sept. 72. Roy O. & C. A. Kendall, Mission, 6 6, 2 9, 9 Sept. 72; 4 6, 1 2, 10 Sept. 72; 6 6, 1 @, Il Sept. 72:53 G2 wSeoman Xenophanes trixus (Stoll) 1784 Barnes & McDunnough (1913) published the Ist record for the United States; 2 6, 2 ?, May and June from Brownsville, Texas; year and collector not given. Freeman (1951) gives an uncited Skinner record for July in Brownsville. So far as we can determine it was not collected again in Texas until 1968 which tends to indicate a periodic residency in the state. Local collection data indicates 3 and possibly 4 broods. Larvae probably feed through the winter months when temperatures are mild; a local freeze may destroy the temporary population. Rearing records. Near Southmost, SE of Brownsville, Kendall observed a @ demonstrating oviposition behavior around Malvaviscus drummondii Torr., MAt- VACEAE, 9 Nov. 69. This specimen avoided capture but another 9 was taken and kept alive for egg production. Confined with M. drummondii twigs it deposited 30 eggs the following day and died 11 Nov. Young larvae soon ate holes through the micropile but died before escaping from the egg shell. Also on 9 Nov., 1 3rd instar larva was found hiding in a very rudimentary shelter on M. drummondii; it continued to feed sparingly in the lab until 24 Jan. 70 when illness was vias: it died 26 Jan. and was preserved. Unaware of Kendall’s findings, Rickard observed and captured, 28 Feb. 70, a ? ovipositing on juvenile leaves of M. drummondii at the same Southmost sear He also found one late instar larva on the plant in a poorly constructed leaf nest same as Kendall had observed. This larva molted 2 March and pupated 12 March. An adult emerged 30 March but escaped in his home and was never found. Rickard gave the live @ and egg collected 28 Feb. to Kendall who obtained VoLuME 30, NuMBER 2 109 additional eggs: 1 March (27), 3 March (5), 4 March (1), 5 March (25). The 2 was killed 8 March and kept as a cabinet specimen. Eggs were placed in an unheated room. By 22 March the embryo had completely developed and some larvae had eaten through the micropile, but all died before completing the hatching process. In a separate effort, 21 March 70, Rickard experienced the same dis- appointment. Low humidity is now suspect as the cause of death. Other Texas records. CAMERON Co.: J. R. Heitzman, nr. Brownsville, 2 4, 21 June 69; 1 ¢, 24 June 69; 1 ¢, 25 June 69; 1 ¢, 1 9, 26 June 69. Roy O. & C. A. Kendall, Brownsville, 1 ¢, 7 Nov. 69; 3 6, 8 Nov. 69; 1 9, 10 Nov. 69; nr. Southmost, 17 ¢,2 9, 9 Nov. 69; 13 ¢, 3 9, 10 Nov. 69. M. A. & S. Rickard, Brownsville & vicinity, 1969: 1 $,2 9, 27 July; 1 6, 17 Aug.; 1 6, 18 Aug.; 1 2, IeCre oes 296 7 Sept; 10 4,4 9, 18 Oct; 2 3, 1 2, 19'Oct; 4 4, dD. 9, 25 Oct.; 3 4,26 Oct; 9 4,8 2, 8 Nov. 2 8,1 2,9 Nov.; 2 4, 13 Dec. 1970: 4 3,2 2, 28 Heb46 4 2, 2 March; 2 6,2 9, 4 April; 1 9, 5 April: 5 6, 8 9, 24 May; cpm aueelade llsept, WOnl: 2)°65)2) O19 May-"5. d2 20 May:\3 6; 6 July; common on 21 Aug., 18 and 19 Oct.; 2 ¢, 30 Oct. Cabares potrillo (Lucas) 1857 First recorded for Texas and the United States by Weeks (1904); Brownsville, Texas, summer 1903, leg. [Wm. H.] Doll. This species is generally restricted to the lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas. It seems to be best established in Hidalgo Co. where its deciduous larval food- plant, Priva lappulacea (L.) Perse, VERBENACEAE, is most abundant. There appear to be 3 full broods with considerable overlapping in September, October and November. Based on limited rearing, it would seem the larvae feed through the winter months with growth and de- velopment greatly retarded. It has been collected each month except February and July. In Mexico, nr. Cd. Mante, Tamaulipas, Kendall observed several 2 ovi- positing on this same plant 20 Jan. 74. Examination disclosed first instar larvae on several small plants at that time. It will be noted that the time frames of these 2 locations are comparable even though one is neotropical, giving stability to residency of the species in Texas. Rearing records. Kendall collected a 9, 13 Oct. 68, at SANWR and kept it alive for eggs. Earlier, Rickard had informed Kendall of seeing a 92 oviposit on an unknown plant at this location. Based on his description, it was easy to locate the larval foodplant, P. lappulacea (det., Dr. Marshall C. Johnston, University of Texas, Austin). The @ deposited eggs on this plant on 14, 15 & 19 Oct. They were not inventoried but were estimated to be about 25, some of which were pre- served. Hatching started 17 Oct. Larvae were placed on a protected potted plant outdoors. Later, it was discovered a moth larva had eaten most of the foliage. Only 2 Cabares potrillo larvae could be found 2 Nov.; they were glossy black and quite small; one soon died, the other pupated 25 Nov. and a Q emerged 27 Dec. 68. A return visit to SANWR 9 Nov. 68 produced 6 larvae on this plant. Larval shelters are constructed in such a way that they are very difficult to find and recognize. Insufficient foodplant was brought back to the lab and it became neces- sary to preserve 1 larva. The others pupated 25 Nov. (2), 26 Nov. (1), 1 Dee. 110 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY (1), and 3 Dec. (1); the last one was injured and was preserved. Adults emerged: 1 4, 30 Dec. 68; 2 9,7 Jan. 69; 1 3, 10 Jan. 69. Other Texas records. BEXAR Co.: Roy O. & C. A. Kendall, San Antonio, 1 4, 4 April 59. Cameron Co.: Roy O. & C. A. Kendall, 10 mi. SE of Brownsville, 1 ¢, 1 April 57; Santa Maria, 1 ¢, 14 Nov. 71. Tilden (1974), Brownsville, 1 2, 30 Oct. 63; Santa Maria, 1 ¢, 18 Oct. 72 (doubtless there are other county records unknown to us at this time). Hmatco Co.: Freeman (1951) found it well estab- lished at Pharr and vicinity from 1946-1959; specimens were taken in Mar., June, Oct., and Nov. Joseph F. Doyle III], SANWR, 1 6, 21 Sept. 68; 3 ¢, 19 Oct. 68; 1 g,1 92, 24 Nov. 68. J. R. Heitzman, SANWR, 1 9, 21 June 66; 1 ¢, 24 June 66; several on 22, 24 & 25 June 68; B-RGVSP, several, 25 & 28 June 68. Roy O. & G. A. Kendall, SANWR, 1 6 22 June 68; 3 6; 1 9, 21 Oct) 66a Ocr 68; 2 3,9 Nov. 68; 1 2, 11 Nov. 68; Mission, 1 ¢, 10 Oct. 72. M. A. & S. Rickard, 1968: 2 @,2 9,5 Aug, 1 6, 6 Aug; 2 6, 21 Aug; 1 657 Seppe ieee 21 Sept.; 2 6,1 9,5 Oct. 2 9,6 Oct; 1 6,1 9, 12 Oct; 1G) 13 Oca 9 Nov.; 1 6, 10 Nov.; 1 6, 16 Nov.; 2 6, 24 Nov.; 1970; 1 GSS 0Wicrcae ia. DO Marche led Oli Mayan ween Ocha le ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to thank the U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish & Wild- life Service, Bureau of Sport Fisheries & Wildlife, Albuquerque, New Mexico, and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Interpretation & Exhibits Branch, Austin, Texas, for providing the necessary permits to conduct basic biological research on the Lepidoptera in the national refuges and state parks. We are especially grateful to the local person- nel of these Departments for their courtesy and assistance in conducting these continuing studies of Texas Lepidoptera. We are also grateful to those who furnished collection data for inclusion in this paper. LITERATURE CITED BarNES, WILLIAM, & J. McDuNNoucH 1913. Species of Lepidoptera new to our fauna with synonymical notes. Can. Ent. 45: 182-185. Comstock, J. A. 1953. Collecting butterflies in the coastal area of Mexico near Manzanillo, Colima, with notes on the life history of a rare skipper. Bull. S. Calif. Acad. Sci. 52: 43-45. pos Passos, C. F. 1964. A synonymic list of the Nearctic Rhopalocera. Lepid. Soc. Mem. 1, 145 p. FREEMAN, H. A. 1948. Notes on some North American skippers, with the descrip- tion of a new species from Kansas. Ent. News 59: 206. 1951. Ecological and systematic study of the Hesperioidea of Texas (Lepi- doptera, Rhopalocera, Hesperioidea). Southern Methodist Univ. Stud. 6: 20. Goutp, F. W. 1969. Texas Plants—a checklist and ecological summary. Texas Agr. Exp. Sta., Texas A & M Univ. Misc. Publ. 585 rev. SKINNER, H. 1901. On a small collection of butterflies made in California and Arizona. Ent. News 12: 170-171. Titpen, J. W. 1974. Unusual and interesting butterfly records from Texas. J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 22-25. Weeks, A. C. 1904. Minutes of meetings of Brooklyn Ent. Soc. held at the resi- dence of Mr. George Franck, 1040 DeKalb Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y. Ent News 1S: 35l. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 12 COLLECTING COCOONS OF CALLOSAMIA SECURIFERA (SATURNIIDAE )* RICHARD S. PEIGLER Department of Entomology and Economic Zoology Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina 29631 Little was published on Callosamia securifera (Maassen) until Fergu- sons work in 1972. Skinner (1920) first synonymized the names C. securifera and C. carolina Jones, but the moth was long considered a subspecies of C. angulifera (Walker). Because the diurnal males are not phototaxic and the species inhabits remote coastal areas of south- eastern United States, specimens are still comparatively uncommon in collections. It is my purpose to provide some helpful advice for anyone wishing to collect cocoons of this moth. Choosing Correct Habitat I have searched successfully for cocoons of C. securifera in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina. However, most of what is said in this paper applies mainly to the habitats in South Carolina where I have collected most. The hostplant is sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana L.), but the tree ranges much farther north along the Atlantic Coast, west along the Gulf Coast and inland from both coasts than does the moth (Peigler, 1975). It is, therefore, advisable to go to or near localities were C. securifera is known to occur. Sweetbay may be easily confused with red bay (Persea borbonia (1L.) Sprengel), but the latter does not have white undersides of leaves which help to recognize sweetbay. There will be many areas near or between known localities of the moth which will appear suitable for searching because of the presence of the host tree, but may be unproductive. Expansive fields with stand- ing water throughout may have hundreds of sweetbays, but I have never found even an empty cocoon in such places. Even if C. securifera were present, it would be very hard to find cocoons unless the popula- tion was high because of the high density of host trees on which to look. Other habitats where I have not found cocoons are thin woods under towering pines and mixed hardwood forests. Perhaps females prefer to fly and oviposit in the open. The most rewarding habitats are along 1 Published by permission of the Director of the South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station. Technical Contribution No. 1250. 112 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY roadsides in which the sweetbays are small and in the open and a lot of areas can be checked with an automobile. Choosing Correct Season In the fall or early winter searching may be very slow because many green leaves are still on the host trees. This situation exists until early December in the Carolinas and Georgia. On the other hand, even the tip leaves may be lost by March so that sweetbays are not readily seen. At such times I spend more time looking for the host than the cocoons themselves. Therefore, December and January are the best times to plan a collecting trip. Comments Dr. R. B. Dominick reports that he usually finds only one cocoon per tree (see Ferguson, 1972, p. 242). I would agree that this is true for the areas in South Carolina where he collects (northern Charleston Co. and eastern Berkeley Co.). However, in western Berkeley Co. where I collect most often, the population of the moth is probably much higher, and I seldom find isolated cocoons. The most viable number of cocoons I found on a single tree was six, and several times I found four and five. Often an empty female cocoon is found along with viable ones, indicat- ing that females often mate and begin ovipositing on the same tree on which they fed as larvae. Usually over 90 percent of the sweetbays examined will have no cocoons hanging on them. The populations may fluctuate or move. One winter I found 18 viable cocoons along a highway in western Berkeley Co. during three days of searching. The following winter I found 60 viable cocoons in four hours along the same stretch of road. This past winter the population was again high in that area. Cocoons may occur on a tree from 1-20 ft. above ground level, but most are about 5 ft. Most sweetbays in the areas where I have col- lected are secondary growth sprouts from cut trees, and if a cocoon is too high to reach, the thin tree may be easily bent over. Brown (1972 and pers. comm.) searches tall sweetbays in central Florida with binoculars. It is important to train one’s eyes to look for hanging clumps of red- brown sweetbay leaves among green ones. The weight of a swinging cocoon detaches leaves from the stem so that cocoons seldom are covered with green, living leaves. The leaves on old cocoons of the previous season are bleached or have weathered away. A collector VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 113 looking for whitish cocoons will probably find more empty than viable ones. Few insects feed on sweetbay, but chewed leaves may not mean C. securifera is present. Grasshoppers or larvae of Papilio palamedes Drury may have done the damage. In southeastern North Carolina I have seen larvae of Epimecis sp. (Geometridae) feeding commonly on this tree in summer. Not all large cocoons on sweetbay may be C. securi- fera because larvae of the saturniid Antheraea polyphemus (Cramer ) sometimes move from adjacent red maples (Acer rubrum L.) to spin their cocoons on sweetbay. Often nests or egg sacs of large spiders, including the green lynx (Peucetia viridans (Hentz)) and a yellow species of Thomisidae, are attached with sweetbay leaves to stems. The tendrils of Smilax spp. vines commonly hold dead sweetbay leaves up in trees. The collector should examine possibilities closely so that a C. securifera cocoon is not overlooked. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank Dr. Richard B. Dominick and Mr. Charles R. Edwards for initial help in searching for cocoons of this moth. Drs. Merle Shepard and G. R. Carner of Clemson University helped with the manuscript. LITERATURE CITED Brown, L. N. 1972. Mating behavior and life habits of the sweet-bay silk moth (Callosamia carolina). Science 176: 73-75. Fercuson, D. C. 1972. Bombycoidea, Saturniidae (in part). In R. B. Dominick et al., The Moths of America North of Mexico, fasc. 20.2B, p. 155-269, pls. 12-22. E. W. Classey Ltd. London. PeicLerR, R. S. 1975. The geographical distribution of Callosamia securifera (Saturniidae). J. Lepid. Soc. 29: 188-191. SKINNER, H. 1920. Callosamia carolina and Samia securifera (Lepid., Saturniidae ). Ent. News 31: 107. A GYANDROMORPHIC LYMANTRIA DISPAR (LYMANTRIIDAE ) It should not be too surprising to find a gyandromorphic Gypsy moth ( Lymantria dispar (L.)) among the hundred thousands that have been defoliating trees in New Jersey the last few years. A single gyandromorphic, adult female was caught 6 July 1974 in Glendola, Monmouth Co., New Jersey in a light trap put up by the College of Agriculture, Rutgers University. The left antenna is female and the right, male. It is otherwise a normal specimen without any other deviations showing. The specimen is in the Rutgers Collection. Dr. J. P. Reed kindly loaned it to me for study. Jos—ErpH MuLLeErR, R.D. #1, Lebanon, New Jersey 08833. 114 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY WING COLOR VARIATION IN CALLOSAMIA (SATURNIIDAE)? RICHARD S. PEIGLER Department of Entomology and Economic Zoology Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina 29631 The genus Callosamia Packard is comprised of three sexually dimorphic species. Callosamia promethea (Drury) is melanic with males almost black and females a wine-red color. Callosamia securifera (Maassen) and C. angulifera (Walker) have brown males and orange females although the former species is lighter and suffused with yellow. Adults of the latter two species also differ seasonally in that the spring or over- wintering forms of both sexes are light and the summer forms are dark. Such seasonal variation has been oversimplified in past literature. It is the purpose of this paper to discuss in greater detail these wing color variations. Although C. promethea does not have seasonal forms as in the other two species, there is color variation. In males the area beyond the post- median line on the underside of the wings may be either bright red or blue-gray. Both color forms, and intermediates, were found among males collected in spring and summer from southeastern Pennsylvania. Orange females of C. promethea may occur among populations with normal dark red females. Young (1968) and Baldy (1890) reported such populations occurring in Ulster Co., New York and on Mt. Cata- wissa, Pa., respectively. The possibility of hybridization is unlikely because of effective temporal isolation. Orange C. promethea females are possibly mutations in which the gene (or genes) governing reddish- ness is not expressed. The pair of C. angulifera which Ferguson (1972, pl. 22, fig. 3, 4) uses to represent summer adults are scarcely darker than spring ones. In upper South Carolina the summer adults of both sexes are nearly as dark as C. promethea and the males have obsolete discal marks as in C. promethea. The winter of 1973-74 was very mild in South Carolina, and the adults of that spring varied through the entire spectrum from light to dark. This included specimens from wild and reared cocoons (kept outdoors all winter) as well as those coming to lights. Apparently, adults are darker when wing scale formation in the pupa occurs under comparatively high temperatures. In fact, C. angulifera cocoons which [ overwintered in the refrigerator (40°F =5°C) yielded dark adults ' Published by permission of the Director o oe f the South Caroli i i i Technical Contribution No. 1259. yu arolina Agricultural Experiment Station. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 ~ WS that match the summer form. The same was true for adult hybrids of angulifera ¢ X promethea 2, although some of their darkness may be attributed to C. promethea parentage. Cocoons of the saturniid Actias luna (L.) which I kept at no lower than 40°F during the winter also produced adults similar to the summer form of that species. The effect of the mild winter of 1973-74 was further illustrated in the C. securifera population in Berkeley Co., South Carolina. Spring adults began flying in mid-April instead of late April, as they usually do, and most were dark. Although a few golden spring males and black- ish summer males emerged from a lot of about 20 cocoons collected in March 1974, most did not fit either form and were intermediate. Ferguson (1972) stated that females of C. securifera from Florida are paler than those collected from further north. However, specimens in my collection from Florida and both Carolinas do not follow this pattern. Possibly the Florida material available to Ferguson was faded. In conclusion, seasonal variation in Callosamia is due apparently to effects of temperature on pupae and is not clear-cut without inter- mediates. There is no constant geographical variation in any of the three species, although seasonal extremes in C. angulifera may be greater in the South. