The text below is grayed out because it is not intended to be read. It is a necessarily imperfect OCR of the original and is only used by a search engine.
84
Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society
the Survey collection by Illinois specimens; four species are represented by the only Illinois specimens known.
Also included are 63 specimens originally in the collection of William Henry Edwards and bearing his holograph labels; of these one is an Edwards syntype. This material was listed and its history discussed in a paper in this Journal (Irwin, 1966, J. Lepid. Soc. 20: 156-162). It has been extensively studied by F. Martin Brown during his current researches on the Edwards butterfly types (see Brown, 1964, Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc. 90: 323-413, and subsequent papers in this series).
With the addition of the Irwin collection, that of the Survey becomes the largest and most complete of Illinois butterflies in existence. The Survey is second only to the Field Museum among Illinois institutions in total holdings of Lepidoptera. The writer is currently incorporating several other individual collections as well as his own into the unified Survey butterfly collection, while the remainder of the Lepidoptera is being curated by Dr. Robert W. Poole of the Survey staff.
The writer plans to continue to collect and study Lepidoptera, and to complete the faunal survey of Illinois butterflies which he and Dr. John C. Downey have been conducting for several years.
Roderick R. Irwin, 24 East 99th Place, Chicago, Illinois.
BOLORIA EUNOMIA LADDI (NYMPHALIDAE) IN COLORADO
On 5 July 1967, John Sorensen of Waterloo, Iowa, Pat Conway of Chicago and I collected a small series of Boloria eunomia (Esper) in a willow bog just above 10,000+ feet in Gunnison County, Colorado'. After examination, these specimens appear to belong to the "Wyoming" subspecies, laddi (Klots), rather than to the "Colorado" subspecies, caelestis (Hemming). They agree with the laddi phenotype by having dark, red-brown coloration on the basal area of the underside of the hind wing and on the subapical patch on the underside of the forewing; rather than the light, yellow-brown coloration of caelestis. Their appearance on the upperside does not differ from either laddi or caelestis. I have no hesitation in assigning them to laddi, even though they are separated from Wyoming populations of this subspecies by considerable distance.
Other than a record by Scott Ellis (19 July 1964, also Gunnison County), these are the only known examples of eunomia from west of the continental divide in Colorado. I suspect that the laddi phenotype will be found to occur along the western slope in Colorado, while the caelestis phenotype will be endemic to the Colorado eastern slope.
John H. Masters, Lemon Street North, North Hudson, Wisconsin.
FLIGHT PATTERN OF THE MALE OF ANISOTA VIRGINIENSIS (CITHERONIIDAE)
A colony of fourth-instar larvae of Anisota virginiensis (Drury) was found feeding on Water Oak, Quercus nigra (L.), early in July, 1970, about seven miles north of McClellanville, South Carolina. The larvae were reared successfully to pupation. About half a dozen mature larvae were preserved by both inflation and vacuum freeze-drying. The authors were especially interested in rearing this species through
Volume 25, Number 1
85
to the adult stage for, contrary to the usual pattern, their collection contains a series of females all caught in light traps, but there is not a male in the crowd. A search of the literature working backward from Lutz and Holland through Seitz, Packard, McDunnough, Forbes, etc., revealed a multitude of descriptions and lots of lovely plates and figures of the males and females, but nowhere an answer to the evident dislike of males for our light traps. It was a chance question during a visit by Drs. D. C. Ferguson and J. G. Franclemont that began to shed some light on the mystery.
"Aha," they said in unison. "It's no wonder. Males of virginiensis are crepuscular and don't fly after dark!" And so we waited while our twenty-one pupae ticked along. On 21 July a female emerged early in the morning and within one week the whole lot had proved viable and had emerged; there were about equal numbers of males and females. Without exception both sexes emerged soon after sunrise and were expanded and ready for flight by about 9 AM, EST. They were in a screen wire cage on a sheltered porch outdoors, and we killed and mounted all the males as soon as they were dry enough (except for one which escaped with remarkable rapidity). The females, which remained quite docile, were left alive in the cage in hopes that they would attract wild males in the late afternoon and thus prove the crepuscular theory. In vain we sat and watched until it was too dark to see, and again the following mid-afternoon till dark. The next morning about eleven o'clock one of us (CRE) happened to pass by the cage and in utter astonishment saw a very swift red object buzzing rapidly about. A hasty grab for a handy net, and a wild male virginiensis was bagged. The following day about noon one of our wives who maintains a close interest in our odd activities reported the same phenomenon. She likewise grabbed the nearby net but failed in the capture. Thereafter we ceased our fruitless afternoon and evening vigils and instead stood watch from sunrise on. In three days, before our last female died her natural death, we caught thirteen more wild males, all between 10 AM and 1:30 PM, EST. They fly rapidly and erratically, reminding one of fast skippers or small Sphingidae, often stopping to hover nearby for a moment and then darting off again. Patience is required of the stalker; wild mid-air sweeps of the net are generally disasterous, but the temptation tantalizing. Thus the actual number of males attracted may have exceeded those captured. The wild males we did capture were almost without exception fresh and in good condition. We did not mate any of the females, and found their natural infertile adult life to be about five days.
One strange and so far unexplained incident occurred. On two occasions a flying object paid a swift passing visit to the caged females. We should have believed it to be virginiensis by size, speed and flight pattern but it was dark in color, not the typical deep red of virginiensis which is very conspicuous in flight. The first of these UFO's zipped away too fast for identification, but it bore resemblance to the second which hovered at the cage just long enough for positive identification as Amphion nessus (Cram). While the latter is a common day-flier in this area, it certainly bears no close relationship to the Citheronidae, and its attraction seems a mystery.
Richard B. Dominick and Charles R. Edwards, The Charleston Museum, Charleston, South Carolina.