|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Nov 25, 2013 7:12:16 GMT -8
dynastes,
Yes, but where do your specimens come from?
Unfortunately I cannot answer your question about a monograph as I am not familiar with the literature on Stichopthalma, since I only work on Papilionidae myself.
Rich,
I saw what I think must be neumogeni from Kachin, N Burma a few years ago, and I seem to remember it was considerably smaller than other Stichopthalma species. Trouble is, the photos have no scale for Inayoshi-san to refer to. Do you have nominate louisa from S Burma or Umphang (Tak Prov., W Thailand)? There may be some Umphang specimens floating around the commercial market, as there are some local collectors there.
With regard to mathilda, the type locality is "Laos, region of Lakhon and SW Tonkin, notably around Dien-Bien-Phu" (rough translation from the original French). Oudomxay (I've been there, it's an interesting place for butterflies) is just to the west of Lakhon, and the hills from there run southwest to Nan which is near Phrae. Thus Wang Chin louisa should definitely be referable to mathilda. Inayoshi-san did say that mathilda is very variable, and that although your Wang Chin specimens look a bit different to the Oudomxay specimens they are the same subspecies.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by dynastes on Nov 25, 2013 7:56:08 GMT -8
Adam,
may be Chaing Mai 05.2012.
I'm not 100% sure of the correctness of the label information for fruhstorferi. Today I met with seller, who sold me it and I tried to find the truth. He got this Stichophtalma species over a year ago, he could not remember all the details. Now paper triangles with ""fruhstorferi"" are stored in a package with a label from insect-sale - S. louisa louisa. Thailand, Chaing Mai 05.2012.
at the same time, as I remember, he had a real Louise for selling, from insect-sale. S.louisa sold out quickly, so he could just pass fruhstorferi in the package under Louise. now he had a few fruhstorferi in paper bags. No any collecting data on it, only handwritten date - 10.04.2012 and sex icon. so that, as I understand there is no information about the true location of catching.
|
|
|
|
Post by timmsyrj on Nov 25, 2013 8:33:35 GMT -8
Adam, I don't have any nominate Louisa unfortunately, thought I had but they are from a not very reliable source, as far as data goes, it appears.
Rich
|
|
|
|
Post by timmsyrj on Nov 25, 2013 8:49:12 GMT -8
The stichopthalma from North Burma could be stichopthalma sparta just to add more confusion, looks very similar to neumogeni but apparently a two tone recto colouring unlike neumogeni and howqua, not seen any but read a description on line.
Rich
|
|
|
|
Post by misuji on Dec 2, 2013 7:25:43 GMT -8
This is Stichophthalma suffusa ，which has been raised to species status by Monastyrskii&Devyatkin，2008.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 2, 2013 10:03:47 GMT -8
I would be rather sceptical about Monastyrskii's species designations, and not just treat them as correct without further corroboration. He seems to be rather prone to splitting at the species level, without any conclusive evidence other than colour pattern. For instance he described "Chilasa imitata" as a good species based on the lack of an orange tornal spot on the hindwing, despite stating that the male genitalia are the same as epycides.
I understand some of his Stichopthalma species similarly have no difference in genitalia from other taxa.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by misuji on Dec 5, 2013 8:05:23 GMT -8
But I think this promotion can be believable because the taxon suffusa is found flying together with taxon howqua not only in mainland China but also in Northern Vietnam（with ssp iapetus）.
I have to admit that there exist no difference in male genitalia structure between these two taxa......
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Dec 5, 2013 11:59:54 GMT -8
But I think this promotion can be believable because the taxon suffusa is found flying together with taxon howqua not only in mainland China but also in Northern Vietnam（with ssp iapetus）. I have to admit that there exist no difference in male genitalia structure between these two taxa...... There are two possibilities if they are sympatric, either they are forms of the same species or they are two different species. Since there are no obvious differences in genitalia this case can only be resolved by breeding experiments or DNA analysis. Adam. |
|
|
|
Post by misuji on Dec 6, 2013 19:49:39 GMT -8
Thanks Adam，I think you are correct~
|
|
|
|
Post by timmsyrj on Jan 12, 2014 2:46:51 GMT -8
Stichopthalma neumogeni s.sp neumogeni female from Yunnan prov.   |
|
|
|
Post by timmsyrj on Jan 12, 2014 2:51:15 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by timmsyrj on Jan 12, 2014 3:03:16 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by timmsyrj on Jan 12, 2014 3:11:33 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by timmsyrj on Jan 12, 2014 3:14:06 GMT -8
An intermediate form of Stichopthalma Louisa s.sp mathilda? from wang chin, phrae. I don't have the "black Louisa" yet..   very nice red coloured spots. |
|
|
|
Post by timmsyrj on Jan 24, 2014 1:31:06 GMT -8
These are just off the boards, data Tam Dao Mt, Vinh Phuc Prov, Vietnam 1350m so should be s.sp tonkiniana but they are not as suffused in the hindwing as specimens I've seen. male. Attachment Deleted female. Attachment Deleted female. Attachment Deleted These look very similar to the specimens above from sapa mt. so could be s.sp iapetus, not sure of the distribution of iapetus or data could be wrong? according to literature I've read there are 2 stichopthalma in the tam dao mtns, fruhstorferi and tonkiniana. |
|