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank Drs. John Morse and G. R. Carner for reviewing the manuscript and offering helpful suggestions. LITERATURE CITED Baupy, S. 1890. [Untitled note.] Ent. News 1: 146. Fercuson, D. C. 1972. Bombycoidea, Saturniidae (in part). In R. B. Dominick et al., The Moths of America North of Mexico, fasc. 20.2B, p. 155-269, pls. 12-22. E. W. Classey Ltd. London. Younc, A. M. 1968. Color variant of Callosamia promethea (Saturniidae) in New York. J. Lepid. Soc. 22: 185-186. 116 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY THE GENUS COPABLEPHARON IN TEXAS, WITH DESCRIPTION OF THREE NEW SPECIES (NOCTUIDAE) ANDRE BLANCHARD P. O. Box 20304, Houston, Texas 77025 Four species of the genus Copablepharon, still unrecorded from Texas, fly in this state. Three of these four species are new and are described in this paper. Copablepharon grandis Strecker 1875 Fig. 1 Lep. Rhop. Het., 129. My records for this species are as follows: Paducah, State owned Matador Wild- life Management Area, Cottle Co., Texas: 8 Sept. 1966, 4 ¢; 11 and 13 July 1967, 3 6,3 9; 22 Sept. 1968, 1 ¢. These were identified by comparison with a pair of specimens in the Canadian National Collection. There are also, in the collection of the American Museum of Natural History, 1 ¢ and 1 @ collected at El Paso, El Paso Co., Texas by A. H. & S. K. Rindge. Fig. 1 unfortunately fails to show the definite contrast between the pale sulfur yellow of the forewings and the white of the hindwings. Copablepharon albisericea A. Blanchard, new species Figs) 2/05, 9013014 Head, collar, thorax, tegulae, forewings above, hindwings above and _ beneath, legs, abdomen shiny silky white (Fig. 2). Forewings beneath more or less soiled with olivaceous in their basal halves between radius and fold. Male antennae weakly serrate, with hair length about half of shaft diameter. Female antennae simple, pubescent. Antennae of both sexes clothed with white scales above, orange below. Wing expanse = 40-43 mm. Male genitalia (Fig. 5): Uncus long, cygnate, not dilated in its middle; sides of tegumen broad, penicillus lobes well developed; vinculum narrow with rounded margin; valves long, slender, narrowest two-thirds distance from base where ventral margin and costa are slightly concave, clasper with broad base, tapering to a point; corona of 17-20 spines aligned along distal margin of valve, except near tip where 3-5 get crowded together; clavi slender, digitate, slightly dilated distally; juxta broad, lightly sclerotized; sclerotization of lateral and dorsal parts of annelus at least equal to that of juxta; aedeagus stout, one small conical cornutus located at apex of small diverticulum of vesica (Fig. 9). Female genitalia (Figs. 13 & 14): Ovipositor cone shaped, lobes clothed near their apex with short, stout setae; anterior apophyses a little longer than sclerotized part of eighth segment collar; posterior apophyses almost twice as long as this collar; ductus bursae short, weakly sclerotized; bursa membranous, with an expanded lateral arm on the right side about half as long as left arm; ductus seminalis from near base of right lateral arm. Holotype: Male, Canadian, State owned Gene Howe Wildlife Management Area, Hemphill Co., Texas, 27 Sept. 1968 collected by A. & M. E. Blanchard, deposited in the National Museum of Natural History (No. 73431 ) VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 117 Figs. 1-8. Copablepharon spp.: 1, C. grandis 9, Paducah, Texas, 11 July 1967: 2, C. albisericea ¢, holotype, Canadian, Texas, 27 Sept. 1968; 3, C. serraticornis &, holotype, Paducah, Texas, 8 Sept. 1966; 4, C. gillaspyi &, holotype, Padre Island National Seashore, 28 Sept. 1973. Figs. 5-7: ¢ genitalia, aedeagus omitted: 5, C. albisericea (A. B. 3555); 6, C. serraticornis (Slide COPA 6 in C. N. C.); 7, C. gillaspyi (A. B. 3612). Fig. 8: C. gillaspyi aedeagus with incompletely inflated vesica (A. B. 3613). 148 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Figs. 9-16. Copablepharon spp.: Figs. 9 & 10: Aedeagus with inflated vesica: 9, C. albisericea (Slide COPA 5 in C. N. C.); 10, C. serraticornis (Slide COPA 6 in C, N. C.), Figs. 11 & 12: Distal part of valve showing corona: 11, C. serrati- cornis (Slide COPA 6 in C. N. C.); 12, C. gillaspyi (A. B. 3612). Figs. 13-16: Female genitalia: 13, C. albisericea (A. B. 3252); 14, C. albisericea CAS Br samen: 15, C. serraticornis (A. B. 3552); 16, C. gillaspyi (A. B. 3554). VoLuME 30, NuMBER 2 119 Paratypes: All from Canadian, Hemphill Co., Texas: 27-30 Sept. 1968, 17 4, 3 2, collected by A. & M. E. Blanchard, 8 of these ¢ are in the American Museum of Natural History; 27 & 28 Sept. 1968, 37 ¢ collected by D. F. Hardwick, in the Canadian National Collection. C. albisericea is readily distinguished from C. alba, the other white species of this genus: C. alba is the only described species of the genus having a very short uncus. Copablepharon serraticornis A. Blanchard, new species Figs. 3, 6, 10, 11, 15 Head, collar, thorax, tegulae pale ochreous yellow, darker on vertex, collar and anterior thorax; paler on front, and metathorax (Fig. 3). Male antennae strongly serrate, with each segmental process developed into a thin edge extending laterally and supporting numerous bristles a little longer than shaft diameter. Widest por- tion of each serration about 2.5 times as wide as narrowest portion. Female antennae simple, very weakly pubescent. Antennae of both sexes clothed above with scales concolorous with front, beneath orange. Forewings above concolorous with thorax; a pale, faint grayish streak along cubitus; fringes concolorous. Hindwings above varying from same hue as forewings but much paler to pale buff; fringes slightly paler than disc. Beneath same hue as above but paler. Wing expanse: Male 36-40 mm; female 40—45 mm. Male genitalia (Figs. 6, 10, 11): Very close to those of C. albisericea, differing from them as follows: Uncus very slightly dilated in its middle; clavi a little stouter and shorter; base of clasper narrower; ventral margin of valve convex all along; corona (Fig. 11) with 11-13 spines in a line which diverges from distal margin of valve as it approaches ventral margin. Vesica (Fig. 10) smaller. Female genitalia (Fig. 15): Similar to those of C. albisericea, differing as follows: Setae on ovipositor lobes stouter and longer; eighth segment collar a little longer; anterior apophyses a little longer than eighth segment collar; posterior apophyses over one and a half times as long as that collar. Holotype: Male, Paducah, State owned Matador Wildlife Management Area, Cottle Co., Texas, 8 Sept. 1966 collected by A. & M. E. Blanchard; genitalia on slide A. B. 505; deposited in National Museum of Natural History (No. 73432). Paratypes: All taken at Paducah, Cottle Co., Texas: 8 Sept. 1966, 1 2; 22 Sept. 1968, 1 ¢, 4 @ collected by A. & M. E. Blanchard; 23 and 24 Sept. 1968, 3 é collected by D. F. Hardwick, in Canadian National Collection. Copablepharon gillaspyi A. Blanchard, new species Figs. 4, 7, 8, 12, 16 Head, collar, thorax, tegulae beige (light grayish, yellowish brown) (Fig. 4). Male and female antennae whitish above and structurally similar to those of C. serraticornis. Forewings above pruinose beige with a paler whitish, poorly defined fascia along costa extending almost to apex and a grayish streak along cubitus, fringes whitish. Hindwings above concolorous with costal fascia of forewings, paler basally: fringes whitish. Beneath, same color as above attenuated to nearly white. Wing expanse = 39-44 mm. Male genitalia (Figs. 7, 8, 12): Similar to those of C. serraticornis, differing mainly in that the clasper is wider at its base and that the corona (Fig. 12) has over 30 spines crowded in 2—4 rows along distal margin of valve. Aedeagus similar to that of C. serraticornis (Fig. 8). Female genitalia (Fig. 16): Similar to those of C. serraticornis, differing mainly in 120 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY that the setae on the ovipositor lobes are smaller and cover only the tip of the lobes and that the anterior apophyses are only three fourths as long as the eighth segment collar and the posterior apophyses barely longer than this collar. Holotype: Male, Padre Island National Seashore, Kleberg Co., Texas, 28 Sept. 1973, genitalia on slide A. B. 3245, Dr. J. E. Gillaspy collector; deposited in the National Museum of Natural History (No. 73433). Paratypes: Padre Island National Seashore, Kleberg Co., Texas, 28 Sept. 1973, 2 4; 7 Oct. 1974, 3 6,1 9; J. E. Gillaspy collector. Same location, 29 Sept. 1975, 1 6; North Padre Island, Nueces Co., Texas, 30 Sept. 1975, 1 ¢@; A. & M. E. Blanchard collectors. I take pleasure in naming this species for its discoverer, my friend, Dr. J. E. Gillaspy, Professor of Biology at A. & I. College, Kingsville, Texas. C. serraticornis and C. gillaspyi are both closely related to C. serrata McDunnough, but the antennae of C. serrata are not as strongly serrated, their serrations are scarcely more than sharp bulges to the sides; the widest portion of a segment is usually about 1.5 times as wide as the narrow portion, the male valves of C. serrata are angled near the apex as those of C. albisericea and not evenly convex as those of the other two species. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am deeply grateful to Mr. J. D. LaFontaine of the Biosystematics Research Institute, Agriculture Canada, for providing me with all the in- formation I needed about all the other previously described taxa in this genus, for many invaluable suggestions and for revising the manuscript. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 121 NATHALIS [OLE (PIERIDAE) IN THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES AND THE BAHAMAS Harry K. CLENCH Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 In the Lepidoptera of Florida Kimball (1965: 36) devotes most of his brief discussion of Nathalis iole Boisduval 1836 to an unusual sub- ject: the absence of early records of it from the state. He concludes, “Perhaps the species began to establish itself during the late 1920's,” and adds that a search should be made in collections for pre-1930 records of iole from Florida. Kimball based his contention chiefly on two points. First, Grossbeck (1917, see below) cited only a single Florida record of iole. Second, the late W. T. M. Forbes examined the collection of Harvard’s Museum of Comparative Zoology and reported (in litt. to Kimball) that it con- tained no iole earlier than a 1924 Coconut Grove specimen that “looks suspicious and an authentic series dated 1933-1934. A survey of the Carnegie Museum Collection, which contains much old Florida material, shows that our oldest Florida specimens of iole are: a male from Dunedin [Pinellas Co.], 3 April 1921, leg. W. S. Blatchley, and two from Miami [Dade Co.], October 1921, leg. J. Harold Matteson. It is noteworthy that the W. H. Edwards Collection has none, although he received many butterflies from Dr. William Wittfeld, who lived and collected at Georgiana [Brevard Co.], on the Indian River, in the 1880's; nor are there any taken by G. Krautwurm, who collected extensively for the museum at Lutz [Hillsborough Co.] and nearby Stemper, notably in 1911. In the American Museum of Natural History are the following pre- 1930 records of iole: a male from Jupiter [Palm Beach Co.], 1-24 February 1920, leg. W. C. Wood; a male from Ft. Myers [Lee Co.], 22 April 1922, leg. F. M. Jones; two females, Punta Gorda [Charlotte Co.], 18-19 April 1922; and a female from Homestead [Dade Co.], 18 April 1923: The older literature provides further interesting information. Scudder (1889: 1842) says of iole, “. . . not known in even southernmost Florida”; and farther on, “. . . does not appear to occur in the United States any- where east of Louisiana, although it is found in Cuba and Jamaica.” Skinner (1898: 63) gives the distribution of iole as “Ill., Mo. to Cala., N. Mex., Ariz., Tex., Mex. ...” and his supplement ( [1905]: 22) adds no further distributional data. Dyar (1901: 449) makes no mention of iole 122 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY in a list of winter (January and February) Lepidoptera taken near Lake Worth [Palm Beach Co.] in 1890 and 1900. The earliest notice of Florida iole that I can find is the one Kimball mentions, Grossbeck (1917: 9), who gives a single record, “Big Pine Key, Sept. 20 (Ds.).” This specimen was taken by William T. Davis— “Ds.’—in 1913, and is conserved in the Staten Island Institute. Published evidence and that in available collections, therefore, sup- port Kimball’s basic contention completely. The fairly extensive informa- tion is all consistent with an hypothesis that Nathalis iole was formerly absent from Florida, and that it invaded the southern part of the state, probably from Cuba, sometime before 1913. (Davis’s capture in the lower Florida keys could have been within a year or two of its first landfall and close to the original site.) It established itself and gradually extended its range northward. By 1920 it had reached Jupiter on the east coast, by 1921 the Tampa area (Dunedin) on the west coast, and in 1931 it was found in Atlanta, Georgia (Harris [1950]; 1972), about its present northern limit. If these dates are used, iole spread northward at an average rate of about 42 miles per year, possibly somewhat slower at first, faster later on. An important point (commented on by Klots, 1951) is that iole in the eastern part of its range is confined to the southernmost states (central Georgia southward). In the Mississippi Basin (see below) it ranges far to the north of this latitude. Nathalis iole may also be a relative newcomer in the Bahamas. The species is now known from four islands, all in the northern part of the archipelago: Grand Bahama (Rindge, 1955); New Providence (West, 1966); North Bimini (Rindge, 1952) and North Andros (Nicolls Town, June 1973, leg. Clench; unpublished ). In the present connection New Providence is the most instructive because it is by far the most thoroughly collected island in the Bahamas, and collections from there date back to the 1880’s at least. Charles J. Maynard made a large collection there in June 1897, conserved in the Museum of Compartive Zoology. Nathalis iole is not represented. J. L. Bonhote collected extensively on New Providence in 1898; his specimens are now in the British Museum. Sharpe (1900) published an account of them, but N. iole is not mentioned. W. W. Worthington col- lected a large lot of Bahama butterflies for Carnegie Museum in 1909- 1910. He visited many islands and was on New Providence in January 1909. He took no Nathalis iole. The American Museum Collection contains New Providence material taken by various collectors in 1912, 1915, 1929 and 1930 (reported in Rindge, 1952). No Nathalis iole is represented in this material, but these collections appear not to have VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 12s} been extensive so no particular significance can be attached to the absence of iole from them. The first known captures of iole on New Providence were the specimens taken by West in 1945, which he re- ported in 1966. Interestingly, iole is also represented in a small collection made on New Providence for Carnegie Museum in 1946. In sum, N. iole was probably absent from New Providence in 1897 and 1898 and could have been absent as late as 1930; but it was present in 1945. Nearly all species of Bahama butterflies have reached the islands from Hispaniola, Cuba or Florida. For the most part, each of these source areas generates a different, characteristic, pattern of distribution within the Bahamas, and most species from that source tend to follow the pattern. Unfortunately, the known distribution of iole is ambiguous. It is restricted to the northern islands, a pattern characteristic of in- vaders from Florida; but it also includes Andros. Invasion from Cuba to Andros to New Providence and other northern islands is both reason- able and in part substantiated by the ranges of other species. At present all we can say about the arrival of Nathalis iole in the Bahamas is that it probably reached the islands sometime between 1898 and 1945. The chances are that it came in the period 1920-1940, but this is by no means certain. It may have arrived from Florida, where iole was by then established, or it could have come in directly from Cuba. Now back to the mainland. Nathalis iole is divisible into three dif- ferent geographical components which, for want of a better term, may be called segregates. At present, the chief discriminating attribute of these segregates is the northward limit of their ranges. This seems a slender thread on which to hang such a speculation, but two further points prompt me to suggest it: (1) the varied northward limits of their distributions suggest physiological differences in their tolerance to cold and a possible further difference in their migratory tendencies; and (2) each of the three segregates is associated with a different southern part of the species range. The three segregates are as follows: 1. Southeastern. In the United States this segregate is confined to Florida and southern Georgia, with no evidence of repetitive northward migration. It is probably not cold tolerant. As detailed above, this segregate is a probable recent arrival in the United States from Cuba. The southern limits of its range include the northern Bahamas (where it is also a probable recent arrival), Cuba, Jamaica and possibly His- paniola (Brown & Heineman, 1972: 62 [“?” in table]). 2. Central. In America north of Mexico this segregate extends from 124 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Mississippi to Arizona, and far northward to Ontario, Manitoba, North Dakota, southeastern Wyoming, nearly all of Utah, and perhaps as far west as the eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevada in California (Warren Creek, 9000-9500 ft., ca. 5 mi. W Lee Vining, Mono Co.: Garth & Tilden, 1963: 88). Whether it is resident northward or occurs there only as a result of repeated immigration is not known, but most authors believe that the latter is the correct explanation. This segregate can tolerate temperatures below freezing and has been found flying at Colorado Springs as late as early December (Brown et al., 1956: 200; Brown, in litt.). Regardless of the nature of its northward occurrence, it differs conspicuously from the Southeastern segregate in being their at all. The southern limits of the range of this segregate include Guatemala (1 ¢, Carnegie Museum) and Mexico, where it is resident to altitudes of at least 7000 ft. (2150 m). The range appears to be old and probably has not changed significantly in historic times. Early authors did not men- tion it as occurring much north of the latitude of Illinois, but areas north of there were then poorly collected and in these areas iole is sporadic and generally uncommon. 