Euphydryas phaeton borealis (F. H. Chermock & R. L. Chermock, 1940 )

Euphydryas phaeton borealis (F. H. Chermock & R. L. Chermock, 1940) View in CoL

In 1940, brothers Frank Chermock and Ralph Chermock described new subspecies E. phaëton borealis . They started their description first with a conclusion:

“In 1927, Dr. Austin H. Clark, recognized two distinct races of E. phaeton , the one a northern race and the other a southern race. He considered the northern race as typical and redescribed the southern race from Maryland specimens, calling it schausi . The southern race represents typical phaeton , therefore schausi becomes a synonym of phaeton leaving the northern race without a name. Dr. Clark, because of our study and extensive material on hand, has advised us to describe this unnamed northern race.”

One can immediately see here a possible misinterpretation of Clark’s description of “southern” ( schausi ) and “northern” (nominotypical phaeton ) races by the Chermocks. By “southern” race, Clark described subspecies schausi from Maryland and Virginia, that differed from the nominotypical phaeton in the region of New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts, which Clark referred to as the “northern” race. Clark had correctly given ample discussion of nominotypical phaeton being the “northern” race. The Chermocks subsequently concluded the southern race ( schausi ) represented “typical phaeton ” (despite the fact that nominotypical phaeton was described from New York) without real analysis or justification, then claimed this left the “northern ” race without a name, which according to Clark, it did in fact: E. p. phaeton . The best interpretation I can determine is what the Chermocks might have intended to convey is that they considered schausi synonymous with nominotypical phaeton over the broad region from Virginia to Massachusetts, thus representing the “southern” race. However, Clark had not addressed populations north of Massachusetts, so the Chermocks defined a new geographic region for the “northern race”. The description of ssp. borealis follows:

“Upper side: the ground color of this race is a jet black, almost glossy, in contrast to the dull sooty black of typical phaeton ; the orange marginal spots of phaeton are replaced by large, almost red markings which form a rather wide band intersected only by the black veins. The red spots in the cells of both wings are large and pronounced; white markings similar to phaeton .

Lower surface: The red markings on this surface are again large and very pronounced; white markings similar to the typical form.

Male wingspread averages about 42 mm.; female wingspread averages about 47 mm. Generally, this race is smaller than typical phaeton .”

The Chermocks list holotype and paratype locations from the following areas: Enfield, Lincoln, and Portland, ME; Hamilton, and Mer Bleue, ON; Georgeville, Knowiton, and Lanoroie QC; Baddeck, NS. This defines, in part, the range of borealis as determined by the Chermocks. Masters (1968) describes the range as “ Maine and Quebec, into the Maritime Provinces – and interestingly, also in western Wisconsin and Minnesota …separated from the nominate subspecies by a sharp cline.”

Literature Treatment 1941-1968

Clark (1951) interestingly, dropped use of the trinomial name schausi in The Butterflies of

Virginia and simply applied the species name phaëton .

Klots (1951) recognized both subspecies phaeton and borealis, but noted: “These poorly differentiated subspecies are really statistical gradations in a cline.”

Tietz (1952) lists E. phaeton at species rank for Pennsylvania, with schausi as a synonym.

Furguson (1953) recognized Nova Scotia populations as E. phaeton borealis .

Mather & Mather (1958) list E. phaëton phaëton for Mississippi.

Forbes (1960) recognized both ssp. phaëton for New York and borealis as the northern race.

dos Passos (1964) listed subspecies phaeton and borealis.

The following authors also treated phaeton at species level only, for various states and regions: Kimball & Jones (1943); Macy & Shepard (1941); Moore (1960), Ehrlich & Ehrlich (1961); Shapiro (1966).