-
1 Attachment(s)
Betong (Yala - Peninsular Thailand), 3 visits in April and June 2017
-
-
1 Attachment(s)
Very very similar to D. cinesoides.
We ID just for a partial upperside of the male
Attachment 24632
-
Hmm how can you tell for certain that it's male since both sexes are similar? It's only in cinesoides that they are dimorphic
-
I am also rather confused with this D. johorensis & cinesoides thing.
I have seen correct images of D. johorensis & the tornal white band is always broader & less constricted at vein 2 , 3 & 4.
Here are correct images of both species.
93 & 96 D. cinesoides : 94 & 97 D. johorensis.
http://archive.org/stream/bulletinof.../n432/mode/1up
Pix of D. johorensis in Fleming & C&P4 are exactly the same as the above link.
D. cinesoides.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc4/83150001.html
TL Seow : Cheers.
-
2 Attachment(s)
We examined the upper of both species and I can confirm the ID of the species from Betong.
Funny thing is that upperside male cinesoides is same as that of the female johorensis.
These are Drupadia cinesoides from Betong (© Satawan Atdhabhan)
Attachment 24633
and these are Drupadia johorensis from Betong mating (© Satawan Atdhabhan)
Attachment 24634
-
Post 6.
I presume the mating pair of johorensis is undoubted, ie that the pair have been caught & set or the uppersides of both sexes are seen & identical to the female johorensis.
This is important because the one on the left which looks like the female is no different from the underside of the female cinesoides above it.
If so, then the only difference is the leg band . the tibia is double black -banded in cinesoides & mostly single-banded in johorensis ,with the upper tibial band faint or missing.
TL Seow: Cheers.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyche
Post 6.
I presume the mating pair of johorensis is undoubted, ie that the pair have been caught & set or the uppersides of both sexes are seen & identical to the female johorensis.
This is important because the one on the left which looks like the female is no different than the underside of the female cinesoides above it.
I think the right one is female because females tend to have more intense orange.
That said the females of both spp. are very difficult to tell apart from field shots because they are both a similar shade of orange ventrally and how intense this orange is can be subjective. For males, the contrast between the two is quite obvious
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Angiud
We examined the upper of both species and I can confirm the ID of the species from Betong.
Funny thing is that upperside male
cinesoides is same as that of the female
johorensis.
Attachment 24633
These are
Drupadia cinesoides from Betong (
© Satawan Atdhabhan)
I think you mean "male johorensis is same as that of female cinesoides"
The ventral shots seem swapped; the paler orange one should be male, as their wing shapes also imply
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
atronox
I think the right one is female because females tend to have more intense orange.
That said the females of both spp. are very difficult to tell apart from field shots because they are both a similar shade of orange ventrally and how intense this orange is can be subjective. For males, the contrast between the two is quite obvious
I have thought so too that the left was male because the palpi 3rd segments were shorter.
TL Seow:Cheers.
