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.
Volume 27, Number 1
83
Antemarginal spots of forewing separated and never included in a patch formed by fusion of the spots _________________________________________________ 3
3. Yellow antemarginal and postmedial series of forewing rather large and only
narrowly separated by black which, especially in the apical part in some
males, tends to be translucent __________________________________________
_______________ C. hezia heclila Godman & Salvin, Guatemala and Honduras.
Yellow antemarginal spots of forewing smaller than postmedian spots, always well separated by opaque black, but the postmedial series sometimes tending
to fuse with the yellow spots in the end of the cell ____________________
_____________________________ C. hezia smalli Fox, Code Province, Panama.
All yellow spots on the forewing tiny and well separated from each other ____
_______________ C. hezia hezia Hewitson, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama.
4. Yellow spots of the hindwings only slightly larger than those of the fore wings
and discretely separated from each other _______________________________
_____________C. hezia perija Masters, Sierra de Perija, Venezuela and Colombia.
Yellow spots of the hindwings large, broad and fused together basally, but present in a single series ___________ C. hezia tridactyla Hewitson, Colombia.
Yellow spots of the hindwings large, broad and fused together basally, but
present in a double series with an outer marginal row of spots present ____
_______________________________________________ C. hezia baccata Fox, Peru.
SOME FIELD NOTES ON ISOPARCE CUPRESSI BDV. (SPHINGIDAE)
During a collecting trip to the Wedge Plantation near McClellanville, Charleston County, South Carolina in mid-September of 1972, I had the opportunity to investigate the life histories of some of the local Lepidoptera. The larval habits of the sphingid, Isoparce cupressi Bdv., were of particular interest to me since my host, Dr. R. B. Dominick, had successfully reared a brood of this species ex-ovo on Taxodium distichum L. (Bald Cypress) in the late summer of 1971. A suspected habitat of the species, a small swamp surrounded by T. distichum and located near the Wedge Laboratory, was surveyed, and several well exposed and isolated trees of the foodplant were chosen for examination.
Concentrated searching of the lower, accessible branches of eight large cypress trees yielded 15 larvae—one 2nd instar, five 3rd instar, seven 4th instar, and two 5th instar larvae. Six of these were in the process of molting when found. All but one of the larvae were on the undersides of the branches of the foodplant, from approximately four to seven feet off the ground. The 2nd and 3rd instar larvae were always situated near the ends of the branches, on the midribs of the terminal pinnae. The location of the 4th instar larvae was usually in the middle of the branches, also on the midribs of the pinnae. A large and nearly mature 5th instart larva, was found resting in the woody crotch of two branches. Finally, the other 5th instar larva, covered with parasitic cocoons, was discovered sitting on the top of a dead branch, moribund and obviously near death.
Two viable ova and several hatched eggshells were collected on the undersides of the terminal needles of the Taxodium branches. Since these were always found singly and randomly deposited, it appears likely that this is the natural mode of oviposition.
Numerous jumping spiders and harvestmen were seen during the daily examinations of the cypress branches. Their suspected predatory behavior was confirmed when a small grey salticid was observed feeding on a wriggling 3rd instar cupressi larva that it had obviously just captured. Judging by the large numbers seen, it
84
Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society
seems logical to assume that these arachnids contribute considerably to the attrition of this sphingid's early stages.
Six of the fourteen larvae later produced parasites—a dipterous maggot emerged from a 3rd instar larva, while five late 5th instar larvae produced numerous braconid-like parasites. Also, several dried corpses of cupressi larvae were seen on the branches, with emerged parasitic cocoons found spun in a silken mass at the base of the dead larvae.
To assess the feeding habits and density of L cupressi larvae, I placed an old bedsheet underneath a number of cypress trees. Each morning I examined this sheet, and found it covered with large amounts of lepidopterous larval frass. Since there are no other known Taxodium-ieeding species whose larvae would be as large as cupressi, it is assumed that most of the droppings were from this species. Almost all of it was identical in color, form, size, and texture to that deposited by the cupressi larvae feeding in captivity. Often there were concentrations of large frass pellets on the sheet, but searching the lower branches just above these areas revealed no larvae. It appears that most of this excreta had filtered down from cupressi larvae on the higher branches. Further, the ground beneath every landlocked T. distichum tree on the Wedge grounds indicated the presence of cupressi in the form of these large pellets of frass. The sheet was shaken clean each morning, and then moved to another nearby cypress tree. While the sheet was checked at frequent intervals, almost no new droppings were deposited during the day. However, the following morning invariably revealed the sheet once again covered with quantities of cupressi-\ike frass. This evidence supports the hypothesis of Bates (1928, Florida Entomol. 12: 20-21), that I. cupressi larvae feed at night. It seems likely that, at least around the Wedge Plantation, the higher cypress branches support healthy populations of cupressi larvae. Searching these higher branches at night with a flashlight, and with a ladder during the day, was unsuccessful.
Michael D. Van Buskirk, 4512 47th S.W., Seattle, Washington 98116.
INTERESTING FLORIDA BUTTERFLY RECORDS
The records below represent either range extensions or reinforcements of older records as published by Kimball (1965, The Lepidoptera of Florida. Gainesville. 363p.) and Clench (1970, J. Lepid. Soc. 24: 240-244). Checklist numbers are those of dos Passos (1964, Mem. Lepid. Soc. 1) and the nomenclature also follows his work. In several cases, primarily those records from the early 1960's, no specimens were taken or the few secured have been destroyed. Therefore, the data in those instances are of a more general nature. I would like to offer a special thanks to Mr. D. W. Bryne who provided support and encouragement during the period that these records were being established.
83. Problema byssus (Edwards). Range extension. In the early 1960's this Skipper could be found in both north Tampa, Hillsborough Co., and at Bishop's Harbor, Manatee Co.
188b. Staphylus mazans hayhurstii (Edwards). Range extension. Ozello, Citrus Co.: 5 September 1970 (5 £ S )• This represents a substantial northward extension on the west coast of Florida. The previous records (Kimball) stopped at Sanibel Island, Lee Co.
218. Urbanus dorantes dorantes (Stoll). Range extension. Caxambas, Marco Island, Collier Co.: 17 October 1970 (1 $). Branchton, Hillsborough Co.: 29 February 1972 (1 $ ) and 5 April 1972 (1 $ ). The two specimens from Branchton were taken in open areas within a forested area and represent a one hundred and fifty mile northward range extension over previous records (Clench). This could