Butterfly species richness and diversity in Experimental Botanic Garden, Botanical Survey
of India, ERC, Umiam, Meghalaya, India
Atanu Bora, L. R. Meitei, Mitrajit Deb Abstract The present paper deals with the study of species richness and diversity of butterfly fauna in the Experimental Botanic Garden of Botanical Survey of India (BSI), ERC, Umiam, Meghalaya, India. The study was conducted from June 2013 to May 2014 in the experimental garden. The population trends of butterflies were monitored for one year using transects counting method. A total of 66 species of butterflies belonging to five families and 47 genera were recorded during the study period. The family Nymphalidae showed the maximum species richness, comprising of 15 genera and 23 species, followed by Lycaenidae (14 genera, 14 species), Pieridae (8 genera, 12 species), Hesperiidae (8 genera, 9 species) and Papilionidae (2 genera, 8 species). A total of 1164 individuals were recorded of which Eurema hecabe (Linn.) was the most dominant species of butterfly in terms of number of individuals (38) followed by Junonia atlites (36). From the conservation point of view, the study area is undisturbed and rich in butterfly fauna.
Keywords: Botanical Survey of India, Butterfly, India, Meghalaya, species richness, transects counting. 1. Introduction The northeastern region of India, south of the Brahmaputra River, is part of the globally recognized Indo-Myanmar biodiversity hotspot and is host to a remarkable biodiversity that includes a high proportion of endemic, rare and endangered species. The Garo Hills of the northeastern state of Meghalaya (previously part of Assam) form the north-westernmost limit of the Indo-Myanmar Biodiversity Hotspot. From there the hotspot extends southeastwards to cover the Khasi, Jaintia, Naga, Manipur and Mizo Hills (together encompassing the Patkai Hills) in northeastern India, and all of the Indo-Chinese subregion. The Indian part of this hotspot is one of the most species-rich regions in the Indian Subcontinent, with considerable endemism at subspecies level. The high species richness and endemism make this an especially important region for butterfly diversity and conservation in India [16]. Early European lepidopterists extensively explored this biodiversity hotspot between 1840 and 1950 and described hundreds of butterfly species and subspecies. The major taxonomic and natural history work in this region was done in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills in eastern Meghalaya [23, 24,
19, 5, 6] in Cachar Hills in southern Assam and Bangladesh [4] and in the Naga-Manipur Hills [25,
26, 27]. The pace of species discovery and accumulation of bionomic information on butterflies of this region has subsequently slowed down as the region has received less attention from lepidopterists with a few notable exceptions [21, 18, 14, 15]. Nevertheless, some areas have historically remained practically unexplored. Thus the present study aimed to explore the species richness and diversity of butterflies in different locations of the Experimental Botanic Garden which might be helpful to pave the way for future research and formulation of an effective strategy for conservation of this important group of insects. 2. Material and Methods The present study was conducted in the Experimental Botanic Garden of Botanical Survey of India, Eastern Regional Centre, Umiam (Barapani), Meghalaya, India from June 2013 to May 2014 to assess the diversity and species richness of butterflies.
~ 213 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
2.1 Study Area The Experimental Botanic Garden of Botanical Survey of India (BSI), Eastern Regional Centre (ERC), Meghalaya is located about 22 km away from Shillong near Umiam Lake at Umiam (Barapani) with an area ca 25 acres, at an altitude of 1000 m above sea level. About 756 species of vascular plants, 13 Gymnosperms, 49 Pteridophytes and 53 Bryophytes of North East India are conserved in this experimental garden. For the better management, the garden is divided into different sections viz. Nursery, Orchidarium, Bamboosetum, Gingiber, Musa, Fern sections etc. A well-designed pond is constructed for ex-situ conservation of water lilies and other aquatic plants. 2.2 Survey Method Field notes, photographs (camera: Nikon d5100) and observations of butterflies were taken for the entire growing season during the day light hours. The population trends of butterflies were monitored for one year using transects
counting method [1]. Species were noted along with the date, location of capture and any plant association. Other factors noted include the time of day using a twenty-four hour clock and the weather conditions. At each location the same route of inspection was followed each time to reduce the number of variables presents [20] and to avoid any personal difference all the counts were made by the same person. 2.3 Identification An effort has been made to use the latest nomenclature and common names as far as possible as per the taxonomic key provided by [7, 9, 10, 27]. The relative abundance or say status of individual species in locality is categorized within the experimental garden as VC-Very Common (> 25 sightings), C-Common (16-25 sightings), UC-Uncommon (9–15 sightings), R-Rare (5–8 sightings), VR-Very Rare (< 5 sightings).
Fig 1: Location Map of Experimental Botanic Garden, BSI, ERC, Umiam, Meghalaya, India
3. Results and Discussion A total of 66 species of butterflies belonging to five families and 47 genera were recorded during the study period (Table 1). The family Nymphalidae showed the maximum species
richness, comprising of 15 genera and 23 species, followed by Lycaenidae (14 genera, 14 species), Pieridae (8 genera, 12 species), Hesperiidae (8 genera, 9 species) and Papilionidae (2 genera, 8 species) being the least (Fig 2).
~ 214 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
Fig 2: Family wise distribution of butterflies during the study period
3.1 Species richness and composition The number count method for relative abundance showed that out of the 66 butterfly species recorded, 24 are common, 16 are uncommon, 14 are very common, 8 are rare and 4 are very rare to the study area. A total of 1164 individuals were recorded from the study area of which Nymphalidae was dominant contributing 443 individuals followed by Lycaenidae (287 individuals), Pieridae (226 individuals), Papilionidae (131 individuals) and Hesperidae with 77 individuals being the least.
Fig 3: Relative Abundance of butterflies during the study period
3.2 Species Dominance Species dominance was determined based on the number of individuals calculated. E. hecabe (Linn.) was the most dominant species with 38 individuals followed by J. atlites (36), J. almana (34), C. lajus (33), Z. karsandra (32), P. demoleus (31), L. nina (31), M. perseus (31), P. maha (30), D. chrysippus (30), P. canidia (29), P. polytes (28), C. Pomona (27), Z. otis (26). Among the rare species, the important species recorded are B. oedipodea (2), P. assamensis (3), D. descombesi (2) and E. aconthea (2).
Table 1: List of Butterflies recorded in experimental garden, BSI
Sl. No. Common Name Scientific Name No. of individuals
counted Relative Abundance
Family: Papilionidae 1 Common Mormon Papilio polytes 28 VC 2 Great Mormon Papilio memnon 18 C 3 Red Helen Papilio helenus 11 UC 4 Spangle Papilio protenor .05 R 5 Common Lime Papilio demoleus 31 VC 6 Common Bluebottle Graphium sarpedon 19 C 7 Common Jay Graphium doson 09 UC 8 Tailed Jay Graphium Agamemnon 10 UC Family: Hesperiidae 9 Branded Orange Awlet Bibasis oedipodea 02 VR 10 Fulvous Pied Flat Pseudocoladenia dan 16 C 11 Common Grass Dart Taractrocera maevius 17 C 12 Small Branded Swift Pelopidas mathias 06 R 13 Great Swift Pelopidas assamensis 03 VR 14 Chestnut Bob Iambrix salsala 09 UC 15 Indian Palm Bob Suastus gremius 11 UC 16 Common Redeye Matapa aria 07 R 17 Grass Demon Udaspes folus 06 R Family: Pieridae 18 Common Grass Yellow Eurema hecabe 38 VC 19 Three Spot Grass Yellow Eurema blanda 19 C 20 Common Emigrant Catopsilia pomona 27 VC 21 Mottled Emigrant Catopsilia pyranthe 18 C 22 Great Orange Tip Hebomoia glaucippe 07 R 23 Striped Albatross Appias libythea 14 UC 24 Chocolate Albatross Appias lyncida 20 C 25 Lesser Gull Cepora nadina 06 R 26 Indian Cabbage White Pieris canidia 29 VC 27 Red-Base Jezebel Delias spasithoe 15 UC 28 Red-Spotted Jezebel Delias descombesi 02 VR 29 Psyche Leptosia nina 31 VC Family: Lycaenidae 30 Western Centaur Oakblue Arhopala pseudocentaurus 17 C
~ 215 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
Sl. No. Common Name Scientific Name No. of individuals
counted Relative Abundance
31 Yamfly Loxura atymnus 05 R 32 Common Imperial Cheritra freja 13 UC 33 Indian Red Flash Rapala airbus 18 C 34 Common Pierrot Castalius rosimon 21 C 35 Zebra Blue Leptotes plinius 12 UC 36 Common Lineblue Prosotas nora 20 C 37 Common Cerulean Jamides celeno 17 C 38 Dark Grass Blue Zizeeria karsandra 32 VC 39 Pale Grass Blue Pseudozizeeria maha 30 VC 40 Lesser Grass Blue Zizina otis 26 VC 41 Quaker Neopithecops zalmora 23 C 42 Lime Blue Chilades lajus 33 VC 43 Punchinello Zemeros flegyas 20 C Family: Nymphalidae 44 Plain Tiger Danaus chrysippus 30 VC 45 Striped Tiger Danaus genutia 14 UC 46 Glassy Tiger Parantica aglea 19 C 47 Striped Blue Crow Euploea mulciber 07 R 48 Common Evening Brown Melanitis leda 24 C 49 Common Palmfly Elymnias hypermnestra 22 C 50 Common Bushbrown Mycalesis perseus 31 VC 51 Dark-Brand Bushbrown Mycalesis mineus 13 UC 52 Common Fourring Ypthima huebneri 25 C 53 Common Fivering Ypthima baldus 21 C 54 Common Leopard Phalanta phalantha 12 UC 55 Commander Moduza procris 14 UC 56 Common Sergeant Athyma perius 20 C 57 Colour Sergeant Athyma nefte 13 UC 58 Common Sailer Neptis hylas 21 C 59 Common Baron Euthalia aconthea 02 VR 60 Common Castor Ariadne merione 12 UC 61 Grey Pansy Junonia atlites 36 VC 62 Peacock Pansy Junonia almana 34 VC 63 Yellow Pansy Junonia hierta 21 C 64 Lemon Pansy Junonia lemonias 23 C 65 Chocolate Pansy Junonia iphita 10 UC 66 Great Eggfly Hypolimnas bolina 19 C Total 1164
