Compsulyx cochereaui (Viette, 1971)

Ancajima, Georgette Paola & Duarte, Marcelo, 2023, Morphological variation of the epiphyses in some Ambulycini hawkmoths (Lepidoptera, Sphingidae, Smerinthinae), Zoologischer Anzeiger 304, pp. 1-9 : 3-5

Compsulyx cochereaui (Viette, 1971) ( Figs. 2C and 4D ).

Length and width: 2.46 and 0.63 mm, respectively, covering 48.3% of the foretibia. Epiphyses lanceolate and apically inserted at about two-sevenths of the foretibia length. Upper lobe straight. Lower lobe rounded. Invagination strongly accentuated, v-notched. Foretibiae length: 4.88 mm.

Bactonema coquerelii (Boisduval, [1875]) ( Figs. 2A and 4E ).

Length and width: 2.27 and 0.38 mm, respectively, covering 69.8% of the foretibia. Epiphysis bent inward, and apically inserted at about one-quarter of the foretibia length. Upper lobe bilobed. Lower lobe truncated. Invagination slightly accentuated, v-notched. Foretibiae length: 3.23 mm.

Orecta lycidas (Boisduval, [1875]) ( Figs. 2A , 3B and 4F ).

Length and width in male: 2.41 and 0.45 mm, respectively, covering 50.0% of the foretibia. Length and width in the female: 2.52 and 0.35 mm, respectively, covering 46.0% of the foretibia. Epiphyses spoon-shaped in both sexes, and apically inserted at about one-quarter of the foretibia length. Upper lobe bilobed. Lower lobe rounded. Invagination strongly accentuated, v-notched. Foretibiae length: 4.72 mm (Ƌ), 4.95 mm (♀).

Epiphyses are sexually dimorphic in the comb (For details see Table 2).

Figures

Fig. 2. Proposed characters of the epiphyses of Ambulycini. (A) Shape: a. elongated, as in Trogolegnum pseudambulyx; b. lanceolate, as in Ambulyx pryeri; c. spoon-shaped, as in Orecta lycidas; d. bent inward, as in Batocnema coquerelii. (B) Insertion point on the foretibia: a. at one-third of the tibia, as in Adhemarius gannascus; b. at one-quarter of the tibia, as in O. lycidas; c. at two-fifths of the tibia, as shown in female Akbesia davidi; d. at two-sevenths of the tibia, as in Protambulyx strigilis. (C) Upper lobe: a. straight, as observed in Compsulyx cochereaui; b. concave, as in Ad. dariensis; c. bilobed, as in B. coquerelii; d. angulate, as in Ad. eurysthenes. (D) Lower lobe: a. truncated, as in T. pseudambulyx; b. rounded, as in Ad. eurysthenes. (E) Invagination shape: a. vnotched, as in P. strigilis; b. u-notched, as in Ak. davidi. (F) Invagination degree: a. slightly accentuated, as observed in P. strigilis; b. strongly accentuated, in Am. pryeri.

Fig. 4. Epiphysial morphology of some Ambulycini (anterolateral view). (A) Ambulyx pryeri Distant, 1887. (B) Protambulyx strigilis (Linnaeus, 1771). (C) Akbesia davidi (Oberthür, 1884). (D) Compsulyx cochereaui (Viette, 1971). (E) Batocnema coquerelii (Boisduval, [1875]). (F) Orecta lycidas (Boisduval, [1875]). (G) Trogolegnum pseudambulyx (Boisduval, [1875]). (H) Adhemarius dariensis (Rothschild and Jordan, 1916). (I) Adhemarius gannascus (Stoll, 1790). (J) Adhemarius eurysthenes (Felder & Felder, 1874). Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

Fig. 3. Morphological details of the epiphysis in SEM. (A) Comb of Protambulyx strigilis (Linnaeus, 1771). (B). Comb of Orecta lycidas (Boisduval, [1875]). (C) Comb of Adhemarius gannascus (Stoll, 1790). (D) Acanthae of Ad. gannascus.