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.
324
Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society
of the Department of Crops and Soils at the Centro Agronomico Tropical de Investigation y Ensefiana. I am especially grateful to Dr. and Mrs. Saunders at that institution for their technical and moral support, to Patricia Blau for the same and for editing and typing the manuscript, and to Paul Feeny for advice and encouragement. This work was supported by NSF grants DEB 76-20114 and BMS 75-15282 to Paul Feeny, and was performed while the author was a graduate student at Cornell University.
William S. Blau, Department of Entomology, North Carolina State University, 840 Method Rd. Unit 1, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607.
Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 34(3), 1980, 324
REPEATED INTERGENERIC ATTRACTION BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND EUROPEAN SILKMOTHS (SATURNIIDAE)
Attraction of one species of saturniid by another in the same genus is well-known, particularly with regard to the various members of Hyalophora, Callosamia, and Sam-ia. Kershaw (1953, Ent. Rec. J. Var. 65: 219-220) reports an intergeneric attraction of Phragmatobia fuliginosa L. males to a Panaxia dominula L. female, both British arc-tiids. Dominick (1974, J. Lepid. Soc. 28: 176) even records an interfamilial attraction involving Amphion nessus (Cramer) (Sphingidae) males and an Anisota virginiensis pellucida (J. E. Smith) (Citheroniidae) female. However, the purpose of this note is to record an intergeneric attraction between two saturniids which do not normally meet in nature.
For several years I have been rearing Saturnia pyri Denis & Schiffermuller, from France, for study purposes. Since these moths normally emerge during the first half of May in this area, a time when most of our native saturniids are still in hibernation, I was quite surprised to discover several large moths trying to gain entrance to our screened porch on 8 May 1976, at 0130 EST. Upon allowing one to enter and discovering that it was a male Antheraea polyphemus Cramer, I felt certain it would seek out a female of the same species, which I had somehow failed to notice. Instead, it flew directly to a transmitting female pyri and tried unsuccessfully to effect copulation. Since that first experience, I have had numerous wild polyphemus males attracted to other transmitting pyri females each year. The males are determined in their efforts to mate and the females quietly submit to the incessant scratching and poking of the males for as long as 20 min before one or the other breaks off contact. None of these encounters has produced a successful union since the male polyphemus seems unable to clasp the abdomen of the female pyri.
As the male polyphemus attempts copulation, the female pyri retracts her ovipositor, making the end of her abdomen smooth with no protrusions on which to get a grip. The male's abdomen repeatedly slides from side to side without being able to "lock on." Visually, male pyri claspers appear to be larger than male polyphemus claspers. It's possible that a male pyri may be able to clasp the last segment of the female's abdomen and by applying pressure, force the female to extrude her ovipositor. The male polyphemus, on the other hand, with smaller claspers and inability to grip the female's abdomen, cannot apply pressure and mating attempts must necessarily fail.
Robert S. Bryant, 522 Old Orchard Rd., Baltimore, Maryland 21229.