3. Pacific. In the United States this segregate is confined to southern California (Emmel & Emmel, 1973: 22). The northernmost record that has come to my attention is Kennedy Meadows, Tulare Co. (anonymous reviewer), unless the Warren Creek record mentioned above should belong here. The occurrence of this segregate in California is spotty but it is locally common (as is true, inter alia, in Florida and the Bahamas), but nothing in its known range suggests that it is cold tolerant. Emmel & Emmel (loc. cit.) mention it as being found “occa- sionally . . . [at] high elevations in the mountains, especially in late summer, so this segregate may have a limited tendency to migrate. Southward the range includes the whole of Baja California. In summary, then, the Southeastern segregate does not range north- ward, is non-migratory and its southern limits are in the West Indies; the Central segregate ranges far northward, is probably migratory and its southern limits are in mainland Mexico and Guatemala; and the Pacific segregate does not range far northward, may be slightly migratory and its southern limit is in the peninsula of Baja California. At present the United States portions of the ranges of the three segregates appear to be slightly disjunct. Whether or not iole occurs in Alabama (where the Southeastern and Central segregates might meet) or in western Arizona (where the Central and Pacific segregates could be in contact) is of little moment in establishing the thesis of three segregates. VoLuME 30, NUMBER 2 125 It would be satisfying to be able to delineate their common boundaries (if they are indeed in contact) more precisely, but even with records from the intervening areas is would be no easy task. Despite careful comparison, the only difference among these segregates that I have been able to find in museum specimens is that in the Central segregate the hind wing upperside of the winter form female is usually yellow, less often pale orange; whereas at least in the Southeastern segregate, females of the winter form are as strongly orange as those of the sum- mer form. In material available to me, adequate dated specimens of the winter forms of all three segregates are few, however, and even this difference is not certain. Curiously, both the slight facies difference and the possible physio- logical differences seem to concern only the Central segregate. No evidence as yet would indicate any real intrinsic difference between the Southeastern and the Pacific segregates, even though they are widely separated geographically and the Central segregate intervenes. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to the following for their help in providing information on specimens in their care: Dr. Frederick H. Rindge, American Museum of Natural History, New York; Dr. George O. Pratt, Jr., director, and Mr. Joseph Burke, Staten Island Institute of Arts and Sciences, Staten Island, New York. I also thank an anonymous reviewer of an earlier version of this paper. He provided a northern locality record of iole in California and clarified the probable status of the Warren Creek record. LITERATURE CITED Brown, F. M., D. Err & B. Rotcer. 1956 (1954-1956). Colorado butterflies. Proc. Denver Mus. Nat. Hist., nos. 3-7: viii + 368 p., ill. Brown, F. M. & B. HEINEMAN. 1972. Jamaica and Its Butterflies. London (Clas- sey): xv + 478 p., ill. Dyar, H. G. 1901. Notes on the winter Lepidoptera of Lake Worth, Florida. Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington 4: 446-485. EMMEL, T. C. & J. F. Emmet. 1973. The butterflies of southern California. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co., Science Ser. 26: xi + 148 p., ill. GartH, J. S. & J. W. TiLpEN. 1963. Yosemite butterflies. J. Res. Lepid. 2: 1-95, ill. GrossBECck, J. A. 1917. Insects of Florida. IV. Lepidoptera. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 37: 1-147. Harris, L., Jr. [1950]. The butterflies of Georgia. Revised. Georgia Soc. Nat., Bull. 5 (mimeographed): [3] + vii + 29 + [4] p. . 1972. Butterflies of Georgia. Norman, Oklahoma (Univ. Oklahoma Press): xvi + [6] + 326 p., ill. Kmsa.L, C. P. 1965. The Lepidoptera of Florida, an annotated checklist. Gaines- ville (Florida Dept. Agr.): v + 363 p., ill. 126 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Krots, A. B. 1951. A field guide to the butterflies. Boston (Houghton Mifflin): xvi + 349 p., ill. Rinvcr, F. H. 1952. The butterflies of the Bahama Islands. American Mus. Novit., sailajeev dls) joy _ 1955. The butterflies of the Van Voast—American Museum of Natural History expedition to the Bahama Islands, British West Indies. American Mus. Novits, 4 1715-220 po. allt Scupper, S. H. 1889. The butterflies of the eastern United States and Canada with special reference to New England. Cambridge, Mass. (author): xxiv + p. 1-766 (vol. 1); xi+ p. 767-1774 (vol. II); vii+p. 1775-1958 + 89 pls. maps (vol. III). SHARPE, E. M. 1900. Ona collection of butterflies of the Bahamas. Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1900: 197-203, ill. SKINNER, H. 1898. A synonymic catalogue of the North American Rhopalocera. Philadelphia (American Ent. Soc.): xvi + 100 + xiv p. . 1905. Same, supplement no. 1. [i] + 34 p. West, B. K. 1966. Butterflies of New Providence Island, Bahamas. Ent. Rec. 78: 174-179, 206-210. MASS HIBERNATION SITE FOR NYMPHALIS VAU-ALBUM (NYMPHALIDAE ) Hibernation is cominon in several genera of butterflies and especially among Nymphalidae. However, in most cases the literature on such hibernating is rather nebulous and repetitive, without specific observational support. One takes for granted that hibernation spots are found beneath debris, loose bark, in hollow trees, etc. Therefore I was interested to see fourteen Compton tortoise shells (Nymphalis vau-album (Denis & Schiffermiller)) actually entering a hibernation site. The observations took place near a radio relay tower at the summit of Mohawk Mountain, Mohawk State Forest, near Cornwall, Connecticut on 15 October 1974 between 1300-1400 hrs. EST. During this still, warm period my attention was drawn to several butterflies fluttering about near the top of the tower some 20-30’ about the ground. Viewing them with my binoculars I made them out to be N. vau-album. Several also rested on the dark green screening of the building windows 6’ above the ground. In each case there seemed to be a concentration at one common area. Watching the junction at the corner of the building and the roof, I could see the butterflies alight, then walk to an opening between metal stripping and the wall. The opening, approximately 2” long and *4” wide, was the focal spot for the butterflies. The butterflies approached this opening, folded their wings and disappeared within. Some would stay inside for a short time, then re- emerge, fly about in a circle, return and re-enter. According to C. L. Remington (pers. comm.), in Autumn, nymphalines change their phototactic responses and are attracted to dark areas. This opening provided such a spot, appearing black against the white walls. The greatest number of individuals seen at any one time was fourteen, and all seemed to be using the opening. Although some individuals were seen to enter and re-emerge, most stayed inside. Therefore, it is felt that this area was a definite hibernation spot for this species. Nose S. Procror. Biology Department, Southern Connecticut State College, 501 Crescent St., New Haven, Connecticut 06515. -I VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 12, OBSERVATIONS OF EUPACKARDIA CALLETA IN SOUTHERN TEXAS (SATURNIIDAE )! THOMAS A. MILLER U. S. Army Medical Bioengineering Research and Development Laboratory, USAMBRDL BLDG 568, Fort Detrick, Maryland 21701 Eupackardia calleta (Westwood) is known to occur in southern Texas from the area of Victoria and Beeville south into the Rio Grande Valley and westward into the Big Bend Area (Collins & Weast, 1961; Ferguson, 1971-72). During the latter half of 1974, while temporarily assigned to Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio (Bexar County), I was able to make field observations and rear this interesting and little reported saturniid. From 9 August-4 December, populations of E. calleta were studied at 13 locations in 7 southern Texas counties (Karnes, Goliad, Bee, Live Oak, McMullen, Jim Wells and Duval), primarily by observing immature stages on one of this species’ known food plants, cenizo, Leucophyllum frutescens (Berland. ). Fifty-seven cocoons were collected from 9 August-28 September. These contained: 18 viable pupae (15 4; 3 2); 37 pupal cases (15 4; 15 2; 7 undetermined sex) from which the adults had emerged; 1 parasi- tized female pupa; and 1 dried, intact larva. All of these cocoons, with viable pupae or otherwise, had a very worn, smooth surface and it was not possible to use the appearance to estimate the cocoon age. Likewise, the age of the cocoon could not be estimated by determining whether or not the silken attachment had ligatured the stem of the food plant, since this condition was observed for some of the cocoons with viable pupae and some without. However, these observations of the appearance of the cocoon surface and the ligaturing of the food plant stems suggest that some of the cocoons with viable pupae were probably as old as some of those from which the adults had emerged. The eighteen viable pupae were kept outdoors at San Antonio and the adults emerged in 1974 as follows: 14 Sept. (1 é); 15 Sept. (1 ¢); 17 Sept. (1 ¢); 18 Sept. (1 ¢ ); 24 Sept. (2 6,1 2); 26 Sept. (2 ¢); 2 Oct. Gere) Oct. (2 3); 9 Nov. (i ¢); 10 Oct: (1 2); HL Oct (1.3, 1 2); 13 Oct. (1 ¢); 29 Oct. (1 ¢). Although these pupae were removed from their original collection locations, it is probable that the period of emergence at San Antonio generally coincided with the period of natural 1 The opinions contained herein are the private views of the author and should not be construed as official or reflecting the views of the Department of the Army. 128 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY emergence farther south, since, as noted later, naturally-occurring males were observed in Jim Wells and Live Oak counties on 28 September. An additional 47 cocoons collected between 26 October and 29 Novem- ber included 27 with viable pupae (15 ¢, 12 2). The 20 cocoons with- out viable pupae were not examined to determine the nature of the contents, but all had the same smooth, worn appearance mentioned earlier, indicating that they were not recently formed. The cocoons with viable pupae were of recent origin because they were white and powdery in appearance, and had short, loose silken threads on the surface or silken networks still attached to various parts of the food plant. Observa- tions of the larvae reared at San Antonio during 1974 showed that they spin a silken network upon which they construct the typical teardrop- shaped cocoon. After the cocoon has taken form, the larva secretes a white fluid which, upon drying, imparts the powdery appearance. The silken threads and the powdery appearance evidently disappear with weathering and their presence is a reliable indicator of recent formation. Several naturally occurring adult males of E. calleta were observed in two instances in southern Texas. The first instance relates to the female that emerged at San Antonio on 24 September. This female was transported to Live Oak Co. on 28 September and set out at 0845 CST. Seven males were attracted from the surrounding cenizo fields within 5 minutes. The eggs from this mated female were used to colonize this species at San Antonio. This method of survey for adult males would have been used more extensively if there had been more females among the viable pupae collected up to 28 September. The second instance was in Jim Wells Co. on 28 September where binoculars were used to observe males flying over the extensive cenizo fields that occur along U.S. Highway 281. The straight-line flights of 3 males were observed for some time in the hope that the moths would pause, circle, or drop into the vegetation and possibly indicate the presence of a naturally occurring female. No such behavior was observed, and the males eventually flew out of sight. Since no observations were made between 28 September and 16 November, the dates of occurrence of early instar larvae were not determined. However, 4th- and 5th-instar larvae were observed in Goliad and Bee counties between 16 November and 4 December. Larvae observed on 16 and 29 November were inactive, with only a few feed- ing or spinning cocoons. This was probably due to the cool temperatures (6-7° C) prevailing at the time. The last observations in Goliad and Bee counties were made on 4 December. At that time a few more cocoons had been formed, but most of the larvae were still inactive and VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 129 not feeding. Eighteen 5Sth-instar larvae were collected on 4 December and transported to San Antonio where they were kept on cenizo cuttings. Some of these larvae began spinning in transit; all had spun cocoons by 7 December. The fact that these larvae began spinning within hours after being placed in a warm environment suggests that they might have remained inactive on the plants in Goliad and Bee counties (as they had from 16 November-4 December) until the return of warm weather in early spring. Unfortunately, follow-up observations of these natural populations could not be made. Although the foregoing observations provide specific records of the occurrence of E. calleta life stages in southern Texas, they are from scattered areas and chronologically incomplete. As such, they provide only limited insight into some aspects of the biology of this species. One interesting observation is that certain of the cocoons, with or without viable pupae, were very similar in surface appearance; and that cocoons of both types had ligatured the food plant stems. This suggests that for individuals of a single generation there is considerable varia- tion in the time period between cocoon formation and adult emergence. In this regard, Kendall (1974) has observed that some E. calleta pupae remain in diapause for up to 22 months. Thus it is understandable that confusion exists concerning generations represented by the reported annual bimodal emergence (March and September—November) of E. calleta in southern Texas. Collins & Weast (1961) reported that E. cal- leta emerges in southern Texas from late October through November, with a partial second emergence occurring the following March. Fergu- son (1971-72) reported that there is a partial emergence of E. calleta in March in southern Texas, followed by a larger emergence which takes place from September-November. Although these authors do not specifi- cally refer to these emergences as generations, this is alluded to in later statements concerning the fact that E. calleta is known to emerge in Arizona only in August, and that there may be only one generation of this species in Arizona. Annual bimodal emergences are known for other saturniids, such as Hyalophora cecropia (Linnaeus). In Illinois, H. cecropia has two distinct periods of emergence which are very close together (May-early June and late June-July). However, these two periods of emergence are known from an intensive 3-year study by Sternburg & Waldbauer (1969) to represent a single generation. In the case of E. calleta, the March and September-November emergences may represent individuals from two or even three earlier generations, but this situation requires considerably more detailed study to be understood. The observation that larvae remain inactive on the food 130 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY plants during cool periods in late November and December could repre- sent a mechanism whereby the development of individuals from a single generation becomes out of phase; with the adults eventually emerging during one or the other of the annual bimodal periods. Certainly, there was considerable variation in the progress of development among in- dividuals that might be considered to represent a “fall” generation; some had formed cocoons and pupated as early as 16 November in Karnes Co.; others were still in the 4th instar as late as 29 November in Bee Co. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank Roy O. Kendall, of San Antonio, for sharing his records and knowledge of this saturniid species and for taking the time to review this paper; and to thank Captains Alan R. Gillogly and Row- land N. Wilkinson, formerly of Fort Sam Houston, who accompanied me on some of the field trips to southern Texas. LITERATURE CITED Cotuins, M. M. & R. D. Weasr. 1961. Wild Silk Moths of the United States. Collins Radio Co., Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 138 p. Fercuson, D. C. 1971-72. Bombycoidea (Saturniidae). In R. B. Dominick et al., The Moths of America North of Mexico, fasc. 20.2, 269 p., 22 pls. E. W. Classey, Ltd. London. KENDALL, R. O. 1974. Personal communication. STERNBURG, J. G. & G. P. WALpBAUER. 1969. Bimodal emergence of adult Cecropia moths under natural conditions. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 62: 1422-1429. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 131 EMERGENCE OF HYALOPHORA CECROPIA (SATURNIIDAE) BLOCKED BY SEEDS IN THE COCOON VALVE G. P. WALDBAUER AND J. G. STERNBURG Department of Entomology, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801 In the fall of 1974 we collected in Champaign, Illinois, a cocoon of Hyalophora cecropia (L.) that, unknown to us, had the exit valve blocked by three unshelled sunflower seeds and half of a peanut kernel which had presumably been inserted there by a bird. At that time the cocoon was heavy and, when shaken, felt as if it contained a living pupa. It was chilled to break diapause and then placed in an incubator at 25°C with other cocoons. When it became obvious that nothing would emerge from this cocoon, we cut it open and discovered the seeds and a dead adult female that apparently had been unable to push through the blocked valve. We have found many cocoons with foreign objects, usually seeds, forced into the exit valve, but this is the first time we have seen direct evidence that this can result in mortality. Reports of seeds within the valves of cecropia cocoons are scattered throughout the literature. For example, Minot (1870) found beech nuts, and LeBaron (1870) and anonymous (1870) found corn kernels. Wald- bauer & Sternburg (1967) found a variety of seeds and an earthworm. Every fall and winter since 1965, we have found foreign objects in cecropia cocoons collected in or near Champaign and Urbana, Illinois, but we recorded data only during the first three years. The number and percentage of cocoons with foreign objects found each year are: 1965-66, 15 (3.1%); 1966-67, 7 (3.5%); and 1967-68, 32 (2.9%). Twenty-two of these cocoons contained living pupae, one contained a dead larva, and 31 had pupae that had been killed by a woodpecker (Waldbauer & Sternburg, 1970). Forty-one cocoons contained one foreign object, eight contained two, four contained three, and one contained four. The 54 cocoons contained 75 different objects: 26 unshelled sunflower seeds, 21 corn kernels, 11 unidentified pieces of nut meat, eight shelled sun- flower seeds, two half peanut kernels, two whole acorns, two pieces of shelled acorn, one entire peanut kernel, one piece of Brazil nut, and one dead earthworm. All of these cocoons were in exposed positions on a twig or branch. One was on the branch of a shrub (Cornus stolonifera) at a height of 1.2 m. The rest were on the twigs or branches of trees— mostly Acer saccharinum, Betula spp., or Malus spp.