Journal of Threatened Taxa |
www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 April 2022 | 14(4): 20908–20914
ISSN 0974-7907
(Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7327.14.4.20908-20914
#7327 | Received 10
April 2021 | Final received 24 January 2022 | Finally accepted 19 March 2022
A report on the butterfly
(Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) diversity of the Upper
Ganga River Ramsar site in Uttar Pradesh, India
Kritish De 1, Keshav Kumar
2, Amar Paul Singh 3, Virendra Prasad Uniyal
4 & Syed Ainul Hussain 5
1–5 Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun, Uttarakhand 248001, India.
1 kritish.de@gmail.com
(corresponding author), 2 keshavkumarju99@gmail.com, 3 amarpaulsingh4@gmail.com,
4 uniyalvp@wii.gov.in, 5 ainul.hussain@gmail.com
Editor: Monsoon J. Gogoi,
Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai, India. Date
of publication: 26 April 2022 (online & print)
Citation: De, K., K. Kumar, A.P. Singh,
V.P. Uniyal & S.A. Hussain (2022). A report on the butterfly
(Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) diversity of the Upper
Ganga River Ramsar site in Uttar Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 14(4): 20908–20914. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7327.14.4.20908-20914
Copyright: © De et al. 2022. Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and
distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: This work is funded by the
National Mission for Clean Ganga, Ministry of Jal Shakti, Department of Water
Resources, River development and Ganga Rejuvenation, Government of India (Grant
No. B-02/2015-16/1259/NMCG-WIIPROPOSAL).
Competing interests: The authors
declare no competing interests.
Acknowledgements: Authors are thankful to the
National Mission for Clean Ganga, Ministry of Jal Shakti, Department of Water
Resources, River development and Ganga Rejuvenation, Government of India for
sponsoring the work under the project “Biodiversity conservation and Ganga
Rejuvenation”. Authors express gratitude to the director and dean, Wildlife
Institute of India for their administrative support for the study. Authors
acknowledge the Environment, Forest and Climate Change Department, Government
of Uttar Pradesh for necessary support during fieldwork.
Abstract: This study provides a primary
inventory of the butterfly diversity of the Upper Ganga River Ramsar site in Uttar Pradesh, India. The study was carried
out in two phases, first in March 2019 and then in November 2019. A total of 44
species of butterflies belonging to 34 genera and five families were seen in
the area. The species observed in the study site belonged to the families Hesperiidae (4 genera, 4 species), Lycaenidae
(4 genera, 4 species), Nymphalidae (18 genera, 24
species), Papilionidae (2 genera, 4 species), and Pieridae (6 genera, 8 species). Three of these species are
legally protected under various schedules of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act
(1972).
Keywords: Hesperiidae, Lycaenidae,
Nymphalidae, Papilionidae, Pieridae, scheduled species, wetland.
There are a total of 42 wetlands
in India covering a total of 1,081,438 ha of the country’s geographic surface
area that have been recognised as Ramsar sites (Ramsar Sites Information Service 2021). Since the life
cycle of a terrestrial pollinator insect is not dependent on the aquatic
ecosystem in most cases, it is assumed that their diversity in wetlands and
riparian areas will always be low, but Begosh et al.
(2020) observed that there was little difference in abundance and richness of pollinators
between uplands and wetlands. However, there have been only a few studies on
the butterfly diversity of Indian Ramsar sites. Trigunayat & Singh (1998) reported 35 butterfly species
in Keoladeo National Park, Rajasthan and Palot & Soniya (2000; 2001)
reported 40 species under seven families. Chowdhury & Soren (2011) reported
the presence of 74 species of butterflies under six families from East Calcutta
Wetlands, Kolkata. Thakur et al. (2010) reported the presence of 50 species of
butterflies under eight families from the Ropar wetland, Punjab. Following
that, Sharma et al. (2014) and Narender (2017) observed Elymnias
hypermnestra and Megisba
malaya in the Ropar wetland. Sarath
et al. (2017) reported the presence of 50 species of butterflies under eight
families from Kole Wetlands, Kerala. So far, no
studies have been conducted to document the diversity of butterflies in the
Upper Ganga River Ramsar site. The current study was
carried out in order to create a primary inventory of butterflies of the Upper
Ganga River Ramsar site.
