The Biology of the Translucent Jewel Caterpillar, the Nudibranch of the Forest

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Yesterday, stunning photos of a semi-translucent, gelatinous caterpillar spread quicklyacrossthe Internet—probably setting a new speed record for larvae of all kinds. Scuba instructor and amateur wildlife photographer Gerardo Aizpuru spotted the creature in early April on a mangrove tree leaf near Cancun, Mexico. He submitted his pictures to Project Noah, a user-created database of geotagged wildlife photos, where various commenters identified the species as the larva of a fuzzy orange moth called Acraga coa.

Although it's not 100 percent certain that the "jewel caterpillar" Aizpuru photographed is Acraga coa, it almost definitely belongs to the same family of moths, known as Dalceridae. Scientists have identified around 84 different species of Dalceridae moths, whose larvae are sometimes called "slug caterpillars" because they are so gooey. If you search for "Dalceridae" in Google Images, you'll see different larvae with the same roly poly bug shape and gumdrop spines, but different colors and patterns. Dalceridae larvae reminded me immediately of nudibranchs, a group of strikingly colored mollusks whose appearance is perhaps best summarized as "trippy."

Nudibranchs and many other animals—including many caterpillars—use vivid pigments to advertise their toxicity and keep predators away. But so far biologists have not figured out why some Dalceridae larvae are so colorful. Daniel Janzen, a biologist at the University of Pennsylvania, has raised Dalceridae in captivity. He says that although the larvae tend to be bright and conspicuous and spend a lot of time walking on the tops of leaves—as though they did not fear birds and other predators—he has no evidence that Dalceridae are poisonous and he knows that they do not sting, unlike some of their cousins.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Biologists do have some ideas about the function of larvae's gumdrop spines, however. The glutinous cones break off extremely easily—one can gently tweeze them off or even pull them off by accident—suggestive of the way some lizards' tails snap off in a predator's mouth. Janzen says this trick might help the larvae escape from hungry insects and birds, but researchers have not yet confirmed this. In one telling experiment, however, Marc Epstein—an insect biosystematist at the California Department of Food & Agriculture—and his colleagues placed Dalcerides ingenita larvae in glass Petri dishes and introduced a few ants (Camponotus floridanus) to each dish. Many ant species devour caterpillars and other plump grub if they get the chance. Once inside the Petri dish, the ants inspected the larvae with their antennae, but most backed off without trying to take a bite. The few ants that chomped down got their mouths temporarily stuck in the larvae's jelly coat or pulled away quickly and cleaned the gunk off their mandibles. In subsequent tests, Epstein found no evidence of toxic chemicals in the larvae's goo, suggesting that it deters ants purely because of its stickiness.

Perhaps "jewel caterpillar" is an apt name after all—you can look, but you can't touch.

Ferris Jabr is a contributing writer for Scientific American. He has also written for the New York Times Magazine, the New Yorker and Outside.

More by Ferris Jabr

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe