Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 February 2025 | 17(2): 26515–26529

 

ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)  

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8254.17.2.26515-26529

#8254 | Received 03 November 2022 | Final received 28 January 2025 | Finally accepted 05 February 2025

 

 

A study on the diversity of butterflies in selected landscapes of the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati campus, Assam, India

                                               

Uma Dutta 1, Sonali Dey 2  & Deepshikha Moran 3

 

1,2 Cell and Molecular Biology Laboratory, Department of Zoology, Cotton University, Guwahati, Assam 781001, India.

3 Department of Zoology, Dibru College, Dibrugarh, Assam 786003, India.
1 umadutta@yahoo.com (corresponding author), 2 sonalidey167@gmail.com, 3 deepshikhamoran6@gmail.com

 

 

Editor: Jatishwor Singh Irungbam, Centrum Algatech, Třeboň, Česká Republika.     Date of publication: 26 February 2025 (online & print)

 

Citation: Dutta, U., S. Dey & D. Moran (2025).  A study on the diversity of butterflies in selected landscapes of the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati campus, Assam, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 17(2): 26515–26529. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8254.17.2.26515-26529

  

Copyright: © Dutta et al. 2025. 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 research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

 

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

 

Author details: Dr. Uma Dutta—an associate professor at the Department of Zoology, Cotton University. She is the former Dean of Life Sciences and Head of the Department of Zoology, CU. Her research focuses on bio-active components in chronic disease treatment viz., cancer, diabetes cardiovascular disease as well as validation of traditional knowledge and its practices in agricultural pest control with ethnopharmacological importance. She is passionate about nature and biodiversity, especially insect, butterfly and birds. She has also published book on butterfly diversity of Cotton University campus; Sonali Dey–a UGC-JRF PhD research scholar at Department of Zoology, Cotton University; Dr. Deepshikha Moran–assistant professor, Department of Zoology, Dibru College, Dibrugarh, she has a good number of publications in journals of national and international reputes.

 

Author contributions: UD—contributed to the study design, conceptualisation, supervision, draft writing, review editing, data collection, spotting of the species and photography. SD—contributed to data collection, survey work, photography, draft preparation, figure and table preparation and bibliographic study.  DM—contributed to table and figure preparation and some part of survey work. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Uma Dutta and  edited by Sonali Dey. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

 

Acknowledgements: Authors are highly grateful to the workers and residents of IIT Guwahati campus for their help and support in finding the places in and around the institute. Authors are also thankful to Miss Bhanita Bora for her help during preparation of the article.

 

 

Abstract: A study has been carried out to find out the diversity of butterflies at the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati campus, Assam India from September 2019 to March 2022. In the present study, a total of 82 species with a total of 1,378 individuals of butterflies belonging to six families, namely, Papilionidae, Pieridae, Lycaenidae, Nymphalidae, Hesperiidae, and Riodinidae have been recorded. During the survey, the maximum number of butterflies were observed in the old E-type site and D-type site and its adjoining areas, where there are abundant flowering, host, and nectar-collecting plants and wildflowers, and a minimum number of butterflies were listed from old and new guest house site and transit campsites.  Among four study years, 2020 had the highest genera and species number followed by the year 2021. From the present study it can be concluded that despite urbanization, there is a good diversity of butterflies. Therefore, the implementation of appropriate and effective conservation methods is of utmost importance in order to protect the diversity.

 

Keywords: Conservation ecology, diversity, ecological indicator, flowering plants, Kamrup District, Lepidoptera, northeastern India, seasonal variation, species richness, urbanization.

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Butterflies act as an ecological indicator of environmental variation and are highly sensitive to disturbances and changes in habitat (Nally & Fleishman 2004). In the field of conservation ecology, butterflies are considered an umbrella species (Betrus et al. 2005). It is worth mentioning that butterfly diversity indirectly indicates plant diversity because both butterfly adults and caterpillars are highly reliable on specific host plants (Padhye et al. 2006).

In India, 1,379 butterfly species, from six different families, viz., Papilionidae, Pieridae, Lycaenidae, Riodinidae, Nymphalidae, and Hesperiidae, with 74 endemic species were observed. Among these, 1,143 species (82.9%) were identified as Oriental elements, 206 species (14.9%) as Palearctic elements, and 23 species (1.7%) as Afrotropical elements. Over two-thirds of the species were documented in the northeastern states of India (Das et al. 2023). Most of the species of order Lepidoptera indicates meta population which are exclusively phytophagous in nature (Menken et al. 2010). Northeastern India comprises eight states, viz., Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, and Tripura are one the richest biodiversity areas which supports a rich butterfly fauna (Bora & Meitei 2014). A huge variety of flowering plants, suitable habitats, topography and climates are ideal for butterfly distribution, diversity and abundance. Eastern Himalayan part as well as northeastern region of India comprises 58% of butterflies found in the Indian subcontinent and Myanmar (Evans 1932). Evans (1932) reported that about 962 species and subspecies of butterflies belonging to five taxonomic families are found in northeastern India alone.

Limited research has been carried out on the butterflies of Assam. A total of 70 species of butterflies belonging to 45 genera were documented from the Regional Research Laboratory Campus, Jorhat, Assam (Bhuyan et al. 2005). In various parts of Guwahati city, a number of studies were conducted to find out the number of butterfly species. A total of 72 species have been reported from Assam State Zoo-Cum-Botanical Garden, Guwahati (Ali & Basistha 2000). Saikia et al. (2015) provided an excellent documentation of about 18 species of butterflies from Jalukbari and Gauhati university campus, Guwahati. A survey in Nambor–Doigrung Wildlife Sanctuary, Assam, identified 224 butterfly species across 137 genera and five families, with Nymphalidae being the most dominant. A study surveyed butterfly diversity in Dangori Reserve Forest, Upper Assam, documenting 121 species across six families, with Nymphalidae being the most dominant. Significant findings include the recording of rare species such as Tanaecia julii and Lethe chandica, along with endemic species like Arhopala ganesa and Mycalesis mineus (Boruah & Das 2017). A study was conducted in Panbari Forest, Kaziranga, upper Assam, that presented a checklist of 137 skipper butterfly species (Hesperiidae) including species such as Purple Lancer Salanoemia fuscicornis, Red-vein Lancer Pyroneura niasana burmana, Pied Flat Celaenorrhinus moreana, and various species of Choaspes, Potanthus, and Halpe (Gogoi 2013).

Under this contemplated background, the present study was carried out to identify and estimate the butterfly diversity in IIT, Guwahati campus.

 

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 

Study Area

The present study was conducted on the IIT Guwahati campus in Assam, renowned as one of the most beautiful campuses in India. Located at 26.187 N and 91.691 E, the campus lies on the northern banks of the Brahmaputra River, connected to northern Guwahati’s Amingaon town, and is approximately 20 km from the city center. Spanning 700 ac (2.8 km²), the campus features undulating terrain, hillocks, and a variety of landscapes, including evergreen, semi-evergreen, and deciduous vegetation, as well as shrubs, grasslands, and wetlands interspersed with lakes.

The campus’s diverse vegetation, host plants, food plants, and nectar-rich flowers support a rich variety of reptiles, birds, mammals, insects, and, notably, many vibrant moth and butterfly species. Study sites included urban habitat areas, hilly terrains, lakes, wetlands, and specific locations such as the guest house, administrative block, and serpentile lake. The relatively undisturbed and tranquil environment of residential and non-residential areas further contributes to butterfly richness. Detailed descriptions of the selected study sites are provided in Table 1 and Image 1.

 

Survey Method

The study was conducted across various sites at IIT from September 2019 to March 2022 using the Pollard Walk method. Surveys were performed twice yearly at each site, between 0900 h and 1700 h on sunny days. Observers walked fixed transects, recording butterflies within 3–5 m. Unidentified butterflies were caught, identified using field methods and references, and  released (Yasmin et al. 2023). Identification was primarily done on-site, with photographs used for challenging cases. Data on date, location, and weather were recorded. The best time for observation and photography was early mornings, especially after rain showers, when flowering plants and nectar sources attracted the highest butterfly activity.

The identifications were done with the help of Evans (1932), and Kehimkar (2008). The WPA, 1972 status of butterflies was obtained from the database available at https://vindhyabachao.org/wildlife_guidelines/schedule_species_insects.pdf

Relative abundance is calculated by the formula:

                                           Species abundance

Species relative abundance = ––––––––––––––––– x 100

                                             Total abundance

 

 

RESULTS

 

During the survey period from September 2019 to March 2022, a total of 82 species with a total of 1,378 individuals of butterfly belonging to six families and 57 different genera were recorded from different sites of IIT, Guwahati campus. Checklist of butterfly species and their abundance in different study sites are shown in Table 2. The study analyzed the composition of butterfly families over four years (2019–2022). Nymphalidae emerged as the most dominant family, with the highest species count and abundance each year, followed by Papilionidae, Lycaenidae, Pieridae, Hesperiidae, and Riodinidae. Each family displayed variations in the number of genera, species, and individuals annually, with the details summarized in Table 3 and Figure 1. Overall, Nymphalidae consistently led in diversity and population.

The majority of butterfly species were observed on the old E-type site and the D-type site with its adjoining areas, which are rich in flowering plants, host plants, and nectar-collecting wildflowers. In 2019, out of 77 species, 19 were recorded at the old E-type site, while 14 were found at the D-type site and nearby areas. In 2020, out of 83 species, both sites recorded 17 species each. Similarly, in 2021 and 2022, out of 79 and 71 species respectively, 20 and 15 species were found at the old E-type site, while 14 and 16 species were recorded at the D-type site and its surroundings (Table 4). Figure 2 illustrates butterfly abundance over four years, showing that 2020 had the highest number of genera and species, followed by 2021.

Table 5 presents the relative abundance of butterfly species, while Table 6 and Figure 3 highlight the relative abundance of different families. The study found that in 2019, Junonia atlites had the highest relative abundance (3%), whereas Telicota linna had the lowest (0.09%). In 2020, 2021, and 2022, Papilio polytes recorded the highest relative abundance at 2.25%, 2.72%, and 3.35%, respectively. Conversely, Rapala tara, Sarangesa desahara, and Abisara neophron had the lowest relative abundance (0.15%) in 2020, while Appias galba (0.18%) and Orsotriaena medus (0.12%) showed the lowest relative abundance in 2021 and 2022, respectively. Across all four years, the family Nymphalidae consistently exhibited the highest relative abundance, while Riodinidae had the lowest (Figure 2).

During this survey, 15 butterfly species with protected status under the Schedule II (Part H with serial numbers) of The Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2022, were recorded. These include Papilio slateri, Graphium sarpedon sarpedon, Graphium eurypylus, Graphium aristeus anticrates, Cepora nadina nadina, Artipe eryx, Poritia hewitsoni, Spindasis lohita, Neptis magadha khasiana, Tanaecia lepidea, Charaxes bernardus, Melanitis zitenius, Ragadia crisilda, Parthenos sylvia gambrisius and Lethe insana (Table 2).

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

During the survey, a total of 82 species with about 1,378 individuals of butterfly belonging to six families (Papilionidae, Pieridae, Lycaenidae, Nymphalidae, Hesperiidae and Riodinidae) and 57 different genera were recorded in the study area.

Similar studies were reported by Gogoi et al. (2023) in Soraipung Range of Dehing Patkai National Park where they recorded a total of 92 butterfly species from five families, among which 13 species were classified as protected under different schedules of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 but according to Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2022, nine species among the list of 13 species are now classified as protected under Schedule I and II.

In the present investigation, a maximum number of butterflies were recorded in the year 2020 (57 genera and 63 species) and 2021 (56 genera and 79 species). This might have happened because of less human interference, disturbances and environmental pollution occurred due to COVID-19 pandemic during the year 2020 and 2021. Comparatively, a lower number of butterflies were documented in the year 2022 (51 genera and 71 species) and 2019 (53 genera and 77 species). Lower number of butterflies in 2019 may be due to restoration of day-to-day human activities in these areas.

In the present study, Nymphalidae family had the highest number and percentage of species of butterflies in all four years of study period compared with the other families. The result of the present survey is in close consortium with the findings of Ali & Basistha (2000). They documented 72 identified species of butterflies belonging to five families with the highest number of species of the Nymphalidae family from Assam State Zoo-cum-Botanical Garden, Guwahati, Assam. Furthermore, the survey of Bohra & Purkayastha (2021) of the urban landscape, of Guwahati, Assam, India, listed 249 species of butterflies belonging to six families. The Nymphalidae family was represented as dominant during the survey period. Adaptation and proper landscape management could be the reason for the high diversity of the family Nymphalidae. Another reason for the rich diversity of the family Nymphalidae might be due to their strong active flying capability and their polyphagous nature which facilitates them to cover large areas and utilize a variety of host plants (Eswaran & Pramod 2005; Janz 2005; Padhye et al. 2006).

Faunal diversity is dependent upon the habitat types, food resources and food quality. The diversity and distribution of butterfly species are also influenced by sufficient larval and adult plant resources (Ramesh et al. 2010). In the present study, the highest relative abundances of different species of butterfly family were found in old E-type and hill top sites. Even though the old E-type site is an urbanized area and has human interference, the residents of this area have transformed the environment of the place in such a way that it has become an attractive and favourable place for butterflies. In agreement with the result of the present study, different earlier studies have shown that butterfly diversity in disturbed habitats is more than in undisturbed areas (Spitzer et al.1993; Hamer et al. 1997). Hill top is the least disturbed area and the occurrence of sufficient host plants make it more favourable for butterflies. Junonia atlites was found to have the highest relative abundance in 2019 and in the years 2020, 2021 and 2022. Papilio polytes showed highest relative abundance. Both Junonia atlites and Papilio polytes are common and most frequently observed butterflies and this may happen due to their adaptation power and the presence of a large number of host plants.

Adult butterflies generally prefer forest areas with medium altitude and larvae prefer ecotones with an abundance of food plants with large leaves (Piccini et al. 2022). Therefore, to conserve this beautiful creation or Nature’s jewels, the suitable environment for the butterflies should be maintained as well as enhanced. Therefore, to restore growth of butterfly population, enough plantation should be carried out in and around the IIT Guwahati campus area. Prevention of human interventions and disturbances and also deforestation for the purpose of clearing land for buildings in the hilly arears and lake sides, by the management, will be a huge step towards the conservation of these amazing insects.

The findings of this study suggest that despite ongoing urbanization within the IIT Guwahati campus in Assam, the area still supports a thriving diversity of butterflies.  During the study period, a total of 82 butterfly species, comprising 1,378 individuals from six families and 57 genera, were documented. Among these families, Nymphalidae exhibited the highest species count and percentage, followed by Papilionidae, Lycaenidae, Pieridae, Hesperiidae, and Riodinidae, in descending order of abundance (Nymphalidae > Papilionidae > Lycaenidae > Pieridae > Hesperiidae > Riodinidae).

 

 

Table 1. Types of habitats present in different study sites of IIT campus of Guwahati, Assam.

 

Study site

Name of the study site

Habitats

1

Site 1

D type and its adjoining area

Flowering plants, urban habitat, children park

2

Site 2

New E type

Vegetation, different plants

3

Site 3

Old E type

Urban habitat, lots of plantation, flowering plants, children park

4

Site 4

F type and its adjoining area

Urban habitat, good management of naturally growing flowering plants

5

Site 5

Old and new guest house site

Urban habitat, flowering plants, vegetation

6

Site 6

Manas hostel site

Vegetation, small water body, flowering plants

7

Site 7

Hill top

Dense vegetation, different flowering plants and fruit trees

8

Site 8

Serpentile lake and its adjoining area

Grass beds, vegetation and plants, road side plantation

9

Site 9

Transit camp site

Wild flowering plants, vegetation

10

Site 10

Admin site and its adjoining area

Two lakes, vegetation

 

Table 2. Checklist of butterfly species and their abundance in different study areas.

 

Common

name

Scientific

Name

Year

Site

Status

Conservation

status, 2022

2019

2020

2021

2022

Family: Papilionidae

1

Common Mormon

Papilio polytes

4+

4+

4+

3+

Site 3, site 7, site 9

Very common

 

2

Great Mormon

Papilio memnon agenor

3+

4+

4+

3+

All sites

Common

 

3

Common lime

Papilio demoleus

3+

3+

2+

2+

Site 1 site 2, site 5

Very common

 

 

4

Common mime

Papilio clytia clytia

3+

4+

4+

3+

Site 1, site 3, site 6, site 10

Common

 

 

5

Blue-striped Mime

Papilio slateri

̶

3+

3+

2+

Site 2, site 7

Not rare

Schedule II
(Part H; No. 250)

6

Red Helen

Papilio helenus

2+

3+

3+

+

Site 1, site 8

Not rare

 

7

Yellow Helen

Papilio nephelus

4+

4+

4+

3+

Site 3, site 4, site 8,

Not rare

 

8

Common Bluebottle

Graphium sarpedon sarpedon

+

+

2+

+

Site 6, site  10

Common

Schedule II

(Part H; No. 255)

9

Fivebar Swordtail

Graphium antiphates pompilius

+

2+

3+

3+

Site 4, Site5

Not rare

 

10

Fourbar Swordtail

Graphium agetes aestes

+

2+

̶

̶

Site 1, Site 7

Rare

 

 

11

Common Jay

Graphium doson

2+

4+

3+

2+

Site 1, site 2, site 3

Not rare

 

12

Great Jay

Graphium eurypylus cheronus

2+

3+

2+

̶

Site 1, site 3

Not rare

Schedule II (Part H; No. 264)

13

Great Zebra

Graphium xenocles xenocles

2+

2+

1+

1+

site 2, site 6

Not rare

 

14

Chain Swordtail

Graphium aristeus anticrates

2+

3+

2+

̶

Site 5, site 6

Not rare

Schedule II

(Part H; No. 252)

15

Common Rose

Atrophaneuraaristolochiae

+

2+

+

+

Site 3, Site 7

Rare

 

 

16

Common Birdwing

Troides Helena cerberus

2+

3+

3+

2+

Site 1, site  3

Not rare

 

17

White Dragontail

Lamproptera curius curius

3+

3+

2+

2+

Site 5, site 6

Not rare

 

18

Great Windmill

Byasa dasarada dasarada

2+

3+

2+

2+

Site 2, site 3

Not rare

 

19

Common Banded

Awl

Hasora chromus

3+

4+

3+

2+

Site 1, site 7

Common

 

 

20

Yellow Gorgon

Meandrusa payeni evan

3+

3+

2+

2+

Site 3, Site 5

Not rare

 

Family: Pieridae

1

Common grass yellow

Eurema hacabe

3+

4+

3+

2+

Site 3, site 7, site 10

Very common

 

2

Great orangetip

Hebomoia glaucippe

3+

3+

2+

2+

Site 1, site 3

Common

 

3

Common Emigrant

Catopsilia Pomona

3+

4+

3+

3+

Site 7, site 9

Very common

 

4

Mottled emigrant

Catopsilia pyranthe

2+

3+

2+

2+

Site 3, site 7

Very common

 

5

Orange Albatross

Appias galba

+

+

+

̶

Site 4

Rare

 

 

6

Striped Albatross

Appias olferna

2+

2+

+

2+

 

Site 4

Common

 

7

Spot Puffin

Appias lalage

2+

+

̶

+

site 3, Site 5

Not rare

 

8

Lesser Gull

Cepora nadina nadina

2+

3+

3+

2+

Site 1, Site 3

Not rare

Schedule II (Part H; No. 286)

9

Redspot Jezebel

Delias descombesi

3+

4+

4+

3+

Site 1, site 5, site 7

Common

 

Family: Lycaenidae

1

Lesser grass blue

Zizina otis

3+

4+

3+

3+

Site 3, Site 5, site 10

Not rare

 

2

Forget me not

Catochrysops strabo

3+

4+

3+

2+

Site 2, site 6, site 8

Common

 

3

Zebra blue

Leptotes plinius

3+

3+

2+

2+

Site 1 site 3

Common

 

4

Yamfly

Loxura atymnus

2+

2+

2+

+

Site 1, site 3

Not rare

 

5

Assam Flash

Rapala tara

̶

+

2+

2+

Site 5

Rare

 

6

Green Flash

Artipe eryx

2+

2+

+

+

Site 7, site 8

Not rare

 

Schedule II
(Part H, No. 39)

7

Dingy Lineblue

Petrelaea dana

3+

2+

2+

+

Site 4, site 5

Common

 

8

Common Tit

Hypolycaena erylus himavantus

2+

+

+

̶

Site 6

Common

 

9

Common Gem

Poritia hewitsoni

2+

3+

2+

̶

Site1, site 9

Not rare

Schedule II (Part H, No. 23)

10

Common Lineblue

Prosotas nora nora

4+

4+

3+

2+

site 3, Site 7

common

 

11

Long-banded Silverline

Spindasis lohita

 

3+

3+

2+

3+

Site 2, Site 3

Not rare

Schedule II (Part H, No. 53)

Family: Nymphalidae

1

Leopard lacewing

Cethosia cyane

3+

2+

2+

+

Site 6, site 7

Not rare

 

2

Peacock pansy

Junonia almana

+

2+

+

̶

Site 1, site 3

Not rare

 

3

Lemon pansy

Junonia lemonias

4+

3+

2+

2+

Site 5, site 8, site 10

Very common

 

4

Grey pansy

Junonia atlites

4+

3+

3+

3+

Site 2, site 10

Very common

 

5

Yellow pansy

Junonia hiertia

3+

4+

3+

2+

Site 7, site 5

Common

 

6

Chocolate Soldier

Junonia iphita

2+

3+

2+

2+

Site 3, site 6

Common

 

 

7

Great eggfly

Hypolimnasbolina

3+

3+

3+

2+

Site 1, site 3, site 7

Very common

 

8

Plain Tiger

Danaus chrysippus

3+

3+

2+

2+

Site 5, site 9

Common

 

9

Common four ring

Ypthima huebneri

3+

4+

4+

3+

Site 3, site 6

Common

 

10

Common fivering

Ypthima baldus

2+

2+

̶

+

Site 6

Common

 

11

Common palmfly

Elymnias hypermnestra

̶

+

+

̶

Site 5

Rare

 

12

Common Bushbrown

Mycalesis persius

4+

4+

3+

3+

Site 1, site 10

Very common

 

13

Blue tiger

Tirumala   limniace

3+

3+

2+

2+

Site 3, site 5

Common

 

14

Dark Blue Tiger

Tirumala septentrionis

̶

+

2+

+

Site 2, site 4

Not rare

 

15

Medus Brown

Orsotriaena medus

2+

+

+

+

Site 1, site 7

Rare

 

16

Common Indian crow

Euploea   core

4+

3+

2+

2+

Site 5, Site 9

Common

 

17

Common sailor

Neptis hylas astola

3+

2+

3+

2+

Site 1, site 3, Site 10

Common

 

18

Spotted Sailor

Neptis magadha khasiana

+

2+

+

2+

Site 3, site 5

Rare

Schedule II (Part H; No. 216)

19

Grey count

Tanaecia lepidea

2+

4+

3+

3+

Site 1, site 4

Common

Schedule II (Part H; No. 165)

20

Plain Earl

Tanaecia jahnu

+

2+

+

+

Site 3, Site 6

Rare

 

21

Colour sergeant female

Athyma nefte

3+

2+

+

2+

Site 5, site 6

Rare

 

22

Tawny Rajah

Charaxes bernardus

2+

4+

3+

3+

Site 7, site 10

Common

Schedule II (Part H; No. 223)

23

Tawny coster

Acraea terpsicore

2+

4+

3+

2+

Site 3, site 5

Common

 

24

Common Evening

Brown

Melanitis leda

 

3+

2+

2+

+

Site 6, site 10

Common

 

25

Great Evening Brown

Melanitis zitenius

 

+

2+

2+

2+

Site 1, site 3

Rare

Schedule II (Part H; No. 160)

26

Plain Tiger

Danaus chrysippus

3+

3+

2+

+

Site 3, Site 8

Very common

 

27

Glassy Tiger

Parantica aglea

+

2+

4+

2+

Site 3, site 7

Common

 

28

Vagrant

Vagrans egista

2+

+

̶

2+

Site 6

Not rare

 

29

Common Sergeant

Athyma perius

2+

3+

2+

2+

Site 8

Common

 

30

Striped Ringlet

Ragadia crisilda

̶

2+

2+

2+

Site 2, site 6

Not rare

Schedule II
(Part H; No. 218)

31

Clipper

Parthenos sylvia gambrisius

2+

2+

+

̶

Site 2, Site 5

Rare

Schedule II (Part H; No. 135)

32

Common Forester

Lethe insana

3+

+

+

-

Site 1, site 5, site 7

Not rare

Schedule II (Part H; No. 141)

33

Great Nawab

Polyura eudamippus eudamippus

+

2 +

+

2+

site 1, Site 3

 

Rare

 

34

Rustic

Cupha erymanthis lotis

2+

3+

3+

2+

Site 6

Not rare

 

Family: Hesperiidae

1

Common small flat

Sarangesa desahara

̶

+

2+

+

Site 2, site 5

rare

 

2

Common snow flat

Tagiades japetus atticus

4+

4+

3+

2+

Site 3, site 10

Common

 

3

Paint Brush Swift

Baoris farri

3+

3+

2+

2+

Site 1, Site 7

common

 

4

Great Swift

Pelopidas assamensis

+

2+

+

̶

Site 3, site 4

Not rare

 

5

Linna Palm Dart

Telicota linna

 

+

2+

2+

̶

Site 3, site 7

Common

 

Family: Riodinidae

1

Punchinello

Zemeros flegyas indicus

3+

4+

3+

2+

Site 3, site 10

Common

 

2

Double Banded Judy

Abisara bifasciata

3+

2+

2+

2+

Site 1, site 3

Not rare

 

3

Tailed Judy

Abisara neophron

2+

+

+

-

Site 2, site 10

Not rare

 

N.B. On the basis of abundance, Butterfly species were included under classes:  4+ (highly abundant, more than 25 sightings), 3+(moderately abundant, 16–25 sighting), 2+(abundant, 6–15 sighting); +(present, 1–5 sighting), -(absent).

 

 

Table 3. Number of genera and species of five families of butterfly.

Family

Year

          2019

            2020

       2021

             2022

No. of

Genera

%

No. of  Species

%

No. of Genera

%

  No. of

Species

%

   No. of  Genera

%

No. of Species

%

No. of  genera

%

No. of Species

%

Papilionidae

9

16.98

21

27.27

 9

15.79

22

26.51

9

16.07

21

26.58

9

17.65

19

26.76

Pieridae

6

11.32

8

10.39

6

10.53

8

9.64

6

10.71

7

8.86

6

11.76

7

9.86

Lycaenidae

10

18.87

10

12.99

11

19.30

11

13.25

11

19.64

11

13.92

9

17.64

9

12.68

Nymphalidae

22

41.51

31

40.26

24

42.11

34

40.96

23

41.07

32

40.51

22

43.14

31

43.66

Hesperiidae

4

7.55

4

5.19

5

8.77

5

6.02

5

8.93

5

6.33

3

5.88

3

4.23

Riodinidae

2

3.77

3

3.90

2

3.51

3

3.61

2

3.57

3

3.80

2

3.92

2

2.82

Total = 53

Total = 77

Total = 57

Total = 81

Total = 56

Total = 79

Total = 51

Total = 71

 

Table 4. Number of butterfly species in different sites of study area.

Sites

Name of the

site

2019

2020

2021

2022

Site 1

D-type and its adjoining area

14

17

14

16

Site 2

New E-type

7

5

2

1

Site 3

Old E-type

19

17

20

15

Site 4

F type and its adjoining area

8

12

15

12

Site 5

Old and new guest house

1

2

3

1

Site 6

Manas hostel site

9

11

8

5

Site 7

Hill top

11

13

9

7

Site 8

Serpentile lake and its adjoining area

4

2

3

5

Site 9

Transit camp site

2

1

1

3

Site 10

Admin site and its adjoining area

2

3

4

6

 

 

Table 5. Numerical abundance and relative abundance (RA) of individual butterflies across the study area.

 

Common name

Family

             2019

          2020

          2021

         2022

No.

RA (%)

No.

RA (%)

No.

RA (%)

No.

RA (%)

1

Common Mormon

 

 

 

 

Papilionidae

27

2.45

31

2.25

30

2.72

28

3.35

2

Great Mormon

24

2.18

28

2.03

26

2.36

23

2.75

3

Common lime

19

1.73

21

1.52

15

1.36

13

1.55

4

Common mime

22

2

29

2.1

27

2.45

24

2.89

5

Blue-striped Mime

 -

-

18

1.31

16

1.45

13

1.55

6

Red Helen

7

0.64

16

1.16

17

1.54

5

0.6

7

Yellow Helen

27

2.45

29

2.1

28

2.54

23

2.75

8

Common Bluebottle

2

0.18

5

0.36

7

0.64

2

0.24

9

Fivebar Swordtail

5

0.45

9

0.65

16

1.45

19

2.27

10

Fourbar Swordtail

3

0.27

7

0.51

  -

-

  -

-

11

Common Jay

14

1.27

26

1.89

23

2.09

16

1.91

12

Great Jay

9

0.82

18

1.31

11

1

-

-

13

Great Zebra

11

1

15

1.09

12

1.09

9

1.08

14

Chain Swordtail

7

0.64

15

1.09

6

0.54

-

-

15

Common Rose

3

0.27

9

0.65

5

0.45

3

0.36

16

Common Birdwing

12

1.09

17

1.23

19

1.72

15

1.8

17

White Dragontail

17

1.55

20

1.45

14

1.27

12

1.43

18

Great Windmill

8

0.73

18

1.31

10

0.91

11

1.31

19

Common Banded

Awl

21

1.91

27

1.96

24

2.18

13

1.55

20

Yellow Gorgon

21

1.91

19

1.38

13

1.18

10

1.19

21

Common grass yellow

 

 

 

 

Pieridae

21

1.91

29

2.1

26

2.36

15

1.8

22

Great orangetip

19

1.73

21

1.52

15

1.36

11

1.31

23

Common Emigrant

25

2.27

27

1.96

23

2.09

22

2.63

24

Mottled emigrant

13

1.18

18

1.31

15

1.36

14

1.67

25

Orange Albatross

8

0.73

5

0.36

2

0.18

-

-

26

Striped Albatross

12

1.09

13

0.94

11

1

14

1.67

27

Spot Puffin

6

0.55

4

0.29

-

-

 

2

0.24

28

Lesser Gull

11

1

16

1.16

17

1.54

12

1.43

29

Redspot Jezebel

19

1.72

26

1.89

29

2.63

21

2.51

30

Lesser grass blue          

 

 

 

 

 

Lycaenidae

24

2.18

28

2.03

24

2.18

20

2.39

31

Forget me not

25

2.27

31

2.25

21

1.91

14

1.67

32

Zebra blue

17

1.55

22

1.6

11

1

9

1.08

33

Yamfly

5

0.45

7

0.51

4

0.36

3

0.36

34

Assam Flash

-

-

2

0.15

7

0.64

5

0.6

35

Green Flash

8

0.73

5

0.36

3

0.27

2

0.24

36

Dingy Lineblue

17

1.55

13

0.94

12

1.09

5

0.6

37

Common Tit

7

0.64

4

0.29

4

0.36

3

0.36

38

Common Gem

 

8

0.73

16

1.16

6

0.54

-

-

39

Common Lineblue

27

2.45

30

2.18

25

2.27

14

1.67

40

Long-banded Silverline

17

1.55

23

1.67

13

1.18

27

3.23

41

Leopard lacewing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nymphalidae

21

1.91

15

1.09

10

0.91

5

0.6

42

Peacock pancy

3

0.27

8

0.58

4

0.36

-

-

43

Lemon pancy

29

2.64

22

1.6

14

1.27

9

1.08

44

Grey pancy

33

3

25

1.81

25

2.27

24

2.87

45

Yellow pansy

24

2.18

30

2.18

21

1.91

15

1.79

46

Chocolate Soldier

8

0.73

19

1.38

16

1.45

14

1.67

47

Great eggfly

16

1.45

22

1.6

19

1.72

14

1.67

48

Danaid eggfly

16

1.45

18

1.31

11

1

8

0.96

49

Common fouring

23

2.09

28

2.03

 28

2.54

25

2.99

50

Common fivering

7

0.64

6

0.44

  -

-

2

0.24

51

Blue striped palmfly

-

-

5

0.36

  3

0.27

-

-

52

Common Bushbrown

27

2.45

31

2.25

29

2.63

23

2.75

53

Blue tiger

20

1.82

24

1.74

13

1.18

14

1.67

54

Dark Blue Tiger

-

-

3

0.22

8

0.73

5

0.6

55

Pointed Palmfly

9

0.82

7

0.51

3

0.27

1

0.12

56

Common Indian crow

27

2.45

21

1.52

13

1.18

14

1.67

57

Common sailor

20

1.82

14

1.02

19

1.72

12

1.43

58

Spotted Sailor

 

5

 

0.45

11

0.79

 

4

 

0.36

 

9

 

1.08

 

59

Grey count  

13

1.18

27

1.96

22

2

19

2.27

60

Plain Earl

2

0.18

6

0.44

3

0.27

3

0.36

61

Perak Lascar

23

2.09

12

0.87

5

0.45

11

1.31

62

Tawny Rajah

13

1.18

28

2.03

20

1.81

14

1.67

63

Tawny coster

15

1.36

29

2.10

25

2.27

15

1.79

64

Common EveningBrown

21

 

1.91

 

9

 

0.65

 

10

 

0.91

 

4

 

0.48

 

65

Great EveningBrown

2

0.18

11

0.79

8

0.73

6

0.72

66

Plain Tiger

18

1.64

17

1.23

9

0.82

5

0.6

67

Glassy Tiger

5

0.45

14

1.02

27

2.45

13

1.55

68

Vagrant

7

0.64

3

0.22

-

-

9

1.08

69

Common Sergeant

13

1.18

24

1.74

14

1.27

12

1.43

70

Striped Ringlet 

-

-

6

0.44

10

0.91

8

0.96

71

Clipper

11

1

8

0.58

4

0.36

-

-

72

Common Forester

14

1.27

23

1.67

9

0.82

4

0.48

73

Great Nawab

2

0.18

8

0.58

5

0.45

9

1.08

74

Rustic

12

1.09

21

1.52

19

1.72

13

1.55

75

Common small flat

Hesperiidae

-

-

2

0.15

7

0.64

4

0.48

76

Common snow flat

26

2.36

27

1.96

23

2.09

15

1.79

77

Paint Brush Swift

20

1.82

18

1.31

8

0.73

7

0.84

78

Great Swift

3

0.27

9

0.65

4

0.36

-

-

79

Linna Palm Dart

 

 

 

1

0.09

6

0.44

3

0.27

-

-

80

Punchinello

Riodinidae

21

1.91

30

2.18

22

2

19

2.27

81

Plum Judy

17

1.55

12

0.87

13

1.18

9

1.08

82

Tailed Judy

8

0.73

2

0.15

3

0.27

-

-

 

 

For figures & images - - click here for full PDF

 

REFERENCES

 

Ali, I. & S.K. Basistha (2000). Butterfly diversity of Assam State Zoo-Cum-Botanical Garden. Zoos’ Print Journal 15(5): 264–265. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.15.5.264-5

Betrus, C.J., E. Fleishman & R.B. Blair (2005). Cross-taxonomic potential and spatial transferability of an umbrella species index. Journal of Environmental Management 74(1): 79–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.08.010

Bhuyan M., P.R. Bhattacharyya & P.B. Kanjilal (2005). Butterflies of the Regional Research Laboratory Campus, Jorhat, Assam. Zoo’s Print Journal 20(6): 1910–1911. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1010.1910-1

Bohra, S.C. & J. Purkayastha (2021). An insight into the butterfly (Lepidoptera) diversity of an urban landscape: Guwahati, Assam, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(2): 17741–17752. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6122.13.2.17741-17752

Bora, A. & L.R. Meitei (2014). Diversity of butterflies (Order: Lepidoptera) in Assam University campus and its vicinity, Cachar District, Assam, India. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences 5(3): 328–339.

Boruah, A. & G.N. Das (2017). Butterflies (Lepidoptera) of Dangori Reserve Forest, Upper Assam, India. Zoo’s Print 32(11): 12–23.

Das, G.N., Z.F. Fric, S. Panthee, J.S. Irungbam & M. Konvicka (2023). Geography of Indian Butterflies: patterns revealed by checklists of federal states. Insects 14(6): 549. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects14060549

Eswaran, R. &  P. Pramod (2005).  Structure of butterfly community of Anaikatty Hills, Western Ghats. Zoos’ Print Journal 20(8): 1939–1942. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1330.1939-42

Evans, W.H. (1932). The identification of Indian Butterflies. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 31: 49–83.

Gogoi, M.J. (2013). Notes on some skipper butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) from Panbari Forest and its adjoining areas, Kaziranga-Karbi Anglong, upper Assam, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 5(13): 4759–4768. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3340.4759-68

Gogoi, R., A. Chetry & A. Bhuyan (2023). Diversity and species richness of butterfly in soraipung range of Dehing Patkai National Park, Assam, India. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology 84(1): 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41936-023-00327-9

Hamer, K.C., J.K. Hill, L.A. Lace & A.M. Langan (1997). Ecological and biogeographical effects of forest disturbance on tropical butterflies of Sumba, Indonesia. Journal of Biogeography 24(1): 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.1997.tb00051.x

Janz, N. (2005). The relationship between habitat selection and preference for adult and larval food resources in the polyphagous butterfly. Journal of Insect Behavior 18(6): 767–780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10905-005-8739-z

Kehimkar, I.D. (2008). The Book of Indian Butterflies. Oxford University Press, 497 pp.

Menken, S.B., J.J. Boomsma & E.J. van Nieukerken (2010). Large - scale evolutionary patterns of host plant association in the Lepidoptera. Evolution, International Journal of Organic Evolution 64(4): 1098–1119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00889.x

Nally, R.M. & E. Fleishman (2004). A successful predictive model of species richness based on indicator species. Conservation Biology 18(3): 646–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00328_18_3.x

Padhye, A.D., N. Dahanukar, M. Paingankar, M. Deshpande & D. Deshpande (2006). Season and landscape wise distribution of butterflies in Tamhini, northern, Western Ghats, India. Zoos’ Print Journal 21(3): 2175–2181. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.1142.2175-81

Piccini, I., M. Pittarello, V. Di Pietro, M. Lonati & S. Bonelli (2022). New approach for butterfly conservation through local field-based vegetational and entomological data. Ecosphere 13(4): e4026. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.4026

Pollard, E. & T.J. Yates (1993). Monitoring Butterflies for Ecology and Conservation. Chapman & Hall, London, 273 pp.

Ramesh, T., K.J. Hussain, M. Selvanayagam, K.K. Satpathy & M.V.R. Prasad (2010). Patterns of diversity, abundance and habitat associations of butterfly communities in heterogenous landscapes of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) campus at Kalpakkam, south India. International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation 2(4): 75–85.

Saikia, M.K., J. Kalita & P.K. Saikia (2015). New records of butterflies and authentication of several species of butterflies existence in Assam. Journal on New Biological Reports 4(2): 180–196.

Spitzer, K., V. Novotny, M. Tonner & J. Leps (1993). Habitat preferences, distribution and seasonality of the butterflies (Lepidoptera,Papilionoidea) in a montane tropical rain forest, Vietnam. Journal of Biogeography 20(1): 109–121. https://doi.org/10.2307/2845744

Yasmin, R., A. Das, L.J. Rozario & M.E. Islam (2023). Butterfly detection and classification techniques: A review. Intelligent Systems with Applications 18: 200214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswa.2023.200214