[113] [Eng. ed. The caterpillar is described and figured by Millière, “Iconographie des Chenilles et Lépidoptères inédits,” tome iii., Paris, 1869; also in the Annales, Soc. Linn. de Lyon, 1871 and 1873.] [This sp. = Hemaris Croatica, Esper., of Butler’s revision. R.M.]
[114] [The following additional species of the subfamily Macroglossinæ have been figured by Butler:—Lophura Hyas, Walk. (loc. cit. Pl. XC., Figs. 1 and 2), Hong-Kong, Silhet, and Java. The larva is apparently figured in two stages, the younger being red-brown with oblique white stripes, and the head and three front segments green. The larger specimen is green, mottled with red-brown, and no oblique stripes. In both figures the subdorsal line is indicated. The whole colouring is very suggestive of protective resemblance. Hemaris Hylas, Linn., from China, Japan, Ceylon, India, Australia, and Africa (loc. cit. Pl. XC., Fig. 4). The upper part of the body is light blue, and the lower part green, the two areas being separated by a white subdorsal line bordered above with brown. The dorsal line is feebly represented. Macroglossa Belis, Cram., N. India (loc. cit. Pl. XC., Fig. 6), is figured with the ground-colour deep indigo; a conspicuous white subdorsal, and a yellow spiracular line is present; on the side of each segment, between the two lines mentioned, there is a large red spot with a yellow nucleus (? eye-spots), the spots decreasing in size towards the head and tail; these probably confer upon this species some special protective advantage. Macroglossa Pyrrhosticta, Butler, China and Japan (loc. cit. Pl. XC., Fig. 8), is greenish-white with dorsal and subdorsal lines, and seven dark oblique stripes along the sides, below the subdorsal line. Of the foregoing species Hemaris Hyas appears to be in the same phyletic stage as M. Stellatarum and M. Croatica, &c., whilst M. Pyrrhosticta is probably, together with M. Corythus and M. Gilia, in another and more advanced stage, which is also passed through by Lophura Hyas in the course of its ontogenetic development. This last species (adult) and M. Belis may represent phyletic stages still further advanced. Caliomma Pluto, Walk., of which the caterpillar is figured by Burmeister (loc. cit. Pl. XIII., Fig. 1), appears to be a case of special protective resemblance to a twig or branch of its food-plant. Figured also by Chavannes; Bull. Soc. Vadoise des Sci. Nat., Dec. 6th 1854. R.M.]
[115] [Genus Pterogon, Boisd., = Proserpinus and Lophura (part). Butler, loc. cit. p. 632. The species above treated of = Proserpinus Œnotheræ, Fabr. R.M.]
[116] [These species = Thyreus Abboti and Proserpinus Gauræ of Butler’s revision. Of the former he states:—“Transformations described, and larva and imago figured, Am. Ent. ii. p. 123, 1870; the larva is also figured by Scudder in Harris’s ‘Correspondence,’ [Pl. III]., Fig. 1 (1869), and by Packard in his ‘Guide,’ p. 276, Fig. 203.” R.M.]
[117] [Proserpinus (Sphinx) Gorgon, Esp. R.M.]
[118] Rösel, loc. cit. vol. iii., p. 26, note.
[119] Figured and described by Abbot and Smith. [Macrosila (Sphinx) Cingulata is figured also by Burmeister, loc. cit. Pl. XII., Fig. 1. R.M.]
[120] Figured in “Cat. Lep. E. Ind. Co.”
[121] See the figure in Sepp’s Surinam Lepidoptera, P. 3, Pl. CI., 1848. A specimen in alcohol of the adult caterpillar is in the Berlin Museum. [The following is the synonymy of the above mentioned species:—Macrosila Hasdrubal, Walk. = Pseudosphinx (Sphinx) Tetrio, Linn.; M. Cingulata = Protoparce (Sphinx) Cingulata, Fabr.; M. Rustica = Protoparce (Sphinx) Rustica, Fabr.; Sphinx Convolvuli, Linn. = Protoparce Convolvuli; S. Carolina, Linn. = P. Carolina; the other species remain in the genera, as given above. The following additional species of Sphinginæ and Acherontiinæ have been figured by Butler:—Pseudosphinx Cyrtolophia, Butl., from Madras (loc. cit. Pl. XCI., Figs. 11 and 13); Protoparce Orientalis, Butl., from India, China, Java, &c. (Pl. XCI., Fig. 16); Diludia Vates, Butl. from India, &c. (Pl. XCI., Fig. 18); Nephele Hespera, Fabr., from India, Australia, &c. (Pl. XCI., Fig. 20); Acherontia Morta, Hübn., from Java, China, India, &c. (Pl. XCII., Fig. 9); and A. Medusa, Butl., from nearly the same localities as the last (Pl. XCII., Fig. 10). Most of these species fall under Dr. Weismann’s general remarks, so that it is unnecessary to give detailed descriptions. The most divergent marking is that of P. Cyrtolophia, which has a broad white dorsal line bordered with pink, and two large pink ovals on the back of the four anterior segments, the hindmost and larger of these being bisected by the dorsal line. In N. Hespera the subdorsal line is present on segments 6 to 11 only, and it is highly significant that the oblique stripes are absent from these segments, but are present on the anterior segments, where the subdorsal line fails. With reference to the larva of A. Atropos, Mr. Mansel Weale states (Proc. Ent. Soc. 1878, p. v.) that in S. Africa the ordinary form feeds generally on Solanaceæ, whilst the darker and rarer variety is found only on species of Lantana. The following species of these subfamilies are figured by Burmeister: Amphonyx Jatrophæ (loc. cit. Pl. XI., Fig. 1); Protoparce (Diludia) Florestan, Cram. (Fig. 2); Sphinx Justiciæ, Walk. (Fig. 3); Protoparce (Diludia) Lichenea, Walk. (Fig. 4); Sphinx (Protoparce) Cingulata, Fabr. (Pl. XII., Fig. 1); and Sphinx Cestri (Fig. 5). All these species have the characteristic Sphinx-like markings. Dilophonota Ello, Linn. (Pl. XII., Fig. 2), is greenish-brown with a yellow subdorsal line, and D. Hippothöon (Fig. 4), yellow with a whitish subdorsal. Neither of these has oblique stripes. D. Œnotrus, Cram. (Fig. 3), has neither stripes nor subdorsal, but is uniform brown above, passing into green beneath. Protoparce Albiplaga, Walk. (Pl. XIII., Fig. 2, also Mérian, [Pl. III]., and Abbot and Smith, I., Pl. XXIV.), pale green with large yellow, black-bordered patches surrounding the spiracles. Pseudosphinx Tetrio, Linn. (Pl. XIII., Fig. 3), and P. Scyron (Fig. 4) are black with broad transverse belts, yellow and white respectively, encircling the middle of each segment. These light bands serve very effectively to break up the uniform surface of the large bodies of these insects, but the whole marking is suggestive of distastefulness. R.M.]
[122] [The species referred to is placed by Butler in Hübner’s genus Hyloicus. R.M.]