Volume 8 Number 4

10 February, 2020

The Taxonomic Report

OF THE INTERNATIONAL LEPIDOPTERA SURVEY

ISSN 2643-4776 (print) / ISSN 2643-4806 (online)

Designation of neotype of Hemileuca maia (Drury, 1773)

and refinement of its type locality

(Bombycoidea, Saturniidae, Hemileucinae)

Harry Pavulaan

606 Hunton Place NE

Leesburg, VA. 20176

intlepsurvev @ gmail.com

ABSTRACT. The present paper defines the original type locality of Hemileuca maia (Drury, 1773) as Edgewood,

New York, in the Long Island Pine Barrens. It has been locally known as the "Coastal Pine Barrens Buckmoth" and its range

may be confined entirely to Long Island, though populations throughout southeastern coastal New England and offshore

islands may be considered the same nominotypical taxon. In analyzing historical events, there are questions regarding the

geographic location, and source and eventual disposition of the specimen illustrated by artist Moses Harris in Drury (1773).

While there is ample evidence that Drury's specimen of maia came from a Mr. Thomas James of Brooklyn, New York, it is not

clear whether the illustrated specimen was actually obtained by, and in the possession of, Dr. John Fothergill at the time the

specimen was illustrated. Drury 1 s illustrated specimen perhaps found its way to various collections and is believed to now be

lost or unidentifiable. A neotype is designated from the Edgewood Scrub Oak Plains, near present day Brentwood, New York,

to agree with a possible collecting location used by Thomas James.

Additional key words: Pitch Pine Barrens, Scrub Oak Plains, Thomas James.

ZooBank registration: http://zoobank.org/References/6A0BCEEB-F6E2-4FC6-BFB8-BD 116194AFA0

INTRODUCTION

Dru Drury (1725-1803) stood out among entomologists in 19 th century England as having likely

the largest private natural history collection of the time, containing an estimated 11,000 specimens.

Drury s livelihood was as a jeweler and silversmith, but he was better known as an entomologist. He

served as president of the Society of Entomologists of London (1780-1782) and was a member of the

Aurelian Society. Among his peers were familiar names such as Cramer, Donovan, Fabricius, Kirby, and

Linnaeus among others.

Drury produced and published his major work 'Illustrations of Natural History in three volumes:

Vol. 1 (1770), Vol. 2 (1773), and Vol. 3 (1782), based on specimens in his collection. What is now

known as Hemileuca maia was described by Dru Drury in Vol. 2 (1773) as Phal[aena\ Bomb\yx\ Maia

(Fig. 1). Interestingly, species names were not included with any of the original descriptions nor the

drawings in this work, thus the only reference to the name “maia" is found in the "Index to the Second

Volume. Names of the Insects, according to the System of Linnaeus". Drury explained his curious

philosophy on names: "It is not my present design to enter into the scientific part of the study, by

arranging the insects according to any system now established; nor will the reader find that I have given a

single name to any one here figured. This, indeed, must be the consequence of not following the system

of any author, unless I had formed one of my own; for it is impossible I should give names to them,

particularly trivial ones."

PLAT

Fi c. III. Expands full two inches tad a quarter.

Upper •fide. — The Antennet are black, and

ftrongly petfinated or combed.—The Neck is afh

colour.—The Thorax and Abdomen black, the

extremity being orange.—All the Wings are funi-

lar to each other, and very thin.—The Superior

are black, with a white bar croJErtg them from the

anterior to the pofterior edges; whereon is a femi

eye placed near the former.—The Inferior Wings

are alfo black, with a white bar, broader than that

on the fuperior wings, crofling them from the an¬

terior to the abdominal edges j having rear the

former a black triangular fpot thereon, anfwering

to the femi eye on the other wings.

E XXIV.

