Hista fabricii Swainson 1823
Creators: name: Moraes, Simeão S.
name: Duarte, Marcelo
name: González, Jorge M.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2010
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Lepidoptera
Castniidae
Hista
Hista fabricii

description: Hista fabricii (Swainson, 1823)
(Figs. 1–39, 55–66)
Castnia fabricii Swainson, 1823: pl. 149 (taxonomy) syntypes Ƥ and 3, BRAZIL, “Diamond district” (probably Diamantina, Minas Gerais) [depository unknown; possibly lost]; Thon, 1829: 7 (taxonomy); Gray, 1838: 144 (catalogue); Walker, 1854: 19 (catalogue); Westwood, 1877: 178 (taxonomy); Buchecker, [1880]: 5, fig.7 (taxonomy); Kirby, 1892: 6 (catalogue); Strand, 1913: 10, pl. 4e fig. [1] (taxonomy); Dalla Torre; 1913: 10 (catalogue); Rothschild, 1919: 20 (taxonomy); Spitz, 1930: 40 (taxonomy).
Castnia boisduvalii Walker, 1854: 27 (catalogue), two syntypes 3, BRAZIL (BMNH) [one syntype examined by photograph; here designated as l ectotype, with three labels, two of them, on white paper, containing the inscription " boisduvalii "; the other one, in green paper, containing the inscription “ Castnia boisduvalii – 8. – Bras”]; Boisduval, [1875]: 510 (taxonomy); Butler, 1877: 5, pl. 1, fig. 4 (taxonomy); Westwood, 1877: 173 (taxonomy); Kirby, 1892: 4 (catalogue); Enslen, 1920: 40 (biology); Dalla Torre, 1913: 11 (catalogue); Strand, 1913: 11, pl. 4d, fig. [4] (taxonomy); Hambleton & Forbes, 1935: 217 (catalogue); Hoffmann, 1937: 164 (catalogue). New synonym.
Castnia herrichii Herrich-Schäffer, [1854]: p. 56, pl. [30], fig. 144 (taxonomy), syntype 3, BOLIVIA [uncertain type locality], (BMNH) [photograph examined]; Ménétriés, 1857: 129 (citation); Boisduval, [1875]: 510 (citation); Kirby, 1892: 4 (catalogue); Strand, 1913: 11 (citation); Dalla Torre, 1913: 12 (citation); Lamas, 1995a: 77 (citation).
Castnia ciela Herrich-Schäffer, [1855]: p. 56, pl. [85], figs. 486, 487 (taxonomy), syntypes 3, BRAZIL, Bahia [Pernambuco]; [depository unknown; not examined]; Boisduval, [1875]: 532 (taxonomy); Westwood, 1877: 179 (taxonomy); Kirby, 1892: 7 (catalogue); Dalla Torre, 1913: 10 (catalogue); Strand, 1913: 10, pl.4d, fig. [2] (taxonomy); Miller, 1995: 134 (citation); Lamas, 1995a: 77 (citation).
Castnia besckei Ménétriés, 1857: 88, 129, pl.11, fig. 3 (as beskei; incorrect original spelling) (taxonomy), holotype 3 [fixed by evidence of monotypy], BRAZIL, Bahia (ZIN) [photograph examined]; Butler, 1877: 5 (taxonomy); Westwood, 1877: 174 (citation); Kirby, 1892: 4 (citation); Strand, 1913: 12 (taxonomy); Dalla Torre, 1913: 14 (citation); Miller, 1995: 134 (citation); Lamas, 1995a: 77 (citation).
Castnia boisduvali Schaufuss, 1870: 9 (taxonomy), holotype 3 [fixed by evidence of monotypy], BRAZIL [depository unknown, not examined;]. Junior primary homonym of Castnia boisduvalii Walker, 1854.
Castnia papagaya Westwood, 1877: 170, pl 30, fig. 6 (taxonomy), syntype Ƥ, BRAZIL, “Papagaya'' (OUMNH) [photograph examined]; Kirby, 1892: 3 (catalogue); Strand, 1913: 11, pl. 4d fig. [3] (taxonomy); Dalla Torre, 1913: 12 (catalogue). New synonym.
Castnia herrickii [sic]; Westwood, 1877: 174 (citation).
Castnia papagaya f. g randensis Strand, 1913: 11 (taxonomy) syntype Ƥ, BRAZIL, Rio Grande do Sul (ZMHB) [photograph examined]; Miller, 1995: 134 (citation); Lamas, 1995a: 77 (citation).
