|
|
Post by papilio28570 on Mar 25, 2013 16:00:35 GMT -8
Is Actias philippinica a valid species or simply a subspecies of A. maenas? What is the disctinction between them. They look the same to me although I have seen heavily marked males of A. philippinica but others that looked identical to maenas. What am I missing?
|
|
|
|
Post by billoehlke on Mar 26, 2013 2:28:06 GMT -8
The following five species/subspecies are currently regarded as valid and distinct
Actias maenas Doubleday, 1847, Borneo, S. E. Asia, Burma = Myanmar,
Thailand: widespread: Chiang Mai, Kanchanaburi, Nakhon Nayok, to Hala Bala Wildlife Research Station in extreme southern Thailand (6 degrees north latitude);
Laos;
Vietnam: Tam Dao;
Borneo,
north-central India
and other areas of South-east Asia, including
the Greater Sunda Islands and
southeastern China: Yunnan, where the species is quite variable.
It is recorded for Nepal: June-July; and also in
southern central Bhutan: near Zhemgang, June, 650m; and in
Actias maenas diana Maassen, [1872] Malaysia
Actias maenas saja Van Eecke, 1913 Java, Bali, Sumatra; Indonesia
Actias philippinica philippinaca Nässig & Treadaway, 1997, Philippines, outside of Palawan
Actias philippinica bulbosa Nässig & Treadaway, 1997, Philippines, Palawan only
The differences between them are subtle and may not be apparent in outward appearance, but would lie in differences in genitalia or DNA barcoding or larvae. Such is the case with many
similar species. If you showed me an image of two different specimens from two different locales, but did not provide the locale, I doubt I would be able to make an accurate determination. The specimens from the various locales, however, are consistent in their differences from each other based on geography.
I am just completing upgrades on WLSS to Actias genus, based on 2013 Entomo-Satsphingia journal
Bill Oehlke
|
|