Under-fide, —The Palpi and Tongue^ if it has

any, are not to be fccn.—The Legs and Thorax

are black.—The Thighs orange.—The Abdomen

grey, having its ftdes fpotted with white ; the ex¬

tremity being orange, as on the upper-fide,—All

the fVings are the fame colour as on the upper-

fide, but rather more diftindh The thinnefs of

the wings occafion the colours to be lefs diitintt

and clear, than in mod others of this kind. The

edges of all the wings are even.

It was brought from New York, and is in the

pofTeflion of Dr. Fothergill.

I have not feen it in any author.

Fig. 1. Original description of Phalaena Bombyx Maia (in Drury, 1773). [Ed. Note: Placement of text is

reformatted here, but content is intact].

The plate (Fig. 2) in Drury (1773) was drawn and engraved by artist and entomologist Moses

Harris, who's engraving work was in high demand in England. Drury set a high standard for accuracy in

the drawings: "[T]he same plan, of giving just and accurate figures, that was followed in the first volume,

is continued in this. The utmost care and nicety has been observed, both in the outlines and engraving.

Nothing is strained, or carried beyond the bounds nature has set; and whoever will compare the

engravings with the originals, I flatter myself will allow, that nothing is borrowed from fancy, or any

colour given to an insect that does not really exist in the subject intended to be represented." One must

assume that care was taken to represent exacting detail to width of the bands, placement of spots, etc. in

the plate of maia. Of interest is the accurate depiction of the secondaries showing as a shadow, as seen

through the primaries where the wings overlap.

Fig. 2. Phalaena Bombyx Maia (in Drury, 1773)

Fig. 3. Saturnia Maia (in Westwood, 1837)

Thirty-four years after the passing of his friend Drury, J. O. Westwood decided to republish

Drury's work. In his Vol. 1 (1837), Westwood explained that Drury's work was of "acknowledged

value", but the scarcity of Drury's work appeared to be "almost unknown to Continental Entomologists".

Thus, as Westwood stated: "I have consented to undertake the charge of bringing it forth in a form more

adapted to the present greatly advanced state of Entomology." Which meant, in part, applying current

names to each species treatment. He went on to write: "[T]he chief difficulty has arisen from the non¬

possession of the specimens which served for the original illustrations...". Unfortunately, all of the

specimens illustrated in Drury's work had been sold or otherwise disappeared into the world of private

and institutional collections by the time his collection was sold at auction in 1805. Typical of collections

of the 18 th and 19 th centuries, generally only one or two specimens represented a species in any collection

(Calhoun, 2010), which were easily "lost." Westwood mentions in a footnote that the copper plates,

drawn and engraved by Moses Harris for Drury's 1773 work, were used exclusively in the first two

volumes of Westwood's 1837 "New Edition". In Fig. 3 (above), one can see some minor differences in

the result, as is expected with hand-colored illustrations.

Westwood, in Vol. 2 (1837), edited the description of Phalaena Bombyx Maia , and in this case

applied the species name “Saturnia maia" (Fig. 4), referring to Drury's Phalaena Bombyx Maia as a

synonym. Westwood dispensed with the French translations that accompanied each of Drury's original

descriptions, added life history information such as hosts, descriptions of immature stages, flight dates,

distribution, and anecdotes referring in this case to the name of common use in America: "Buck-fly".

Westwood's description of the adult is without any doubt representative of H. maia :

SATURNIA MAIA.

Ptaw XXIV. fig. 3.

Order : Lepidoptcm. Section: Nocturn*. .Family : Bombycid®, Leach.

Obmue. Batumi*, Schrank. Attaeua, German Phal«na (Altacua), Drury.

Saturnia Maia. Alb rotundaUa nlgrb , tod* alb4, roaculA tuboctUarl nlgrA, too rufeaceoti. (Expans. Alar.

3 udc. 3 lin.)

8yi». P baleen a (Bombyx) Maia, Drury, App. vol. 2. Cramer, In*. 2. tab. 9A.