Athis ciela; Houlbert, 1918: 308, 684, pl. C1, fig.108 (taxonomy).
Athis fabricii; Houlbert, 1918: 306 (taxonomy).
Athis herrichii; Houlbert, 1918: 303, pl. B1, fig.105 (taxonomy).
Athis boisduvalii; Houlbert, 1918: 298, 684, 710, pl. 454, figs. 3819, 3820 (taxonomy).
Athis boisduvali [sic] var. besckei; Houlbert, 1918: 302, 684 (as beskei [sic]) (taxonomy).
Athis papagaya; Houlbert, 1918: 305, 684 (taxonomy).
Castnia fabricii papagaya; Rothschild, 1919: 12 (taxonomy).
Castnia fabricii boisduvalii; Rothschild, 1919: 12 (taxonomy).
Athis fabricii boisduvalii; Lathy, 1922: 77 (catalogue).
Athis fabricii papagaya; Lathy, 1922: 77 (catalogue).
Castnia similis Röber, 1927, (taxonomy), holotype 3, BRAZIL, Rio Grande do Sul, (ETHZ) [photograph examined]; Lamas, 1995a: 77 (synonym).
Castnia boisduvali [sic] f. interrupta Spitz, 1930:39, lectotype Ƥ [designated by Mielke & Casagrande, 1988: 6, fig. 9], BRAZIL, São Paulo, [“Ypiranga”] (MZSP) [examined]; Lamas, 1995a:77 (synonym).
Castnia papagaya-grandis [sic]; Spitz, 1930: 39 (taxonomy)
Hista boisduvalii; Miller, 1995: 134 (catalogue); González & Stüning, 2007: 90 (citation).
Hista boisduvalii interrupta; Miller, 1995: 134 (catalogue).
Hista herrichii; Miller, 1995: 134 (catalogue).
Hista fabricii; Miller, 1995: 134 (cat.); Lamas, 1995a: 77 (catalogue).
Hista papagaya; Miller, 1995: 134 (catalogue).
Hista fabricii boisduvalii; Lamas, 1995a: 77 (catalogue).
Hista fabricii papagaya; Lamas, 1995a: 77 (catalogue).
History. Swainson (1823: pl. 149) described Castnia fabricii, type locality “Diamond District” (presumably municipality of Diamantina, state of Minas Gerais, Brazil). The illustration consists of a female with the ovipositor partially extended.
Walker (1854: 27) described Castnia boisduvalii based on two syntypes belonging to the collections of Milne and Becker. The syntype of Milne´s Collection has not yet been found.
Herrich-Schäffer (1854: 56, fig. 144) described Castnia herrichii, type locality Bolivia. There is no evidence that this description was based on a unique specimen, although this is most probable because Houlbert (1918: 305, pl. B1, fig. 105) considered the specimen he studied to be the same analyzed by Herrich- Schäffer.
Herrich-Schäffer (1854: 56, figs. 486, 487) also described Castnia ciela, type locality Bahia, Brazil. Boisduval (1875: 533) mentioned that his specimens were from Bahia and Pernambuco.
Ménétriés (1857: 129) described Castnia besckei emphasizing similarities with Castnia herrichii. In the original description the author stated “l’exemplaire que nous possédons est un mâle” which is here considered the holotype fixed by monotypy according to article 73.1.2 of ICZN (1999).
Boisduval ([1875]: 510) recognized Castnia herrichii and Castnia besckei respectively as female and male of Castnia boisduvalii.
Westwood (1877: 170, fig. 6) described Castnia papagaya, type locality “ Papagaya (Rogers) ”. A female was illustrated. There is no evidence that this description was based on a unique specimen. Houlbert (1918: 306) mentioned that “ Papagaya ” was a locality in South Brazil.
Butler (1877: 5, pl. I, fig.4) redescribed Castnia boisduvalii, based on a specimen from the collection of Becker.
Strand (1913: 11) described Castnia papagaya grandensis as a form, type locality Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Houlbert (1918) allocated all the previously described taxa related to Castnia fabricii in the genus Athis (nec Hübner, 1819). Also, he established C. besckei as an albino variety of C. boisduvalii and corrected a mistake made by Boisduval ([1875]), recognizing the type of Castnia herrichii as a male.
Rothschild (1919: 12) established Castnia fabricii as female of C. boisduvalii, and considered C. papagaya as a “race of boisduvalii bigger and brighter”.
Spitz (1930) described C. boisduvali [sic] form interrupta, type locality “Ypiranga”, São Paulo, Brazil.
Diagnosis. Forewing dark brown with two or three hyaline spots at apex. Hindwing reddish orange with beveled extradiscal spotband resembling a spiral.
Redescription (male and female). Head. Ferruginous as the antennae; vertex with iridescent scales. Labial palpi white.
Thorax. Dorsally dark brown, prothorax and tegula slightly lighter, ventrally white. Coxa and trochanter white, other segments brown. Forewing subtriangular, outer margin rectilinear or somewhat rounded in females. Average wing length of 34 mm in males and 42 mm in females. Dorsal surface brown, darker at base, and with three maculae: an elliptical contour distal to discal cell; an inverted triangle in postmedian region near the apex with two or three hyaline spots between R3 and M1; a subtriangular macula adjacent to inner margin, near tornus. These maculae are usually independent and well defined in females but sometimes are fused in males. Ventral surface with color and maculation pattern similar to dorsal surface, but slightly paler. Hindwing with dorsal surface reddish orange and dark brown base; two extradiscal spotbands black and beveled along the outer margin, acquire a spiral form. Ventral surface reddish orange or pale brown with the same pattern of dorsal maculae but less marked.
Wing venation (Figs. 55–56). Typical of the genus.
Abdomen. Dorsally dark brown with A1-A3 darker. Ventrally pale or dark brown with ferruginous iridescence.
Male genitalia (Figs. 57–63). Tegumen subrectangular in dorsal view. Uncus with three lobes; medial lobe longer than the lateral ones. Gnathos excavate posteriorly, dorsal and ventral arms sclerotized and fused anteriorly. Valva subtriangular, slightly rounded; upper margin slightly convex in the region of costa, lower margin parallel to the horizontal axis near the region of sacculus, and inclined posterodorsally, inner surface without ornamentation. Subscaphium weakly sclerotized. Sacculus developed, consisting of a fold on the inner surface of the valva, oriented towards distal-medial axis. Saccus developed, with anterior projections rounded apically and curved. Juxta weakly sclerotized, “U” shaped. Aedeagus with distal lateral carina forming a flap, lacking spines; cornuti absent; coecum developed, longer than the wider diameter of the ejaculatory bulb foramen, not ornamented.
Female genitalia (Figs. 64–66). Eighth tergum with anterior margin concave, central band weakly sclerotized, regularly extending beyond the middle portion, but not reaching the posterior margin; posterior half of the tergite rectangular. Lamella antevaginalis weakly sclerotized. Lamella postvaginalis with posterior margin sinuous. Anterior and posterior apophyses well developed, being the former two fifths the length of the latter. Papillae anales sclerotized and bristled. Antrum membranous longer than wide. Ductus bursae with a spirally twisted portion near corpus bursae. Signa symmetrical or asymmetrical. Bulla seminalis globular and distinctly ornamented with microspicules.
Ethology. Barely known. There are some records of larvae foraging in Tillandsia aeranthos (Loisel.) L.B. Sm. (Bromeliaceae), commonly known as “cravo-do-mato” (Enslen 1920; Biezanko 1961). Most collecting records indicate that the adults of H. fabricii emerge mainly from December to February but emergence can even reach mid April, with a flight period generally from 13:00 to 15:00 (Biezanko 1961; Miller 1986). This species pupates in the ground at the base of trees covered with epiphytic Bromeliaceae (Miller 1986). The flight pattern is similar to that of several Sphingidae, spinning around trees and perching vertically with wings flat in a stegopterous position, over 12 and up to 15 m above ground (Miller 1986).
Distribution (Fig. 38). Hista hegemon occurs mainly in the south and southeast of Brazil, in areas of Atlantic forest, with records for the states of Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Minas Gerais, Paraná, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul. There are also records for states of Bahia, Goiás and Sergipe and though these places may seem anomalous, they are included in the original coverage area of Atlantic forest, where H. fabricci is found. There are two erroneous records of specimens presumably collected in the Brazilian state of Amazonas and in Bolivia. The species is found to fly from September to April.
Etymology. The specific epithet is a tribute granted to Johan Christian Fabricius (1745–1808), renowned Danish entomologist and widely recognized as the first insect taxonomist.
Comments. Swainson (1823) illustrated the female of H. fabricii and commenting on the sexual dimorphism observed in this species mentioned that “the bases of the wings beneath are furnished, in the male, with a spiral socket and horny spring”. Even though the syntypes of this species may be lost (Martin Honey pers. comm.) we believe that the information contained in the original description corroborates the hypothesis that C. boisduvalii is the male of C. fabricii. Rothschild (1919) was the first to reveal the evidences to support this hypothesis.
The distribution of H. fabricii is almost endemic to south and southeast of Brazil. However, C. herrichii has a disjunct distribution, occurring in Bolivia, but this seems to be a false locality (Gerardo Lamas pers. comm.).
Material examined. BRAZIL. Pará: Óbidos, 1 male (ZFMK) [Highly improbable locality (González & Sünning 2007)]. Sergipe: no date, 1 male (AMNH). Bahia: no date, 1 male (MZSP); Salvador, no date, 2 males (MZSP). Distrito Federal: no date, 3 males (AMNH). Rio de Janeiro: Nova Friburgo, II-1934, 7 males (MNRJ); idem, II-1934, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, III-1934, 1 male (FIOC); idem, III-1934, 1 male (FIOC); idem, no date, 8 males (MNRJ); idem, no date, 4 males (MNRJ); idem, no date, 1 male (MNRJ); Teresópolis, 11- III-1903, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, I-1919, 3 males (MNRJ); idem, IV-1924, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, XI-1924, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, no date, 5 males (MNRJ); idem, no date, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, no date, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, no date, 2 males (MNRJ); idem, no date, 2 males (USNM); idem, 1888, 1 male (AMNH); Casimiro de Abreu, distrito de Barra de São João, 05- XI-1987, 1 male (ZUEC); Itatiaia, 02- II-1914, 1 female (MNRJ); idem, 18- III-1924, 1 male, 1 female (MNRJ); idem, III/ IV- 1925, 700m alt., 3 males (MNRJ); idem, 07- IV-1925, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, 15- III-1937, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, no date, 2 males (FMNH); Petrópolis, 16- II-1903, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, 07- II-1914, 1 female (MNRJ); idem, 23- II-1960, 1 male, 1female (DZUP); idem, 03- III-1965, 1 male (ZUEC); idem, 21-I-1966, 1100m alt., 1 male (DZUP); idem, 13-II-1968, 800/ 1000m alt., 1 male (DZUP); idem, no date, 1 male (MNRJ); Petrópolis, 1000 m., 30- III-1974, 1 male (MGCL); idem, 20- II-1975, 1 female (MGCL); idem, no date, 1 female (MGCL); idem, no date, 1 female (MNRJ); Rio de Janeiro, Floresta da Tijuca, estrada Paineiras, 10/25- I-1957, 1 male (DZUP); Angra dos Reis, Jussaral, III/ IV-1935, 2 males (FIOC); idem, IV-1935, 1 male (DZUP); idem, 23- II-1936, 1 male (MNRJ). Goiás: Jaraguá, no date, 1 male (AMNH). Minas Gerais: Passa Quatro, 915m alt., 18- II-1923, 1 male (FIOC).