Materials and Methods
The study was carried out first
in March 2019 and then again in November 2019 along an 85-km stretch of the
Ganga River in Uttar Pradesh, from Brijghat to Narora (Figure 1). This section of the river was designated
as a Ramsar site in 2005 (Ramsar
site no. 1574). It is India’s only Ramsar site in the
lotic (river) wetland category (Murthy et al. 2013). This stretch is shallow
with deep water pools that are home to many conservation-worthy species such as
Gangetic River Dolphins, Gharials, crocodiles, six species of turtles, otters,
82 species of fish, and hundreds of bird species (Ramsar
Sites Information Service 2021). Agriculture is the most important land use in
this region (Prasad et al. 2021). A total of 14 study sites were selected at
5-km intervals along the left bank of the river. A 100-m stretch was chosen at
each site to record butterfly species. Sampling was conducted at each study
site between 0930 h and 1330 h.
The opportunistic sampling method
was used to visually record the species with binoculars. Butterflies that could
not be identified in flight were captured with a butterfly net, identified, and
safely released. The butterflies were identified in the field using field
guides (Evans 1932; Wynter–Blyth, 1957; Kunte 2000; Kehimkar 2008). For further confirmation, a photograph of
the documented species was taken during the survey using a DSLR camera.
Scientific names of butterflies were followed as per Varshne
& Smetacek (2015).
Results
A total of 44 species of
butterflies belonging to 34 genera and five families (Hesperiidae,
Lycaenidae, Nymphalidae, Papilionidae, and Pieridae) were
found in the study area (Table 1). The butterflies under the family Nymphalidae was most abundant with 24 species (54.545 % of
total species) and 18 genera (52.941 % of total genera), followed by family Pieridae with eight species (18.182 % of total species) and
six genera (17.647 % of total genera), family Lycaenidae
with four species (9.091 % of total species) and four genera (11.765 % of total
genera), family Hesperiidae with four species (9.091
% of total species) and four genera (11.765 % of total genera), and family Papilionidae with four species (9.091 % of total species)
and two genera (5.882 % of total genera) (Figure 2).
Among these butterflies, three
species are listed in the schedules of the Wildlife Protection Act (WPA), 1972.
Among these three species one species: Euchrysops cnejus (Fabricius, 1798) belongs to the family Lycaenidae
and two species: Euploea mulciber (Cramer, [1777]) and Hypolimnas
misippus (Linnaeus, 1764) belong to the family Nymphalidae.
Discussion
In comparison to other ecological
elements, the terrestrial arthropod fauna of wetlands has received little
attention from researchers (Batzer & Wu 2020).
Butterflies are a major herbivore group in terrestrial ecosystems but they are
also common in riparian ecosystems because they actively use riparian habitats
for nectar and larval food, and they can be used as an indicator group for riparian
ecosystem assessment (An & Choi 2021).
Since butterflies are pollinators
of their nectar plants as well as indicators of the health and quality of their
host plants (Tiple et al. 2006) and the ecosystem as
a whole, exploration of butterfly fauna is important in identifying and
preserving potential habitats under threat. The presence of the Upper Ganga
River Ramsar site, a wetland of international
significance and India’s only riverine Ramsar site,
it is practically equivalent to the presence of a ‘spring in a desert’. The
river Ganga experiences different anthropogenic dangers throughout its course
causing habitat degradation, which makes the preservation of a Ramsar site even more critical for species survival that
cause the natural habitat of several aquatic and riparian biota to decline,
however this region secures them.
Despite its immense ecological
importance, the entomofauna of the Upper Ganga River Ramsar
site is poorly documented. From this area, De et al. (2021) reported presence
of 29 species of aquatic insects, including three species of Coleoptera, four species of Hemiptera, and 22 species of
Odonata. For the first time, this study found 44 species of butterflies from 34
genera and five families in this area. Because the butterfly fauna of Indian Ramsar wetlands is largely unknown, the findings of this
study contribute to our understanding of butterfly biodiversity in them.
The current list of butterfly
species is non–exhaustive, and further detailed studies encompassing all
seasons, variety of host and nectar plants, and other influential factors is
recommended for creating favourable environments to sustain butterfly diversity
in this wetland ecosystems.
Table 1. List of butterflies
reported from the Upper Ganga River Ramsar site.
|
Family |
Scientific
name |
Authority |
Common name |
WPA status |
|
Hesperiidae |
Matapa aria |
(Moore,
[1866]) |
Common
Branded Redeye |
|
|
Hesperiidae |
Parnara sp. |
|
|
|
|
Hesperiidae |
Pelopidas sp. |
|
|
|
|
Hesperiidae |
Udaspes folus |
(Cramer,
[1775]) |
Grass Demon |
|
|
Lycaenidae |
Euchrysops cnejus |
(Fabricius, 1798) |
Gram Blue |
Schedule II
(Part II) |
|
Lycaenidae |
Chilades lajus |
(Stoll,
[1780]) |
Lime Blue |
|
|
Lycaenidae |
Tarucus balkanica nigra |
Bethune-Baker,
[1918] |
Black-spotted
Pierrot |
|
|
Lycaenidae |
Zizeeria karsandra |
(Moore,
1865) |
Dark Grass
Blue |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Acraea terpsicore |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Tawny Coster |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Ariadne merione |
(Cramer,
[1777]) |
Common
Castor |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Cupha erymanthis |
(Drury,
[1773]) |
Rustic |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Cyrestis thyodamas |
Doyère, [1840] |
Map
Butterfly |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Danaus chrysippus |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Plain Tiger |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Danaus genutia |
(Cramer,
[1779]) |
Striped
Tiger |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Euploea mulciber |
(Cramer,
[1777]) |
Striped
Blue Crow |
Schedule IV |
|
Nymphalidae |
Hypolimnas bolina |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Great Eggfly |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Hypolimnas misippus |
(Linnaeus,
1764) |
Danaid Eggfly |
Schedule II
(Part II) |
|
Nymphalidae |
Junonia almana |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Peacock
Pansy |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Junonia atlites |
(Linnaeus,
1763) |
Grey Pansy |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Junonia iphita |
(Cramer,
[1779]) |
Chocolate
Pansy |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Junonia lemonias |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Lemon Pansy |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Junonia orithya |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Blue Pansy |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Kaniska canace |
(Linnaeus,
1763) |
Blue
Admiral |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Libythea myrrha |
Godart, 1819 |
Club Beak |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Melanitis leda |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Common
Evening Brown |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Mycalesis sp. |
|
|
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Neptis soma |
Moore,
1858 |
Creamy Sailer |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Parantica aglea |
(Stoll,
[1782]) |
Glassy
Tiger |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Phalanta phalantha |
(Drury,
[1773]) |
Common
Leopard |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Symbrenthia lilaea |
(Hewitson, 1864) |
Common
Jester |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Vanessa cardui |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Painted
Lady |
|
|
Nymphalidae |
Ypthima huebneri |
Kirby, 1871 |
Common
Four-ring |
|
|
Papilionidae |
Pachliopta aristolochiae |
(Fabricius, 1775) |
Common Rose |
|
|
Papilionidae |
Papilio demoleus |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Lime
Swallowtail |
|
|
Papilionidae |
Papilio polymnestor |
Cramer,
1775 |
Blue Mormon |
|
|
Papilionidae |
Papilio polytes |
Linnaeus,
1758 |
Common
Mormon |
|
|
Pieridae |
Cepora nerissa |
(Fabricius, 1775) |
Common Gull |
|
|
Pieridae |
Catopsilia pyranthe |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Mottled
Emigrant |
|
|
Pieridae |
Delias eucharis |
(Drury, 1773) |
Common
Jezebel |
|
|
Pieridae |
Ixias marianne |
(Cramer,
[1779]) |
White
Orange Tip |
|
|
Pieridae |
Ixias
pyrene |
(Linnaeus,
1764) |
Yellow
Orange Tip |
|
|
Pieridae |
Pareronia hippia |
(Fabricius, 1787) |
Indian
Wanderer |
|
|
Pieridae |
Pieris brassicae |
(Linnaeus,
1758) |
Large
Cabbage White |
|
|
Pieridae |
Pieris canidia |
Sparrman, 1768 |
Asian
Cabbage White |
|
For figures &
images - - click here
References
An, J.S.
& S.W. Choi (2021). Butterflies as an indicator group of riparian ecosystem assessment. Journal
of Asia-Pacific Entomology 24(1): 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2020.12.017
Batzer, D.P. & H. Wu (2020). Ecology of terrestrial
arthropods in freshwater wetlands. Annual Review of Entomology 65:
101–119. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-011019-024902
Begosh, A., L.M. Smith, S.T. McMurry
& J.P. Harris (2020). Influence of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and playa wetlands
on pollinator communities in the Southern High Plains, USA. Journal of
Environmental Management 256: 109910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109910
Chowdhury, S.
& R. Soren (2011). Butterfly (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) Fauna of
East Calcutta Wetlands, West Bengal, India. Check List 7(6): 700. https://doi.org/10.15560/10960
De, K., A.
Sarkar, K. Singh, V.P. Uniyal, J.A. Johnson &
S.A. Hussain (2021). Diversity of aquatic insects and biomonitoring of water quality in the
upper Ganga River, a Ramsar site: a preliminary
assessment. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(13): 20011–20018. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5458.13.13.20011-20018
Evans, W.H.
(1932). The
Identification of Indian Butterflies. Bombay Natural
History Society, Bombay,
India, 302 pp.
Kehimkar, I. (2008). The Book of Indian
Butterflies. Bombay Natural History Society and Oxford University Press,
New Delhi, 497 pp.
Kunte, K. (2000). India - A lifescape:
Butterflies of peninsular India. Universities Press (India) Privet Limited,
Hyderabad, 254 pp.
Murthy,
T.V.R., J.G. Patel, S. Panigrahy & J.S. Parihar
(Eds.) (2013). National Wetland Atlas: Wetlands of International Importance under Ramsar Convention, SAC/EPSA/ABHG/NWIA/ATLAS/38/2013. Space Applications Centre
(ISRO), Ahmedabad, 230 pp.
Narender, S.
(2017). Sighting of Megisbamalaya (Horsfield)
(Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) at Ropar Wetland, Punjab,
India. Journal of Insect Science 30(1): 84–86.
Palot, M.J. & V.P. Soniya (2000). Preliminary report on the butterflies of Keoladeo National
Park, Bharatpur, Rajasthan, India. Zoos’ Print
Journal 15(6): 287–288. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.zpj.15.6.287-8
Palot, M.J. & V.P. Soniya (2001). Additions to the Butterflies of Keoladeo
National Park, Bharatpur, Rajasthan, India. Zoos’
Print Journal 16(5): 495–495. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.zpj.16.5.495
Prasad, S.,
R. Saluja, V. Joshi, & J.K. Garg (2021). Riverine landscape dynamics of
the Upper Ganga River (Haridwar-Narora), India. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment 193(2): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-08868-8
Ramsar Sites Information Service
(2021). Annotated
List of Wetlands of International Importance: India.
https://rsis.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/rsiswp_search/exports/Ramsar-Sites-annotated-summary-India.pdf?1617983966.
Accessed 9 April 2021
Sarath, S., E.R. Sreekumar & P.O. Nameer (2017). Butterflies of the Kole
Wetlands, a Ramsar Site in Kerala, India. Journal
of Threatened Taxa 9(5): 10208–10215. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3513.9.5.10208-10215
Sharma, N.,
P. Kumar & P.C. Tak (2014). Occurrence of Elymnias hypermnestra undularis (Drury) (Lepidoptera: Satyridae)
at Ropar wetland, Punjab, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 6(2):
5499–5500. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.o3190.5499-500
Thakur, M.S.,
H.S. Mehta & V.K. Mattu (2010). Check list of butterflies
(Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) of Ropar wetland and its
environs, Punjab, India. Journal of Entomological Research 34(1): 85–94.
Tiple, A.D., V.P. Deshmukh &
R.L.H. Dennis (2006). Factors influencing nectar plant resource visits by butterflies on a
university campus: implications for conservation. Nota Lepidopteralogica
28: 213–224.
Trigunayat, M.M. & N.P. Singh (1998). Checklist of butterfly fauna of Keoladeo National Park, Bharatpur
(Rajasthan). Cheetal 37(3–4): 48–51.
Varshney,
R.K. & P. Smetacek (2015). A Synoptic Catalogue of the
Butterflies of India. Butterfly Research Centre, Bhimtal and Indinov Publishing, New Delhi, 261 pp.
Wynter-Blyth,
M.A. (1957). Butterflies
of the Indian Region. Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay, 523 pp.