Sabah, Malaysia - ID requests

Hi Dr Seow,

Went on a trip to Sabah recently and I require some help with the following IDs. Only managed these shots and did not get the dorsals for most of them. Was wondering if an ID is still possible with just the undersides, but if not that would be totally understandable. Thank you!

1. Arhopala sp. The markings are quite faded, but it did not seem like a very worn or aged individual.
Attachment 28258
iNaturalist link for better quality: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160875636

2. Curetis sp.
Attachment 28259
iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160876432

3a. Allotinus sp.
Attachment 28260
iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160707895

3b. Allotinus sp.
Attachment 28261
iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160707721

4. Miletus sp.
Attachment 28262
iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160707926

5. Mycalesis sp. anapita/patiana? Read the C&P5 keys but seems like dorsals are needed to differentiate the two, unfortunately did not get any.
Attachment 28263
iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160708308

6. Symbrenthia sp. I read that there is a black and white Symbrenthia that is unique to the Crocker Range region. This individual was very worn.
Attachment 28264
iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160895258

7. Hesperiinae. Not even sure which genus this belongs to, but the size was notably quite large, bigger than most similar looking Hesperiinae in Singapore, but smaller than Erionota sp.
Attachment 28265
iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160708222

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160875636

1. Arhopala probably muta or moorei. Correction: Likely to be A. metamuta
Attachment 28266
Amphimuta group.
HW with postdiscal spots 5 , 6 & 7 in echelon, spot 6 nearer spot 5 than the cellend bar.
FW postdiscal spots in an arc.

A. amphimuta & major.(include A. alicia, zylda & stubbsi.)
Postdiscal spots smaller & more spaced out.
HW spot 1b ( V ) partially dislocated from the postdiscal band.

A. metamuta, muta & moorei.
Postdiscal spots larger, HW spot 6 nearer to the cellend bar.
V spot fully dislocated from the postdiscal band.
A. muta & moorei.
FW spot 2 & 3 not in line, staggered.

A. meatmuta: FW spot 2 & 3 in line obliquely.

A. muta
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Un_604_AC1.jpg
A. metamuta.
https://thaibutterflies.com/wp-conte...metamuta-1.jpg

It is hard to make out FW spots 2 & 3.

PS. The lighter brown ground colour & the shape of the metallic green patches match that of A. metamuta.
See the images in Borneo Lycaenids by Otsuka.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc4f/81950001.html
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc4f/81930020.html
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc4f/81940010.html

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/160876432

2. Curetis felderi. male.
There appear to be only three species in Borneo, namely C. santana, felderi, & C. dentata.

C. felderi.
Labial palps not spotted red or orange.
FW with the orange extending close to the margin at the tornus (lower corner)in the male.
The tear at the tornus shows orange scales.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc3/84080001.html
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc3/84050010.html
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc3/84060010.html

3 a Allotinus horsfieldi male.
Ground colour light buff marked with light ochreous brown.
HW postdiscal spot 6 under spot 7.
https://a4.pbase.com/o6/25/686825/1/...onleogoron.jpg

3b Allotinus unicolor female.

HW spot 6 set well inside of spot 5 & 7.

4. Miletus boisduvali.male.

The FW is raised high enough so that the cellend bar is almost fully exposed.
There is no white shading at all .
The males of similar species , M. biggsii, gaesa, gopara & drucei have some degree of white shading just outside the cellend bar.

5. Mycalesis anapita.
Very similar.
FW with both discal bands diverging at the costa.
FW with usually three subapical spots.

M. anapita. FW outer discal band not darken at upper third.
HW submarginal band at most about 1.5 X width of the marginal band.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/sat/40600001.html
http://www.samuibutterflies.com/expe...alesisanapita/
https://www.jamiun.com/tag/mycalesis-anapita/
https://wingscales.com/Nymphalidae/M...napita-anapita

M. patiana.
FW outer discal band often kinked & darken at upper third.
HW submarginal band 2X that of the marginal band.
http://www.samuibutterflies.com/expe...alesispatiana/
https://alchetron.com/cdn/mycalesis-...esize-750.jpeg

Bornean endemic. M. pitana.
FW both bands parallel.
FW with usually 5 submarginal spots.
https://www.jamiun.com/mydosama-pita...u-bush-orange/

6. Synbrenthia hypatia female.
The female is black & white.

This is called the Intricate Jester.
Unfortunately it gets confused with S. intricata, a Sulawesi endemic.

Male.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/126169531
Female.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/131335244

The continental female is orange.