—at an average height of approximately 2.38 m above the ground (range: 0.3 to 6.1 m). With one exception, the objects were pushed through the valve of 132 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY the outer envelope into the space between the outer and inner envelopes [see Waldbauer & Sternburg (1967) for illustration]. The exception was a corm kernel pushed through a hole in the outer envelope at the end opposite the valve. Several birds that occur in this vicinity are reported to insert seeds in crevices, knot holes, and other crannies: the bluejay (Bent, 1946), the white-breasted nuthatch (Bent, 1948), and the red-bellied and red- headed woodpeckers (Bent, 1939). However, only the bluejay is com- mon in the urban environment in which we collected most of the cocoons. We do not know how frequently blockage of the valve is sufficient to prevent the escape of the adult from the cocoon because we removed any foreign objects we noticed. A seed or two in a cocoon may have escaped our notice. Indeed, we often found sunflower seeds and corn kernels, apparently pushed out of the valve by emerging adults, at the bottom of our emergence cages. However, a blockage large enough to prevent the moth’s exit has obviously escaped our notice only once. Eleven of the 54 cocoons mentioned above appeared to be sufficiently blocked to prevent emergence, but we do not know if this would have happened, either because we removed the objects or because the cocoon did not contain a living pupa. LITERATURE CITED ANnonyMous. 1870. Corn kernels in cocoons of cecropia moth. Amer. Ent. 2: 370. Bent, A.C. 1939. Life histories of North American woodpeckers. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 174, 334 p. Bent, A. C. 1946. Life histories of North American jays, crows and _ titmice. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 191, 495 p. Bent, A. C. 1948. Life histories of North American nuthatches, wrens, thrashers and their allies. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 195, 475 p. LeBaron, W. 1870. Corn kemels in cocoon of cecropia moth. Amer. Ent. 2: 177. Minor, C. S. 1870. Beech-nuts in cocoon of the cecropia. Amer. Ent. 2: 242. Wappavuer, G. P. & J. G. Srernpurc. 1967. Differential predation on cocoons of Hyalophora cecropia (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae) spun on shrubs and trees. Ecology 48: 312-315. Wavppaver, G. P. & J. G. Srernsurc. 1970. Hairy and downy woodpecker attacks on cocoons of urban Hyalophora cecropia and other saturniids (Lepi- doptera). Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 63: 1366-1369. VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 133 DESCRIPTIONS OF THE IMMATURE STAGES AND BIOLOGY OF VITULA LUGUBRELLA (RAGONOT ) (PYRALIDAE: PHYCITINAE )! H. H. NeEunzic Department of Entomology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 Vitula lugubrella was described by Ragonot in 1887. In 1901, Hamp- son, who completed volume 8 of Ragonot’s “Mémoires sur le Lépi- dopteres’, included a slightly more extensive description [based in part on Moodna ostrinella (Clemens)] and a figure of the adult of this phycitine. Heinrich in 1956 described and partially illustrated the male genitalia. The present paper gives information on the appearance of the last stage larva, pupa and habits of the larval stage. Last Stage Larva Color.” Head yellowish brown; all groups of muscle attachments usually pale brown, indistinct; small brown patch at notch of postgenal region of head, with darker pigmentation extending dorsally along posterior margin of head capsule; hypostoma with brown to black markings; mandibles yellowish brown between articulations becoming dark brown to black distally and dark brown to black along lateral margins. Prothoracic shield yellowish brown to brown without any distinctly contrasting patches of color. Prespiracular plate yellowish brown to brown. Remainder of prothorax yellowish white, white or grayish white (translucent pink to pinkish white in living larva). Mesothorax and metathorax yellowish white, white or grayish white (living larva translucent pink to pinkish white; young last stage larva with internal organs readily evident, including dark purple gut and pale, whitish tracheae); mesothoracic ring pale brown to dark brown, usually darker along inner margin. Thoracic legs mostly yellowish brown. Abdomen similar to mesothorax and metathorax; caudal segments usually more yellowish (living larva with pink and dark internal color not as evident on caudal segments ). Eighth abdominal segment ring pale brown to brown, usually paler than meso- thoracic ring. Anal shield pale translucent yellowish brown, without distinct markings. Peritreme of spiracles pale brown to brown. Structural characters. Entire length 12.5-18.5 mm. Width of head 1.19-1.32 mm. Mandibles (Fig. 1) with 3 distal teeth. Sensilla styloconica of maxillae (Fig. 2) simple, tapering to a point, curved mesally. 1 Paper No. 4769 of the Journal Series of the North Carolina Agricultural Experiment station, Raleigh. 2 Of preserved larva, unless otherwise indicated. 134 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY a 544092 9 0:5 0%0.00 599, 290 y81000 09a 0 6 + 110 aParorrons 5 Seofo * of eon: e O Soe * 0 40 OD: * ve aPe:0 MISS oe +o teen ot 0% tai 4 S) Figs. 1-5. Vitula lugubrella. 1, mesal view of right mandible of last stage larva; 2, mesal view of left maxilla of last stage larva; 3, lateral view of head, prothorax and mesothorax of last stage larva; 4, dorsal view of cephalic segments of pupa; 5, dorsal view of caudal segments of pupa. VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 135 Most morphological characters similar to Vitula edmandsae (Packard), as described and figured by MacKay (1972), with at least the following exceptions: On the head, L1 distinctly above imaginary line between A2 and A3 (Fig. 3) (V. edmandsae with L1 very close to, or on, an imaginery line between A2 and A3); prothoracic shield with distance between XD2 and SDI only slightly less than distance between SD1 and SD2 (Fig. 3) (V. edmandsae with distance between XD2 and SD1 distinctly less than between SD1 and SD2; abdominal segments 1-5 with D2 setae about 2 longer than D1 setae (V. edmandsae with D2 setae on 1-5 about 3X longer than D1 setae). Pupa Color. Yellowish brown to brown. Structural characters. Length (excluding cremastral “spines” ) 8.3-10.0 mm. Width across mesothorax 2.4-2.6 mm. Head minutely granulate on front; vertex broadly produced anterior to prothorax (Fig. 4). Thoracic spiracles distinct, narrow, protruding (Fig. 4) dorsum of metathorax with 2 groups of about 16 shallow punctures. Cephalic 4% to %3 of abdominal segments 1-3 with numerous shallow punctures; punctures usually do not reach spiracles on segment 2 and barely extend to spiracles on segment 3; segments 4—7 with numerous shallow punctures encircling segments; segment 8 with 2 groups of dorsal punctures and D1 and L2 setae (D1 missing on some specimens); segment 9 with D1, L2, and L3 setae and sometimes vestigial SV2 setae; segment 10 with 12 stout, hooked setae (Fig. 5); gibba absent. Material Examined Texas: Ft. Davis, 8 larvae, 1 pupa, Quercus grisea, Liebmann 9-IX-73, Coll. H. H. Neunzig; 3 larvae, Quercus grisea, Liebmann 28-IV-74, Coll. H. H. Neunzig; 5 larvae, 2 pupae, Quercus grisea, Liebmann 27-IV-75, Coll. H. H. Neunzig. Larval Habits Larvae of Vitula lugubrella live within the dried galls of Atrusca spp. which occur on Quercus grisea. These cynipid galls are of the “oak apple” type and are approximately 15-30 mm in diameter. The small larvae feed just inside the outer covering of the gall on the fibrous material that constitutes most of the internal structure (Fig. 6). Late or last stage larvae also feed on these peripheral fibers and, in addition, frequently tunnel through the center of the gall, including the central chamber in which the cynipid develops (Fig. 7). Large quantities of conspicuous, loose frass accumulate within infested galls. Pupation takes place in a loosely woven silk cocoon within the gall. Vitula lugubrella apparently is multivoltine because larvae, of various sizes, and pupae, at different stages of development, are present in galls in the spring and also in the fall. Vitula lugubrella is the 2nd North American phycitine species known to be associated with “oak apple” galls. Sosipatra thurberiae (Dyar) 136 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Migs. 6-7. Vitula lugubrella. 6, partially grown larva in gall of Atrusca sp.; some of the frass in the gall was deposited by a large larva of V. lugubrella that inhabited the gall earlier; 7, last stage larva in tunnel made through center of gall of Atrusca sp. has previously been reported by Heinrich (1956) as an inhabitant of these leaf galls. It is interesting to note that Roesler (1973) has synony- mized Sosipatra and Vitula indicating a close relationship between lugubrella and thurberiae VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 137 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The drawings were prepared by Mrs. Lily Shen. LITERATURE CITED Herricu, C. 1956. American moths of the subfamily Phycitinae. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 207. 581 p. MacKay, M. R. 1972. Larval sketches of some Microlepidoptera, chiefly North American. Mem. Ent. Soc. Canada 88. 83 p. Raconot, E. L. 1887. Diagnoses of North American Phycitidae and Galleriidae. Paris. 20 p. Raconot, E. L. & G. F. Hampson. 1901. Monographie des Phycitinae et des Galleriinae II. In Mém. sur les Lépidoptéres. 8. St. Petersburg. 602 p. Roeser, R. U. 1973. Phycitinae. Parts 1 and 2. In Microlepidoptera Palaearctica. A, Vienna. 752 p. & 137 p. SUMMER MONARCH (DANAUS PLEXIPPUS) IN SOUTHERN TEXAS (DANAIDAE ) The monarch, Danaus plexippus (L.), is by far the best-known butterfly in North America. During several years’ personal observation in the Brownsville, Cameron Co. area of southern Texas, monarchs were normally observed only from late Sep- tember through April. Adults were most commonly seen in the fall and early spring as they migrated south and north, respectively. However, in warmer years monarchs were observed during the winter months. Other observers (see Urquhart 1960, The Monarch Butterfly, U. Toronto Press, pp. 165, 172-173; Yeager 1974, News Lep. Soc. 1974(3), p. 3) have reported similar near total absences of monarchs in southern Texas during summer months. Summer breeding of monarchs is normally limited to northern Texas and areas to the north. However, in June and July 1966 larvae of the monarch were found in Browns- ville on milkweed. Adult monarchs reared from wild larvae in the laboratory emerged on 17 June (2), 19 June (4), 3 July (1), 5 July (1) and 11 July (2). Climatic factors could have been involved in this southern extension of summer breeding of the monarch in 1966. Temperatures during January-May were cooler than normal. January was wetter than normal followed by three months of very little rainfall (2.16 in.) until a very wet May (6.05 in. vs. normal 2.50). Another possible factor needs to be considered. The monarch butterfly is subject to cyclical population crashes which have attributed to a cytoplasmic polyhedrosis virus (Urquhart 1970, Atalanta 3(2): 1-11). The year 1966 was characterized by generally low populations throughout most of North America, including southern Texas (Urquhart 1970, op. cit.). If the monarch is less prone to migrate during low population periods as suggested by Urquhart (1970, op. cit.), this aberrant summer occurrence of the monarch in the Brownsville area may have been the indirect result of a virus outbreak. RayMonp W. Neck, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, John H. Reagan Building, Austin, Texas, 78701. 138 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY BOOK REVIEWS Tue Burrerruies OF NortH AMERICA, by William H. Howe, Contributing Editor. 1975. Doubleday and Co., Inc., Garden City, L. I. New York. xiii + 633 p. +97 plates. Price $39.95 U.S. for the standard edition. This long awaited work, including sections by twenty contributors, edited and illustrated by Howe, fails to meet expectations. Some sections are very well done while others are not. These will be treated in specific terms subsequently. The general format of the book follows that of Holland’s Butterfly Book, including the general introduction and the sequence of presentation of families. The family sequence is awkward in comparison with modern books and checklists. The work begins with the danaids and ends with the Hesperioidea. The colored plates are bound in the middle of the volume. Also included are a glossary of terms, a short bibliography and general index plus an index of food plants. General criticisms of the book relate to nomenclature, literature citations, the plates and ease of use. It must be recognized that considerable time may elapse between the date when the finished manuscript is submitted to the publisher and the release of the bound volume. On this basis, the author can be forgiven for not including taxonomic work published after late 1973. On the other hand, much work in some families prior to that date is omitted, while in other families it is included. There is a basic lack of consistency in this respect. It probably relates to the fact that the various contributors submitted their entries over a wide time period, however it is the job of the editor to note additional work and insure that the contributors make any necessary changes. Apparently the individual authors saw neither the final manuscript nor the galley proofs. It also appears that the plates were executed without consultation with the authors and prior to the writing of many of the sections. The authors should have been given the opportunity to select the specimens illustrated. Despite an initial statement to the contrary on p. vii, a number of new taxa are introduced (which may cause problems with authority) and other taxa are omitted without comment. There is considerable lumping of subspecies in some genera without appropriate discussion. There is no reference for the new Bauer names in the Melitaeinae, for example, and one assumes that the book constitutes the first publication of these taxa. With respect to the Code of the I.C.Z.N. ( Arts. 11, 13, 68-73), some or all of these names may represent nomina nuda. No holo- types have been designated; in most instances no type localities are indicated; in several cases the accompanying text does not clearly distinguish how the new subspecies differs from the related subspecies. Other problems in the text include incorrect and incomplete distribution information, incorrect and incomplete flight periods, and too many typographical errors. The first two categories could have been avoided by checking original descriptions of many of the species and available regional books and checklists, as well as the “Annual Summary’ in the News of The Lepidopterists’ Society. Although a bibliography appears at the end of the book, I question the rationale of its selection. A number of pertinent entries are omitted, while others of lesser value are included. Author and date citations included in the main text do not appear in the bibliography in many cases. Regarding ease of use, I find it awkward to have the plates bound in the middle of such a large volume. A more critical feature is the lack of page references in the plate legends, although the text descriptions cite plate and figure. The color quality of the plates requires some comment. Watercolors can come close to modern photography, and there are some practical book production problems that favor their use, but they definitely detract from the scientific value VoLUME 30, NUMBER 2 139 of this book. There is a distinct color shift to green and blue-green in many of the plates. This is especially noticed in the Hesperioidea where the warm browns are gray-green-brown and in the lycaenids where many of the colors are off-register. Part of this relates to poor quality control in the printing. I had occasion to check several copies of the book. On given plates, the colors were not uniform throughout the copies. A number of plates have a pastel color background, usually green or blue, so that better definition is given to the specimens represented. The intensity of the background varied considerably from copy to copy, with concomitant color shifts in the specimens depicted. This situation was prominent in three copies examined, although not the same plates were involved. Based upon comments from correspondents who have seen other copies of the book, some do not exhibit this problem to the extent that the copies I examined did. The unrealistic blue and red tones throughout the book, however, appear to stem from the original plates. While scientific illustrators may take “artist’s license” to insure reasonable reproduction of their subjects in the final printed form, Howe has overdone this technique in many cases, producing an artificial and unrealistic portrayal. Many of the plates have a “washed out” aspect, which again may result from production difficulties, but this should not occur in a book of this scope. Generally, the colors are disappointing. The lycaenids, in many cases, should have been illustrated larger than life size. In many of the blues, it is difficult to tell just what is being repre- sented in the figures. Other problems relate to the mixing of families, genera and species over a number of plates. In some plates, examples from as many as six different families appear, when there is no valid reason for doing se. Another problem is the figuring of the male, female and underside of a given species over three separate plates. Initially some thought should have been given to the arrangement of the sexes and. species so that the reader would not have to leaf through several plates to find all the illustrations for a given insect. The species corresponding to a given genus should have been uniformly grouped. One wonders why Figure 32 which illustrates maculation in Parnassius was placed on p. 211 in the Speyeria discussion. On pp. 578-579, several addenda regarding distribution and taxonomy appear noting recent work. If some addenda could be included, why not all of the new works? It would have made the book both current and of more value. Considering the magnitude and scope of this project, it seems strange that not a single genitalic sketch appears, excepting a generalized drawing in the introductory portion. In view of the, in many cases, marginal plates, especially in the blues and some of the Hesperioidea, genitalic sketches of the difficult species would have been very valuable. These would have been extremely useful in separating look- alike species in such genera as Lerodea, Lerema, Nastra, Bolla, Cogia, Erynnis, Staphylos and Thorybes. This is also true in several other families and genera such as Euphydryas, Philotes, Oeneis, etc. In a number of instances, it was noted that the subspecies figured in a plate, with associated collection locality stated in the plate legend, did not agree with the text description of the distribution for that subspecies. The plates and associated text should have