Danum Valley - July 2013

[Psyche]

Post 50.

Allotinus sarrastes.
HW postdiscal spot 6 (lunule) in line with spots 2 - 5, marginal spots sharply black & white; FW postdiscal band broken.

TL Seow

[Glorious Begum]

Dr Seow, One more help from Danum. Thanks

[Psyche]

Post 52.

It should be Psolos fuligo.
This species have the FW basal costal area (between the forward margin(costa) & the cell ) widened due to the strong convexity of the FW costa basally.
The colour is also right.

TL Seow

[Glorious Begum]

Thank again Dr Seow.

[Psyche]

After seeing a good example of Arhopala kurzi in the Panti thread, I realised I had fail to double-check along the key further up,by ignoring the position of spot 4.
Anyway this Arhopala (tentative ID hypomuta ) was in the back of my mind as not being right.

Post 3.
Arhopala Danum 1 A. similis correct.
Arhopala Danum 2 A. epimuta correct.
Arhopala Danum 3 FW spot 4 distinctly shifted out; orange tip antenna.

Post 8 LD 3 below FW spot 4 barely shifted out; antennal tip orange.



Following key line 55, 59, 63, 71, 77, 82, 84, 86, 87, 90/91
This is either A. muta or moorei .
Note the FW is raised high & spot 2 can be seen staggered (in echelon) with spot 3.
Arhopala Danum 3 is the same species. (The dislocation of FW spot 4 is quite variable from none to distinct.)

The difference between these 2 species are very slight in Borneo as stated in C&P4.

Note the A muta male below have the orange tip antenna (probably fresh)
Note variable dislocation of FW spot 4 in all examples. Spots 2 & 3 are variably staggered.

http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...iMFUpUnAC1.jpg

http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...iMFUpUnAC1.jpg

TL Seow

[Painted Jezebel]

I, myself, was not altogether happy with A. hypomuta for those photos, particularly as I had a true A. hypomuta from there, including the spot at the base of space 6. I can see that, whilst I did not go wrong at 46, as I originally suspected, I did go wrong at 56!

However, could it be Arhopala alica, which has been recorded from Danum before? The key at No. 78 leaves a certain amount of doubt regarding that species. A. muta has been recorded there but not A. moorei.

[Psyche]

I, myself, was not altogether happy with A. hypomuta for those photos, particularly as I had a true A. hypomuta from there, including the spot at the base of space 6. I can see that, whilst I did not go wrong at 46, as I originally suspected, I did go wrong at 56!

However, could it be Arhopala alica, which has been recorded from Danum before? The key at No. 78 leaves a certain amount of doubt regarding that species. A. muta has been recorded there but not A. moorei.

You can safely discount A. alica.
Evan's description states the underside markings are faint & ill-defined.
http://www.archive.org/stream/bullet...ge/95/mode/1up
The FW spots are almost obsolete particularly the lower ones.
http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...caFUpUnAC1.jpg

The separation of A. muta & moorei is based on the upperside.
I am only inclined towards moorei because all examples seen have FW spots 2 & 3 separate & staggered, while in muta the two spots may be partially in line.
It is certainly not good enough for a definite confirmation.
I would probabaly leave it as muta with a query on the possibility of moorei.

TL Seow

PS. It is stated that A. hypomuta from Sumatra & Borneo usually lack the HW space 6 basal spot.
However, it can be readily differentiated because the HW is strongly toothed at vein 2 as well as at vein 1b.

[Painted Jezebel]

Thank you. I have now done what I should have done ages ago, that is bookmark the wikipedia site!