The Sulawesi endemic.
https://uk.inaturalist.org/taxa/6260...thia-intricata

7. Pithauria marsenamale.

Pithauria are recognised by the orange tip antenna & sharp FWs.
P. marsena is the one with distinct white spots on the HW.
https://thaibutterflies.com/Butterfl...auria-marsena/


TL Seow: Cheers.

Thank you for all the IDs Dr Seow!

Hi Dr Seow, would also like to seek your opinion on a couple of butterflies taken on the same trip.

1. Prosotas sp. Am inclined to P. bhutea
Attachment 28268

2. Chersonesia sp. (1)
Attachment 28269

2. Chersonesia sp. (2) This appears to be similar to the one above, but almost twice it's size.
Attachment 28270

Thanks in advance!

Edited to correct the genus.

Definitely not Cyrestis for #2 and #3. These Maplets are all from the Chersonesia ​genus.

Thanks for the correction Mr Khew. Have edited the post.

Post 11.

1. Prosotas bhutea.

Three species are very similar in the field.

Prosotas bhutea.
FW midcell band not extending into space 1b.
Likewise the postdiscal band is almost always without any spot in space 1b.
Postdiscal spots with more rounded margins.
Marginal & submarginal spots are usually equally poorly defined.
HW orange ring not defined in black.
Attachment 28271
Below images which the FW is raised enough to show no extension of the mid cell band.
https://www.ifoundbutterflies.org/si...f7e96046-1.jpg
https://www.ifoundbutterflies.org/si...f9c4ec33-1.jpg
Thailand.
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1906/...24c8f1fb_c.jpg
Sabah.
https://www.jamiun.com/prosotas-bhutea-tambunanensis/

Prosotas pia.
FW midcell band extend into space 1b.
HW submarginal spots weak & faded more than the marginal spots.
https://www.ifoundbutterflies.org/si...unte_ai937.jpg
https://www.ifoundbutterflies.org/si...0f81cc09-2.jpg
https://www.jamiun.com/prosotas-pia-...ined-lineblue/


Prosotas nora.
FW midcell band extend into space 1b.
All markings well-defined .
Marginal & submarginal spots equally strong.
https://www.butterflycircle.com/chec...imon%20Sng.jpg

Post 11.
2 & 3.

Yes these are Chersonesia species.

Both are C. intermedia. The size is very variable in this species.

Three species have the postdiscal band single, ie not with multiple lines or margins.

C. risa have the postdiscal ban narrow, defined, & all bands with straight margins.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherso..._Meghalaya.jpg


C. rahria.
FW submarginal fascia undulate & broad.
FW apex crossed by a curved line.
https://thaibutterflies.com/Butterfl...onesia-rahria/


C. intermedia.
FW submarginal band undulate.
FW apex not cross by a curved line.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/beauti...n/photostream/
https://www.ifoundbutterflies.org/si...46793b-1_0.jpg


TL Seow: Cheers.

Thank you Dr Seow! Much appreciated.

Hi Dr Seow,

Just returned from another trip to Sabah and have some IDs I need help with, mostly of Hesperiinae.

1. Chersonesia sp:

a. Size was small. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166385435
Attachment 28272

b. Size was bigger. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166385370
Attachment 28273
Size comparison between the two, the smaller one is the individual shown in 1a.
Attachment 28295

c. Size was small. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166553421
Attachment 28274

2. Curetis species. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166551744
Attachment 28275

3. Quedara species? iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166765940
Attachment 28276
Attachment 28277

4. Notocrypta paralysos? iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166766530
Attachment 28278

5. Halpe sp. maybe ormenes? iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166996957
Attachment 28279
Attachment 28280

6. Koruthaialos sp. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166998366
Attachment 28281

7. Isma sp? Unfortunately only got this one shot before it flew away. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166552814
Attachment 28282

8. Erionota/Gangara sp? Size was very large. Ventrals shot by my friend.
Attachment 28283
Attachment 28284

9. Unknown Hesperiinae shot by my friend.
Attachment 28285

10. Choaspes sp. Not sure if C.subcaudatus or C.plateni. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166766261
Attachment 28286
Attachment 28287

11. Celaenorrhinus species:
a. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/166996364
Attachment 28289

b. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/167152323
Attachment 28290

12. Tagiades sp. maybe ultra? Shot by my friend
Attachment 28291

Continued

Part 2, just left with some Euploea sp and a Prosotas sp.

