Papilio mechowi & Papilio gallienus

[africaone]

the true is not complicate.

- the verso HW margin of gallienus is black and well marked (separated from base and discal area light brown)
- the same area in mechowi is of the same color as the rest of the wing except nervures and internervures that are blackened.

In mean, yellow HW band is more regular and broad in gallienus than in mechowi (not a 100 % character but reliable for most), and HW shape is more rounded in gallienus.

The two species doesn't live excatly together. in Eastern RDC, in Kivu mountains mechowi is dominant and in lowland rain forest it is gallienus being dominant.

androconial scales on male FW is on both species and FW yellow band is very much variable, not a good character. It is usual that Hanckok publish such b... infos. He did the same in other groups of African butterflies.

[africaone]

These are the two “uncertain” gallienus from Column 2 that you requested pictures of. First each showing the surface as in the drawer and in the next picture the opposite surface.
As presented in drawer.JPG
Both reversed.JPG

first is gallienus, second is mechowi

[adamcotton]

androconial scales on male FW is on both species and FW yellow band is very much variable, not a good character. It is usual that Hanckok publish such b... infos. He did the same in other groups of African butterflies.

I did not post the Hancock text because it is accurate, but because Tom, and other readers may not have seen it. I had noticed that both species have androconial scales on the male forewing.

Perhaps this is one of the publications Tom referred to when he wrote

I'm also fairly certain that most literature which describe the species get certain characteristics wrong (though it seems not the same ones).

Adam.

[Cabintom]

apologies if the res is not high enough but location wise RDC up to females, then Cameroon, then RCA

It's tougher with the lo-res, but it looks to me that you've got the boxes well organized. I'd peg everything as gallienus, except for the last box (last 2 images) which are mechowi.

I've DM'd you about the shared folder.

[Cabintom]

These are the two “uncertain” gallienus from Column 2 that you requested pictures of. First each showing the surface as in the drawer and in the next picture the opposite surface.
As presented in drawer.JPG
Both reversed.JPG

first is gallienus, second is mechowi

Ce n'est pas compliqué ? (It's not complicated?)
The ventral HW of that first specimen is "the same color as the rest of the wing except nervures and internervures that are blackened" = mechowi
Additionally, I believe gallienus would be rare (if at all present) at that locality (Mapimbe, Kivu which actually in Mambasa Territoy, Ituri).

[Cabintom]

androconial scales on male FW is on both species and FW yellow band is very much variable, not a good character. It is usual that Hanckok publish such b... infos. He did the same in other groups of African butterflies.

I did not post the Hancock text because it is accurate, but because Tom, and other readers may not have seen it. I had noticed that both species have androconial scales on the male forewing.

Perhaps this is one of the publications Tom referred to when he wrote

I'm also fairly certain that most literature which describe the species get certain characteristics wrong (though it seems not the same ones).

Adam.

Thanks Adam. I had found Hancock's paper on ResearchGate.

Here's a look at what I was referring to:

Larsen (Butterflies of West Africa) wrote "P. gallienus has the hindwing distinctly angled at space 2"
This is the case in mechowi not gallienus (gallienus has a more rounded HW). Additionally, (I'm going out on a limb since I can't judge the androconia or ventral surface) his figure for gallienus looks a whole lot more like mechowi to me.

Berger (Papillons du Zaire) wrote (I'll translate directly) "The yellow tridentate spots in spaces 2, 3 (and 4) of the anterior wings of gallienus are characteristic and are never observed in mechowi."
But, many specimens of mechowi do in fact have "tridentate" spots. (even his figure of male mechowi has spots closely approaching what I assume is meant by "tridentate")

D'Abrera repeats Hancock's assessement (I don't know if it's actually a "repeat", but they both state mechowi lacks androconial patches, which is clearly false.) They also both point to the outer/leading edge of the FW discal spots being diffuse/blurred in gallienus but "sharply defined"/"in precise contrast" in mechowi. It's perhaps a bit subjective, but I've seen mechowi which are a bit "fuzzy", so I'm not convinced this characteristic holds up.

Then there's the matter of the "bi-coloured" HW in gallienus. I agree that most of the time this is a good characteristic, but there are gallienus with "mechowi-like" HWs (lighter, or featuring more of a gradient), and there are mechowi featuring HWs which are a relatively dark distally.

[africaone]

Yes Tom, not so complicated ....
litterature is full of confusion and complicated but the field situation seems clearer.
I also had some difficulties in the past to find the answer (because of litterature), it seems now the situation is clearer at least the better existing for the congolese ones. I am now busy with the other parts of Africa and the close species attached to them.
Sometimes mechowi are less or more dark and gallienus less or more light but it seems that the hw marginal dark fused always with nervural and internervural black stripes in gallienus and never in machowi despite there are more less marked. It is a usual variation in papilionidae.
We have yet spoke about that but the Papilionidae of Africa are clearly to be revised as many "species" are not clearly defined or recognised. We just solved the problem of the "bromius" for which I had a suspicion of bad nomenclature.
New infos are coming ....

[Cabintom]

We have yet spoke about that but the Papilionidae of Africa are clearly to be revised as many "species" are not clearly defined or recognised. We just solved the problem of the "bromius" for which I had a suspicion of bad nomenclature.
New infos are coming

I'm looking forward to it!

