Deilephila
genus of moths
The genus Deilephila is part of the family Sphingidae, the hawk-moths or sphinxes. The genus was erected by Jakob Heinrich Laspeyres in 1809. It consists of a small number of Palearctic species most of which have common names involving the phrase "elephant hawk moth". They include the elephant hawk moth, Deilephila elpenor; the small elephant hawk moth (D. porcellus) and the Chitral elephant hawk moth (D. rivularis). The oleander hawk moth is sometimes classified in this genus as D. nerii, but sometimes treated in genus Daphnis.
The adults are quite similar to those of the related and larger genus Hyles. However their eyelashes are much more distinct, and the numerous spines on their abdomens are less strongly chitinized. They lay pale glossy green eggs. The larvae are not typical of hawk moth caterpillars, with the horn on the terminal segment being less pronounced than usual, and absent in some species. The head and thorax segments can be retracted into the first and second segments of the abdomen, which then appear enlarged and display eyespots.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Deilephila” is genus of moths. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Deilephila, genus and moths, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “genus of moths” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 18, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q138270. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1809.
Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Deilephila”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Deilephila primary sources, Deilephila archive and Deilephila research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Deilephila”?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Deilephila” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.