been carefully reviewed to prevent such inconsistencies. This situation is going to cause confusion and perpetuate misconceptions. There are also some misidentified species in the plates. These will be treated later. On the positive side, the introductory material by Harry Clench (butterfly anatomy, biology, etc.) and Alexander Klots (scientific nomenclature, collecting, preserving, etc.) is extremely useful and informative to the amateur and _ profes- sional alike. These are perhaps the best done sections in the book. The overall editing appears to have been carefully done to insure uniformity of format, a formidable task when twenty contributors are involved. SATYRIDAE. The text appears basically correct, although I prefer the approach 140 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY that assigns most of the North American Coenonympha to tullia rather than the book approach which treats inornata, ochracea, ampelos, etc. as separate species. There are several recent revisions in the Satyridae that are not included. The concerned reader would do well to consult L. D. Miller's revisions in the Euptychiini pub- lished in the Allyn Museum Bulletin series. The Heitzman and dos Passos revision of Lethe should also be consulted (Trans. Amer. Entomol. Soc., 100: 52-99, 1974). Erebia debanensis is incorrectly identified as E. youngi rileyi, while discussion of E. debanensis, inuitica and semo is omitted. Incomplete distribution data are given for Erebia callias, magdalena, Oeneis alberta daura and Gyrocheilus patrobas tritonia. The latter is quite common in New Mexico in Grant and Sierra Counties. Records have appeared in published regional lists and in the Lep. Soc. News. Incomplete and incorrect data are given for Oeneis jutta reducta which was described from Montana and is found in eight Wyoming counties in addition to Colorado. The discussions of Cercyonis meadii mexicana and nominate meadii seem to be juxta- posed to some extent. It should be noted that the flight period for Paramecera allyni Miller (not xicaque which is Mexican) is normally from mid-July into early August, and not late summer as stated. The following errors were noted in the plates: Pl. 4, f. 22, Coenonympha ochracea brenda was described from the “Los Angeles area”, although Brown in his discussion of the Edwards’ types casts doubt upon this locality, suggesting the Great Basin. The Utah collection site is slightly odd, although I have taken brenda phenotypes in extreme western Nevada; Pl. 5, f. 1, the specimen shown is Erebia rossii gabrieli and not E. r. kuskoquima (note col- lection site and text discussion of distribution); Pl. 5, f. 16 is E. theano ethela and not demmia (note collection site, demmia is found only in one area of southern Colorado); Pl. 5, f. 18-19, specimens shown are Coenonympha ochracea subfusca and not C. o. furcae (note collection site and compare with text and Pl. 4, f. 23-24); Pl. 9, f. 12 is Oeneis bore/taygete and not O. melissa gibsoni. NYMPHALIDAE. A number of nomenclatural changes occur in this section, most without adequate comment. A number of new taxa are introduced and the inclusion of recent taxonomic work is not consistent. All of the Asterocampa taxa are treated as separate species. Two recently described subspecies of Euphydryas chalcedona are included in the text, while two earlier described subspecies of E. editha, alebarki Ferris and gunnisonensis Brown are omitted, although there is reference to the occurrence of E. editha in Wyoming and Colorado. J. Scott’s work in Poladryas is omitted. It is stated that Nymphalis californica herri is the Rocky Mountain race. This subspecies was described from the Buckhorn Mountains in Washington and is found in the Priest River area of Idaho. Specimens from southwestern New Mexico through Wyoming are typical californica. The character by which Vanessa atalanta rubria is separated from nominate atalanta is reversed; rubria exhibits a somewhat smaller subapical white bar rather than a larger bar. The main problem with this section is the treatment of the genus Speyeria. I disagree entirely with the elevation of nevadensis and electa to species status, and with several other nomenclatural changes. This assignment totally ignores the work that Grey and Moeck have done in studying the distributions and color phases of western Speyeria. Additionally, leto and adiaste are also elevated to species status. There is perhaps sound basis for the latter, but considerable further study is neces- sary with respect to leto. I do not accept minor variations in larval stages as the basis for separation at the species level. The form clio in S. mormonia eurynome has been given subspecific status. I can see no basis whatsoever for this action. Unsilvered forms are typical in all mormonia populations. I have taken mixed pairs in copulo. The author seems to haye ignored the Rocky Mountain populations of atlantis and callippe in his elevation of nevadensis and electa to species rank. The misconceptions are too numerous to detail here. Two other taxa are treated to provide resolutions to two long-standing problems. S. zerene sordida is treated as VoLuME 30, NuMBER 2 141 an aberrant form of bremnerii and is probably correct. The introductory section in Speyeria alludes to the pfoutsi and platina problem, but the ensuing text does not resolve it. Skinner’s type series for S. zerene platina was a mixture of several species, which led Gunder to describe pfoutsi. The taxon pfoutsi should be considered a synonym of platina. The new species S. egleis toiyabe Howe merits some comment. The figure reference in the text (p. 237) is incorrect as the reader is directed to Plate 31, f. 13 rather than f. 14. Apparently only the holotype has been designated without a type series. This is unfortunate as there is no discussion concerning the variation of facies within this subspecies. What is shown as the holotype (Pl. 31, f. 14) resembles quite closely some of the pale disc specimens from the egleis cline found in the Pine Creek area of Elko Co., Nevada. Several items were noted in the plates: Pl. 34, f. 1 is a very poor rendition of Boloria eunomia ursadentis. This subspecies is distinctly pale and yellow-brown. Regarding the related text discussion of this species, it should be noted that it has been found to date only at high altitude on the Beartooth Plateau as cited in the original description (J. Res. Lep. 9(4) :243-248, 1970 [1971]). Northen Wyoming and southern Montana colonies of ewnomia are closer to dawsoni than to any other subspecies. Pl. 34, f. 3, the specimen figured is typical low altitude eunomia nr. dawsoni; nichollae is very dark, almost melanic, and apparently occurs above tree- line only at the edges of snow fields. The colors are misleading in a number of Boloria figures. LIBYTHEIDAE. There is considerable confusion in the text (p. 258) and in Pl. 47, f. 14-15. The description of L. carinenta applies to L. bachmanii larvata and vice versa. The plate figures depict /arvata and not carinenta. RIODINIDAE. Celephelis is combined into seven species which seems an improvement over McAlpine’s recent splitting of the genus. Some nomenclatural changes are mentioned. LYCAENIDAE. This section is generally well done. Several minor items are noted. The subspecies minnehaha is applied erroneously, as did Holland, to the montane Colorado population of Plebejus shasta. This situation was explained by the author in 1970 (Ent. News 81:203-207). Pl. 59, f. 17 does not fit at all the con- cept of P. shasta comstocki. The specimens shown as Plebejus icarioides pembina (Pl. 56, f. 27-28) are from a blend-zone region and are not representative of neotopo-typical western Montana specimens. The specimen shown in Pl. 50, f. 12 is Incisalia polios obscurus Ferris and Fisher and not nominate polios. The text omits this taxon, described in 1973. Plebejus acmon spangelatus is assigned incor- rectly to lupini despite Goodpasture’s genitalic studies and revision of acmon and lupini (J. Kan. Ent. Soc. 46:468-485, 1973). The genus Phaedrotes is incorrectly retained instead of Glaucopsyche as pointed out by Brown (J. Lepid. Soc. 25:240- 246, 1971). There are several new combinations proposed in Callophrys. In C. mitoura, the brood form smilacis has been elevated without comment to subspecific status replacing sweadneri. In the discussion of Ministrymon, it is stated that ines is simply the fall brood of leda. This bears further study. I have taken ines in May along with leda in southwestern New Mexico and typical leda in the fall. John A. Legge, Jr. has taken both forms from the same mesquite tree in Baja California del Sur in December. The distribution for Satyrium liparops fletcheri is listed as southern Manitoba only; it also occurs in Saskatchewan and North Dakota. Vaga blackburni is described as “. . . an abundant species on all of the Hawaiian Islands.”, which contradicts the recent proposal for inclusion of this species under endangered status. Pl. 60, f. 3-4 figure Lycaeides argyrognomon ricei and not anna. Various nomenclatural changes in Lycaena are proposed. It is stated that L. arota schellbachi extends into southern Wyoming. I know of no valid records for the state. The Everes amyntula/comyntas confusion seems to have been fairly well resolved in this book. The interested reader should refer to the recent revisionary 142 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY _ work on the Philotes group by O. Shields and published in the Allyn Museum Bul- letin series, as he has proposed some substantial nomenclatural changes as well as describing new subspecies. PAPILIONIDAE. Again there are some minor items in the generally well done treatment of Papilio. In Pl. 62, f. 1, P. troilus as shown as P. brevicauda. In Pl. 63 which illustrates the machaon complex, none of the undersides of the species are shown. Unfortunately, the undersides are diagnostic in most cases for reliable species separation in this group. The treatment of Parnassius, however, is particularly distressing. Granted that there has been too much “splitting’’ in this group, the authors of this section go too far in the opposite direction. The lumping of nearly all of the Rocky Mountain region phoebus under the umbrella sayii with the retention of a few questionable additional subspecies (hermodur for example, which is an altitudinal female form) is unrealistic. Even the Great Basin rubina (text misspells as rubiana) is lumped into sayii. It appears that the authors have recognized differences in facies when it suited them and ignored same when it did not. The discussions of P. clodius altaurus, gallatinus and menetresii are badly mixed up. PI. 78, f. 18 illustrates P. clodius altaurus (yellow-orange spots) and not menetresii (red spots). One should consult McDunnough’s paper relative to Bryk’s treatment of the North American Parnassius (Can. Ent. 68:216—225, 1936). There has been considerable confusion in the taxonomy of Parnassius in the past and the present treatment serves only to further rather than clarify it. PIERIDAE. This section, with a major contribution by A. B. Klots, appears to be the most carefully done in the book, and cites current research as of early 1973. Many of the problem areas in the Colias have been resolved, and the genus Pieris, noting Warren’s work, is thoughtfully handled. The illustrations accompanying this section are perhaps more realistic than in some of the other families. Dr. Klots is to be complimented on his handling of the Coliadinae. The specimen shown in Pl. 72, f. 17 as C. o. occidentalis from Crook Co., Oregon is probably a local form of C. alexandra peculiar to that region. Appias drusilla poeyi is dropped without comment. The subspecies mayi has been applied to all northern populations of Euchloe ausonides. This is not correct, as true mayi is a very distinct insect, and specimens from many of the colonies in the far Northwest do not qualify. Many are closer to nominate ausonides. The name andrewsi has been retained under ausonides rather than placed with hyantis as Opler suggested in his revision of the genus. HESPERIOIDEA. Although Freeman’s 1969 revision of the Megathymidae is cited, Kilian Roever, who prepared this section, has sensibly chosen a rather dif- ferent arrangement. Many of the Agathymus have been demoted to subspecies of several principal species such as neumoegeni and mariae. The western Megathymus have been reassigned to yuccae with coloradensis as a subspecies. C. D. MacNeill who authored the Hesperiidae section has revised his earlier work in lumping all of the harpalus/manitoba taxa under comma. Some of the other subspecies in Hesperia have been dropped without comment. The treatment of Erynnis generally follows Burns’ 1964 revision. Overall, the coverage is good and the various species, especially the Mexican migrants, are figured, but many of the plates leave much to be desired regarding color fidelity. Occurrence in the U.S.A. of some of the doubtful Mexican species would have been confirmed had several museum and private collections been examined more carefully. Several species cited as occurring in Wyoming should be considered doubtful and may relate to misidentifications as I have no confirmed records. The lack of genitalic sketches is a major omission. In summary, the book has some good points and some good sections, but on the whole, in this reviewers opinion, it exhibits some serious faults. Many of the problem areas could have been resolved had the manuscript been submitted to VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 143 several competent technical reviewers prior to publication. The selection of the majority of the contributors from the West Coast has lent an unfortunate parochial flavor to the text. One receives the distinct impression that there is nothing of taxonomic interest east of the Great Basin. The plates are a major disappointment, especially in the lycaenids and hesperiids where they are most needed. It is unfortunate that this book, which had the potential for being a really definitive treatise on the North American butterflies, has fallen so far short of the mark. I am sure that there will be those who will praise the book, citing its utility to amateurs and the fact that nearly every North American species is figured. To them, I would reply that while the book has its good points, the novice collector can be easily misled in a number of areas because of problems with the text and illustrations. As a consequence of the number of flaws which produce frustration in the reader, the work as a whole must be considered as marginally worth the price. CiirForD D. Ferris, Bioengineering Program, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071. Mires oF Morus AND BuTTERFLIES, by Asher E. Treat. 1975. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N. Y., 362 p., 150 figures (Frontispiece in color). Price $35.00 (U.S.). Clearly a classic work both for substance, including a remarkable amount of original (unpublished ) material, and for scholarly and poetic styie! The introductory section covers a concise history of mite-moth scientific discovery, a fine chapter on methods of study and a brief, thoughtful account of the important characteristics of mites. In the body of the book, major sections (Mesostigmata: Acariformes) and chap- ters are presented under higher taxa headings, for the mites, but within each chapter the arrangement is “. . . primarily ecological at familial or lower levels” (Author’s preface ). This is also a well-edited and very useful book with (1) 150 figures of excellent quality, (2) lists of moth-mite and mite-moth records, (3) keys to mites recorded from moths, (4) an extensive bibliography and (5) geographic and general indexes. The book should be read by not only “lepidopterists, acarologists and parasitologists” (vide Author) but by all amateur and professional scientists. Mites of Moths and Butterflies will form a solid foundation for and be a lasting stimulus to future studies in many fields of scientific research. Truly a basic excel- lent book for any lepidopterist’s library. WituiaM B. Nuttinc, Department of Zoology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts 01002. BUTTERFLIES OF LEBANON, by Torben B. Larsen. 1974. National Council for Scien- tific Research, (C.N.R.S.), Beirut, Republic of Lebanon, xv + 255 p. Price: £7.50 sterling (U.K.), $22.50 (U.S.). Distributed in the U.K. by E. W. Classey, Ltd., Park Road, Faringdon, Berks. SN7 7DR, England, and in the U.S. by Entomological Reprint Specialists, P. O. Box 77224, Dockweiler Station, Los Angeles, California 90007, U.S.A. A review is a very personal thing to the reviewer. Without attempting to pass moral judgment, recent events in Lebanon have made the writing of this review especially difficult. Make no mistake about it, though, Larsen has written a very good book, and the Lebanese National Council for Scientific Research is to be congratulated for producing it in its present form. 144 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Larsen expends the first 76 pages in prefatory material: Lebanon’s history from the naturalist’s viewpoint, the zoogeography of the area, distributional patterns within the country, a comparison of the butterflies of Lebanon with those of sur- rounding countries, the economic importance of Rhopalocera and their classification, along with a Lebanese checklist. Detailed discussions of the 139 recorded species are given in the next 140 pages, and this discussion is followed by a few pages of possible, doubtfully and erroneously recorded butterflies. The sixteen color plates, identified by the text pages they face, range in quality from excellent to at least acceptable. Probably the least readable plate is that facing page 193, which is too dark and too red; some others are a bit too dark, but all are quite usable. It is unfortunate that the plates do not have figure numbers, but one soon becomes accustomed to the legends, and the exact details of the capture of each figured specimen are given, a policy that should achieve greater currency. The text, however, is where the book really excels. There is a wealth of informa- tion tucked into these pages, information that is so well documented that one is left with the impression that he could return to those spots at the appropriate times and be virtually assured of collecting the insects. Available foodplant informa- tion is given and original sources on life histories are cited, where available; when the early stages are unknown, informed speculation on possible foodplants is offered. Habitat information is detailed and based on the author’s personal experience in most cases; in others the best available information is cited. A single taxon is described as new in the book, but three others were to have been proposed before the present publication. These were to have been described in Alexanor during 1974, but publication was delayed, and the inclusion of these names in Butterflies of Lebanon does not constitute valid descriptions. These names, in the context of the book, are nomina nuda, as Larsen correctly states. By the time this review is printed these names will be validated, but they cannot be dated from 1974, as stated in the text. This book is a fine investment for anyone interested in Middle Eastern