Bombyx Proserpina, Fabr. Ent. Sy*t. 111. l.|>. 410. No. 40. Gmet. Lin*u S. N. 2407 . 480. Abbot £

Smith In*. Georg, pi. AO. Oliv. Bne. Mith. 3. 37. 43. Pal. Bauv. In*. dCAfr. et tfAmer. Up.

pi. 2i.f. 2.3.

Habitat • Navr York (DruryJ. Georgia (Abbot).

Upper Side. Antennae black, and strongly pectinated. Neck ash-coloured. Thorax and abdomen

black, the extremity being orange. Wings pellucid. The anterior being black, with a white bar

crossing them from the anterior to the posterior edges; whereon is a semi-eye placed near the former.

Posterior wings black, with a broader white bar crossing them from the anterior to the abdominal edges;

having near the former a black triangular spot thereon.

Under Side . Palpi and tongue indistinct. Legs and thorax black. Thighs orange. Abdomen

grey, having its sides spotted with white; the extremity orange. Wings coloured as on the upper side,

but rather more distinct. The thinness of the wings occasions the colours to be less distinct and clear

than in most others of this kind. Margins of the wings entire.

Fig. 4. Description of Saturnia Maia (in Westwood, 1837).

At this point, one needs to determine the source and eventual disposition of the one original

specimen that was modeled by Moses Harris for the plates of both the Drury (1773) and the Westwood

(1837) works. A pertinent passage was written by Whitehead (1978) as follows: "[T]he modern

specialist trying to trace type or figured specimens must explore such famous old museums as the

Leverian or Bullock's and he must probe the many small and ephemeral collections that time and again

changed hands, at each step with some loss of material and of the information that accompanied it. A

complex web of sales, loans, gifts and transfers must be unraveled if the specimen is to be located or its

provenance authenticated. The task is time-consuming, and it is often held that such "historical

taxonomy" is an old-fashioned and expensive luxury in modern systematic work." Nevertheless, such a

task must be pursued in the case of Phalaena maia.

It must be noted that Dru Drury enlisted the help of associates throughout the world to supply him

with specimens and report natural history observations. Enlisting the employ of ship captains and other

travelers, Drury sent letters and printed instructions abroad, even supplying collecting equipment when

necessary, and always insisting on perfect specimens. Curiously, Drury (1773) mentions in the OD of

maia : "It was brought from New York, and is in the possession of Dr. Fothergill." This indicates that the

specimen was not part of Drury's own collection, at least at the time of writing Vol. 2.

Among Drury's overseas associates was Thomas James of Brooklyn, New York (Calhoun, 2010).

Drury corresponded with James beginning in 1763, and received specimens from him between 1764 and

1776. Drury paid James for insect specimens and instructed him with collection techniques and sent him

equipment. Drury had also encouraged James to collect duplicates, which Drury would exchange with

other collectors. Thus there is a possibility there were additional specimens of maia being distributed, but

no documented record of such transactions exists. It is believed that James originally lived in Flatbush,

Brooklyn (New York), though some letters from Drury were addressed to James in "Guanoes, Long

Island". The best current translation of "Guanoes" is similar to Gowanus (Brooklyn), a neighborhood

near present-day Flatbush. Later correspondence between Drury and James went through a Mr. Rapalje,

who lived at Brookland Ferry in the same area (Calhoun, 2010). The specimen of maia that James would

have sent to Drury was collected or delivered in 1766, presumably while James still lived in Brooklyn. It

is not known whether James could have collected the specimen of maia in Brooklyn or further out on

Long Island, where James eventually relocated in 1767 or 1768.

The Gowanus and Flatbush areas at that time were primarily open farmland associated with

scattered hamlets. The largest settlement of the time on the Brooklyn side of New York Harbor was

around Brookland Ferry, where farmers from Long Island would take their produce across the East River

to New York (Manhattan). This landscape was captured in excruciating detail in the "Plan of the City of

New York in North America: surveyed in 1766 and 1767" by Bernard Ratzer, commonly referred to as

the "Ratzer Map" (Miller, 2016). Much of Brooklyn (Kings County) was apparently in agricultural

production. East of this agricultural region, south of the glacial moraine, was a vast prairie-like plain

stretching from present-day Queens County to Hempstead in central Nassau County (Flint, 1896), where a

tiny remnant of the "Hempstead Plains" remains today protected, but otherwise unrecognizable to most.