Butterflies have always been a subject of interest, and they are probably next only to birds in their universal popularity. This is partly attributable to the great variety and beauty of their colour patterns and partly to their dramatic transformation during their life cycle and the interesting phenomena of mimicry and migration [2]. Butterflies are suitable for biodiversity studies, as the taxonomy, geographic distribution and status of many species are relatively well known. Further, butterflies are good biological indicators of habitat quality as well as general environmental health [17, 11, 22] as many species
are strictly seasonal and prefer only particular set of habitats [13]. Kunte et al. [16] surveyed butterflies in Balpakram National Park, Baghmara Reserve Forest and Siju Wildlife Sanctuary in southern Garo Hills, and Nokrek National Park in Western Garo Hills during four visits amounting to 49 days spread over two seasons, pre-monsoon (April–May) and post-monsoon (November–December), between 2008 and 2010. They reported 298 butterfly species for the Garo Hills, eight of which are legally protected under Schedule I and 33 under Schedule II of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
Great Mormon (Papilio memnon)
Common Lime
(Papilio demoleus)
Common Bluebottle
(Graphium sarpedon)
~ 216 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
Common Grass Yellow (Eurema hecabe)
Indian Cabbage White (Pieris canidia)
Red-Spotted Jezebel (Delias descombesi)
Common Four Ring (Ypthima huebneri)
Common Fivering (Ypthima baldus)
Common Leopard
(Phalanta phalantha)
Fig 4: Photographs of some Butterflies recorded during the study
Botanic Gardens serve as the nation’s thrust in research, conservation, public awareness and world cooperation. They serve as ‘Refugio’ for plants driven to the verge of extinction. Ex-situ conservation provides a valuable source of accessible plant material useful for the restoration of species. Butterflies are host-specific animals. The division of the garden into different sections viz. Nursery, Orchidarium, Bamboosetum, Gingiber, Musa, Fern sections etc, the study area serves as suitable habitat for high larval-host plant interaction. Findings suggest that the family Nymaphalidae with 15 genera and 23 species was the most dominant in the study area. Members of the Nymphalidae were always dominant in the tropical region because most of the species are polyphagous in nature, consequently helping them to live in all the habitats. Additionally, many species of this family are strong, active fliers that might help them in searching for resources in large areas [8, 12]. A high proportion of nymphalid species indicates high host plant richness [3]. Our attention has long been driven by butterflies as there is still works to be done on habitat selection, current populations, distributions, seasonality and occurrence of butterflies with habitat variability in the entire north-east India. From this study information can be gained regarding the role of Botanic Gardens in conservation plans not only for butterflies and birds that are very sensitive and specific to their habitats but also for other vertebrates with inclusion of further studies and modifications. This study will promote Botanic Gardens and other residential campus as a source of conservation practice for biodiversity.
4. Acknowledgement The authors thank Dr. Paramjit Singh, Director, Botanical Survey of India, Kolkata and Dr. A. A. Mao, Head of Office, Botanical Survey of India, ERC, Shillong for encouragement and necessary facilities. 5. References 1. Barhaum KP, Anderson DR, Cauke ZL. Estimation of
density from line transects sampling of biological population. WILD 1980-1981; Monograph No. 72:515.
