InsectNet forum

WOW !!

What a "staggering" assortment of simple magnificence !

I don't know where you get them or find them but, you sure have a good thing going !!

Outstanding holdings / such fine examples EVERY time you post these....

joachim wrote: ↑Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:26 pm wonderful ! Are they from Than Lee?

The guys name is Dang.

Trehopr1 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 4:11 pm Dave, could that VERY chocolate-brown looking specimen be a quite (melanic) aberration of something ?

Extraordinary find ....

Here is the other specimen I got from Chuck Ianni from the same locality. No date on this one either

According to Inayoshi's website at http://yutaka.it-n.jp/ama/50280001.html S. mathilda does not occur in Thailand, and he also states:

Monastyrskii,2008 treated this species as distinct species, however some authors regard it as a subspecies of louisa. The relationship and taxonomic status of louisa group including mathilda, eamesi and devyatkini are still unclear. I follow the treatment of Monastyriskii provisionally but further study is needed.

S. louisa from Phrae used to be referred to mathilda but that is not correct according to Inayoshi (see the link for ssp. siamensis above).

Adam.

Amazing variability. Thanks for sharing.

Stichiphthalma godfreyi godfreyi
Kanchanburi, Thailand
Took these pictures in 2019.
Two females & a male. Same data for all

Sticophthalma godfreyi pinratanai
Ranong,Thailand.
A pair & the underside of the female. The female of this subspecies is the largest Stichophthalma in my collection.
Data for the female is Ranong March 2001

Dave I'm loving the morphological variation! Keep them coming, this is an amazing thread.

Chuck wrote: ↑Wed Jan 25, 2023 1:08 pm Dave I'm loving the morphological variation! Keep them coming, this is an amazing thread.

Here you go Chuck. More of my Vietnamese specimens with data.
If my assumptions are right the last four are Stichophthalma devyatkini. As with all the other Vietnamese material it is pretty much guesswork though. Don't know if this puzzle will ever be solved completely.

I was thinking that the disruptive pattern on Stichophthalma would be a real bear to track in broken sunlight; looked at a couple boobtube videos and yes, it's readily apparent that they'd pull the on-off disappearing act like morphos and ulysses, but also the disruptive pattern is also confusing because it is disorienting.

I was in the locality that some of this batch were from back in 2008. Did not venture out at dusk & was only in Viet Nam for a short time so have still not seen a single Stichophthalma on the wing (did not know these species even existed back in 2008).
Unsurprised hearing they do the on off disappearing act. The multiple oceli on all four of the verso wing edges presumably help should that ploy not work.

I saw Stichophthalma flying in Laos in the daytime, I don't think they are only crepuscular.

Adam.

That's a very impressive series of Stichophthalma specimens, daveuk - many thanks for posting! I have only a single specimen of this genus in my collection, in storage and still papered, collected about 40 years ago. It's a Stichophthalma howqua (probably ssp. formosana).

livingplanet3 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 25, 2023 8:14 pm That's a very impressive series of Stichophthalma specimens, daveuk - many thanks for posting! I have only a single specimen of this genus in my collection, in storage and still papered, collected about 40 years ago. It's a Stichophthalma howqua (probably ssp. formosana).

Thanks livingplanet. Have a few more specimens from Thailand & elsewhere which I can photograph & post in this thread over the coming days. Glad you like them.
S howqua formosana is a good one to have as everything from Taiwan impossible or very hard to get now. I only have a very old & imperfect pair of that subspecies

Top picture from left to right: S howqua formosama pair (Taiwan) S howqua suffusa pair (Sichuan, China) Male S neumogeni(China) & male S sparta evansii(Burma)

Middle picture S cambodia. All specimens from Kanchanaburi Thailand

Bottom picture Top row S louisa louisa Kanchanaburi, Thailand. Bottom row S louisa siamensis Chiang Mai & Phrae,Thailand

daveuk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:17 pm Top picture from left to right: S howqua formosama pair (Taiwan) S howqua suffusa pair (Sichuan, China) Male S neumogeni(China) & male S sparta evansii(Burma)

Middle picture S cambodia. All specimens from Kanchanaburi Thailand

Bottom picture Top row S louisa louisa Kanchanaburi, Thailand. Bottom row S louisa siamensis Chiang Mai & Phrae,Thailand...

Thanks again - beautiful specimens!

daveuk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:17 pm Middle picture S cambodia. All specimens from Kanchanaburi Thailand

Perhaps the correct data is Chantaburi (similar sounding name, especially the shortened spoken Thai form "Kanburi" versus "Chanburi").

S. cambodia does not occur in Kanchanaburi, which is in WEST Thailand, it is only found in SE Thailand and SW Cambodia. Almost all specimens in collections are from Chantaburi.

See
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/ama/50250001.html

Adam.

Thanks for that Adam. Always good to have someone "in situ" to clarify the data.

adamcotton wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:55 pm

daveuk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:17 pm Middle picture S cambodia. All specimens from Kanchanaburi Thailand

Perhaps the correct data is Chantaburi (similar sounding name, especially the shortened spoken Thai form "Kanburi" versus "Chanburi").

S. cambodia does not occur in Kanchanaburi, which is in WEST Thailand, it is only found in SE Thailand and SW Cambodia. Almost all specimens in collections are from Chantaburi.

See
http://yutaka.it-n.jp/ama/50250001.html

Adam.

I've faced this issue. Presuming the data label(s) says Kanchanaburi, does one change the label? Add a corrective label?

I've had labels that I am quite certain are incorrect; and by "figuring out" the most likely location, it would make sense to "correct" the label. On the other hand, my field work has expanded the known ranges of dozens of species, some by hundreds of kilometers. I've been told "species does not occur there" yet, there I am holding a fresh specimen. And I recall at least in one case I'd "corrected" a label, only to later discover that in fact the original label was, as unlikely as it was, correct. So I no longer correct labels.

So what is the recommended data labeling action?

I can’t be certain but as far as I can see Dave’s label it says Chanthaburi on it which would be correct at the first.