Earlier records documented the unbroken Pine Barrens of central and eastern Long Island extending

westward only to around Hempstead (central Nassau County). As the Long Island population of H. maia

is known to be primarily associated with extensive growth of Scrub Oak (Quercus ilicifolia ), the

likelihood exists that James collected Drury's specimen farther east, not in Brooklyn.

Cockerell (1922) cited Drury's correspondence through two letters with James, one of which

confirms James' move in that time period. In a letter dated Aug. 1, 1768 Drury requested James to send

more insects from James' new home out on Long Island, some 40 miles away, and included payment for

specimens. Interestingly, the distance from Gowanus (Brooklyn) to the Edgewood Pine Barrens/Oak

Plains, just east of present-day Deer Park, N.Y., is approximately 40 miles. In the mid-1700's this area

was characterized by vast expanses of Pitch Pine/Scrub Oak forest. I have observed H. maia commonly

in the Edgewood area since the late 1960's, when I lived in Brentwood, and collected it many times.

Much of this area has now been converted to industrial use, though a considerable remnant of the

Edgewood Pine Barrens and associated Scrub Oak Plains is protected within the New York State Dept, of

Environmental Conservation's Edgewood Oak Brush Plains Preserve, and there are scattered remnants

adjacent to the Preserve which will likely be developed in coming years.

Westwood's first hint at the disposition of Drury's specimens was as such: "[A]s appears from the

Catalogue of his [Drury's] Insects, which I obtained at the sale of Mr. [Edward] Donovan's collections, to

whom, as appears by a note, they were presented by Mr. Drury... Here it is quite evident that Drury had

carefully noted down the localities of all the specimens of this insect which he possessed..." Drury

reportedly produced printed circulars for the public sale of his collection in London, in 1788, several years

prior to his death on Jan. 15, 1804, which included not only insects, but also cabinets, books and the

original copper plates. Drury's handwritten collection catalogue provides whatever data was available to

the author (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5. Portion of Drury's handwritten catalogue confirming the source of the maia specimen to be "Mr.

James". It was apparently obtained in 1766. Note Drury listed it under “Phalena" [sic].

The original copy of Drury's handwritten collection catalogue, four notebooks in his hand and

presumably prepared around 1790, was presented to Edward Donovan, who in turn used it to produce the

catalogue of Drury's collection for public auction (Donovan, 1805; Calhoun, 2010), of which Westwood

obtained a copy. It should be noted that P. maia was NOT specifically listed among sale items in the sale

catalogue (though possibly grouped with several unspecified multiple " Phalaend " entries which were

purchased by John Francillon). Westwood reproduced part of Drury's handwritten catalog in his 1837

work to list purchasers of Drury's collection. The following names were among those listed: G.

Humphrey, Donovan, General Davies, Macleay, Latham, and Kirby. John Francillon was listed among

those purchasing the multiple " Phalaend " entries, which could have included Drury's specimen of maia.

However, when Francillon's own collection was auctioned in 1817-1818, there was no record of maia

(Calhoun, pers. corr.). Interestingly, Macleay was the recipient of many of Drury's specimens either

through the sale of Drury's collection or from the auction of Francillon's collection.

The original specimen illustrated by Moses Harris (Drury, 1773) is believed to be either lost or

unrecognizable among worldwide lepidoptera collections. A problem now encountered is that data labels

were rarely affixed to specimens during the 18 th and 19 th centuries, and data (if any) was recorded in

separate logbooks or catalogs (Hancock, 2004; Calhoun, 2010). Often, any labels affixed to specimen

pins or trays were simply cabinet labels produced to identify a species. This information would have been

imprecisely forwarded or lost in the process of specimen exchanges, thus becoming unreliable.