São Paulo: Campos do Jordão, I-1935, 6 males (MNRJ); idem, I-1935, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, 1750m alt., 14- I-1957, 1 male (DZUP); Campos do Jordão, parque Umuarama, 1800m alt., II/ IV-1937, 11 males (DZUP); idem, 29- I-1938, 1 female (MNRJ); Campos do Jordão, Eugênio Lefreve, III-1938, 1 male (FIOC); idem, 1200m alt., 21- II-1963, 3 males (MZSP); Campos do Jordão, Mananciais de Campos do Jordão, 12- II-1983, 1 male (ZUEC); Jundiaí, Serra do Japi, 07-XII- 198, 1 male (ZUEC), São Paulo, Cantareira, II-1935, 1 male (FIOC); Salesópolis, Estação Biológica de Boracéia, 10- II-1942, 1 male DZUP); idem, III-1948, 7 males (MZSP); idem, III-1948, 1 male (MZSP); idem, III-1948, 10 males (MZSP), idem, II/ III-1949, 5 males (MZSP); idem, I-1949, 1 male (MZSP); idem, 850m alt., II-1950, 4 male (MZSP); idem, III-1950, 1 male (MZSP); idem, 850m alt., 16- I-1958, 2 males (MZSP); idem, 850m alt., 08- II-1962, 1 male (MZSP), idem, III-1964, 1 male (MZSP); idem, II/III/ IV-1968, 6 males (MZSP); São Paulo, II-1946, 3 males (MZSP); idem, 750m alt., 7 males (MZSP); São Paulo, Ipiranga, 750m, 1924, 2 males (MZSP); idem, no date, 1 male, 2 females (MZSP); São Bernardo do Campo, Alto da Serra, II-1923, 2 males (MZSP); idem. II-1936, 1 male (MZSP); Juquiá, 26- III-1946, 1 male (MZSP); 21- III-1903, 1 male (CUIC); Alto da Serra Santos, 2600 ft., 23- II-1910, 2 males (MGCL) Paraná: Marumbi, 23- III-1971, 1 male (DZUP); Curitiba, 02- II-1976, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, XII-1945, 1 male (DZUP); idem, 900m alt., 06- II-1968, 1 male (DZUP); idem, 900m alt., 22- I-1977, 1 male (DZUP); Curitiba, Bairro Cascatinha, 26- I-1961, 1 male (DZUP); Piraquara, Sanepar, 20- XII- 2000, 1 male (DZUP); Guaratuba, Pontal de Itararé, 800m alt., 08- II-1968, 1 male (DZUP); Tijucas do Sul, Bairro Vossoroca, 850m alt., I/ II-1937, 2 males (DZUP); idem, 900m alt., II-1968, 1 male (DZUP); idem, 900m alt., II-1969, 2 males (DZUP); idem, II-1970, 1 male (DZUP); idem, 850m alt., II-1976, 3 males (DZUP); idem, 850m alt., I/ II-1977, 2 males (DZUP); idem, 850m alt., 24- II-1980, 1 male (DZUP); idem, 850m alt., II-1981, 11 males (DZUP), idem, 850m alt., 15- II-1982, 1 male (DZUP); São Bento do Sul, I-1976, 2 males (DZUP). Santa Catarina: no date, 2 males (USNM); idem, no date, 1 female (MNRJ); São Bento do Sul, 28- I-1985, 1 male (MGCL); idem, 850m, 26- II-1985, 1 male (MGCL); idem, 28- I-1984, 1 female (MGCL); idem, no date, 1 female (MGCL); idem, 10- III-1984, 1 male (MGCL); idem, 29- I-1984, 1 male (MGCL); idem, 15- I-2007, 8 males (CRVP); idem, 14- I-2003, 2 males (CRVP); Rio Vermelho, III-1960, 1 male (MZSP); idem, 850m, no date, 2 males, (CRVP), idem, 21-II- 1982, 850m alt., 1 female (DZUP); idem, no date, 1 male (AMNH); idem, I-1948, 1 male, 1 female, (AMNH); idem, 22- III-1939, 1 male (AMNH); Joinville, 10- VIII-1908, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, 21- III-1941, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, IX/ X-1941, 2 males (MNRJ); idem, 21- IV-1982, 1 female (CRVP);idem, 09- II-1974, 1 male (DZUP); idem, 12- XII-1974, 1 male (DZUP); idem, no date, 2 males (MNRJ), idem, no date, 1 male (MNRJ); idem, no date, 1 male (MGCL); idem, no date, 1 male (MGCL); idem, II-1960, 1 male (MGCL); idem, III-1960, 1 male (CUIC); idem, 1931, 1 male (CUIC); idem, 8- I-1984, 1 male (MGCL); idem, no date, 1 male (MGCL); idem, 14- III-1984, 2 males (MGCL); idem, VIII-1894, 1 male (FMNH); idem, 1- II-1976, 1 male (FMNH); Timbó, III-1950, 1 female (MZSP); idem, III-1957, 2 females (MZSP); idem, III-1964, 1 male (MZSP); Itapema, II-1974, 1 male (DZUP). Rio Grande do Sul: no date, 1 female (USNM); idem, no date, 2 males (MNRJ), idem, no date, 1 male (USNM), 1 female (MNRJ); Pelotas, no date, 1 male (USNM); no locality, 04- IV-1923, 1 female (FIOC); idem, 21- III-1924, 1 female (FIOC); idem, III-1925, 2 males (FIOC); idem,II-III-1926, 3 males (FIOC), 1 male (MNRJ); idem, 1800m alt., 15- III-1937, 1 male (DZUP); no locality, no date, 1 femea, 1 male (FIOC), 1 male (DZUP), 2 males (MNRJ), 2 males, 1 female (MZSP), 3 males, 2 females (USNM), 1 male, (AMNH), 1 male, 1 female (CUIC), 1 male (MGCL). Unknown State (But Brazil as locality): no date, 2 males, 2 females (AMNH); 1932, 2 males (CUIC); No date, 2 males (ANSP); no date, 1 male (MGCL); no date, 1 female (MGCL); no date, 1 male (MGCL); 5- III-1926, 1 male (FMNH); 20- II-1925, 1 male (FMNH). Unknown State (with an unknown or possibly misspelled locality name): Chirinu?, I-1947, 1 male (AMNH); Corujota, XII-1948, 1 male (AMNH).
