Imara satrapes ( Kollar, 1839 )
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3055.1.3 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6188108 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C4E64D-FFB1-D923-FF36-69D5FC66FE22 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Imara satrapes ( Kollar, 1839 ) |
status |
|
Imara satrapes ( Kollar, 1839) View in CoL
( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 2 – 9 )
Castnia satrapes Kollar, 1839 View in CoL
Castnia catharina Preiss, 1899 View in CoL
Castnia satrapes f. aberrans Strand, 1913 View in CoL
Castnia satrapes f. rufimaculata Strand, 1913 View in CoL
Castnia satrapes f. sapucaya Jörgensen, 1930 View in CoL
Castnia satrapes var. pomposa Niepelt, 1932 View in CoL
Castnia satrapes insolita Schweiser & Kay, 1941
Castnia sapuca J. Y.Miller, 1995 , missp.
Imara satrapes catharina Lamas, 1995 View in CoL , n. syn.
Taxonomic history. Preiss (1899) described the subspecies catharina View in CoL (as Castnia catharina View in CoL ) based on color differences with the nominate subspecies and illustrated a female with a band of red spots on the hind wings which are not present in the material later studied by Strand (1913). Strand (1913) states this particular subspecies differs from the nominate one in having a hindwing median band “light yellow instead of orange”. He also mentions that the red spots could be a sexual difference present always in females but only occasionally in males ( Strand 1913). Jörgensen (1930) reports that this is a rare subspecies but few specimens were collected by Höhn in the forests of Mbuvevo, Guairá Department. Breyer (1935) mentions that he collected catharina View in CoL in Puerto Aguirre, Misiones, Argentina. Jörgensen (1930) described also the new form sapucaya based on a specimen collected by Heinrich in Sapucay, Paraguarí Department. Miller (1986, 1995) does not consider sapucaya [erroneously mentioned as sapuca in Miller (1995)] and catharina View in CoL as valid subspecies placing them as synonyms. The topotype of Castnia satrapes View in CoL is Brasil, Mato Grosso, [ Vila Bela View in CoL da Santíssima Trindade], [15º00'S, 59º57'W, 200m], west of Cuiabá and north of Pantanal, far from the locality from where f. catharina View in CoL (Rio Grande do Sul) was described. Based on that premise (Lamas, pers. comm.), Lamas (1995) reinstated catharina View in CoL as a valid subspecies while considering sapucaya a synonym of I. satrapes View in CoL . The hindwing coloration of Imara satrapes View in CoL is highly variable, and we do not see much sense in considering the Santa Catharina View in CoL , Brazil and Paraguay specimens as a separate subspecies. Furthermore, Miller (1986; pers. comm.) studied large series of I. satrapes View in CoL which allowed her to notice how variable the species is and also to include catharina View in CoL as synonym, thus we prefer to follow Miller (1986, 1995) on this regard and consider Imara satrapes catharina View in CoL as new synonym of I. satrapes View in CoL until a more detailed study indicates otherwise.
Distribution. This species is known to be sympatric with Imara pallasia (Eschscholtz, 1821) . They are both commonly found in the southeastern region of Brazil and even though the color pattern of their forewings are quite different, their hindwings are highly variable and in cases might be sligthly similar to each other ( Miller 1986).
Even though we were able to examine just a few specimens from Paraguay, many have been collected and/or mentioned by a few authors in the past. Does this mean that the species used to be more common? Or is it just that collectors and entomologists have not been able to determine locations and/or times where adults emerge and fly?
Biology and behavior. Jörgensen (1930) mentions that it frequently flies in Paraguay around plants of “ Caraguatá ” ( Bromeliaceae : Bromelia spp.?, Caraguata spp.?, Pseudananas spp.?). Miller (1986) mentions that she found at the Museu Nacional-Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, a pupal skin with a label stating that it was found in Bromelia simour (an unknown plant species name, as far as we know. It might have been an erroneous translitteration) while an intact pupa had a label reading only “ Bromeliaceae ”. Biezanko (1961b) mentions that the larva of this species feeds on Bromelia fastuosa Lindl. (Bromeliaceae) . This species has been recorded flying high (over 10 m above ground) normally at mid-day (11:00 – 15:00) from November to February in Brazilian lowland and/or cloud forests ( Miller 1986, Biezanko 1961a).
Material examined. GUAIRÁ: 1Ƥ, “ Paraguay. Villarica”, A. Breyer Collection ( MLP). ITAPÚA: 13, Estancia Nueva Gambach, 26°25´S, 55°40´W. 21.XII.2008 (MNHNPY). ALTO PARANÁ: 13, Estancia Dimes 25°33’S, 55°13’W. 19–23.XII.2005. Coll. U. Drechsel (MNHNPY);
MLP |
Museo de La Plata |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Imara satrapes ( Kollar, 1839 )
Ríos, Sergio D. & González, Jorge M. 2011 |
Castnia sapuca J. Y .Miller, 1995
J.Y.Miller 1995 |
Imara satrapes catharina
Lamas 1995 |
Castnia satrapes insolita
Schweiser & Kay 1941 |
Castnia satrapes var. pomposa
Niepelt 1932 |
Castnia satrapes f. sapucaya
Jörgensen 1930 |
Castnia satrapes f. aberrans
Strand 1913 |
Castnia satrapes f. rufimaculata
Strand 1913 |
Castnia catharina
Preiss 1899 |
Castnia satrapes
Kollar 1839 |