What further complicates matters is the mention in the OD of Phalaena Bombyx Maia , where

Drury (1773) writes: "It was brought from New York, and is in the possession of Dr. Fothergill". It is not

clear from whom John Fothergill obtained the specimen mentioned in the OD, but he apparently had his

own contacts in the New York area who likewise sent him specimens. Fothergill is known to have

received specimens from his Quaker friends in the New World (Douglas, 2015). Drury always indicated

in his written work, who owned the specimen (Brock, 1977). This brings to question: Did Thomas James

NOT collect the specimen described and illustrated in Drury (1773)? Calhoun (pers. corr.) suggests that

Drury might have obtained additional specimens of maia at a later date and incorrectly credited them to

James when he prepared his catalog. Also William Hunter is known to have received many American

specimens from his own network of acquaintances and exchanged specimens with other collectors, among

them a medical student of his, William Wood, who sent specimens mainly from Philadelphia and Rhode

Island (Jeanne Robinson, pers. comm.; Calhoun, 2010). There was apparently considerable exchange of

material back and forth between Drury, Fabricius, Macleay and Hunter (Hancock, 2004; Hancock et. al.,

2015), often making it difficult or impossible to keep track of specimen transfers. Fothergill's collection

was bequeathed in 1780 to William Hunter, whose own collections formed the basis of the Hunterian

Museum, which opened in 1807. Interestingly, the two "co-types" of Bombyx proserpina Fabricius (Figs.

7 and 8), now housed in the Hunterian Museum (University of Glasgow), could possibly have come from

Fothergill and served as the model for Drury's Phalaena Bombyx Maia. Jeanne Robinson (pers. comm.)

informed me that the only specimen data available comes from Fabricius (1775) where Fabricius

mentioned the specimens came from America. The current cabinet labels were prepared between 1783

and 1785 by Hunter's nephew, Matthew H. Baillie (Hancock et. al. , 2015).

The two Hunterian specimens (Figs. 7 and 8) are a much closer match to Drury's illustrated figure.

Could one of these have been the model for Harris' illustration for Drury? Fabricius described proserpina

from Hunter's collection in 1775. Calhoun (pers. corr.) advised this occurred five years before Hunter

ever received Fothergill's material. It is possible that Fothergill gave the original specimen to Drury.

Both "co-types" appear to be males by their broad antennae, though the University of Glasgow's online

collection entries indicate the sex of each is "unknown". Drury's specimen was obviously a male.

Calhoun (pers. corr.) questioned why Drury would list a specimen of maia coming from James, yet

possibly described the species from a Fothergill specimen. A satisfactory answer to this may never be

found.

Fabricius' description of Bombyx proserpina follows below (Fig. 6). The type locality is indicated

as "Habitat in America", but interestingly he lists Hunter (or the Hunter collection) as the source:

VI. G L O S S A T A. Bombyx, 561

17. B. alis patulis, rotundatis, nigris, fafcia alba: macula Proftrpi*

fuboccllari nigra. na.

Habitat in America, Muf. D. Hunter.

Statura praecedcntis. Antennae valde pe&inatae, atrac.

Caput atrum. Thora* ater, fafcia antica pallida.

Abdomen atrum, atio rufefeeme. Alae concolorcs,

fuliginofo-nigrac, in medio fafcia lata alba, in qua

macula nigra pnpilla lunata alba. Pfcdcs atri, fe-

moribus femigineis*

Fig 6: Description of Bombyx proserpina Fabricius (1775).

A rough translation of Fabricius (1775): "Stature as follows. Antennae very comb-like, black,

with a dark head. Thorax black, and the front fascia pale. The abdomen with dark reddish anus. The wings

of the same colors, chimney-black, with white curves in the middle, in which a black eye is shaped by

white. Black legs, thighs reddish brown." Fabricius refers to the abdomen having a dark reddish anus,

characteristic of the male. Hunterian Museum specimen 133603 appears to be missing the orange-red

terminal hairs, while 133604 is missing the abdomen entirely. The two specimens are nearly identical in

phenotypic characters. A problem with these Hunterian Museum specimens is without detailed locality

information they could be H. maia , or perhaps what is now known as H. lucina (characterized by broader

white bands and greater translucence,) or possibly H. nevadenis , or another Hemileuca species. The

bands are unusually wide for Long Island maia.