The validity of subspecies in Hista fabricii. Subspecies may be defined as different populations of a species that are recognizably distinct from each other. They are distributed in subareas that altogether form the geographical coverage of the species (Mayr 1942, 1954; Monroe 1982). Subspecies may also be geographically separated and genetically distinct populations, with or without areas of contact that allow crossing between individuals of different populations (Wilson & Brown 1953).
According to O'Neill (1982), the distribution of the frequencies of variable characteristics may result in a smooth cline, when the characters grade each other along the cline in such way that the populations are not easily recognized as morphologically discrete entities; the frequencies may also result in a step cline, when parts of a cline are broken by climatic, geographical or geological changes, making different populations of a species morphologically separable from each other, and, finally, the frequencies may be randomly distributed avoiding one of ordering the variation of different populations. In the case where the populations can be isolated as morphological and geographical entities, the hierarchical category of subspecies may be used.
Besides the supportive evidences found in the literature, the material deposited in collections (see Materials and Methods) demonstrated that H. fabricii boisduvalii is represented only by males (275 individuals examined). These males show constant patterns in color and genitalia, differently from the females. The geographical distribution of H. fabricii boisduvalii and H. fabricii fabricii did not show a model of allopatric populations, which corroborates the hypothesis that H. fabricii fabricii and H. fabricii boisduvalii correspond to male and female of the same species, invalidating the subspecies status for these forms.
The material available for study of H. fabricii fabricii and H. fabricii papagaya revealed the existence of female exclusively. From the 21 females examined and/or dissected nine are deposited in the MZSP collection and were comparatively analyzed with the aim of documenting possible variation in wing color pattern and male and female genitalia.
The females possess variation for some morphological traits of genitalia and for wing color. Characters of genitalia, such as the presence of a distinct area of light sclerotization in the eighth abdominal tergite (Figs. 17–20), the thickened extradiscal spotband on the hindwing (Figs. 28–37) and the symmetry of signa (Figs. 25–27) showed a smooth cline pattern. On the other hand, the shape of posterior extremity of the lamella postvaginalis (Figs. 21–24) presented a random pattern of variation.
Based on the examined material it was not possible to establish an obvious correlation between variations and geographical distribution (Figs. 38–39). The asymmetry of signa follows a smooth cline pattern and the degree of asymmetry decreases from North to South; the different phenotypes for a distinct area of light sclerotization in the eighth abdominal tergite also correspond to a smooth cline but do not correlate with latitude or longitude; on the other hand, the differences in shape of lamella postvaginalis follow a random pattern and do not correlate with latitude or longitude.
The variation of some female characters does not corroborate the existence of populations limited by morphological boundaries. Moreover, the continuous distribution of H. fabricii fabricii and H. fabricii papagaya does not support their subspecies status based on allopatric populations.
The evidences previously presented do not disagree with the importance of morphological variation, or that this information is essential for studies of evolutionary models and speciation events (Monroe 1982). The problem here discussed concerns about how the variation is expressed nomenclaturally. Having in mind that the concept of subspecies involves populations geographically and morphologically delimitated, the differences found in the species analyzed are not enough to support subspecies status for H. fabricii boisduvalii and H. fabricii papagaya. The data best agree with the hypothesis of intra-population variation.
description: Published as part of Moraes, Simeão S., Duarte, Marcelo & González, Jorge M., 2010, Revision of Hista Oiticica (Lepidoptera: Castniidae) and discussion on the validity of its subspecies, pp. 1-27 in Zootaxa 2421 on pages 5-17, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.194483