13. Euploea sp. All were of large size.

a. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/167327464
Attachment 28292

b. iNaturalist link: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/167153690
Attachment 28293

c. Shot by my friend.
Attachment 28294

14. Prosotas bhutea? Can't really tell for certain if the spot in space 1b is present, but the FW post-discals are certainly more rounded like in P.bhutea.
Attachment 28296
Attachment 28297
Attachment 28298

Post 17.

a. Chersonesia intermedia.
FW apex with a single black dot. HW inner two black-edged band same width as the postdiscal band.

b & c.
Chersonesia rahria.
FW apex with 2 black spots forming a curved cross band.
HW inner two bands narrower than postdiscal band.

Post 17 no 2.
Curetis tagalica.
Postdiscal band parallel to termen. No black dots.
Legs banded black.
Postdiscal band may be narrow or broad.

C. regula is very similar but in Borneo band seem to be narrow ?always.
The outer margins on the HW band is more regular.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc3/84110010.html
http://www.jamiun.com/curetis-tagali...thern-sunbeam/
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc3/84100001.html

Post 17.

3. Likely male Quedara monteithi.
Wings are unmarked; labial palps bulging. N other match seem possible.


4. Notocrypta clavata female.
UnF white band extend broadly to the costa margin.
The white spot in space 4 is sometimes present, & is not diagnostic of N. paralysos.
https://thaibutterflies.com/Butterfl...rypta-clavata/

Post 17.

5. Halpe zema.
The band is yellowish & the outer margin have deep incisions.
https://thaibutterflies.com/Butterflies/halpe-zema/

Halpe ormenes.
The band is white & the incisions are smaller.
https://www.butterflycircle.com/chec...Bene%20Tay.jpg



6. Koruthailos sindu.female.
The females of the two are very similar.
Both have the orange band broad & reaching the costa .(The male rubecla have a narrow band not reaching the costa.)

K. sindu. 3rd sement of labial palp short ,like a button.
Female.
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-riMYGNwuH...0/DSC_0194.JPG

K. rubecula female. Palpus 3rd segment long.
http://www.jamiun.com/category/macro...banded-velvet/

Post 17.

No 7. Isma bononiamale.
HW with a series of hyaline spots some long in the male.
Underside pale ochreous, abdomen whitish & dark bands.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/91990001.html
https://thaibutterflies.com/Butterflies/isma-bononia/


No. 8 CORRECTION: Both pix are of Hidari doesoena.
1st pic Hidari irava.
The sharper FW & the white dot in the HW cell.
https://butterflycircle.blogspot.com...uary-2019.html

2nd pic is a different species unknown
The large orange-yellow spots does not match any species.



9. Acerbas species . Correction : Probably not Acerbas or Unkana as white band seem to extend across both wings.CORRECTION 2: Acerbas martini
The large white UnH white band is characteristic.
Three Bornean species very similar.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/92510001.html
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/92500001.html
Acerbas selta Bornean endemic.

Post 17.

10 a Choaspes stigmatus.(Formerly under C. plateni.) Correction: Choaspes subcaudatus.
The black bar in HW space 1b, within the fold does not extend to near the margin.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/90300020.html
https://thaibutterflies.com/Butterfl...pes-stigmatus/

b, if it is certain the same individual then it is C. stigmatus.
If not certain then probably another species.
C. subcaudatus.
Black bar within the fold long extending to near the margin.
It is sometimes visible near the inner margin.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/90330010.html
https://wingscales.com/Hesperiidae/C...atus-crawfurdi

Post 17.

11. Celaenorrhinus putra.
C. putra & leucocera are rather similar but C. leucocera is not found in Borneo.
The FW white band does not reach the costal margin.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/90480010.html


12. Tagiades ultra.
FW lacks a spot in space 3.
HW marginal spots large & regular.
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qO-SYyCXb...t_Sunny_01.jpg

Thank you Dr Seow for all the IDs so far, just to clarify:

No. 8 both are the same butterfly, just that my friend had a clearer underside shot compared to mine. Could it be Gangara sanguinnocculus? The size was big enough that its definitely not possible to be H.irava.

No. 9 perhaps the resolution or angle of the uploaded picture is unclear, but when I zoomed in on the original shot, the white band is only on the HW, so I think most likely it is a Acerbas sp.

No. 10 Both are certainly the same individual.

Post 18.

The forms of Euploea in Borneo tend to have reduced spotting.

13. a & b Euoloea camaralzeman.
Large size with long FWs, & small spots mainly on the FW.
Kubah.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BXTkI8B-o...2BDSC_7582.jpg

Compare Singapore example.
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bsNgjRN0n...alayancrow.jpg


c. Euploea mulciber.
FW bluntly truncate; HW with at least one or thin streak in the discal area.
India.
https://indiabiodiversity.org/files-...lciber/210.jpg
Singapore.
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kQVbdQw4O...t_Sunny_03.jpg


14. Prosotas bhutea.
The 2nd pic shows the FW midcell band not extending below the cell.



TL Seow: Cheers.

