Results 1 to 10 of 70

Thread: Some ARHOPALA from my trips that I don't know or I'm too lazy to ID

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Upper Changi
    Posts
    2,873

    Default

    Arhopala vihara vihara from the lack of any costal spots on the forewing and the rounded spot in space 6 on the hindwing
    Aaron Soh

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    6,864

    Default

    Concur it is A. vihara.
    A set specimen for comparison.
    https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/A...raMUpUnAC1.jpg


    TL Seow: Cheers.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Koh Phangan Thailand
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Thank you!!!

    The last two unidentified, this time from Thale Ban National Park, close to the Malayan border of Perlis, an interesting and not well known area in both sides of the border.



    Arhopala sp.
    - Medium size




    Arhopala sp.
    - Large size

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Upper Changi
    Posts
    2,873

    Default

    First one is Arhopala silhetensis adorea from the shape of the spot in space 6

    Second is an alea subgroup species, probably A. phaenops sandakani
    Aaron Soh

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    6,864

    Default

    Post 27. sizes in error.

    1. Arhopala silhetensis is right.

    2, should be Arhopala selta.Male ;short palpi & truncated abdominal end.
    This pic is in perfect profile & the FW termen is very rounded.
    Only two species in the alea subgroup have the termen rounded, the other being A. aroa which have the submarginal & postdiscal band well-spaced out.
    In addition A. selta have HW spot 6 widely or distinctly overlapping the cellend bar.
    The FW postdiscal band also tends to be wide.
    https://www.thaibutterflies.com/wp-c...a-1080x675.jpg
    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arhopa...e:Arhopala.jpg

    In A. phaenops, FW termen is straigth in the middle part. HW spot 6 do not or just overlap cellend bar.
    FW shape is distorted here .Upperside narrow border indicate it is A. phaenops. Correction :Upperside shot is not the same individual.
    https://www.thaibutterflies.com/wp-c...s-1080x675.jpg
    http://www.samuibutterflies.com/02_i...phaenops.r.jpg

    TL Seow: Cheers.
    Last edited by Psyche; 12-Sep-2017 at 06:02 PM. Reason: correction

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Koh Phangan Thailand
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    A partial upperside of the second could be of some help?



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    6,864

    Default

    Post 30.
    If this is the upperside of the individual in post 27 ,then it is a female.
    This make it very confusing.
    The upperside of the male.
    http://www.samuibutterflies.com/02_i.../upperside.jpg
    https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arhopa...9_1_Knight.png
    Male A. phaenops with narrow FW border.
    https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/A...96MUpUnAC1.jpg

    It could be either A. selta or phaenops.


    TL Seow: Cheers.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Upper Changi
    Posts
    2,873

    Default

    Based on the dorsal, it's female and best matches A. phanda phanda but the shape of spot 6 is inconsistent with what's stated in C&P4 for this species
    Aaron Soh

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us