eumorphina:. 



41 



and Daphnis, although it may be noted that, whilst Theretra porcellus 

 and Eumorpha elpenor have them on the metathorax and the ist and 

 2nd abdominal segments, H. celerio has none on the metathorax, and 

 D. nerii none on the ist and 2nd abdominals. Although usually 

 considered an Eumorphid (sens, strict.), i.e., a Chcerocampid, larva, 

 that of D. nerii is wanting in the marked characteristics observed 

 in Eumorpha and Theretra, and they appear also to be more or less 

 absent in the larva of Hippotion, also usually considered a typical 

 Eumorphid, i.e., Chcerocampid, and certainly much more definitely 

 so than is Daphnis. Sepp's figure (Ned. Ins., viii., pi. 50) suggests, 

 indeed, that the resemblance between Eumorpha and Hippotion is 

 not so very real. The larva of the latter, also, has a lateral line on 

 the abdominal segments, 3 — 8, in a line with the ocellated spots, and a 

 very straight, long, slender caudal horn, but one cannot forget that the 

 really closely-allied Theretra (porcellus) has no larval horn. Hippotion, 



of course, is not to 

 be derived through the 

 Phryxids (see fig.), and 

 may, therefore, very 

 well have resemblances 

 to Eumorpha wanting 

 in Hyles, Celerio, or 

 Phryxus. In many 

 characters, however, 

 Hippotion has gone 



Hippotion 

 \Phryxus 



'Eumorpha 



further from the 

 Eumorphid (sens, lat.) 

 base than the Phryxids, 

 and the Phryxids than 

 Eumorphids (sens, 

 strict.), whilst one 

 recognises, of course, 

 at the same time, that 

 one can show characters 

 in which the position 



would be reversed. Bacot is quite agreed as to the larval characters 

 throwing Eumorpha and Theretra together, and is inclined to place 

 Hippotion also on a more specialised branch of the same group, 

 but separates Daphnis completely from the others, and suggests 

 that it belongs to a more primitive branch of the Eumorphid stirps, 

 although quite as specialised in its own particular features as are the 

 other British genera in theirs. He considers it further removed from 

 any other British genus than are, say, Theretra (porcellus) and Hyles 

 (euphoi'biae) from each other. The Phryxid species known to him, he 

 considers, fall into an euphoi'biae-dahlii group, gallii-zygophylli group, 

 with livornica separate from either, and he adds that the larvae forbid 

 any association between the last-named species and celerio in spite of the 

 broad superficial resemblance of the imagines. 



The Eumorphid egg is very similar to that of other Sphingids, 

 of a pale green colour, the shell transparent and slightly iridescent, 

 almost smooth, and with little or no surface markings. Those 

 eggs that we have seen have been small for the size of the moth, 

 but there are no very definite characters to distinguish them from 

 those of other Sphingids. 



The Eumorphid larvae are usually said to fall into two marked 

 groups : (1) With the body fairly cylindrical and the anterior segments 

 not markedly retractile — the Phryxid or Deilephilid group. (2) With 

 the thoracic segments attenuated, drawn out to a point, and retractile 

 within the ist and 2nd abdominal segments, which are much enlarged 

 — the Eumorphid or Chcerocampid group. In addition, the formei 

 is generally stated to carry longitudinal, rows of striking spots, 

 and to possess a warning coloration, whilst the latter has well- 

 developed ocellated spots on certain of the segments. But there are 



