Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T06:12:52.284Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ON CERTAIN STATEMENTS IN SCUDDER'S “BUTTERFLIES OF NEW ENGLAND.”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

W. H. Edwards
W. H. Edwards
Affiliation:
Coalburgh, West VA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As Mr. Scudder has charged me with blunders of one sort or other, I am compelled to notice the matter, as slience on my part would properly be construed as an acknlowledgement that he was right.

O. On p. 1805, the synonymy of Argynnis (Brenthis) Freija is given, closing thus: “Argynnis Chariclea Edw., in his catalogues.” And on p. 180, under Chariclea: “Argynnis Freya Edw., in his cat.”

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , April 1890 , pp. 61 - 67
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1890

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* Mr. Scudder says, page 1807, under Freya, by which he means Chariclea: “To judge from the captures north of Lake Superior, it is a late species, flying late in August and early in September, or at the very close of the season, at that place. Evidently winter must be passed, by the caterpillar just from the egg.” I have not learned from Mr. Bean the date of first appearance of Chariclea imago, but I received eggs sent by him 4th of August, 1866, and another lot 6th August, same year. Part of each lot hibernated direct from the egg, but part went past third moult and then hibernated. I lost these during the winter. But these last larvæ, had they lived, would have reached imago three or four weeks earlier than the larvæ that hibernated from the egg. This would give the appearance of two broods of the butterfly, and account for some flying in July and others in September.

Under Chariclea, p. 1809, by which Mr. Scudder means Freya, we read: “Nothing is known of its seasons or history, except that it appears in Colorado early in the season, in May, or early in June, so that winter can certainly not be passed as a caterpiller just from the egg.” I have not had eggs of Freya from Colorado, but received some from Laggan, sent 6th June, 1886; and again, sent 4th June, 1889. I lost the survivors of the first lot after they had passed the second moult; but those of the last lot (6) reached eight-tenths of an inch in length, and had passed three moults before 2nd July. I thought from their actions they would pupate, but after several alternations of quiet and activity, they finally dropped asleep, and I sent them to Clifton Springs, N. Y., 16th of July, to go in the refrigerating house.

The species A. Helena is the representative of Chariclea in Colorado, and as that behaves so Chariclea might be supposed to behave, if it dwelt in Colorado. Eggs of Helena, sent from that State 24th July, 1886, gave larvæ, all of which passed the third moult and then went into hibernation. I lost them during the winter.

I may as well here speak of one other of this group, A. Triclaris, found in Colorado and north. I received eggs sent from Laggan, 2nd August, 1889. The larvæ passed second moult and hibernated, and were sent to Cliffton Springs 19th September.

The larvæ of all four species are closely like that of Bellona. In the first stage, the alternate segments are green and brown, as in Bellona, and also Myrina. The spines of Triclaris are somewhat different from the rest after the first stage, but these others are same as in Bellona, so far as I carried the larvæ. Mr Scudder has tried hard to find characters in the preparatory stages by which to separate the genus Brenthis Scudder (not the coitus Brenthis of Hubner, by a good deal), but wholly without success; and the same is true of the imago. The small species are merely a group of the genus Argynnis. As to two other genera, so called, chipped off from Argynnis, viz., Semnopsyche and Speyeria, there is not a feature in any stage to justify either of them.