Identification & Distribution:
Uroleucon hypochoeridis is a large pinkish-grey aphid with pale legs that are darkened towards the apices of the segments. The apical segment of the rostrum (RIV+V) is usually shorter than, or similar in length to, the second segment of the hind tarsus (HTII) (cf. Uroleucon cichorii
which has RIV+V longer than HTII). Abdominal hairs are placed on scleroites and the crescent-shaped antesiphuncular sclerites are prominent. The coxae are dusky or dark, darker than the basal parts of femora. The cauda is pale, usually with about 17 hairs.
Alate Uroleucon hypochoeridis (see second picture above) are similarly coloured to the apterae. Immatures are grey with a reddish-pink suffusion around the bases of the siphunculi.
The clarified slide mounts below are of adult viviparous female Uroleucon hypochoeridis : wingless, and winged.
Micrographs of clarified mounts by permission of Roger Blackman, copyright AWP all rights reserved.
The large cat's ear aphid lives on the stems of cat's ear (Hypochoeris radicata), autumn hawkbit (Leontodon autumnalis) and related species. Oviparae and alate males occur from late August to October. It is found throughout Europe.
Other aphids on same host:
- Blackman & Eastop list 24 species of aphid as feeding on cats ear (Hypochoeris radicata) worldwide, and provide formal identification keys.
Of those aphid species, Baker (2015) lists 21 as occurring in Britain:
- Blackman & Eastop list 17 species of aphid as feeding on autumn hawkbit (Leontodon autumnalis = Scorzoneroides autumnalis) worldwide, and provide formal identification keys.
Of those aphid species, Baker (2015) lists 15 as occurring in Britain:
Our particular thanks to Roger Blackman for images of his clarified slide mounts.
Whilst we make every effort to ensure that identifications are correct, we cannot absolutely warranty their accuracy. We have mostly made identifications from high resolution photos of living specimens, along with host plant identity. In the great majority of cases, identifications have been confirmed by microscopic examination of preserved specimens. We have used the keys and species accounts of Blackman & Eastop (1994) and Blackman & Eastop (2006) supplemented with Blackman (1974), Stroyan (1977), Stroyan (1984), Blackman & Eastop (1984), Heie (1980-1995), Dixon & Thieme (2007) and Blackman (2010). We fully acknowledge these authors as the source for the (summarized) taxonomic information we have presented. Any errors in identification or information are ours alone, and we would be very grateful for any corrections. For assistance on the terms used for aphid morphology we suggest the figure provided by Blackman & Eastop (2006).