Help with ID please

[MinuteMaid]

Hi, need help with some ID.

Is this A. athada?

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-01atPM093301.png

what about this? It's very small...for an Arhopala. Maybe dwarf? Mistook it for a Rapala at first.

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-01atPM093310.png


thanks!

[MinuteMaid]

one more for ID, thanks :)

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-01atPM093237.png

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-01atPM093246.png

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-01atPM093229.png

[Psyche]

You certainly have a couple of interesting Arhopalas that adds to the confusion,

1. have all the features of A. sublustris except that spot 6 on the hindwing ( the one that is astride the 2 others below it) is not quite the usual shape for this species.
If this individual is about the size of A. major it is A. sublustris.
If it is much larger,(1 & a half or more ) than it is A. athada.
See discussion here.
http://www.butterflycircle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12887

2 is a member of the similar group (cleander group , subgroup alea).
Spot 6 on the hindwing is quadrate; the forewing postdiscal band's topmost spot is not shifted inwards as in 1.
This indicates this should be A. normani.
A. normani is usually only a little bit smaller than sublustris.
Compare sizes, C&P4 plate 51/39 A. sublustris & Pl 51/41 A. normani.
( C&P4 corrigenda indicates typo error & fig 43 is A. phanda not A normani.)

The crow is a female Malayan Crow Euploea camaralzeman.

TL Seow:cheers:

[MinuteMaid]

You certainly have a couple of interesting Arhopalas that adds to the confusion,

1. have all the features of A. sublustris except that spot 6 on the hindwing ( the one that is astride the 2 others below it) is not quite the usual shape for this species.
If this individual is about the size of A. major it is A. sublustris.
If it is much larger,(1 & a half or more ) than it is A. athada.
See discussion here.
http://www.butterflycircle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12887

2 is a member of the similar group (cleander group , subgroup alea).
Spot 6 on the hindwing is quadrate; the forewing postdiscal band's topmost spot is not shifted inwards as in 1.
This indicates this should be A. normani.
A. normani is usually only a little bit smaller than sublustris.
Compare sizes, C&P4 plate 51/39 A. sublustris & Pl 51/41 A. normani.
( C&P4 corrigenda indicates typo error & fig 43 is A. phanda not A normani.)

The crow is a female Malayan Crow Euploea camaralzeman.

TL Seow:cheers:

Thank you very much Seow, appreciate your help very much.

I have a whole bunch of Arhopalas that I can never ID and always just dump them as A. athada if it looks similar. for Arhopala #1, it is slightly smaller than athada (if i ID-ed athada correctly in the first place; see below). Arhopala #2 is smaller than #1 indeed. thanks for the ID on the Euploea as well. Can you know which subspecies this is based on the markings?

Is this A. athada then?

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/v.png

[Psyche]

Thank you very much Seow, appreciate your help very much.

I have a whole bunch of Arhopalas that I can never ID and always just dump them as A. athada if it looks similar. for Arhopala #1, it is slightly smaller than athada (if i ID-ed athada correctly in the first place; see below). Arhopala #2 is smaller than #1 indeed. thanks for the ID on the Euploea as well. Can you know which subspecies this is based on the markings?

Is this A. athada then?

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/v.png

Yes. You have a typical Arhopala athada.
I guess 1 is A. sublustris which according to C&P4 is common in Singapore.
As for the Malayan Crow. Not sure if it is the local subspecies malayica which the male had recently been redicovered in Singapore.
The spots are a bit reduced and small for ssp. malayica, but this could be just normal variation.

TL Seow:cheers:

[MinuteMaid]

Yes. You have a typical Arhopala athada.
I guess 1 is A. sublustris which according to C&P4 is common in Singapore.
As for the Malayan Crow. Not sure if it is the local subspecies malayica which the male had recently been redicovered in Singapore.
The spots are a bit reduced and small for ssp. malayica, but this could be just normal variation.

TL Seow:cheers:

thanks for the ID!

I asked about the crow because this wasn't shot in the wild. I shot this in the butterfly aviary in Sentosa last year, but chucked it into the Un-ID files. Since i'm digging some of it out now, i thought i'd post it just to ask.

There's another ssp for this crow, paraclaudina. i don't know if this is malayica or the former since it wasn't shot in the wild. but thanks for ID-ing, at least i know what species it is now. :-)

[Psyche]

thanks for the ID!

I asked about the crow because this wasn't shot in the wild. I shot this in the butterfly aviary in Sentosa last year, but chucked it into the Un-ID files. Since i'm digging some of it out now, i thought i'd post it just to ask.

There's another ssp for this crow, paraclaudina. i don't know if this is malayica or the former since it wasn't shot in the wild. but thanks for ID-ing, at least i know what species it is now. :-)

Subspecies paraclaudina is only found in Langkawi & occassionally in the mountains of peninsular Malaysia.

TL Seow:cheers:

[MinuteMaid]

Subspecies paraclaudina is only found in Langkawi & occassionally in the mountains of peninsular Malaysia.

TL Seow:cheers:

thanks for the info!

[Psyche]

I did a check on the underside of 1, & both C&P4's plate 67/10 and Fleming (Butterflies of West Malaysia & Singapore) 's L211B shows examples of A. sublustris which have spot 6 on the hindwing broader as in this individual, so this is considered normal as well.

As for 2, a 2nd possibility is A. phanda, another smallish species, though the description of the shape of hindwing spot 6 with its outer edge convex, and the presence of a costal spot in space 10 on the forewing point to this being A. normani.

