Comprehensive Description

provided by Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology
Cynthia carye Hübner

Hamadryas carye Hübner, [1812], pl. 45: figs. 1, 2.

Vanessa carye.—Hübner, 1819, p. 33.—Williams, 1930, p. 231.—Ureta, 1938b, p. 298; 1938c, p. 127; 1939, p. 231.—Gutiérrez, 1940, p. 34.—Bridarolli, 1944, p. 32.—Breyer, 1945, p. 312.—Zischka, 1947, p. 32.—Verity, 1950, p. 329.—Hayward, 1951, p. 195.—Herrera, 1954, pp. 45, 53, pl. 6: fig. 4.—Herrera and Etcheverry, 1956, pp. 277, 285.—Biezanko, Ruffinelli and Carbonell, 1957, p. 124.—Herrera, Etcheverry and Barrientos, 1958, pp. 240 (fig. 1), 244, 246–250, 247 figs. 11–14), 248 (figs. 18, 19), pl. 1: figs. 1, 2.—Niculescu, 1965, p. 191.—Hayward, 1966, p. 69.

Pyrameis carye.—Doubleday, 1849, p. 205.—Kirby, 1871, p. 186.—Berg, 1875, p. 70; 1876, p. 201.—Burmeister, 1878, pp. 151–152.—Butler, 1881, p. 466.—Staudinger, 1885, pp. 97, 98.—Bartlett-Calvert, 1886, p. 314.—Weymer and Maassen, 1890, pp. 14, 41, 97.—Godman and Salvin, 1891, p. 101.—Staudinger, 1894, p. 70.—Izquierdo, 1895, p. 823, pl. 4: figs. 4, 13.—Bartlett-Calvert, 1898, p. 99.—Porter, 1899a, p. 36.—von Bayeren, 1901, p. 257.—Rebel, Weymer and Stichel, 1901, p. 305.—Elwes, 1903, p. 287.—Reuss, 1910a, pl. 1: figs. 2, 6, 10; 1910b, pp. 64, 66; 1910c, pp. 86, 89, 90.—Seitz, 1914a, p. 459, pl. 94: figs, A 2, A 3; 1914b, p. 459, pl. 94: figs, A 2, A 3.—Giacomelli, 1922, pp. 203–204.—Porter, 1930, p. 279.—Hayward, 1931, pp. 69, 186, pl. 12: fig. 4.—Ureta, 1934, p. 79; 1935, p. 87; 1938a, p. 181.

Pyrames [sic] carye.—Porter, 1899b, p. 181.

Cyntia [sic] carye.—Costa Lima, 1923, p. 150; 1928, p. 135.

Vanessa charie Blanchard [misspelling of carye], 1852, p. 26, pl. 2: fig. 5.—Hayward, 1951, p. 195 [synonym of carye].

Pyrameis charie.—Reed, 1877, p. 679.—Gazulla and Ruiz, 1928, p. 290.—Hayward, 1931, p. 69 [synonym of carye].

Vanesja [sic] charie.—Philippi, 1859, p. 1089.

Payrameis [sic] charie.—Reed, 1877, p. 735.

Vanessa charye Porter [misspelling of carye], 1898, p. 32.

Pyrameis caryae Verity not Hübner [misspelling of carye], 1916b, p. 128.—Hayward, 1931, p. 69 [synonym of carye, a misidentification of a misspelling by Holland]; 1951, p. 195 [as before].

Pyrameis caryoides Giacomelli [new synonymy], 1922, pp. 203–205, fig. [3].

Pyrameis carye aberration caryoides.—Hayward, 1931, p. 70.

Vanessa carye aberration caryoides.—Hayward, 1931, p. 196.

Pyrameis carye form minscula Hayward [excluded name, type 3], 1931, pp. 69–70, pl. 12: fig. 5.

Pyrameis carye minuscula Hayward, 1931, p. 186 [corrected spelling of minscula]; 1951, p. 196.

Pyrameis caryae aberration bruchi Kohler [excluded name, type 2], 1945, p. 256, pl. 20: fig. 1.

Vanessa carye aberration bruchi.—Hayward, 1951, p. 196.

C. carye and C. annabella as mentioned in the description of the latter are easily distinguished from all other species of Cynthia, except C. terpsichore and some females of C. virginiensis, in having the bar just beyond cell on upper side of forewing tawny instead of white. They are easily distinguished from C terpsichore and C. virginiensis by having four, instead of two, blue-centered ocular markings on the upper side of hindwing.

MALE (Figures 137–142).—Forewing above with tawny subapical bar just beyond cell slightly smaller in C. carye; subapical white spot at costa and interspaces R1 and R2 slightly smaller than in C. annabella; basal transverse bar in cell less distinct in C. carye than in C. annabella; bar below base of Cu2 usually very small, sometimes absent in C. carye, present and distinct in C. annabella; with the small tawny spot in interspace M3 just above the large tawny quadrate spot in interspace Cu1 found in C. annabella, absent in most specimens of C. carye; submarginal white line composed of three slender bars on apex of forewing much less distinct in C. carye than in C. annabella.

Hindwing above with white spot in middle of costal margin smaller and less distinct in C. carye than in C. annabella, otherwise as in C. annabella.

Forewing underneath with the pale yellowish-white postmedial and marginal bar slightly smaller in C. carye; with dark spot at base of interspace Cu1 smaller and usually separate from postmedial black bar in this interspace in C. carye, while in C. annabella it is larger and always connected to the postmedial black bar.

Hindwing underneath with whole aspect darker in color in C. carye; with pure white spot in middle of wing opposite end of cell somewhat hourglass shaped in C. carye, more triangular in C. annabella.

Length of forewing, 20–27 mm (average 22.7 mm).

Male genitalia as illustrated by Figure 16 (drawn from my preparation no. 3660), with uncus in lateral view very similar to that of C. annabella, a little thicker, especially just before distal end, in ventral view constricted before distal end and thus not so clearly triangular in shape; gnathos with lateral arms very large, with distal one third sharply bent upward toward uncus, with lower margin of these arms having a “heel” near middle of relatively straight portion of lower margin; ventral process of lateral arm of gnathos bent inward so that it shows in lateral view; valva with dorsal margin nearly straight or only slightly curved upward near middle; valva with a large club-shaped process at junction of dorsal and distal margins instead of the acute lobe found in C. annabella, this club with a blunt to other lobe dorsally near its base; distal margin of valva greatly concave because of this clublike process; lower margin of valva gradually and broadly rounded with a large acute lobe at junction of distal and lower margins; clasper similar to but not as large as that of C. annabella; cuiller also similar to that species but much more heavily armed with large teeth; aedeagus similar to that of C. annabella, with base longer; saccus also similar to the latter species.

FEMALE (Figures 149–154).—As in C. annabella this species differs from C. carye in the same characters as do the males and is not distinguishable from the male sex except by examination of the genitalia, where the large podlike ostium bursa lobe can be seen after the scales are brushed off the underside of posterior surface of abdomen.

Length of forewing, 15–29 mm (average 25.4 mm).

Female genitalia as illustrated by Figure 32, (drawn from my preparation no. 3678), similar to those of C. annabella, differing in the shape of the large podlike lobe at ostium bursa, which in this species is swollen at the base.

METHOD OF IDENTIFICATION.—See notes under this heading in the description of C. annabella. The lack of type material of C. carye and the fact that Hübner did not cite a type locality were found not to be a deterrant in the identification of this species, since Hübner's original colored figures of both surfaces ([1812], pl. [45], figs. 1, 2) were found to beautifully and quite accurately portray C. carye as the species found in the Andes and farther south in South America. Hübner's figures agree with the population just mentioned in the following nine particulars: (1) The subapical white spot on forewing above in interspaces R2 and R3 is smaller than it is in C. annabella. (2) The basal transverse bar in forewing cell is smaller than in C. annabella. (3) The tawny spot found in C. annabella just above the large quadrate spot in interspace Cu1 is absent in Hübner's figure as it is in the South American population. (4) The white spot in middle of costal margin of upper surface of hindwing is absent or greatly reduced as it is in the South American species, while in C. annabella it is never absent and is always larger and more distinct than in the latter. (5) On the under surface of forewing the pale yellowish-white postmedial bar is small in Hübner's figure as it is in the South American species. In the North American species this bar is distinctly larger. (6) On this same surface the postmedial fuscous bar ends at 2n A as it does in all of the South American specimens I have seen. In the North American species this bar continues into interspace 2nd A. (7) The white spot in middle of hindwing opposite the end of cell on the under surface is hourglass shaped in Hübner's figure. This is true also of the South American species, while in C. annabella this spot is more triangular in shape. (8) On the under surface the apex of hindwing is quite dark in Hübner's figure, with a cheveron-shaped terminal line in interspaces Rg. In the North American species this area is yellowish to white in color and lacks a cheveron-shaped terminal line in interspace R8. (9) The tawny spot found in C. annabella just above the large quadrate spot in interspace Cu1 on the under surface of the forewing, is absent in Hübner's figure as it is in the South American species.

According to Horn and Kahle (1935, p. 119) the Hübner collection went to the Zoologische Abteilung, Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna. Dr. F. Kasy of that institution informs me that there are only a few Hübner types remaining in their collection, all of Heterocera. The butterfly types and other missing Hübner types were probably destroyed by fire in 1848. Because of the excellent original colored figures, I see no need to designate a neotype.

LIFE HISTORY.—The larval food plants are Malvaceae: Althaea rosea, Malva nicacensis, M. parviflora, Modiola caroliniana, Sphaeralcea bonariensis, and S. obtusiloba; Compositae: Cynara cardunculus, Gaillardia scabiosoides, and Pascalia glauca; Geraniaceae: Pelargonium pelatatum and P. zonale. It has been reported upon Urtica urens (Urticaceae) but this was perhaps a forced rearing.

The egg, larva, and pupa have been described by Burmeister (1878, p. 152), Izquierdo (1895, p. 832), and Hay ward (1931, p. 70).

DISTRIBUTION.—This species is found from the Andes in Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia south through Chile and in southwestern Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay south through much of Argentina. It also occurs in the Juan Fernández Islands of Chile, on Easter Island, and on Mangareva Island of the Gambier Islands, of the Tuamotu Archipelago on the Tropic of Capricorn, over halfway to New Zealand from Chile.

MATERIAL STUDIED.—Forty-two males and forty-seven females were studied from the following localities: COLOMBIA: Guambia, Cauca (December). ECUADOR: Oriente; Salcedo (March, 2,700 m). PERU: Chichicastenango (September); Cuzco (July, 11,500 ft); Ollantaitambo, Cuzco (March, 9,200 ft); Oroya (May); Pisco (May); Puno (March, April); Usaquen, Cundiamarca (January, 2,800–2,900 ft). BOLIVIA: Belen Experiment Station (May); La Paz (April, May, 12,000 ft); Neguejahuica (May, 8,000 ft); Okala-Ankoma (April, 7,500–13,700 ft); Oruro (March, April, 12,500 ft); Oruro (March, April, 12,500 ft); Pitiguaya (May, 5,800 ft); Playa Verde (December, 13,000 ft). CHILE: Angol (January–March); Criados, Province Tarapacá (February, October, November); Huanta, Conquimbo (December); Iquiqui, Province Tarapaca (September, October, November); La Junta, Coquimbo (December); Los Lagos; Olmul (March); Macul (March); Maipu; Pucon (February); San Carlos, Nuble (December); Santiago; Talca, 22 miles north (December); Temuco; Valparaiso (January, August); Tofo (January, Apirl, November). BRAZIL: Castro Parana; Ponta Grossa, Parana (August). URUGUAY: Carmen, Durazno; Montevideo (November). ARGENTINA: Cordova; La Rioja; Punta Lara, La Plata (November); Tucumen. JUAN FERNÁNDES ISLANDS (CHILE): Bahia Cumberland, Masatierra (January, March); Las Chozas, Masafuera (January). EASTER ISLAND (CHILE): Hanga Rosa (January). TUAMOTU ARCHIPELAGO: Rikitea Village, Mangarewa Island, Gambier Islands (December).
bibliographic citation
Field, William Dewitt. 1971. "Butterflies of the genus Vanessa and of the resurrected genera Bassaris and Cynthia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae)." Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology. 1-105. https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00810282.84