Fig. 7. Co-type of Bombyxproserpina Fabricius. Hunterian Museum

catalogue number GLAHM 133603. Image reproduction by permission,

Fig. 8. Co-type of Bombyx proserpina Fabricius. Hunterian Museum

catalogue number GLAHM 133604. Image reproduction by permission,

A specimen housed in the collection of the Macleay Museum (University of Sydney) (Fig. 9)

might have passed through the hands of several people, thus losing any possibility of knowing its true

source. An accompanying data label only indicates "New York", and no other information accompanies

the specimen. Robert Blackburn (pers. corr.) informed me that George Masters, first curator of the

Macleay Museum, wrote the specimen's data label. Such labels were written to replace the original

labels. The specimen has also been re-pinned, as the current insect pin is not of the 1 old style' type used

by Drury. Possibly purchased by Macleay from the Drury collection, this specimen does not match the

pattern of the specimen illustrated in Drury (1773), though the white bands are characteristic of Long

Island maia. However, it does lend to the belief that several specimens of maia made their rounds among

the collectors of the time. Since they are of unknown origin, it is unwise to designate a lectotype from

among specimens of uncertain provenance.

Sydney, Australia. Image: © Macleay Collections, University of Sydney.

Also curious is the fact that a second H. maia specimen in the Macleay Museum collection,

identified as “Hemileuca proserpina" indicates "Georgia" as the location. This specimen was likely

collected by John Abbot, but it could not have been examined by Fabricius for the original description of

proserpina , as Abbot did not arrive in Georgia until 1776.

The only other taxon of interest is the original holotype of H. maia "ab. lintneri" (Packard, 1914).

The original description reads as follows:

"In one c? [ab. lintneri\ captured at Albany, N.Y. (fig. 11, PI. LXVII), photographed by

the late Dr. Lintner, there is no white band on the fore wings; the ocellus is distinct, but

on the hind wing a white band incloses [sic] the ocellus."

A poor photograph is illustrated in Packard (1914), showing this extreme male variant of a H. maia male

that is entirely missing the white band on the forewing. This specimen may quite possibly represent an

aberrant specimen of H. lucina. The disposition of the specimen is presently unknown.

NEOTYPE DESIGNATION

Since none of the known historic specimens (despite links to Drury and his peers) clearly satisfy

the phenotypic characters evident in the illustrated specimen (Drury, 1773), a neotype is proposed here to

objectively define nominotypical Hemileuca maia (Phalaena Bombyx Maia) with a typical male,

representative of the Long Island Pine Barrens population. I select a specimen from the Edgewood Pine

Barrens (Fig. 10). The Hunterian Museum specimens of proserpina, which are closer matches to the

specimen illustrated in Drury (1773), do not appear to be of the nominotypical phenotype of maia. A

specimen from the Long Island Pine Barrens region would best represent the species from the immediate

"New York" (city) region, which is likely the geographical origin of the specimen illustrated in Drury

(1773). The Long Island population is essentially a Pine Barrens isolate. The next nearest populations of

maia occur in southeastern New England. Other populations from around Albany, N.Y. and in the New

Jersey Pine Barrens region differ phenotypically by having more opaque, darker wings (Pavulaan, in

press).

Fig. 10. Proposed neotype of Phalaena Bombyx Maia Drury (1773).

The proposed neotype, a male (Fig. 10), bears a plain white printed label [Hemileuca maia /

October 21, 2017 / Long Island Avenue / north of Deer Park train station / Edgewood, New York.

Collected by Harry Pavulaan] and a red printed label [NEOTYPE / Phalaena Bombyx Maia / Drury

(1773) / Designated by / Harry Pavulaan 2020]. The neotype is deposited in the McGuire Center for

Lepidoptera & Biodiversity, Gainesville, Florida.

TYPE LOCALITY

The location of the defined type locality of the neotype of Hemileuca maia is just outside the east

edge of the Scrub Oak Plains which he within the Edgewood Oak Brush Plains Preserve, between Deer

Park and Brentwood, Long Island, New York (Fig. 11). Industrial growth has destroyed most of the

native forest cover of the area in the image with only patches of habitat remaining in some areas outside

of the Preserve. This site, in what little remains of the historic hamlet of Edgewood, is directly north of

the Long Island Railroad's Deer Park station along Long Island Avenue. The type locality site will very

likely be developed shortly after publication of this paper, though there is a thriving population of Buck

Moths in the Scrub Oak Plains within the Preserve. A portion of the Scrub Oak habitat, which is visible

in the image below (Fig. 12), was once part of the continuous Long Island Pitch Pine Barrens and Scrub

Oak Plains, as recently as the mid-1960's.

Fig. 11. Location of the defined type locality of the neotype of Hemileuca maia beyond

the east edge of the Scrub Oak Plains within the Edgewood Oak Brush Plains Preserve

between Deer Park and Brentwood, Long Island, New York.

Plains Preserve, immediately west of the proposed type locality. This is typical habitat

for H maia on Long Island. The Scrub Oak (Q. ilicifolia) "canopy" in the foreground is

the primary component of the Scrub Oak Plains and is approximately 5 ft. in height.

Pitch Pine (.Pinus rigida ) towers above the Oaks in the background. [Photo: 10/21/2017]

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many thanks to John Calhoun for helpful correspondence, pertinent reprints, direction to locating

much of the historical sources used to write this paper, and for scanned images of P. maia from an

original copy of Drury (1773), as well as that of Saturnia maia from an original copy of Westwood

(1837), and for his review of the historical aspects of this paper; David Wright for final review and

helpful comments; Jeanne Robinson (Curator of Entomology, Hunterian Museum) for discussions

pertaining to exchanges between collectors in the late 18 th century; Graham Nisbet (Rights and

Reproductions Officer, Hunterian Museum) for image reproduction permission and improved image of

proserpina ; Robert Blackburn (Curatorial Assistant of the Macleay Museum) for discussions pertaining to

the source of the Macleay Museum specimen and image reproduction permission; Jon Pelham for

taxonomic discussion.

LITERATURE CITED

Brock, C. H. 1977. Dru Drury s Illustrations of Natural History and the type specimen of Goliathus

goliatus Drury. Journal of the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History 8(3): 259-265.

Calhoun, J. V. 2010. Affirmation of the name Papilio hyllus Cramer (Lycaenidae) for a Nearctic butterfly,

with the designation of a neotype. J. Lep. Soc. 64(2): 79-90.

Cockerell, T. D. A. 1922. Dru Drury, an eighteenth century entomologist. Scientific Monthly 14(1): 67-

82.

Dononvan, E. 1805. A Catalogue of the Most Capital Assemblage of Insects Probably Ever Offered to

Public Sale. Privately printed, London, U.K.: 16 pp.

Douglas, S. 2015. Dr. John Fothergill: significant donor. Pp. 165-175. In Hancock, E. G., N. Pearce, &

M. Cambell (eds.), William Hunter's world: the art and science of eighteenth-century collecting.

Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Surrey, UK.

Drury, D. 1770. Illustrations of Natural History, Vol. 1. Printed by author, London: xxvii + 132 pp. + 51

pis, + 4 figs..

Drury, D. 1773. Illustrations of Natural History, Vol. 2. Printed by author, London: vii + 94 pp. + 50 pis.

Drury, D. 1782. Illustrations of Natural History, Vol. 3. Printed by author, London: xxviii +78 pp. + 50 pis.

