The winged/smooth sumac grows wild around here, and I've never found a caterpillar on it. I always look, because it has the reputation for being a host plant, but I never find any.
Sherry

Prairie Flameleaf Sumac & Fragrant Sumac are listed as a host plant for both the Banded Hairstreak & Red-Banded Hairstreak...not sure what others are host plants.
I have a start of 'Flameleaf' but not sure which species it is...there are 2 listed as Flameleaf Sumac.

Here is a link that might be useful: Fragrant Sumac Info

WOW... tall order.

In this country just off the top of my head... besides all the Geometridae, Noctuidae, Pyralidae and other nondescripts:

Spilosoma virginica and Lophocampa caryae

Hemileuca neumoegeni & chinatiensis
Saturnia walterorum & mendocino
Hyalophora cecropia, columbia and euryalus
Samia cynthia
Eacles imperialis and oslari
Actias luna
Citheronia splendens and regalis

Celastrina argiolus and Calycopis cecrops

Probably more not coming to mind now.

Livestock was most likely found using:
Rhus trilobata, glabra, microphyllia, typhina or aromatica

Larry

Your comment about common names suggests that once again I mention that this is exactly why I do not use common names. They are often localized, and all too often the same common name is used for more than one species (as is the case for many of the species of Rhus).
L.

Ladobe, could you list the common names of the butterflies you've seen on those species of rhus (I'll stop using common names lol)??

The only one I have memorized is 'actias luna', which is the luna moth if I'm not mistaken.

I don't think anything on Larry's list is a butterfly.

Some of the species that Larry posted also double as the common name most people know. You pointed out "luna." Cecropia, columbia, splendens, and cynthia are also there. And then imperialis equals imperial while regalis equals regal. I think that covers the easily translated ones.

The only thing I've raised on sumac was a couple regals on "Tiger Eye" staghorn sumac last year.

When reading Larry's posts, I just refer to Google or Wikipedia. I know hundreds of scientific names for plants, but not very many yet for leps, birds, etc. Slowly branching out.

Common names are really confusing for plants - red milkweed can refer to three different asclepias species - A. rubra, A. incarnata, and sometimes A. curassavica. How about black eyed susans? Many people have no idea what species of Rudbeckia they're talking about.

Learning a language is supposed to be excellent for maintaining brain power during aging. Becoming fluent in the language is not necessary - it's the effort of learning that keeps the brain agile.

I've acquired an ability for Latin names of flora, but not all butterflies and moths. Sphingid names spring to mind easily, but forget the others. I mean, come on, how much Latin can the brain repository of a single, old female hold?

I was hoping to see a Catocala on the list. I would love to find some of those.

BTW, I think that report on NPIN is in error about the Banded Hairsteak using Sumac. If you follow the link to BAMONA for info on the Banded, only Oaks, Hickory, and Walnut are listed as LFPs. The only butterfly I am aware of that uses Sumac, is the Red-Banded Hairstreak, and they are usually found in the leaf litter at the base of the plant/shrub, because they consume the dead leaves. I grow Rhus aromatica, but keep forgetting to check them - not that I could even FIND them in leaf litter for Pete's sake!

Susan

Here is a link that might be useful: Banded Hairsteak

KC - Lycaenidae are Rhopalocera (butterflies), and I listed two of them.

Ladies... once you understand the roots of Latin it matters not whether for flora or fauna. At least when you do learn a taxonomic assignment, what you are referring to will be clear and exact instead of muddled with various common names that seldom point to subspecies. Even any of the "old" taxonomy I use that have been reasigned since I was still activly doing leps will still point to the new assignment and the exact same bug.

Susan - BAMONA is only a simple guide, and one with lots of errors and ommissions. I personally know that Opler and Stanford do know better because I supplied a lot of the data to them. Pretty typical though of anything that only goes to species level - they are far too abridged and often leave off even well known data, including proven host plants.

Larry

I stand corrected - my bad. Further research indicates the use of various Rhus species as indicated for Satyrium calanus.

Thank you, Larry, for pointing this out so that I was inspired to look into it more in-depth.

Susan

My bad, Larry. I missed Celastrina and Calycopis in your list.