VOLUME 57, NUMBER 3 243 SNODGRASS, R. E. 1935. Principles of insect morphology. McGraw­ MARCELO DUARTE, OLAF H. H. MIELKE AND MIRNA Hill Book Company Inc., New York. 667 pp. M. CASAGRANDE, Departamento de Zoologia, Univer­ TASHIRO, H. 1987. Turfgrass insects of the United States and Canada. Cornell University Press, Ithaca. 391 pp. sidade Federal do Parana, CP 19020, Curitiba, Parana TASHIRO, H. & w. C. MITCHELL. 1985. Biology of the fiery skipper, 81531-990, Brazil; Email: [email protected] Hylephila phyleus (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae), a turfgrass pest in Hawaii. Proc. Hawaiian Entomo!. Soc. 25:131-138. TOLIVER , M. E. 1987. Hesperiidae (Hesperioidea), pp. 434--436. In Stehr, F. W. (ed. ), Immature insects. Va!. 1. Kendall! Hunt Pub­ Received for publication 8 January 2001 ; revised and accepted 30 lishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa. January 2003. Journal oj the Lepidopterists' Society 57(3), 2003, 243- 249 NOTES ON THE HISTORIC RANGE AND NATURAL HISTORY OF ANAEA TROGLODYTA FLORIDALIS (NYMPHALIDAE) Additional key words: Croton, Florida, West Indies, seasonal forms, parasitism. Populations of the Florida leafwing, Anaea 1999) . Anaea andria uses several different Croton host troglodyta florida lis F. (Comstock & Johnson) (Fig. 1), species throughout its range, as opposed to A. t. flori­ a butterfly endemic to south Florida and the lower dalis which is stenophagic and will only use Croton lin­ Florida Keys, have become increasingly localized as its earis (Opler & Krizek 1984, Schwartz 1987, Hen­ pine rockland habitat is lost or altered through an­ nessey & Habeck 1991, Smith et al. 1994, Worth et al. thropogenic activity (Baggett 1982, Hennessey & 1996). In northern Florida, A. andria primarily uses Habeck 1991, Schwarz et al. 1995, Salvato 1999, Croton argyranthemus Michx. (Glassberg et al. 2000) 2001 ). Croton linearis Jacg., (Euphorbiaceae) a sub­ as a host, but will also feed on C. capitatus Michx tropical species of Antillean origin , is the sole host (Opler & Krizek 1984, Salvato 1999). Salvato (1999), plant for A. t. floridalis (Opler & Krizek 1984, in preliminary feeding studies, found that when of­ Schwartz 1987, Minno & Emmel 1993, Smith et al. fered a variety of Croton species (C. capitatus, C. lin­ 1994). Once common throughout the pinelands of the earis and C. argyranthemus), A. t. floridalis larvae (n = lower Florida Keys (Dickson 1955), C. linearis now oc­ 5) would only accept C. linearis as a food source. curs only on Big Pine Key (Monroe Co. ) and in frag­ Anaea andria larvae (n = 5), when given the same se­ mented populations on the southeast Florida mainland lection, preferred C. argyranthemus as well as C. cap­ as far north as Jupiter Island (Martin Co. ) (Salvato itatus but refused to feed on C. linearis. The prefer­ 1999). However, as host plant availability and appro­ ence of A. andria for only northern occurring Croton priate habitat have declined, there is little recent evi­ species may explain why the butterfly has not estab­ dence that A. t. floridalis ventures further north than lished itself farther southward in the state. The appar­ southern Miami (Miami-Dade Co.) to make use of ently strict diet reg uirements of A. t. floridalis and pos­ these fragmented host populations (Baggett 1982, Sibly an inability to tolerate the colder winter climate Smith et al. 1994, Salvato 1999). Salvato (1999) has of north Florida keep it from expanding northward. found few-documented field sighting records or mu­ Croton grandulosus Michx. is the prevalent Croton seum collection specimens of A. t. florldalis from areas species in the central part of Florida where neither north of Monroe and Miami-Dade counties suggesting butterfly occurs. Both Anaea species refused this plant that this species may not have been common further as a host when offered it in feeding trials. Salvato is north historically. currently conducting continued feeding studies with Delineating the precise historic range of A. t. flori­ A. andria and A. t. floridalis to establish larger sam­ dalis has been further complicated by its confusion pling sizes. However, it does appear that an allopatric with Florida's other resident Anaea species, Anaea an­ relationship occurs between A. andria and A t. flori­ dria Scudder (Opler & Krizek 1984, Hennessey & dalis within Florida, one similar to that observed be­ Habeck 1991 ). An extremely tolerant species climati­ tween other memhers of the genus within the West In­ cally, A. andria is widely distributed in the United dies (Smith et al. 1994). Figure 2 indicates the States and Mexico (Pyle 1981, Opler & Krizek 1984). documented distribution of A. t. florida lis and A. an­ In Florida, Hernando County appears to represent the dria in Florida. southern boundary for A. andria and this may corre­ Anaea t. floridalis maintains an appearance charac­ spond with the distribution of its host plants (Salvato teristic of the genus and the taxonomy of this