-
5 Attachment(s)
Dear Dr Seow,
Requesting ID and clarifications regarding some Skipper shots of the Tribe Baorini from across my butterfly-photography journey!
1. Borbo cinnara?
Attachment 28398
iNaturalist: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/161603866
2. Borbo cinnara? To differentiate Borbo from Parnara, do we look at the FW subapical spot 8 (absent in local Parnara?) and arrangement of HW spots?
Attachment 28399
iNaturalist: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/178335950
3. Not too sure about this one.
Attachment 28400
iNaturalist: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/153816731
4. Baoris sp. maybe Baoris oceia?
Attachment 28401
iNaturalist: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/178335954
5. Caltoris sp. or Baoris sp.? This one seems to have faint HW spots which I've never seen before in Caltoris!
Attachment 28402
iNaturalist: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/178335953
6. Just wanted to confirm if this is Potanthus ganda! My saturation levels are in the negatives and yet it is still so orange!
iNaturalist: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/178336776
I apologize for the quality of some of the photos as they were taken with my old lens when I was just starting out! Thank you so much in advance!
Cheers,
Lumin Ong
-
1 Attachment(s)
Adding on what I think is a Parnara sp. shot by JX! Shot on 8 June 2023
7.
Attachment 28403
iNaturalist: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166431587
Thank you!
-
Post 41.
In terribly worn individual the subapical spots may be a help.
Parnara .
FW subapical spots 6 & 7 with their margins aligned. The upper spot 8 shifted out or also aligned with spot 6 & 7.
P. ganga.
https://thaibutterflies.com/wp-conte...a-1080x675.jpg
https://www.flickr.com/photos/26689187@N00/5003748713
p. bada.(spot 8 absent0.
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0I-dS-avZ...C_0330-001.JPG
Borbo cinnara.
All three subapicalspots in an arc or upper spots 7 8 more aligned.
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jMZu5Yy4Y...ederick_01.jpg
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-w--ngH74-..._flower_01.jpg
https://www.butterflycircle.com/chec..._female_01.jpg
Pelopidas mathias/agna
FW subapical spots 7 7 8 with their margins aligned. Spot 6 shifted out.
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q60220...B_DSC_0113.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...14b98478_b.jpg
1. FW subapical spots eveenly separated; Greenish body hairs; antennal clubs thick.
Likely Borbo cinnara.
2. Borbo cinnata.
No hW cellspot; thick antennal club ;fW subapical spots 7 8 in line.
3. Pelopidas agna female.
FW spots 6 & 7well separated. This indicate if spot 8 is present it will be close to spot 7 (as in Pelopidas)
There appear to be a faint white cellspot in the correct position.
4. Uniform dark brown ;antennae black suggest Baoris probably B. oceia.
5. Unknown
Fw spots suggest or baoris.
The reddish brown colour exclude Borbo or Pelopidas or Parnara.
HW "vague spots" do not match any species.
6. Female Potanthus ganda.
Potanthus ganda is normally stated to be quite reddish.
The Singapore population is likely to be mixed & variable.
typical male.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/16026310
7. Parnara probably P. bada.
Note FW subapical spots 6 & 7 in line, spot 8 is missing; thick antennal club.
HW with irregular spotting.
TL Seow:Cheers.
-
Re4vision
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/178335953
Post 41, 5.Pelopidas spp.
The three well-spaced HW spots are as in this example of female Pelopidas agna.
The three large HW spots are spot 2, 4, & 6.
The three small spots are spot 3, 5, & 7.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/178388163
The HW cellspot is missing, but this does occasionally happens.
Below, note the male from Ranong lack HW cellspot.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/93090001.html
TL Seow: Cheers.
-
-
2 Attachment(s)
Dear Dr Seow,
Requesting ID for these two skippers!
1. Potanthus trachala tytleri? FW spots 4 and 5 touching only the spikes of the adjacent spots + abdominal end black-banded. So unfortunate a Crab Spider got it before I did :-(
Attachment 28405Attachment 28406
iNaturalist:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/179335384
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/179342250
2. Baoris sp. maybe Baoris oceia male? Shot by JX.
iNaturalist: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/179335836
Thank you so much in advance!
Cheers,
Lumin Ong
-
Post 46.
1. This is a typical male Potanthus trachala.
Abdominal end banded black; FW spots 4 & 5 without overlap from the others.
Note HW band upper spot (actually in space 4 & 5) strongly shifted outwards.
2 Baoris likely B. oceia .
If abdomen is noticeably banded, it is a plus feature.
eg.
http://www.butterflycircle.com/check...ift---Khew.jpg
https://www.butterflycircle.com/chec...race%20Tan.jpg
TL Seow: Cheers.
-
5 Attachment(s)
Dear Dr Seow,
Hope you've been well! Requesting ID for this skipper found in Sungei Buloh. It has white-tipped antennae so I assume I can rule out most of the local swifts such as Caltoris and Baoris. All photos are of the same individual shot by JX and I.
Might this be Hyarotis microsticta (please correct me if it has been revised to H.microstictum!)?
Attachment 28504 Attachment 28507Attachment 28508
Thank you in advance!
Cheers,
Lumin Ong
-
Yes. This is Hyarotis microsticta.
All scientific names are written in Latin.
Latin have gender specific endings whether in noun or adjective.
The earlier European naturalists all studied Latin
Hyarotis is the ancient Greek name of a river in the Punjab ( now Ravi river.)
microsticta means small spots.... female gender.
microstictus is the male gender form.
microstictum is the plural neutral gender form.
This species was named first as Isoteinon microstictum by Wood-mason et al.
Not sure what Isoteinon meant.
When it was transferred to Hyarotis it was named as Hyarotis microsticta.
To be grammatically correct the gender of the describing adjective must match the noun.
Since Hyarotis is regarded in the male gender, the correct adjective should be microstictus.
I am simply following C&P4 in retaining the name as Hyarotis microsticta.
( Hyarotis' gender was probably uncertain then ,& thought to be female.)
Japanese entomologists who now do extensive studies do not have Latin; they simply use the first written taxonomic name without considering the gender change.
Thus they put this down as Hyarotis microstictum.
https://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/91840001.html
Here is the grammatically correct name placed at the top.
https://thaibutterflies.com/Butterfl...s-microsticta/
TL Seow: Cheers
-