butter- flies or for one who wants a wealth of recent biological information about them. Lee D. Mutter, Allyn Museum of Entomology, 3701 Bayshore Road, Sarasota, Florida 33580. VOLUME 30, NUMBER 2 145 GENERAL NOTES LIBYTHEANA BACHMANNII (NYMPHALIDAE) IN CONNECTICUT Libytheana bachmannii (Kirtland) is considered a rare vagrant in Connecticut to the local lepidopterists and reaches the northern terminus of its range in this area (Klots, 1951, A Field Guide to the Butterflies, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston). Those that do occur are suspected to be immigrants from more southern territories and stay till they are lost to winter kill. There being only three Connecticut speci- mens in collections, it was unusually interesting to make several observations of this species during 1974. All specimens have taken in Guilford, Connecticut, and it is from this town that all present observations were made. Between 18 and 20 June three individuals were seen. One fed on Mock Orange (Philadelphus coronarius L.) and two rested on bark of Apple (Malus sp.). In each case there were considerable nearby stands of Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis L.), the larval hostplant of L. bachmannii, leading to suspicions of a possible summer brood by the immigrants. On 3 October three additional Snout Butterflies were encountered in an area with a half mile radius. Again Celtis occidentalis was quite common. However, in each case the butterflies were seen resting and possibly feeding on the fruits of Wineberry (Rubus phoenicolasius Maxim.). This fruit is very viscid to the touch, and its sweet juice would be a logical attractant. Only future observations will show whether there is indeed a summer brood of L. bachmannii in the Guilford area. Nosie S. Proctor. Biology Department, Southern Connecticut State College, 001 Crescent St., New Haven, Connecticut 06515. A CLAMP FOR MARKING BUTTERFLIES IN CAPTURE-RECAPTURE STUDIES I have recently begun a study of adaptive differences in social behavior of several species of butterflies near Whitehall, Washington Co., New York. I initially used techniques described by Ehrlich & Davidson (1960, J. Lepid. Soc. 14: 227-229), in which two people first capture all the butterflies in a given area, then mark and release them en masse in a central location. Although this program was adequate for some species, the observed pattern of local dispersal of sedentary species was greatly affected for a period of several days by the spatial pattern of my collecting and releasing. The affected species showed the least variation in individual behavior when individuals were marked and released quickly at the site of capture. So I de- signed and built a clamp that allows speedy and efficient marking at the site of capture by a single person (see Fig. 1). The base is made of 14” Masonite, as is the anvil, which is glued to the base with its smooth side up. The softwood fulcrum is glued to the base. The “hinge” pins are # 18 brads that are driven through the base, cut short and filed smooth. The clip is made of 4” clear acrylic plastic with 46” holes to clear the pins and seven 46” holes in an H pattern as shown, each chamfered from the top with a countersink. The pieces may be cut roughly, and the assembled clamp shaped on a vertical power- sander. A rubber band holds the jaws of the clamp together. A hole in the upper end of the base allows the clamp to be carried accessibly on a hook or string about the waist or neck. A butterfly is placed between the jaws of the clamp, and a small number is written on its forewing, using a permanent fiber-tipped pen (e.g., Sanford “Sharpie” at the suggestion of L. E. Gilbert). The several chamfered holes accommodate 146 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY I“"HINGE" PINS 0 CM 5 Fig. 1. Top, side and “exploded” views of the clamp. butterflies of various sizes, and the pressure of the clip is adjustable by moving the rubber band back and forth between the fulcrum and the anvil. Since the clip is transparent, accurate measurements can be made of the wing length, presence and size of spots, etc. The butterfly is turned over and marked on the other side after the number on the first side is thoroughly dry. During a total of 21 weeks in the summers of 1974 and 1975, I used this clip to mark 1,612 individuals of 28 species, varying in size from tailed blue ( Everes comyntas Godart) to tiger swallowtail (Papilio glaucus Linnaeus). Marked individuals were recovered a total of 950 times. I had little success with blues (Plebejinae), which are simply too tiny and delicate and I had difficulty with freshly eclosed pearl crescents (Phyciodes tharos Drury) and bronze coppers (Lycaena hyllus Cramer), which combine delicate wings with hefty wing muscles. Painted ladies (Vanessa cardui Linnaeus; V. virginiensis Drury) and skippers (Hesperiidae) cannot be held firmly because their straight wings, wide bodies and strong muscles give them a mechanical advantage over the clip unless they are clamped close enough to the body to risk damage to their wings. Other species rarely caused trouble. Large species could escape if they could reach something to pull against with their feet. Very rarely, an individual would damage its wing mechanism trying to escape; such individuals ap- peared superficially unhurt, but were unable to fly and seldom recovered. The clip can also be used to capture feeding or strutting hairstreaks (Theclinae ) directly, with greater success and less damage than netting. Henry S. Horn, Department of Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08540. VoLUuME 30, NUMBER 2 147 PAPILIO TROILUS (PAPILIONIDAE) IN PURSUIT OF FISH CROW On 13 August 1974 while crossing a dike of an impoundment in the Barn Island Wildlife Management Area, Stonington, Connecticut, I noticed two fish crows (Corvus ossifragus Wilson) flying about 200’ over the marsh. This species is uncommon in that area and was therefore of interest. As I watched, a spicebush swallowtail (Papilio troilus L.) climbed toward the second bird, actually circled it and darted in on the bird. Such a response, elicited by the stimulus of a flying object such as a bird passing nearby has been reported by others, monarch ( Danaus plexippus (L.)) and red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus L.) by Slansky (1971, J. Lepid. Soc. 25: 294), Lorquin’s admiral (Limenitis lorquini ( Boisduval ) ) and glaucous-winged gull (Larus glaucescens Naumann) by Pyle (1972, J. Lepid. Soc. 26: 261) and question mark (Polygonia interrogationis (Fabricius) ) with chimney swifts (Chaetura pelagica L.) by Hendricks (1974, J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 236). I was quite surprised, however, to see the crow twist in the air, grasp the butterfly in its bill and eat it! I know of no other records for this species of bird eating this type of food and certainly corvids do not normally capture prey while in flight. Therefore, not only were the swallowtail’s actions of interest but also the behavior and diet of the fish crow! Pre-courtship responses and aggressive territorial behavior have been listed as possible explanations for the butterfly’s actions. One can only conjecture what the butterfly was intending. Noste S. Procror. Biology Department, Southern Connecticut State, 501 Crescent St., New Haven, Connecticut 06515. MORE RECORDS OF BUTTERFLIES AS PREY FOR AMBUSH BUGS (HETEROPTERA ) In a recent publication (Pyle 1973, J. Lepid. Soc. 27: 305-307) it was related that a butterfly, Boloria selene, (Denis & Schiffermiiller), was discovered being fed on by two unidentified ambush bugs (Phymatidae) on a flower head in Washington State. It was indicated that ambush bugs were not known to capture butterflies. This writer has made numerous observations of attacks on butterflies by crab spiders and certain insects, including ambush bugs. Recorded here are observations in Maryland of ambush bugs capturing certain butterflies. A single observation of this behavior was made in 1969. However, during exten- sive collecting throughout Maryland in 1973-1975, 13 additional butterflies of 10 species were seen being fed upon by ambush bugs, which evidently had captured the butterflies. In each case the prey and predator were collected and preserved. In one instance two ambush bugs were captured feeding on a single butterfly. Of the 15 ambush bugs collected, only 4 were nymphs. Each butterfly was on a flower head and probably was attacked while feeding. Except for two specimens, the butterflies were fresh or nearly fresh. The ambush bugs were identified as Phymata fasciata (Gray). The adults averaged 8.9 mm and the nymphs 5.5 mm in length. Data on the butterflies captured by the ambush bugs are tabulated in Table 1. From these data it can be surmised that captures of butterflies by ambush bugs may be quite common. Although this behavior is referred to in older texts, it has been generally overlooked by collectors. Comstock, Comstock & Herrick (1895, A Manual for the Study of Insects. 19th ed., Comstock Publ. Co., Ithaca, N.Y.), in discussing ambush bugs, stated, “It overpowers and captures insects like cabbage butterflies, honey-bees and large wasps.” Lutz (1918, Field Book of Insects. 2nd ed., G.P. Putnam’s Sons, New York), in a similar discussion, stated, “it conceals JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY 148 ‘ds wnuhzody ‘ds osppyos poelyueprun ‘ds spidajasy ‘ds osppyos ‘TT suadas wnyofis T, TT wmuwayiuvona] wnwayzuoshy)D ‘ds wnuhoody ‘ds spidajasy ‘ds osppyos ‘ds smdajosy ‘ds sajagp J, ‘ds wnuhoody ‘ds wnuhoody JSOPT IOMOTY (UoJSUTYse AA ) YOOouRT] e) ‘sny I[¢ (q1eATeD ) UMOJSUTQUNT] ©), 1095 6T (sopieyD ) peoy uerpuy ¢) ‘sny 7 (HeATeD ) wog wnId eZ 4nf OT AVGIIVHdWAN (ses1005) sourTg ) a]FAsyog GCG) SnY 6 (sas1oay soulrg ) aT[TAs}og 69 ‘Ssny FI AVGINAVOA'T (qeATeD ) WUIog wNJq FL, "Idag GZ AVGIMaT J (sopeyp ) opoueg GL ounf GG (ses1095 s0ultg ) [[?H EL “Sny CT (sArey] yures ) oSpry PL ‘Bny 1G (sa81095 s0ul1g ) e[IAs}eg PLA 6 (qoATeD) WIog uNfg = GJ, "deg FT (Hoa]eD ) WUIOg wn] g PL 39g CT (sepeyD ) dIpeusg EL Anf 63 AVCIMAdSAL (Aqunop ) uMOy, aed M4 SOP SO) SOF Or Ot Cri<o BULUIWIOF] SYD.MUUWULD Ippo} D1LLO]Og (Ammiq ) SOLDY} SOMDY} Sapolnhyg (Ammiq, ) SOLDY} SO.MDY} Sapolnhyg (s10yepeid OA\} ) (Amniq ) sisuamms.ia pryquhy SILI} DUDIWaWD spapjYyd DUaDIA'T (SIMI Py) yniwny snuyaw uowhys [eAnpsiog awayihina awayjhina spyoy (1oweID ) snwpj9 sninja snaihs.ivd (TourleID ) sp1oo saqyog (spreMpy ) puiaa puiaa sniadwog (spreMpy ) Dusaa Dusaa smadwog (eAnpstog ) si1zsaduipo sapadojn}V (yeBAnpsiog ) siijsaduipo sapadojpiy oldeys apiupziz 107010 sauv0g x9 puv sarads ‘pueyAieyy Ul (AvId)) vyn10sp{ pyowhyg Aq peinjdeo saljfieyng “T aquye VoLUME 30, NuMBER 2 149 itself in flowers, where it captures various insects including large butterflies and even bees.” However, the more recent text of Borror & DeLong (1954, An Intro- duction to the Study of Insects. 3rd ed., Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, New York) did not list butterflies as prey of Phymatidae. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author thanks Dr. Jon L. Herring, Systematic Entomoiogy Laboratory, U.S.D.A., for identifying the ambush bugs. Joun H. Fates, Ridge Road, Neeld Estate, Huntingtown, Maryland 20639. PAPILIO XUTHUS (PAPILIONIDAE) IN HAWAII The Hawaiian Islands have a very limited butterfly fauna—the only large butterfly is the monarch (Danaus plexippus (L.)), and medium-size species are limited to several species of Cynthia and Pieries rapae L. (Zimmerman, 1958, Insects of Hawaii. Vol. 7: Macrolepidoptera, Univ. of Hawaii, Honolulu). I was very surprised, there- fore, on 6 February 1975 to observe a cream and white swallowtail fluttering around hibiscus bushes planted in the lawn of a condominium two miles north of Kaanapali on the island of Maui. Although an attempt at hand capture failed, in the process of achieving a “near miss” I was able to tentatively identify the butterfly as Papilio xuthus L., a native of Japan and East Asia. Numerous other individuals were observed in the next few days, and the identification was confirmed when I obtained a net and captured a short series of specimens. Since P. xuthus is a member of the Rutaceae-feeding group of Papilios, an immediate search was made of local Citrus. Eggs, young larvae and pupal skins were found, and two individuals were reared on young citrus leaves (the larvae showed no interest in the tough older leaves). Because of the potential importance of P. xuthus as a citrus pest, I notified the Hawaiian Department of Agriculture in Honolulu by telephone and was informed that they were aware of the introduction. In a subsequent letter, Ronald Mau, Survey Entomologist for the Department, kindly sent me the following information. Papilio xuthus was first discovered on Oahu in April 1971 and has now reached all the major Hawaiian Islands. It was first observed on Maui in May 1974 (I would guess that there was only a single introduction there since 10 months later the generations still appeared to be synchronized). A chalcoid wasp egg parasite, Trichogramma spp., according to Mau appeared to be giving good control, and a tachinid fly, Exorista sorbillans (Wiedmann), parasitic on the larvae has been introduced to supplement Trichogramma. Its successful estab- lishment is not certain at present. Mau also reports that P. xuthus pupae underwent some type of obligate diapause in 1971 and 1972, although adult and larval activity did not cease entirely. More observations on the behavior of this newly introduced species would be most interesting. In March 1975 on Maui, P. xuthus adults were abundant and large numbers of eggs and larvae were present on cultivated citrus, showing every sign that the population was in the “log phase” of growth. There are native Rutaceae in the Hawaiian flora of the genera Ptelea, Platydesma and Zanthoxylum, and the impact of P. xuthus on these should be carefully observed. It is interesting to speculate on the source of the introduction. One possibility that has been suggested is the accidental importation of a gravid female or two, but it is difficult to visualize such an “accident” with a large and attractive insect like P. xuthus. There is a more intriguing possibility. Papilio xuthus is known from the Bonin and Marianna Islands (Shirézu, 1960, Butterflies of Formosa in Colour. 150 JoURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Hoikusha, Osaka). The only native Hawaiian lycaenid, Vaga blackburni (Tuely), has its nearest relative V. ogasawaraensis (Pryer) on the Bonin Islands. Zimmerman (op. cit., p. 494) suggests the possibility that “blackburni is a derivative of ogasa- waraensis, or that they are descended from a common stock, and the original ancestors which populated Hawaii may have come from the Bonin Islands.” So it is just possible that this beautiful addition to the Hawaiian fauna arrived by natural dispersal, carried more than 3000 miles by the westerly winds of the North Pacific. Pau. R. Exnriicu, Professor of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305. CHARAXINAE (NYMPHALIDAE): OLD WORLD VERSUS NEW The life history of Anaea eurypyle confusa Hall (Muyshondt 1974, J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 306-314) reveals some interesting differences between this species and the Old World Charaxinae. First, concerning the adults, is it quite certain that both sexes are attracted to dung and carrion? In the Old World species, only the male is so attracted, although both sexes are attracted to fermenting fruit and sap. It has been suggested that the male’s attraction to dung and carrion may have some connection with the male metabolism with regard to courtship and mating. This is comparable, perhaps, to the requirements of certain male danaids for the juices of withered plants of the Boraginaceae as a precursor of the male pheromones used in courtship. With regard to the larvae, I know of no Old World species in which the young larva constructs a perch of frass and silk on which it rests between feeds, and, as can be seen from Dr. van Someren’s list of foodplants (1974, J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 315-331), the East African Charaxinae have been bred extensively. The Old World larvae usually spin a carpet of silk, without frass, on which they rest between feed- ing. I also know of no Old World species that makes a retreat by rolling or folding a leaf. Strangely enough, the young larvae of the genus Asterope (Eunicinae) and Cyrestis camillus F. (Marpesiinae) do have this habit of constructing a perch of silk and frass on which to rest, but none of these rolls or folds a leaf when larger. Generally, the pupae of the Old World Charaxinae are green and monomorphic, but those of Charaxes protoclea Feisth. and C. lasti Gr. Sm. are dimorphic, having a green and a brown form. It seems highly probable that the pupae of the closely allied C. boueti Feisth. and C. cynthia Btlr. are dimorphic also. D. G. Sevasroputo, P.O. Box 95026, Mombasa, Kenya. VoLuME 30, NuMBER 2 151 NOTES AND NEWS Recent Letters Dear Sir, A paper by Benton and Jennings (1975, Lepid. Soc. 29: 192-194) ... . gives a photographic figure of a pupal anomaly. It also mentions in the text examples of hysterotely by Cockayne (1927) and Haggett (1954) with the comment “None of these cases is similar to the R. neomexicana pupal anomaly.” The LITERATURE CITED, at the end of the paper, omits several quite important references, among them: Hawkins, C. N. 1933. Trans. Roy. Ent. Soc. Lond. 81: 223. . 1938. Proc. Roy. Ent. Soc. Lond. 13: 92. Evans, E. 1940. Entomologist 73: 134. Cockayne, E. A. 1942. Ibid. 75: 49. Classey, E. W. 1942. Ibid. 75: 151. In the last mentioned paper, figures are given of the anomalies of segmentation in the larva, pupa and adult of the same specimen. From the figure of the pupa, it will be seen that the segmentation is very closely similar to that of Rhyacionia neomexicana shown in Benton and Jennings’ paper. The main differences are that an extra segment is involved and the spiral in the case of Classey (1942) for Malacosoma neustria Lin. is sinister and in the other, dexter. E. W. Classey Dear Dr. Godfrey, The pupa described and figured in Benton & Jennings’ paper (1975, J. Lepid. Soc. 29: 192-194) appears, from the photograph, to be a fairly typical example of spiral segmentation, the spiral affecting the 2nd, 3rd and 4th abdominal somites. The authors, whilst referring to Cockayne’s paper on prothetely and _ hysterotely, quite different phenomena, rather strangely make no mention of Cockayne’s papers dealing specifically with spiral segmentation (1929, Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. 77: 177-184 and 1934, Ibid. 82: 165-172). In these papers Cockayne describes and figures spirals in a number of insects belonging to various Orders, and discusses the probable origin and cause of the phenomenon. He is definitely of the opinion that it arises during the development of the ovum. There is a later paper by Cockayne (1942, Entomologist 75: 49-54) in which he records further cases that had come to light since his 1934 paper, and in which he records his opinion that the condition has a genetic basis, the gene probably being recessive and with very poor penetration. Since these papers were published, I can trace very few accounts of spiral seg- mentation in the English language journals available to me. Classey (1942, Entomologist 75: 151-152) describes and figures an example in the lasiocampid Malacosoma neustria L., and there are three papers dealing with examples that I have bred, viz. a brood of Leucania irregularis Wlk. (Noctuidae) (1948, Entomologist 81: 38-40), a brood of Euxanthe wakefieldi Ward (Nymphalidae) (1965, Entomolo- gist 98: 107) and a single Acherontia atropos L. (Sphingidae) (1966, Entomologist 98: 107). D. G. Sevastopulo 152 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY OBITUARY MAURICE LOUIS BRISTOL (1890-1975 ) Maurice Louis Bristol, a charter member of The Lepidopterists’ Society, died at his home in Elgin, Illinois on 13 February 1975. He was born in Naperville, Illinois, 23 March 1890, and moved to Elgin in 1906. He was employed by the Elgin National Watch Company and later by the David C. Cook Publishing Company until his retirement. He never married and is survived by two brothers, Harris and George, and two sisters, Mrs. Hattie Graves and Mrs. Lucy Miller. Bristol began to collect butterflies as a boy of eight. He was an all-around naturalist of the old school, whose interests in addition to Lepidoptera included Coleoptera, birds, fossils, nature photography and plants, especially native prairie species, which he grew in his back yard. When the Audubon Society of Kane County, of which he was also a charter member, reconstructed a small patch of native prairie north of Elgin, he donated many of the plants for it, and it was named in his honor. He actively encouraged young people in developing an interest in nature and was well known in Elgin for his activities and his devotion to children. Bristol’s collecting in the Elgin area yielded such Illinois rarities as Glaucopsyche lygdamus couperi Grote and Chlosyne harrisii (Scudder ), as well as most of the known Illinois specimens of Calephilis muticum McAlpine. He rediscovered the classic Wakelee, Michigan type locality of Euptychia mitchelli (French) in the late 1920's and collected there regularly for many years. His particular interests were Apantesis. Catocala, Schinia, Papaipema and Theclinae. He maintained an extensive corre- spondence and exchange with other lepidopterists. I remember encountering Maurice at Wakelee on my first visit there a number of years ago. Then nearly 70, he was collecting with an energy that I, less than half his age, envied. He retained that vigor and continued active field work until the end of his life; at the time of his unexpected passing he was busily planning for his next season. His collection has been acquired by the Illinois Natural History Survey. Unfortunately, some of it was found to have suffered dermestid damage, but the greater portion was intact and will be incorporated into the Survey's research collection. The assistance of Bristol’s friend and collecting companion Irwin Leeuw, and his sister, Mrs. Hattie Graves, in the preparation of this article and in arranging for the transfer of his collection to the Survey is gratefully acknowledged. Roperick R. Irwin, Illinois Natural History Survey, Urbana, Illinois 61801. EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE JOURNAL GrorcE L. Goprrey, Editor Illinois Natural History Survey, Natural Resources Building Urbana, Illinois 61801 U.S.A. WituiaM H. ALLEN, Associate Editor JAMEs G. STERNBURG, Associate Editor NOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS Contributions to the Journal may deal with any aspect of the collection and study of Lepidoptera. Contributors should prepare manuscripts according to the following instructions. Text: Manuscripts should be submitted in duplicate, and must be typewritten, entirely double-spaced, employing wide margins, on one side only of white, 8% x 11 inch paper. Titles should be explicit and descriptive of the article’s content, including the family name of the subject, but must be kept as short as possible. The first men- tion of a plant or animal in the text should include the full scientific name, with authors of zoological names. Insect measurements should be given in metric units; times should be given in terms of the 24-hour clock (e.g. 0930, not 9:30 AM). Underline only where italics are intended. References to footnotes should be num- bered consecutively, and the footnotes typed on a separate sheet. Literature Cited: References in the text of articles should be given as, Sheppard (1959) or (Sheppard, 1959, 196la, 1961b) and all must be listed alphabetically under the heading LirErature Crrep, in the following format: SHepparp, P. M. 1959. Natural selection and heredity. 2nd. ed. Hutchinson, London. 209 p. 196la. Some contributions to population genetics resulting from the study of the Lepidoptera. Adv. Genet. 10: 165-216. In the case of general notes, references should be given in the text as, Sheppard (1961, Adv. Genet. 10: 165-216) or (Sheppard 1961, Sym. Roy. Entomol. Soc. London 1: 23-30). Illustrations: All photographs and drawings should be mounted on stiff, white backing, arranged in the desired format, allowing (with particular regard to lettering ) for reduction to their final width (usually 4% inches). Illustrations larger than 8% x 11 inches are not acceptable and should be reduced photographically to that size or smaller. The author’s name, figure numbers as cited in the text, and an indication of the aricle’s title should be printed on the back of each mounted plate. Figures, both line drawings and halftones (photographs), should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals. The term “plate” should not be employed. Figure legends must be typewritten, double-spaced, on a separate sheet (not attached to the illustrations ), headed EXPLANATION OF FicurEs, with a separate paragraph devoted to each page of illustrations. Tables: Tables should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals. Headings for tables should not be capitalized. Tabular material should be kept to a minimum and must be typed on separate sheets, and placed following the main text, with the approximate desired position indicated in the text. Vertical rules should be avoided. Proofs: The edited manuscript and galley proofs will be mailed to the author for correction of printer's errors. Excessive author’s changes at this time will be charged to authors at the rate of 75¢ per line. A purchase order for reprints will accompany the proofs. Page Charges: Authors with grant or institutional funds are requested to pay a charge of $27.50 per printed page (including tabular and black-and-white illustrative material) for articles up to 20 pages in length. This charge may be waived in the case of authors who have no grant or institutional funding, as it is not intended that any author should pay this charge from personal funds. However, all authors will be requested to pay this charge for material in excess of 20 printed pages. Address all correspondence relating to the Journal to the editor. Material not intended for permanent record, such as current events and notices, should be sent to the editor of the News: Ron Leuschner, 1900 John Street, Manhattan Beach, California 90266. ALLEN PRESS, INC. PRINTED LAWRENCE, KANSAS USA CONTENTS A Srupy OF THE PENINSULAR FLornmDA POPULATIONS OF THE MONARCH BUTTERFLY (DANAUS P. PLEXIPPUS; DANAWDAE). F. A. Urquhart and N. R. Urquhart ee FucitivE Coton IN THE MALes oF CERTAIN PieripAE. Harry K. Clench oo LarvaL More VARIATION IN CHLOSYNE LACINIA (NYMPHALIDAE). Raymond W. Neck _..- PORTABLE OutTpoor CAGcEs FOR MATING FEMALE GIANT SILKWORM Morus (SaTurNUDAE). Thomas A. Miller and William J. Cooper 0 LARVAL FOODPLANTS, SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION FOR FIVE SKIPPERS (HESPERIDAE) FROM Texas. Roy O. Kendall and MA.’ Rickard esc 2 i Oe nC ae Me! / COLLECTING COCOONS OF CALLOSAMIA SECURIFERA (SATURNIDAE). Richard 8S, Peigler | Winc Cotor VARIATION IN CALLOSAMIA (SATURNUDAE). Richard S. Peigher 0 8 THE GENUS COPABLEPHARON IN TEXAS, WITH DESCRIPTION OF THREE New Species (Noctruwae). André Blanchard ______ NATHALIS IOLE ( PIERIDAE) IN THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES AND THE Banamas. Harry K. Clench 0. OBSERVATIONS OF EUPACKARDIA CALLETA IN SOUTHERN TEXAS (SAT- URNIDAE). Themas A. Miller. EXMERGENCE OF HYALOPHORA CECROPIA (SATURNIIDAE) BLOCKED BY SEEDS IN THE Cocoon VALve. G. P. Waldbauer and J. G. Sternburg DESCRIPTIONS OF THE IMMATURE STAGES AND BIOLOGY OF VITULA LUGUBRELLA (RaAGONOT) (PyYRALIDAE: PuyciTinAE). H. H. Neunzig GENERAL NOTES A gyandromorphic Lymantria dispar (Lymantriidae). Joseph Muller Mass hibernation site for Nymphalis vau-album (Nymphalidae). Noble 8, Proctor to nO Ae OO oi a a Summer monarch (Danaus plexippus) in southern Texas (Danaidae). Raymond W. Neck io ee Libytheana bachmannii (Nymphalidae) in Connecticut. Noble S. Proctor A rahe for marking butterflies in eapture-recapture studies. Henry S. PRU a le A Ce Oe ea 0h nh rrr Papilio troilus (Papilionidae) in pursuit of fish crow. Noble S. Proctor a of butterflies as prey for ambush bugs (Heteroptera). John UR a NN i Papilio xuthus (Papilionidae) in Hawaii. Paul R. Ehrlich Charaxinae (Nymphalidae): Old World versus New. D. G. Sevastopulo Book Review 73 88 91 95 105 111 114 116 121 127 131 133 Si A tg Ra fa Se ee ee SSS Ss ieee aS SSS & vw Oe eee ee Volume 30 1976 Number 3 JOURNAL of the LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Published quarterly by THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Publié par LA SOCIETE DES LEPIDOPTERISTES Herausgegeben von DER GESELLSCHAFT DER LEPIDOPTEROLOGEN Publicado por LA SOCIEDAD DE LOS LEPIDOPTERISTAS ¢. hodges 22 September 1976 THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY EXECUTIVE COUNCIL S. S. Nico.ay, President Cartos R. BEUTELSPACHER, MrmiamM RoruHscuitp, Ist Vice President Vice President THEODORE D. SARGENT, Vice President Joun M. Sniper, Treasurer Lee D. Miter, Secretary Members at large: J. T. BREWER D. F. HArpwIck R. A. ARNOLD K. S. Brown J. B. ZiEGLER E. D. CasHatr K. W. Pxinip F. S. CHEw R. E. STANFORD The object of the Lepidopterists’ Society, which was formed in May, 1947 and formally constituted in December, 1950, is “to promote the science of lepidopterology in all its branches, . . . . to issue a periodical and other publications on Lepidoptera, to facilitate the exchange of specimens and ideas by both the professional worker and the amateur in the field; to secure cooperation in all measures” directed towards these aims. Membership in the Society is open to all persons interested in the study of Lepidoptera. All members receive the Journal and the News of the Lepidopterists’ Society. Institutions may subscribe to the Journal but may not become members. Prospective members should send to the Treasurer full dues for the current year, together with their full name, address, and special lepidopterological interests. In alternate years a list of members of the Society is issued, with addresses and special interests. There are four numbers in each volume of the Journal, scheduled for February, May, August and November, and six numbers of the News each year. Active members—annual dues $13.00 Student members—annual dues $10.00 Sustaining members—annual dues $20.00 Life members—single sum $250.00 Institutional subscriptions—annual $18.00 Send remittances, payable to The Lepidopterists’ Society, and address changes to: John M. Snider, 3520 Mulldae Ave., San Pedro, Calif. 90732 U.S.A. Memoirs of the Lepidopterists’ Society, No. 1 (Feb. 1964) A SYNONYMIC LIST OF THE NEARCTIC RHOPALOCERA by Cyrit F. pos Passos Price: Society members, $5.00 U.S.; non-members, $7.50 U.S. Paper covers, revisions of the Melitaeinae and Lycaenidae supplied separately. Order: Mail to Charles V. Covell, Jr., Memoirs Editor, Department of Biology, Uni- versity of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40208, U.S.A. The Lepidopterists’ Society is a non-profit, scientific organization. The known office of publication is 1041 New Hampshire St., Lawrence, Kansas 66044. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A. 66044. JOURNAL OF Tue LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Volume 30 1976 Number 3 THE OVERWINTERING SITE OF THE EASTERN POPULATION OF THE MONARCH BUTTERFLY (DANAUS P. PLEXIPPUS; DANAIDAE) IN SOUTHERN MEXICO F. A. URQUHART AND N. R. URQUHART Scarborough College, University of Toronto, West Hill, Ontario, Canada MIC 1A4 Twenty-five years have passed since we started an intensive investi- gation of the movements of the monarch butterfly (Danaus p. plexippus (L.)) in North America, although experiments concerned with methods of identifying specimens of a moving population were conducted from 1937-1939. The question to be answered was: “Where is the final destination of the migrating monarchs?” Over the years we have had the assistance of thousands of volunteers living in various parts of North America. Over 300,000 monarchs were alar tagged (Urquhart, 1960, 1966). In addition, through numerous field expeditions on which we traveled more than 100,000 mi. during the 25-year period, we investigated the presence of monarchs (larvae and imagoes) and the host plants in most parts of southern Canada, the United States, Mexico, and Central America. Some data were obtained as a result of visits to 56 colleges and universities to examine insect and plant collections and discuss the project with our colleagues. In January 1975, the overwintering colony of the monarch was finally located. We were able to join an expedition in January 1976 to view for ourselves this most spectacular sight—the final southern destination of the eastern population of the migrating monarch butterflies. Description of Site The overwintering colony described in the present paper was located on the slope of a volcanic mountain situated in the northern part of the State of Michoacan, Mexico, at a height of slightly over 3,000 m (Fig. 1). The predominant tree, averaging 26 m in height, was the 154 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY \ ae 4 ery ~— Fig. 1. A, area over which monarch butterflies of the eastern population are known to breed; B, area of greatest concentration around the Great Lakes; C, over- wintering site of the eastern population; D, location of migrants in southeastern Mexico and Guatemala (Urquhart & Urquhart 1976); E, aberrant migration com- posed of a small portion of the eastern population that reaches the base of the Florida peninsula and continues southward; F, possible route taken by the aberrant Florida migrants. Note: the breeding area of the western population lies within the mountain valleys with overwintering on the California coast. Oyamel (Oyamel mexicano (Dougl.)). The colony occupied an area of roughly 20 acres. The trunks and branches of the Oyamel trees were completely covered with monarchs (Fig. 2)—only small portions of the crowns of the trees were bare as a result of the action of the mountain winds dislodging the butterflies. The monarchs were so closely packed together on the trunks that it was impossible to see even a small portion of the underlying bark. The branches were not only completely covered, VoLuME 30, NUMBER 3 155 Fig. 2. Clusters of monarch butterflies on three of over a thousand Oyamel trees in the overwintering site. The trunks of the trees are also completely covered. Because of higher temperatures and exposure to the sun through a forest clearing, the monarchs in this photograph have spread their wings. During the evening and throughout the night and early morning, the wings remain closed. Color photographs appear in an article in the National Geographic Magazine (August 1976). 156 JouRNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY from the smallest terminal twig to the base, but the butterflies clung to each other to a depth, in some instances, of 10 cm. One such branch, ca. 2 m in length with a base 4 cm in diam., was so heavily laden with butterflies that it broke, spilling countless thousands of monarchs upon the ground beneath the tree. The forest floor throughout the area was sprinkled with monarchs that, having been dislodged from the trees, were unable to fly because of the low temperatures at this alti- tude. In some locations the ground was covered to an average depth of 10 cm. It was impossible to walk over the area without crushing hundreds of monarchs underfoot, so, to avoid such wanton destruction, the field party limited its tagging activities to one small area near a forest clearing. During the early part of our visit (January 7-21) the temperature on the mountain slope varied from a low of -1° C at night and in the early morning to a high of 13° C in the afternoon. During cloudy periods and periods of rain or snow, the daytime temperature remained at an average of 10° C. In the cool periods the monarchs remained inactive with wings closed. With the advent of higher temperatures, many of them, particularly in areas where the sun shone through the Oyamel branches, opened their wings, presenting a magnificent display of color. At such times thousands would take to wing, filling the air over the forest clearing. As the temperature dropped, the monarchs returned to the trees and remained inactive during the night and early morning. Occasionally there was a slight snowfall. Monarchs shaken from the Oyamel branches were found fluttering on the snow surface. With the advent of warmer temperatures, the light snow cover would melt and the monarchs would return—either by flight, in areas where the sun could reach them, or by crawling—to roosting sites—trunks and branches of the Oyamel trees, bushes, or upright dead branches of fallen trees. To estimate the possible number of monarchs roosting upon one small Oyamel branch, the following procedure was conducted. A small branch, 1.5 m in length, weighed down by its burden of butterflies, was located 2m from the ground surface. The distance from the ground to the tip of the branch was measured. The roosting monarchs were then removed, which allowed the branch, relieved of its burden, to return to its unweighted position. One end of a cord was tied to the branch, about % from the tip, and the other end to a bag. A number of stones were placed in the bag, which caused the tip of the branch to return to its monarch-laden position. On returning to our base, we were able to weigh the bag and its content of stones, which came to 3,800 gm. VoLuME 30, NUMBER 3 Tey Knowing the weight of one butterfly to be 0.61 gm, based on the weight of 50 specimens of both sexes, the estimated number of monarch butterflies on this small branch is calculated to be 6,230. Since over a thousand trees, with branches much larger than the experimental one, together with the trunks and the forest floor, were covered with butter- flies, some conception of the number of overwintering monarchs in the area can be imagined. An accurate estimate is, of course impossible, but the numbers would undoubtedly be in the millions. On our last trip to the site, January 24, the afternoon temperature had risen to 22° C. Thousands of monarchs had left the trees and were flying about, filling the air with fluttering wings, a sight long to be remembered. A number of matings were taking place—pairs flew from one tree to another, and clusters of males and females copulated on the ground. As we climbed the slope of the mountain, we witnessed thousands upon thousands of monarchs heading on a compass bearing of true north. We had witnessed the first spring movement back to the breeding areas of the United States and Canada. Two members of the field party returned to the site on February 9 to find that an estimated 75% of the butterflies had left the colony. Trees that were previously covered with monarchs were bare. Predators A few stray cattle were seen feeding extensively upon the monarchs that were on the ground and the lower portions of the tree trunks. The natives informed us that the cattle commonly fed upon monarchs and grew fat on the diet. In addition to the predation by cattle, a number of species of birds fed upon the roosting monarchs. We procured one bird (later identified as Myiarchus tyrannulus, the Brown-crested Flycatcher) and found its crop and stomach filled with the bodies and a few wing scales of monarchs. The wings of the monarchs had been removed by the birds before ingesting the bodies. It seems reasonable to conclude that other birds did the same thing because the ground was covered with monarch wings that we saw falling from the trees and fluttering to the ground like so many dead leaves. Tagging Program and Results Three monarchs that bore our identifying alar tags were recovered at the overwintering sites. During the expedition of January 1975, one specimen tagged in Nevada, Missouri on 9 September 1974 and another tagged in Fredericksburg, Texas on 8 October 1974 were re- 158 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY captured. During the January 1976 expedition one specimen tagged at Chaska, Minnesota on 6 September 1975 was recaptured. Such recaptures indicate that the site here described is the overwintering area for the monarch butterflies of the eastern population of North America. During our field trips to the site, a total of 25,000 specimens were alar tagged. In view of the fact that the specimens at the site were in excellent condition with very little indication of wing fractures, we are confident that tagged monarchs from the overwintering colony will eventually be recaptured at various localities throughout the United States and Canada, thus indicating a return migration for at least a part of the eastern population. Such recaptures will be reported in subsequent publications. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The study presented in this paper is part of a long-term investigation of the migrations and ecology of the monarch butterfly sponsored through grants from the National Research Council of Canada and the National Geographic Society of the United States, and donations from members of the Insect Migration Association. Permission to use the photograph of the overwintering monarchs on the Oyamel trees was granted by the National Geographic Magazine. The final discovery of the site was made possible by the active cooperation of thousands of volunteer field assistants living in various parts of Canada, the United States, and Mexico. LITERATURE CITED Urgumartr, F. A. 1960. The monarch butterfly. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto. B61" p: 1966. A study of the migrations of the Gulf Coast populations of the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus L.) in North America. Ann. Zool. Fennici 3: 82-87. Urgunart, F. A. & N. R. Urqgumarr. 1976. <A study of the Peninsular Florida populations of the monarch butterfly (Danaus p. plexippus; Danaidae). J. Lepid. Soc. 30: 73-87. VoLuME 30, NUMBER 3 ; 159 NOES ON THE LIFE CYCLE AND NATURAL HISTORY OF BUTTERFLIES OF EL SALVADOR. VIII. ARCHAEOPREPONA ANTIMACHE GULINA, SIDERONE MARTHESIA, ZARETIS CALLIDRYAS AND CONSUL ELECTRA (NYMPHALIDAE) ALBERTO MUYSHONDT 101 Avenida Norte #322, San Salvador, El Salvador This article completes a series dealing with what my sons and I have learned about the early stages, larval food plants, and adult behavior of the Charaxinae found in El Salvador. As far as we know, the re- maining local species of this group for which we have been unable to find the early stages, even though we have collected adults, are Anaea (Anaea) aidea Guerin-Méneville, A. (Memphis) nobilis Bates and A. (M.) glycerium Doubleday. Another species of Archaeoprepona occurs here, but we unfortunately have been unable to capture an adult to have it determined. All these species are very scarce locally; only one or two specimens of some are known in local collections (including Ours ). Life Cycles Archaeoprepona antimache gulina Frihstorfer This species is like A. demophon centralis Frihstorfer (Muyshondt, 1976) except for the following points: Larva (Figs. 2-6). Dark brown dorsally during Ist and 2nd instars; 3rd instar lighter brown with a whitish spiracular area on 7th and 9th abdominal segments; 5th instar larva whitish dorsally from 3rd—9th abdominal segments, rest of body brown. During all instars the mesal thoracic prominence is larger than in respective instars of A. d. centralis. Prepupa (Fig. 7). Prepupa changes to yellow instead of green. Pupa (Figs. 8,9). Pupa slightly more slender laterally than pupa of A. d. centralis. Adult (Figs. 10, 11). Same shape as A. d. centralis but colored triangle on dorsal surface of forewing and band on dorsum of hindwing are definitely iridescent light blue instead of iridescent greenish-blue. Ventral surfaces of wings mostly light gray instead of light brown with a complicated array of darker zones and black lines, more abundant than in A. d. centralis. The wingspan and developmental time are about the same as A. d. centralis. Siderone marthesia Cramer In all respects, this species is like Zaretis itys Cramer (Muyshondt, 1973b) but for the following: Egg. Considerably larger, but same shape and color. Larva (Figs. 12-16). Corresponding instars about 114 times larger, lighter brown than Z. itys; caudal end rounded instead of bifid. Later instars with a white patch formed by short and thin spinulets subdorsally on mesothorax. Head horns very thick and knobby; head and its horns covered with short setae. 160 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Figs. 1-6. Archaeoprepona antimache gulina. 1, Egg, width about 2.5 mm; 2, second instar larva, about 13 mm long; 3, third instar larva, about 30 mm long; A, fourth instar, about 47 mm long; 5, head of fifth instar larva, note lateral pro- jections; 6, fifth instar larva, about 80 mm long. Pupa (Figs. 18-20). Bigger than but about the same shape as pupa of Z. itys. Green with dark markings along the spiracular zone and on the lateral edges of the wingcases. The latter have a marked indentation, lacking in Z. itys. Adults (Figs. 21, 22). Sexually dimorphic. Wing of male: costal margin convex, apex pointed, outer margin S-shaped, tornus rounded and inner margin of forewing straight. Costal margin of hindwing strongly rounded basally, outer angle and margin rounded, anal angle slightly projecting, inner margin S-shaped. Female: larger with costal margin of forewing less convex than in the male, apex without a marked point, outer margin slightly convex, forewing not S-shaped. Hindwing as in the male. Dorsal color pattern of the male: forewing dark brown, almost black, with a slanting red bar from the mid-costal margin almost to the tornus and a red triangle basally, leaving a black band in between. Male hindwing mostly black or very dark brown with red markings of variable size starting from mid-costal margin, markings sometimes reduced to two or three spots or forming a band running toward the anal angle. Apex of front wing in some individuals red-tinged and with a very small white spot near costal margin of the subapical area. Females have same color pattern, but lighter brown with two subapical white spots on forewing and red markings of hindwing greatly reduced. Ventral wing surfaces of both sexes very VoLUuME 30, NUMBER 3 161 Figs. 7-11. Archaeoprepona antimache gulina. 7, Prepupa, note tails located on either side of twig; 8, pupa, dorsal view, about 42 mm long; 9, pupa, ventral view; 10, male, dorsal view, wingspan about 80 mm; 11, male, ventral view. similar but darker in male: ground color dark brown with darker lines resembling leaf veins and lighter zones, the latter more evident on hindwing. Apex of forewing with some white sprinkling. The whole of ventral wing surfaces gives silvery sheen at certain angles. Thorax reddish above, yellowish below; abdomen brown. Antennae light brown; palpi and proboscis yellow. Wingspan of female about 7.0 cm, male 5.0 cm. Zaretis callidryas R. Felder A second instar of Z. callidryas was collected and at first thought to be a difterent morph of the common Z. itys. The larva was reared on Casearia silvestris and C. nitida. During the later instars differences were noticed and photographed: Larva (Fig. 23). Abdomen lighter dorsally than Z. itys; head smoother, without the typical Z. itys spines and the horns incurved posteriorly. Pupa. Closely resembles the green morph of Z. itys. Adult. The obtained adult was a tailed female. Its shape similar to Z. itys except for tail on M-3 of hindwing and less acute anal angle. Dorsal color predominantly 162 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Figs. 12-14. Siderone marthesia. 12, Fourth instar larva, about 32 mm long; 13, same, dorsal view; 14, fifth instar larva, two days after molting, about 44 mm long. Fig. 15. Left, Zaretis itys, fifth instar larva; right, Siderone marthesia, fifth instar larva, about 62 mm long. Compare caudal end of Zaretis with Siderone. Figs. 16-17. Close-up of larval heads: 16, Siderone and 17, Zaretis. white with pearly sheen; apex of forewing faintly gray. Outer margin of hindwing with submarginal row of small faint brown spots. Ventrally wings yellowish-white with faint markings as in Z. itys. Wingspan about 5 cm. Consul electra Westwood In its early stages, behavior and selection of food plant, this species is similar to C. fabius (Cramer) (Muyshondt, 1974) except for the following noticeable dif- ferences: Larva (Figs. 26, 27). During 5th instar, head predominantly green with black near the horns and yellow frontal bands. In C. fabius the head is mostly black with yellow frontal bands. Pupa (Wigs. 28-30). Green and brown pupal morphs occur. Slightly wider lat- erally than in C. fabius; shows two dark spots dorsally on thorax. Adult (Figs. 31-38). Adults not showing marked sexual dimorphism, but are amazingly polymorphic. Apex of forewing more or less elongate and acuminate; M-3 VoLUME 30, NUMBER 3 163 1 22 Figs. 18-22. Siderone marthesia. 18, Pupa, dorsal view, about 25 mm long; 19, pupa, lateral view; 20, pupa, ventral view; 21, male, dorsal view, wingspan about do mm; 22, male, ventral view. of hindwing more or less elongate and spatulate, anal angle sometimes forming second tail. Dorsal and ventral colors more or less dark with some variations in color pattern. Variations in shape and color exist between individuals reared simulta- neously, thus, not attributable to seasonal variation. Wingspan of female about 7.0 cm, male 5.5 cm. Natural History Archaeoprepona a. gulina behaves during its early stages and as an adult very much like Prepona omphale octavia (Muyshondt, 1973a) and A. demophon centralis (Muyshondt, 1976). It looks very much like the latter except for variations in color. The larva of A. a. gulina also reacts in a menacing manner by lifting the forked tail which is opened and closed scissor-like when prodded. During the later instars 164 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY Figs. 23-25. Zaretis callidryas. 23, Fifth instar larva, about 40 mm long, note incurved horns, compare with Z. itys, Fig. 15; 24, female (tailed morph), dorsal view, wingspan about 50 mm; 25, female, ventral view. it also has a reptilian aspect when viewed dorsally. This is due to a prominent dorsal projection which covers the head. The lateral aspects of the dorsal projection bear false eyes which enhance the effect. This prominence also is retractable. A. a. gulina larvae feed on a Laurinaceae tree determined by Lic. Flores, Universidad Nacional, as Nectandra sinuata, which is the same food plant used by the larvae of Anaea morvus boisduvali Comstock (Muyshondt, 1975). Actually it was while searching for A. m. boisduwali eggs that the first eggs of A. a. gulina were found. The eggs of the latter species are also heavily parasitized by chalcidid wasps, and the small larvae are preyed upon by spiders. A. a. gulina occupies the same habitat as A. demophon centralis. Siderone marthesia and Zaretis callidryas behave like Z. itys (Muy- shondt, 1973b) and share its food plants: Casearia sylvestris and C. nitida although Zaretis itys appears to prefer the latter and Siderone marthesia and Zaretis callidryas the former. Both S. marthesia and Z. callidryas have been collected at an altitude of 1,000 m. Z. itys has a wider range. The females of S. marthesia are very seldom seen. Most of our observations have been of adult males; they have definite hill- topping behavior between 1030-1600 hr. They usually perch on the top branches of trees, and it is quite a feat to net them. Luckily they are attracted by fermenting banana baits, but we have never found females at the baits. However, Descimon et al. (1973) report several captures of females at baits near Colima, Mexico. We are unable to VoLUME 30, NUMBER 3 165 Figs. 26-34. Consul electra. 26, Fifth instar larva, about 37 mm long; 27, close- up of larval head; 28, pupa, dorsal view, about 20 mm long; 29, pupa, lateral view: 30, pupa, ventral view. Emergence of adult: 31-34, sequenced from left to right. comment on the behavior of adult Zaretis callidryas because the only specimen we have seen is the one reared in our insectary. The behavior of the early stages and adult of Consul electra resemble those of Anaea (Consul) fabius Cramer (Muyshondt, 1974). The larvae of both use a number of species of Piperaceae as food plants. C. electra has been collected at higher altitudes than fabius (500-2,600 m). Both 166 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY 37 38 Figs. 35-38. Consul electra. 35, Female, dorsal view, wingspan about 70 mm; 36, female, ventral view; 37, male (acute apex morph), dorsal view, wingspan about 55 mm; 38, male, ventral view. species can be found simultaneously feeding on the same plants where their ranges merge at an altitude of 500-1,200 m. The adults do not visit flowers, but feed on fermenting fruits and excrement on the ground and on sap from tree cavities. The males are pugnacious and perch on shrubs at a height of 2-4 m. With C. fabius, C. electra is one of the slowest flyers among the local Charaxinae. The larvae and pupae are often parasitized by tachinid flies and chalcidid wasps. DISCUSSION Miiller (1886) described the life cycles of various Archaeoprepona (under the generic name of Prepona), including A. amphimachus Fabricius on Laurinaceae (probably Nectandra spp.), A. catachlora Staudinger on Mollinedia brasiliensis Jul. (Monimaceae) and A. demo- phon extincta Staudinger on Dugetia lanceolata St. Hilaire (Anonaceae). VoLuME 30, NUMBER 3 167 His descriptions conform closely with our own observations of A. demo- phon centralis (Muyshondt, 1976) and A. antimache gulina except for the eggs which he describes as having “very fine and crowded longi- tudinal ribs” which we have been unable to detect, even under 15x magnification. Miller also described the early stages of Siderone ide Hubner and S. strigosus Gmelin and claimed both species fed on Cas- earia sylvestris. However, Siderone strigosus, according to Comstock (1961), is a synonym of Anaea (Zaretis) itys. Furthermore, because Miller states that the early stages of “Siderone strigosus’ are “as ide,” it appears that his descriptions actually deal with two species of Zaretis. After studying species of both genera (Zaretis itys (Muyshondt, 1973b), Z. callidryas, and Siderone marthesia), we are certain that there are notable differences between the early stages of the larvae of the two genera that would not escape the attention of an investigator. The only part in Miller’s description of “ide” that would fit a Siderone pupa is “wing edge and stigma brown, yet he does not mention a drastic indentation (as seen dorsally and ventrally) at the brown mark on the wingcase of the pupa he described. According to Comstock (1961), the only information about the early stages of A. (Siderone) marthesia is Miiller’s, however, we are certain that Miuller’s description was not of a species of Siderone. In Rydon (1971) there are some good painted illustrations of the larvae of S. marthesia and S. nemesis and their respective pupae copied from the original drawings of Miss M. E. Fontaine which were published by the Royal Entomological Society around 1910. However, Miss Fontaine apparently did not write any descriptions. We are unaware of any previous publications on the early stages of Zaretis callidryas. The adult is figured in Seitz (1924) as an Anaea and is not likened to its close relative, Zaretis itys. Even in Lewis (1973) the tailless form of Z. callidryas is presented as an Anaea. The same is true with Consul electra. Seitz (1924) and Lewis (1973) present it as Anaea electra and do not relate it to its close relative, Consul fabius, which they picture as Protogonius hippona Fabricius. We hope our descriptions and illustrations of the species we have studied will help the experts clarify and settle the apparent congeneric questions of the Charaxinae. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are greatly thankful to Drs. A. H. B. Rydon and H. Descimon for supplying us with a number of publications that helped document the present article; to Drs. James G. Sternburg and G. L. Godfrey for dedi- 168 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS SOCIETY cating part of their valuable time to reading, criticizing, and suggesting improvements for the manuscript; to Viktor Hellebuyck for sharing his own observations of the species mentioned; and to Alberto, Jr., Marilynn and Pierre, members of the family, for their enthusiastic help. LITERATURE CITED Comstock, W. P. 1961. Butterflies of the American Tropics, the genus Anaea, (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). The American Museum of Natural History, N.Y. QIA p. peers H., J. M. pe Magscur & J.-R. SrorFeL. 1973. Contribution a létude des Nymphalides neotropicales. Description de trois nouveaux Prepona mexi- cains. Alexanor 8: 155-159. Hemminc, F. 1967. The generic names of the butterflies and their type-species. (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera). Bull. British Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Entomology Suppl. 9. 509 p. Lewis, H. L. 1973. Butterflies of the World. Harrap Books, London; and Follett, Chicago. xvi + 312 p. MULLER, W. 1886. Siidamerikanische Nymphalidenraupen. Versuch eines natiir- lichen Systems der Nymphaliden. Zool. Jahrb. Zeitschr. Syst., Geogr., Biol. der Thiere 1: 417-678. MuysHonpr, A. 1973a. Notes on the life cycle and natural history of butterflies of El Salvador. I. Prepona omphale octavia (Nymphalidae). J. Lepid. Soc. 27: 210-219. | 1973b. Notes on the life cycle and natural history of butterflies of El Salvador. II. Anaea (Zaretis) itys (Nymphalidae). J. Lepid. Soc. 27: 294-302.<