[mcheki]

Outside of those 2 specimens, looking at the first 4 specimens of Col. 1 again, and I'm far less certain they are gallienus than before. If it's not too much trouble, could you post pics of these as well?

Here are pics of both sides of the four specimens in Column 1 that you listed.

DSC00651.JPG (679.33 KiB) Viewed 920 times

DSC00654.JPG (574.65 KiB) Viewed 920 times

[mcheki]

Col. 3, Specimens 1 & 2.: I was sure these were gallienus (based on the FW discal band), but the location makes that more than improbable. (Now that I look at it again, the shape of the HW of #2 is that of mechowi). Could I see dorsal/ventral pics of these too?

Pictures of the two specimens from Column 3. Again, both sides shown.

DSC00656.JPG (777.57 KiB) Viewed 915 times

DSC00658.JPG (428.21 KiB) Viewed 915 times

[mcheki]

Col. 4, specimen 10. I don't know what to say about this one, but if it's from Kalinzu Forest it's not going to be gallienus like I thought. Can I get a photo of the dorsal surface? (This may be a "stick in the spokes" of my hypothesis...)

Column 4 Specimen 10 Both sides of this specimen.

DSC00659.JPG (724.04 KiB) Viewed 915 times

DSC00660 - Copy.JPG (714.05 KiB) Viewed 915 times

[Cabintom]

Outside of those 2 specimens, looking at the first 4 specimens of Col. 1 again, and I'm far less certain they are gallienus than before. If it's not too much trouble, could you post pics of these as well?

Here are pics of both sides of the four specimens in Column 1 that you listed.
DSC00651.JPG
DSC00654.JPG

Ok, those are definitely all mechowi. The HW both dorsally & ventrally make it clear.
The dorsal FW of #1 looks awfully like gallienus at a glance (the same can be said of #2), but the discal spots are relatively well separated and it seems the androconia isn't very extensive (though it's tough to tell from pictures).

[Cabintom]

Col. 3, Specimens 1 & 2.: I was sure these were gallienus (based on the FW discal band), but the location makes that more than improbable. (Now that I look at it again, the shape of the HW of #2 is that of mechowi). Could I see dorsal/ventral pics of these too?

Pictures of the two specimens from Column 3. Again, both sides shown.

DSC00656.JPG
DSC00658.JPG

Once again, these 2 are mechowi. The HW shape and markings make that evident.
The dorsal FW discal bands on both specimens look a lot like gallienus though (minus the long costal spot), but as @africaone pointed out the FW discal bands aren't a reliable character.

I'm curious though, the dorsal image makes it seem as though the androconia of the left specimen extends from the discal band to the cell, Is it really that extensive? (If so it seems pretty extreme for mechowi).

[Cabintom]

Col. 4, specimen 10. I don't know what to say about this one, but if it's from Kalinzu Forest it's not going to be gallienus like I thought. Can I get a photo of the dorsal surface? (This may be a "stick in the spokes" of my hypothesis...)

Column 4 Specimen 10 Both sides of this specimen.

DSC00659.JPG
DSC00660 - Copy.JPG

Ok, long FW costal spot points to mechowi along with the brown ventral HW. The HW shape (fairly rounded) and the marginal spot in S2 S3 not being clearly smaller than it's neighbours are more gallienus-like (though dorsally the spot in S2 S3 is clearly smaller than the one in S3 S4). In the end, with the location taken into account (and the series of specimens from that location), this must be mechowi.

I'm referring to that marginal spot (even though I have yet to see any authors make mention of it) because in almost all mechowi I've seen (including the vast majority of the ones posted here) the marginal spot in space 2 3 is clearly smaller than those at the ends of space 1b 2 and space 3 4 (which are often slightly elongated).
In gallienus, the marginal S2 S3 spot is practically the same size as it's neighbours (and often slightly bigger than the one in S1b S2).

This character has held true for the vast majority of males & females that I've seen. (This specimen being a rare exception.)

[MAC]

Just asking, but is the specimen from Kalinzu fst a male or a female ? And is it not mechowi whitnalli?

[Cabintom]

Just asking, but is the specimen from Kalinzu fst a male or a female ? And is it not mechowi whitnalli?

Looks like a female (no claspers!).
The nominate is found in the W. Ugandan forests, while whitnalli is said to be central & east Ugandan. What the exact delineation is between the two, I'm not sure. whitnalli has, on average, more developed marginal spots (but some nominate ssp. specimens are equally well developed).

[MAC]

Thought it was, so would you agree that it’s whitnalli or do you still feel it’s not ?

[Cabintom]

Thought it was, so would you agree that it’s whitnalli or do you still feel it’s not ?

I lean towards the nominate. First, Kalinzu is in western Uganda. Second, "true" whitnalli have those noticeably wide spots in the FW discal band, and longer HW marginal spots. For the specimen in question, those spots aren't out of the normal scope of variance found in the nominate.
Furthermore, another user provided me with images of specimens from Uganda. A few are also from Kalinzu and are clearly nominate.

[Cabintom]

What do you think? I'm open to suggestions.



*EDIT: I've updated the the text in the image to provide more clarity. I had been following the numbering system for veins & spaces from Larsen's "Butterflies of West Africa", but it seems this is a non-standard system for the HW. (Thanks Adam for pointing out the confusion this may have been causing.)
I'll go back and edit previous posts.

[Chuck]

Tom, I can't speak to it scientifically, but I think it's fabulous you've done this.