sub- 244 JOURNAL OF T HE LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY FIG.1. The Florida leafwing, Anaea troglodytajloridalis 4 January, 2003 in Long Pine Key (Everglades National Park), Florida (photo H. L. Salvato). species has been well described elsewhere (Comstock (1980, 1988a, b ) found that the length of photoperiod 1961, Baggett 1982, Opier & Krizek 1984, Smith et al. exposure experienced by fifth-ins tar larvae (several 1994, Worth et aI. 1996). Briefly, its upperwing surface days prior to pupation) as well as the influence of sea­ is red to red-brown, the underside gray, with a tapered sonal moisture, were key factors in determining the outline, cryptically looking like a dead leaf when the seasonal forms of A. andria. The summer Anaea form, butterfly is at rest. Anaea t. floridalis exhibits sexual di­ (wet-season or long-day form ) (late May to Septem­ morphism, with females being slightly larger and with ber), of the genus tends to have forewing margins darker coloring along the wing margins than the males which are blunt and a hindwing with a less pro­ (Fig. 3). nounced tail; their colors also tends to be brighter. The The species also appears to demonstrate seasonal winter Anaea form, (dry-season or short day form), polymorphism (Fig. 3). Comstock (1961) employed (October to early May) tends to have the opposing the terms "summer" and "winter" morph to differenti­ characters, these being pronounced tails and crescent­ ate between seasonal forms within the genus. Riley shaped forewings. VOLUME 57, NUMBER 3 245 \- 0 o ~- - - • Anaea andria o o Anaea trog/odyta florida/is ~\ \ FIG. 2. Historic distribution of Anaea species, by county in Florida. Distribution based on verified records of specimens collected or pho­ tographed for each county (J. V Calhoun pers. com.). Although a great deal of research has been con­ tree trucks in a slanted position to mll11mlZe the ducted to explain opposing wing characteristics of sea­ shadow they project. Similar behavior was observed sonal forms and how they are cued (Comstock 1961, with A. t. flortdalis while conducting mark-release-re­ Riley 1980, 1988a, b), more research is needed to un­ capture field studies from 14 July 1997-29 August derstand what implications this change in wing shape 1998. When at rest on the sides of slash pines, A. t. has on Anaea biology. One possibility is that the floridalis adults would angle their bodies, with wings change in wing shape is an adaptation by Anaea to closed, in such a way that it seemed to mimic the more cryptically blend into its surroundings during raised and peeling bark of the pine trees. given seasons. Muyshondt (1974a, b) indicated that Anaea t. floridalis caught during the winter/spring Anaea (Consul) fabius Cramer and A. (Memphis) eu­ months (October to early May) of the 1997-98 study rypyle confusa Hall appear very inconspicuous (n = 46), always maintained well-developed hindwing amongst vegetation and that these species alight on tails and anal angle projections, as well as forewings 246 JOUR NAL OF THE LEPIDOPTE RISTS' SOC IETY FI G. 3. Demonstration of seasonal and sexual dimorphism in Anaea t.florida/is. Males (on the left), females (right). Butterflies on the top row are the winter-morph, those on the bottom, the summer-mOlphs (photo M. H. Salvato). with an acute and falcate apex. Likewise, those marked ported previously for this subspeCies (Baggett 1982, in the summer/fall months (late May to September) Opler & Krizek 1984, Schwartz 1987, Smith et al. (n = 85), possessed shortened tails on the hindwing, 1994, Worth et aI.1996). The adults are rapid, wary reduced anal angle projections, and forewings that fli ers. The species is extremely territorial, with both were not apically falcate. Several larvae (n = 15) were sexes flying out to pursue other butterflies (Baggett reared from field-collected specimens in the winter 1982, Worth et al. 1996). The occurrence of adults months (January- March ) of 1999. These all produced consistently perching on the same spot, on a tree or the winter form. Table 1 indicates the seasonal forms sign post, as well as using the same speCific host speci­ observed in the field-marked A. t. fioridalis in men for OvipOSition, suggests these areas are continu­ 1997-98. Further field studies are required to deter­ ally suitable and recognized. This behavior was partic- mine the precise periods of change from winter to TABLE 1. Monthly overview of seasonal wing patterns observed summer-morph (and from summer to winter-morph). in marked and released Anaea troglodyta florida/is between 14 July An abrupt change from winter to summer-morph indi­ 1997 and 29 August 1998 on Big Pine Key and Long Pine Key, Florida. cated in fi eld-captured specimens in April and May 1998 suggests that this is the period of change to the Winter- Summer- summer-morph for A. t. fioridalis. There was no evi­ Month n mOlph morph dence of intermediate forms between the seasonal January 11 11 0 morph types.