NOTODONTIDAE; GENERAL TOPICS. By Dr. A. Seitz. 
901 
15. Family: Motodontidae. 
This very large family has not been equably defined by various authors. Especially in recent years 
attempts were made to separate different groups from this family and to range them under the Eupterotidae ; 
sometimes also the Phalera, Rosema and other genera were given the name of the Eupterotidae, and instead of 
it some genera from this old family were united under another name. Moreover, the name of the family itself 
has been changed into i 'Ceruridae“ . We do not, in a manual, see sufficient advantage in such a schematism to 
make it worth while going into all the inconformities with the entire previous lepidopterological literature. 
The subdivision of the family into several is urged by a certain heterogeny which seems to separate 
several groups from this union which exhibits the most variegated shapes. If we compare the most homo¬ 
geneous Sphingidae, the Geometridae which are quite similarly organised as larvae, the Zygaenidae which are in 
no way connected with any other large family, with the Notodontidae, we notice an almost unique variety of 
shapes even in the larvae of the latter. There are no hairy Sphingid larvae, no bare Lasiocauqiid larvae, no 
Geometrid larvae with more than 12 feet at most, or 10 feet at least, etc.; all these are strikingly contrasted 
with the Notodontidae which sometimes have 14 feet, sometimes 16 feet, and are either hairy or bare. Yet, if 
we study them more minutely, we find numerous characteristics which are common to all or nearly all the 
Notodontidae. An extremely perfect adaptation to the surroundings both in colour and shape, which is otherwise 
only peculiar to the older lepidopteral groups, such as the Geometridae , many Noctuae, and some microlepidoptera, 
but which is entirely absent in the modern groups, such as the Zygaenidae, Arctiidae, Lymantriidae etc., occurs in 
nearly all the Notodontidae, both in the larval stage and in the imago, whereas the mimetic adaptation to other 
animals in the perfect insect is not to be found in any Notodontidae. Nor can the strange fact that some larvae, 
for instance those of Stauropus, copy spiders and bugs, be attributed to mimicry, since no definite model 
could yet be ascertained in any case *). In Aegeria apiformis we can positively declare a Vespa to be the model 
copied, on account of its dangerous stings, while the larva of Theretra lucasi most certainly copies a viper for 
the same reason. We can even sometimes easily determine the species that has served as its model, and can 
say that, for instance, the Erycinid Apodemia stalachtoides copies the Stalachtis phlegya, the Pseudospliex 
rubripalpus the Polistes ruficornis, the $ of Chalcosia trepsichrois the Euploea ( Trepsichrois) mnlciber. But we 
cannot ascertain a definite model of the larva of Stauropus jagi, and although the larva of a Centra may appear 
as a small monster which might seem to be dangerous to animals of a lizard-like size, yet it is not the copy 
of a certain armed or poisonous insect, of a reptile, a mouse, or any other creature that bites. 
The geological age of the Notodontidae can also be inferred by considering their geographical distribu¬ 
tion. In the warm and temperate regions they are only absent in the Islands of New Guinea, which however 
are also neglected by all the other families of Macrolepidoptera with the sole exception of the Noctuae and 
Geometridae. But though they are not altogether absent in the southern cooler parts of the Earth, in Cape 
Colony and Patagonia, yet they are of a remarkably rare occurrence there, whereas in the neighbouring 
countries of the more temperate south, as for instance North Argentina and South Brazil, they appear in great 
numbers. 
If by having recourse to the introductory geographical sketches which we provided for the palaearctic 
Ethiopian and Indo-Australian Notodontidae in other volumes **), we try to form a general survey of the 
distribution of the family on this earth, we arrive at the following results. 
*) Some authors have considered the birch-bug, Syromastes marginatus, to be the model, which has an offensive 
smell and is certainly also scorned by insectivorous animals for this reason. But this resemblance is only noticeable when 
the insect is approached from behind, and disappears as soon as the animal moves. We must therefore consider this resem¬ 
blance to be merely accidental. 
**) Vol. II, p. 283; Vol. X, p. 605; Vol. XIV, p. 401. 