Fabricius, J. C. 1775. Systema Entomologiae, Sistens Insectorum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species,

Adjectis Synonymis, Locis, Descriptionibus, Observationibus. Flensburgh and Leipzig; Library

Kotii, 8vo: xvi + 832 pp.

Flint, M. B. 1896. Early Long Island: a Colonial Study. G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, N.Y.: 549 pp.

Hancock, E. G. (2004). William Hunter's insect collection and emerging descriptive taxonomy in the

Eighteenth century. NatSCA News 4: 8-13.

Hancock, E. G., N. Pearce, & M. Cambell (eds.). 2015. William Hunter's world: the art and science of

eighteenth-century collecting. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Surrey, UK. 424 pp.

Miller, L. 2016. Colonial New York Close Up: Revisiting Bernard Ratzer's Plan of the City of New

York. Brooklyn Historical Society, https://www.brooklynhistorv.org (accessed 24 Jan. 2020).

Packard, A. S. (in: Cockerell, T. D. A.). 1914. Monograph of the Bombycine Moths of North America,

including their transformations and origin of the larval markings and armature (Part III) Families

Ceratocampidae (exclusive of Ceratocampinae, Saturniidae, Hemileucidae, and Brahmaeidae.

Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences 12(1): ix + 516 pp.

Westwood, J. O. 1837. Illustrations of Exotic Entomology, Containing Upwards of Six Hundred and

Fifty Figures and Descriptions of Foreign Insects, Interspersed with Remarks and Reflections on

Their Nature and Properties. By Dru Drury - A New Edition, Brought Down to the Present State

of the Science, with the Systematic Characters of Each Species, Synonyms, Indexes and Other

Additional Matter. Henry G. Bohn, London. Vol. 1: xxvi + 123 pp. + 20 pi.; Vol. 2: vi + 100 pp.

+ 20 pi; Vol. 3: vi + 94 pp. + 20 pi.

Whitehead, P. J. P. 1978. A guide to the dispersal of zoological material from Captain Cook's Voyages.

Pacific Studies 2(1): 52-93.

The Taxonomic Report

is a publication of

The International Lepidoptera Survey (TILS)

The International Lepidoptera Survey is registered as a non-profit Limited Liability Company (LLC) in

the state of Virginia, U.S.A. The Taxonomic Report (TTR) is published for the purpose of providing a

public and permanent scientific record. It appears in digital, open-access form, is regularly disseminated

in hardcopy form to select institutional repositories and is also available as printed copy upon request at

the discretion of authors and/or the editor. Printing and postage costs may apply. Contents are peer-

reviewed but not necessarily through the anonymous review and comment process preferred by some

publishers of serial literature. An initial run of 25 copies is printed on paper to meet ICZN

recommendation 8B. Copies of all TTR papers are available via the following digital repositories:

Internet Archive (https://archive.org/) . Biodiversity Heritage Library

(https://www.biodiversitvhbrarv.org) , Zobodat (https://www.zobodat.at/) and at the archival TTR website:

(http ://lep survey, carolinanature. com/report .html) .

TILS Purpose

TILS is devoted to the worldwide cohection of Lepidoptera for the purpose of scientific discovery,

determination, and documentation, without which there can be no preservation.

TILS Motto

"As a world community, we cannot protect that which we do not know"

Articles for publication are sought

They may deal with any area of research on Lepidoptera, including faunal surveys, conservation topics,

methods, etc. Taxonomic papers are especiahy welcome. There are no page charges for authors. Before

sending a manuscript, simply write to TTR editor, Harry Pavulaan, 606 Hunton Place NE, Leesburg,

VA, 20176, USA to initiate discussion on how to best handle your material for publication, and to discuss

peer review options; or email to intlepsurvev@gmail.com .

Visit The International Lepidoptera Survey on the World Wide Web at:

http://lepsurvey.carolinanature.com

Join the discussion at our list serves on Yahoo! Groups at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TILS-leps-talk/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TILS-moth-rah/