Note both species are new to the Checklist, and require vouchered specimens for proper verification.

TL Seow:cheers:

[MinuteMaid]

I did a check on the underside of 1, & both C&P4's plate 67/10 and Fleming (Butterflies of West Malaysia & Singapore) 's L211B shows examples of A. sublustris which have spot 6 on the hindwing broader as in this individual, so this is considered normal as well.

As for 2, a 2nd possibility is A. phanda, another smallish species, though the description of the shape of hindwing spot 6 with its outer edge convex, and the presence of a costal spot in space 10 on the forewing point to this being A. normani.

Note both species are new to the Checklist, and require vouchered specimens for proper verification.

TL Seow:cheers:

Thanks again v much Seow.

Here's another un-id Arhopala and a Jamides. is it J. pura?

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-02atPM054938.png

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-02atPM054928.png

[Psyche]

Post 10.

1. is Arhopala pseudomuta.
The small spot above the central cell-spot is missing (which sometimes happened). The rest of the pattern is typical.

(After going thru another request, I realised you thought this looks somewhat like A. alitaeus with its more rounded spots & purplish tone. Possibly there is a hybrid element in this one. The colour tone may be due to wb imbalance. A. pseudomuta sometimes have a slight purplish tone. However, if the striae of the hindwing submarginal band are weak & faded compared to those around the spots(not always true) it is A. pseudomuta even if it has some hybrid blood. Addendum: If it does look like the typical A. alitaeus you shot before, leave it as A. pseudomuta. )

2. I have a strong feeling you do have a male Jamides pura here.
Not only are the hindwing striae perfectly aligned (as in most examples of J. pura) but the white striae are very broad.
Here is a local male J. celeno for comparison.
http://www.butterflycircle.com/checklist%20V2/CI/mugshots/Jamides%20celeno%20aelianus/148%20Jamides%20celeno%20aelianus%20(Common%20Caer ulean)%20%20Bobby%20Mun.jpg
To confirm I need to see the outer margin of the forewing, whether there is a black border or not. (J. pura have no black border.)

I have been trying to correlate whether all with thick white striae are J. pura, but no pic of upperside have been posted.

TL Seow:cheers:

[MinuteMaid]

Post 10.

1. is Arhopala pseudomuta.
The small spot above the central cell-spot is missing (which sometimes happened). The rest of the pattern is typical.

(After going thru another request, I realised you thought this looks somewhat like A. alitaeus with its more rounded spots & purplish tone. Possibly there is a hybrid element in this one. The colour tone may be due to wb imbalance. A. pseudomuta sometimes have a slight purplish tone. However, if the striae of the hindwing submarginal band are weak & faded compared to those around the spots(not always true) it is A. pseudomuta even if it has some hybrid blood. Addendum: If it does look like the typical A. alitaeus you shot before, leave it as A. pseudomuta. )

2. I have a strong feeling you do have a male Jamides pura here.
Not only are the hindwing striae perfectly aligned (as in most examples of J. pura) but the white striae are very broad.
Here is a local male J. celeno for comparison.
http://www.butterflycircle.com/checklist%20V2/CI/mugshots/Jamides%20celeno%20aelianus/148%20Jamides%20celeno%20aelianus%20(Common%20Caer ulean)%20%20Bobby%20Mun.jpg
To confirm I need to see the outer margin of the forewing, whether there is a black border or not. (J. pura have no black border.)

I have been trying to correlate whether all with thick white striae are J. pura, but no pic of upperside have been posted.

TL Seow:cheers:

Hi Dr. Seow,

here's an upperside shot (blur) of that un-id Jamides. It has a very slight black edge at the forewing. so does this mean it is J. celeno?

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-03atPM035826.png

Here's a mating pair of the same sp. i think?

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-03atPM035945.png

[MinuteMaid]

Just on a separate note, are these also J. celeno?

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-03atPM035917.png

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-03atPM035908.png

[Psyche]

The upperside is that of J.celeno. Here, J pura have the black border a mere thread.

What a disappointment! It also means it is impossible to ID J. pura from the underside, perfect alignment & thick striae are useless.

All your pics are more typical J. celeno.

TL Seow:cheers:

[MinuteMaid]

The upperside is that of J.celeno. Here, J pura have the black border a mere thread.

What a disappointment! It also means it is impossible to ID J. pura from the underside, perfect alignment & thick striae are useless.

All your pics are more typical J. celeno.

TL Seow:cheers:

thanks for the help!

At least now we know :)

the last picture, the one puddling on the sand with the faded wings. It looked a little bit different to me because the 'V" marking on the hindwing inbetween the tornus and the dorsum looked unfamiliar to me. looks like J. celeno is highly variable!!

[Psyche]

:grin2:


http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-02atPM054928.png





http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab169/rustysocute123/Screenshot2012-08-03atPM035826.png



Hi Lemon,
Is there a possibility that the 2 pix here are of 2 different butterflies.
I ask this because in looking at valid examples of J. pura two features in combination define J. pura on the underside.

1. Perfect or near perfect alignment of the white striae on the hindwing.
2. The tornal black spot is narrowed at the side with 2 white bars (rectangular-shaped.)

Here is J. pura from Brunei showing the same features.
http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:JamidesPuraTenusMFUpUnAC1.jpg

Also see C&P4's plate 36/18 of J. pura underside.

The male of our local form of J. pura do not have a black border.
If there is a possibility of doubt or mixup this would explain why the upperside & underside are at odds.
It also means you very likely have J. pura.

TL Seow:cheers: