Ficus Pumila L.: a new Host Plant of Common Crow (Euploea Core Cramer, Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae)

2005·1.1 MB·

by  N A Aravind

MISCELLANEOUS NOTES
ADDITIONS TO THE LIGHT ATTRACTED BUTTERFLIES
27.
Insects ingeneral areknowntobeattractedto light. Of OnApril 17, 2002, ataround 2000 hrs, RMS noticed a
course, moths outnumber many other groups in this habit, large butterfly dash against a tube light at his residence at
and catches of moths at light sources have regularly been Paul Road in Pune. Ascertaining that it was not a regular
reported. However, little is known about the attraction of visitor,he identified itasTailedJay,PapiUoagamemnonLinn.
butterfliestolight,astheyaremostlydiurnal,orsuch incidents (Family Papilionidae). Incidentally,this isthefirstpapilionid
go unnoticed. being reported as attracted to light.
Inthepast, Usman(1956)recordedaLycaenid Talicada
nyseus attracted to light at Bangalore. Donahue (1962) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
recorded butterflies attracted to light in India. Shull and
Nadkemy (1967) have reported 18 species (Nymphalids, RMS thanks Dr. J.R.B. Alfred, Director, Zoological
Pierids and Satyrids 5 each, Lycaenid 1, and Hesperiids 2) Survey of India (ZSI), Kolkata and Dr. H.S. Mehta, Joint
attracted to light in Surat Dangs. Recently, Sharma and Director and Officer-in-Charge, ZSI, HAZFS, Solan for
Chaturvedi (1999) reported one more species ofNymphalid facilities and encouragement.
fromTadobaNationalPark,andNair(200 addedthreespecies
1)
tothe list(twoLycaenidsandaSatyrid)ofbutterfliesattracted January6,2003 R.M. SHARMA
tolightfromAralamWildlifeSanctuary,Kerala. Herewereport Zoological SurveyofIndia,
twomorespecies,oneLycaenidfromSanjayGandhiNational HighAltitude Zoology Field Station,
Park, MumbaiandonePapilionidfromPune, Maharashtra. Solan 17321 1,Himachal Pradesh, India.
During a faunistic survey of Sanjay Gandhi National
Park (located in the Mumbai-Thane suburban district in NARESH CHATURVEDI
Maharashtra),ataround2330hrsonSeptember26,200 one BombayNatural HistorySociety,
1,
ofus(RMS)sawatinybutterflyflutteringanddashingagainst Hornbill House, S.B. Singh Road,
atube light in Rest HouseNo. 4 (Kanchan). Itwas identified Mumbai400023, Maharashtra, India.
astheLime Blue, Chiladeslaius(Stall)FamilyLycaenidae. Email: [email protected]
REFERENCES
Donahue,J.P.(1962):ObservationsandrecordsofButterfliesattracted Hist. Soc. 96(1): 168-169.
to light in India. Jour. Lepid. Soc. 16(12): 131-135. Shull, E.M. & N.T. Nadkerny (1967): Insects attracted to mercury
Nair, V.P. (2001): Butterflies attracted to light at Aralam Wildlife vapourlamp inthe Surat Dangs, GujaratState.J. BombayNat.
Sanctuary, Kerala. Zoo's PrintJournal, 16(12): 670. Hist. Soc. 64: 256-266.
Sharma, R.M. & N. Chaturvedi(1999): BlackRajah Charaxesfabius Usman, S. (1956): Some insects attracted to light Part III. J. Bombay
attracted to light at Tadoba National Park. J Bombay Nat. Nat. Hist. Soc. 53(3): 482-484.
28. FICUS PUMILA L.: A NEW HOST PLANT OF COMMON CROW
{EUPLOEA CORE CRAMER, LEPIDOPTERA: NYMPHALIDAE)
Common Crow Euploea core Cramer (Family ficus, showing no preference. The caterpillar successfully
Nymphalidae) is one of the commonest butterflies of the pupatedonanearbyfern.Unfortunately,thepupawasdestroyed
Indian region, virtually found in all kinds ofhabitats up to after 10daysofpupationduetoheavyrain.ClimbingFicuswas
2000 m above msl (Kunte 2000). The adult butterfly is a introducedintoIndia,and isnowacommongardenplant. It isa
generalist species and feeds on nectar ofa wide variety of vine that attaches itselfwith its roots to walls or trees. The
plants. The larval food plants belong to families Moraceae, speciesisdistributedin EastAsiafromJapantoNorthVietnam.
Asclepiadaceae andApocynaceae; the commonly used food
plantsareFicusracemosa,Nerium odorum N. oleanderand December23,2002 N.A. ARAVrND
,
Cryptolepis buchanani. Ashoka Trust for Research
Here I report a newhost plant forthe Common Crow. I in Ecologyandthe Environment(ATREE)
foundaCommonCrowcaterpillarfeedingonClimbingFicus(or #659 5lhAMain, Hebbal,
Creeping Rubberplant Ficuspumila, Family Moraceae). The Bangalore560024, Karnataka, India.
caterpillarwasfeedingonyoungaswellasmatureleavesofthe Email:[email protected]
J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 102 (1), Jan-Apr 2005 129
.
MISCELLANEOUS NOTES
REFERENCE
Kunte, K. (2000): ButterfliesofPeninsular India. Pp. 149-152. In: India-ALifescape (Ed.: Gadgil, M.). Universities Press, Hyderabad.
ON THE TAXONOMY AND APPEARANCE OF MIXOLOPHIA OCHROLAUTA
29.
WARREN (LEPIDOPTERA: GEOMETRIDAE) IN THE KUMAON HIMALAYA
MixolophiaochrolautaWarren is arare Emerald moth Notmuchcanbe inferredaboutthehabitatpreferences
(SubfamilyGeometrinae)knownfromamalespecimenfrom ofthis species. It is very rare in the Bhimtal valley and the
Bhutan,whichisthetype,andafemalefromNepal.Theearly specimen recorded was probably a straggler from higher or
stages are unknown. A single female has been recorded in lowerelevation. ItiscertainlyverylocalaswellasaHimalayan
Jones Estate inthe Bhimtal valley ofthe Kumaon Himalaya, endemic, but whether its rarity in collections is due to its
extending the known distribution of this taxon westwards. scarcityinnatureoritsretiringhabitswillonlybeclarifiedby
The specimen is inmycollection and is described below. an understanding ofits life history. It is probablycommoner
in biotopes that have not been thoroughly surveyed so far.
Mixolophia Warren Thespecimenexamineddifferssomewhatfromtheother
1894.Nov. Zool:391. two known specimens. This appears to be a case of
Mixolophia ochrolauta Warren infraspecific variation, as commonly occurs in Episothalma
1894.Nov. Zool.:391 robustaria Guenee and Spaniocentra lyra Swinhoe of the
MaterialExamined: 1 ex.:30.ix.1977(female). samesubfamily.
ForewingLength: 14mm. Warren(1894)andHampson(1895)describedthemale,
Distribution: Nepal, Bhutan (Prout 1934); Bhutan since the female was unknown at the time. Prout (1934)
(Hampson 1895). described both sexes. Differences between the sexes appear
Remarks:Anewrecordforthe Kumaon Himalaya. to be restricted to the structure ofthe legs and antennae.
AccordingtoHampson(1895),theantennaeofthemale According to Prout (1934), the hindlegs ofthe male
areciliated.Theantennaeofthespecimenexaminedaresimple, typespecimen are lacking. Hence, it isnot possibletodecide
hence it isafemale. The specimen isnot in perfectcondition whether the species should remain in the monobasic genus
for,althoughthewingsareintact,thescaleshavebeenrubbed Mixolophia or be transferred to a section ofMetallochlora
offinparts,especiallyaroundthetomalareaoftheforewings. Warren. The main differencebetweenthegenerarestson the
The ground colour is a dull yellowish-green, agreeing development ofspurs on the hind tibiae ofthe male. Ifthese
with Hampson’s (1895) and Prout’s (1934) descriptions, but areallfullydeveloped,as inMetallochlora,thenthere islittle
notmatchingtheillustration inSeitz(1915),wheretheground justification for the continuance of Mixolophia, since the
colour is a much brighter green. The specimen examined onlyremainingdifferencesaredetails ofform andcolour.
differs in another important aspect, that is the area between Hampson (1895) placed ochrolauta in the genus
the postmedial line and the margin ofthe forewing recto is HemitheaDuponchel,underthesection inwhichtheantennae
notstriated with white above vein Cuia, as in the illustration. ofthe male are ciliatedand thehindtibiae lackmedial spurs.
Hampson (1895) also noted that the veins ofthe outer area Since Hampson statedthatheexaminedthespecimensofthe
arewhite.Rather,thisareaisplaingreenwithawhitemarginal species described in his work, andthe onlyknown specimen
line in the specimen examined. The specimen matches the ofochrolautaatthattimewasthemaletype, itisevidentthat
descriptions and illustration in all otherrespects. thetypespecimenhaditshindlegs in 1895. BythetimeProut
The legsofthe specimenare intactand allthespurson examinedthespecimenduringthe 1930s,thelegswerebroken
the hind tibiae are developed. off, perhaps due to careless handling.
ProceedingonHampson’s(1895)statementthatthemale’s
DISCUSSION hindtibiae lackmedial spurs, itfollowsthatMixolophiadiffers
from Metallochlora sufficiently to be a valid genus and that
The specimen was recorded at the end of the SW ochrolauta is correctly separated from Metallochlora.
monsoon. In subfamily Geometrinae, there are very few
univoltinespeciesintheareaand itisunlikelythatthis isone February 14,2003 PETER SMETACEK
ofthem. Itismore likelythatthere is anearliergeneration in JonesEstate,P.O. Bhimtal,
spring or at the beginning ofthe monsoon. Nainital263 136, Uttaranchal,India.
130 J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 102 (1), Jan-Apr 2005