2. Behera S. Researcher adds 38 new butterfly species to Dudhwa TR baseline. http://www.wti.org.in. 5 March, 2012.
3. Bora A, Meitei LR. Butterfly Fauna (Order: Lepidoptera) in Five Major Tea Gardens of Sivasagar District, Assam, India. Biological Forum — An International Journal 2014; 6(2):7-15.
4. Butler AG. On a collection of Lepidoptera from Cachar. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London 1879; 1-8.
5. Cantlie K. More butterflies of the Khasi and Jaintia Hills, Assam. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 1952; 51:42-60.
6. Cantlie K. Hesperiidae of Khasi and Jaintia Hills. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 1956; 54:212-215.
7. D’Abrera Bernard. Butterflies of the Oriental Region Part-I-III’. Hill House, Victoria 1982-86.
8. Eswaran R, Pramod P. Structure of butterfly community of Anaikatty hills, Western Ghats. Zoo’s print Journal 2005; 20(8):1939-1942.
9. Evans WH. The identification of Indian Butterflies. The Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay, India, 1932; 455.
10. Kehimkar I. The Book of Indian Butterflies. Bombay Natural History Society and Oxford University Press, Mumbai, India 2008; 497.
11. Kocher SD, EH Williams. The diversity and abundance of North American butterflies vary with habitat disturbance and geography. Journal of Biogeography 2000; 27:785-794.
12. Krishnakumar N, Kumaraguru A, Thiyagesan K, Asokan S. Diversity of papilionid butterflies in the Indira Gandhi Wildlife Sanctuary, Western Ghats, Southern India. Tiger Paper 2008; 35:1-8.
13. Kunte K. Seasonal patterns in butterfly abundance and species diversity in four tropical habitats in Northern Western Ghats. Journal of Bioscience 1997; 22(5):593-603.
14. Kunte K. Occurrence of Elymnias obnubila Marshall and de Nicéville, 1883 (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Satyrinae) in southern Mizoram: Range extension of the species and an addition to the Indian butterfly fauna. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2009; 1(11):567-568.
15. Kunte K. Rediscovery of the federally protected Scarce Jester Butterfly Symbrenthia silana Nicéville, 1885 (Nymphalidae: Nymphalinae) from the Eastern Himalaya and Garo Hills, northeastern India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2010; 2(5):858-866.
16. Kunte K, Sondhi S, Sangma BM, Lovalekar R, Tokekar K, Agavekar G et al. Butterflies of the Garo Hills of Meghalaya, northeastern India: their diversity and conservation. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2012; 4(10):2933-2992.
17. Larsen TB, The butterflies of the Nilgiri mountains of the Southern India (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera). Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 1988; 85(1):26-43.
18. Larsen TB. Butterflies of Bangladesh – An Annotated Checklist. IUCN Bangladesh Country Office, Dhaka 2004, 147.
19. Parsons RE, Cantlie K. The butterflies of the Khasi and Jaintia hills, Assam. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 1948; 47:498-522.
20. Pyle RM. The Audubon Society Handbook for butterfly watchers. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1984.
21. Radhakrishnan C, Alfred JRB, Rynth MR. Butterflies of Shillong and Its Environs. Science & Technology Cell, Govt of Meghalaya, Shillong, 1989, 70.
22. Sawchik J, Dufrene M, Lebrun P. Distribution patterns and indicator species of butterfly assemblages of wet meadows in southern Belgium. Belgian Journal of Zoology 2005; 135(1):43-52.
23. Swinhoe C. A list of the Lepidoptera of the Khasi Hills. Part I. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London 1893; (41):267-330.
24. Swinhoe C. New species of Lepidoptera from Khasi Hills. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, including Zoology, Botany, and Geology 1896; 17(6):357-363.
25. Tytler HC. Notes on butterflies from the Naga Hills. Part I. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 1911; 21:48-65.
26. Tytler HC. Notes on butterflies from the Naga Hills. Part II. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 1912; 21:588-606.
27. Tytler HC. Notes on some new and interesting butterflies from Manipur and the Naga Hills. Part I. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 1914; 23:216-229.
28. Varshney RK. Revised Nomenclature for Taxa in Wynther-Blyth’s Book on the Butterflies of Indian Region-III. Journal of Bombay natural History Society 1990; 87(1):53-61.
