Printable View
This individual is not that well marked, but appears to have the correct alignment of spots for Arhopala moorei.
Images of well-marked individuals seem rare to non-existent.
Comments on ID appreciated please.
From Ton Nga Chang WS, Songkhla, s Thailand 23 Jun 24.
Many thanks.
Attachment 28552
Most likely Arhopala amphimuta.
The smaller members of the amphimuta group are very difficult to id in fieldshots.
Attachment 28553
The larger members FW 21-23mm have UnF spot 2 & 3 in line.
UnH spot 6 is relatively small & far from the cellend bar, covering less than half the gap between spot 5 & cellend bar.
eg A. amphimuta, major, moolaiana & norda.
In A muta & moorei FW 17- 19mm, UnF spot 2 & 3 are not inline.
UnH spot 6 is larger & covers more than half the gap between spot 5 & cellend bar.
A. metamuta FW 18-19mm is in between ,with FW spot 2 & 3 in line & Unh spot 6 covering more than half the gap stated.
Examples
A. amphimuta & major.
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-J9Xmngyim...+amphimuta.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.co..._female_02.jpg
A. muta .
https://www.butterflycircle.com/chec...e-HoraceT2.jpg
A. metamuta.
https://thaibutterflies.com/wp-conte...metamuta-1.jpg
It does not seem possible to separate A. muta from moorei from the underside.
Back to your image.
https://www.butterflycircle.com/atta...2&d=1720330173
The FW is raised high enough to see spot 3 clearly (squarish).
The very edge of spot 2 can be seen & this is in line with that of spot 3.
This prove that it is a large species.
UnH spot 6 being small & far from the cellend also confirm this.
The tornal white spot is absent ( could be abraded).
The V spot is very well-formed.
The appearrance is very much Arhopala amphimuta.
https://ms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arhopa...naMUpUnAC1.jpg
TL Seow; Cheers.
Many thanks. Yes, I would agree Arhopala amphimuta looks more likely based on the descriptions and diagrams.