[QUOTE=LJK1410;136885]Thank you Dr Seow for all the IDs so far, just to clarify:

No. 8 both are the same butterfly, just that my friend had a clearer underside shot compared to mine. Could it be Gangara sanguinnocculus? The size was big enough that its definitely not possible to be H.irava.

No. 9 perhaps the resolution or angle of the uploaded picture is unclear, but when I zoomed in on the original shot, the white band is only on the HW, so I think most likely it is a Acerbas sp.

I cant see how 8 a & b can be the same individual.
For example there is a subapical spot that cannot be seen in a.

The upperside spots does not match G. sanguinocculus.

The spots a FW cellspot, a spot in space 2 & 3 & space 1b . Also the subapical spot is not found in Gangara.
The number of spots match that of Hidari but the main spots seem way too large.
Also the underside HW white dot is quite diagnostic of Hidari irava since no other skipper seem to have it.


9 could also be unkana myrheca.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/92460001.html


TL Seow: Cheers.

The upperside of 8 b matched this species but I have no idea if this is found in Borneo.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/92480001.html


TL Seow: Cheers.

Confirmation.

Hidari doesoena is recorded from Borneo.
The underside HW also has white dot as in H. irava.
So, undoubtedly the upperside & underside match H. doesoena.
Fleming's book shows both sides clearly H190.

TL Seow: Cheers.

Thank you so much Dr Seow!

Correction.

Post 17.
no 9. Acerbas martini.

The HW white band is strongly angled on its outer margin.
It it wider than the dark brown border generally.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/92510001.html

Unkana mytheca have a broad white band with straight margins.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/92460001.html

Acerbas anthea have straighter margin & a distinct 'leak' of the white to the termen in the middle.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/hes/92500001.html

Acsrbas selta have both the white band & the dark brown border of equal width.
You can download the pdf on 'Bornean Endemic Butterflies'.
This shows all the Bornean endemics.

TL Seow: Cheers.

Correction
Post 17.

No 10. Choaspes subcaudatus.

The long black bar in the fold of space 1b never extend to the inner margin of HW in both species.(The ovate orange part.)
It is always in the fold .In pic 2, the bit of black is actually in the fold.

The two species can be separated thus.

Choaspes subcaudatus.
At rest HW lobe fols into a sharp point.
The visible black 'spot' large.
https://wingscales.com/Hesperiidae/C...atus-crawfurdi
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3Lgc-FbLt...0/DSC_0272.JPG
https://thaibutterflies.com/wp-conte...caudatus-1.jpg

Choaspes stigmatus.
HW lobe folds into a broad 'tail'. Black 'spot' small.
https://thaibutterflies.com/wp-conte...-stigmatus.jpg
https://thaibutterflies.com/wp-conte...tigmatus-1.jpg
https://farm66.static.flickr.com/655...ae3b5c1b3a.jpg


TL Seow :Cheers.

Hi Dr Seow,

There was this Cheritra sp. that I shot in Sabah and I've read briefly that in Borneo it should be C.pallida which is a synonym to C.freja ssp pallida. Are these two separate species? I couldn't find much more information for C.pallida so it is a little confusing.

Attachment 28346

Post 34.

It is a matter of opinion whether it is Cheritra freja pallida or Cheritra pallida.
As Cheritra freja pallida it is merely a subspecies (geograpical race) pallida of the widespread C. freja.
As Cheritra pallida it is raised to full species status ,& distinct from C. freja (which no longer exist in Borneo).

Species designation is matter of peer acceptance.
https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/C...daFUpUnAC1.jpg
https://www.flickr.com/photos/76033499@N00/32970587676

The latest Compilation on Bornean endemics 2021 does not list C. pallida.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...ic_Butterflies

The status may have change by now.
You can use either name.

As an example , consider Tanaecia iapis.
The nominate subspecies from Java is so different that most authors separate it from the other ssp in Sundaland.
Thus Tanaecia iapis iapis Java
https://www.jungledragon.com/image/1...pis_iapis.html
https://www.jungledragon.com/image/1...pis_iapis.html

All the other subspecies are relegated to Tanaecia cocytina.
The species here would be T. cocytina puseda.
The genus change to Cynitia is a separate matter.
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lim2/721070010.html



TL Seow: Cheers.