Moth Taxon Search
Observation_292983
Gender (optional)
Notes (optional)
Cerura himalayana Moore, 1888
Schintlmeister, A. 2008. Palaearctic Macrolepidoptera Vol. 1. Notodontidae, pp. 1-482. Pg. 120, Pl. 12/201. Text at https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Notodontidae/vt8zDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cerura+vinula&pg=PA113&printsec=frontcover. Plate at https://books.google.co.in/books/publisher/content?id=vt8zDwAAQBAJ&pg=RA1-PA12&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U3CmR-rqSJfHpLjHWIZLj0MXd8now&w=1280
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1224543-Cerura-himalayana
Similar species: Cerura vinula (Linnaeus, 1758) which is extralimital.
JD : vide Schintlmeister,, C. himalayana closely resembles vinula & besides the size, can be separated by genitalia dissection. C. vinula is part of a group of similar looking spp,,but vinula is excluded because of the distribution.
Have you differentiated from other spp. that have closer distribution?
C. przewalskii has a distribution in Tibet & is sympatric with himalayana in Afghanistan. Schintlmeister also states that some of the uncommon greyish specimens morphologically closely resemble vinula. However, this is a lower altitude moth & found on steppes,etc where Salix & Populus spp. grow (hostplants), I believe both are found in Ladakh.
SS: Morphologically, it is difficult to separate from other species such as C. przewalskii. C. himalayana is only based on location. I have collected a specimen, so I can check the size. Perhaps this can be a provisional ID.
Schintlmeister, A. 2008. Palaearctic Macrolepidoptera Vol. 1. Notodontidae, pp. 1-482. Pg. 120, Pl. 12/201. Text at https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Notodontidae/vt8zDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cerura+vinula&pg=PA113&printsec=frontcover. Plate at https://books.google.co.in/books/publisher/content?id=vt8zDwAAQBAJ&pg=RA1-PA12&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U3CmR-rqSJfHpLjHWIZLj0MXd8now&w=1280
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1224543-Cerura-himalayana
Similar species: Cerura vinula (Linnaeus, 1758) which is extralimital.
JD : vide Schintlmeister,, C. himalayana closely resembles vinula & besides the size, can be separated by genitalia dissection. C. vinula is part of a group of similar looking spp,,but vinula is excluded because of the distribution.
Have you differentiated from other spp. that have closer distribution?
C. przewalskii has a distribution in Tibet & is sympatric with himalayana in Afghanistan. Schintlmeister also states that some of the uncommon greyish specimens morphologically closely resemble vinula. However, this is a lower altitude moth & found on steppes,etc where Salix & Populus spp. grow (hostplants), I believe both are found in Ladakh.
SS: Morphologically, it is difficult to separate from other species such as C. przewalskii. C. himalayana is only based on location. I have collected a specimen, so I can check the size. Perhaps this can be a provisional ID.