Butterfly species
diversity, relative abundance and status in Tropical Forest Research Institute,
Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, central India
Ashish D. Tiple
Forest Entomology Division,Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh 482021, India
Deparment of Zoology, Vidyabharati College Seloo, Wardha, Maharashtra 442104, India
Email: ashishdtiple@yahoo.co.in
Date of publication (online): 26 July 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 July 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: B.A. Daniel
Manuscript details:
Ms # o2656
Received 23 December 2010
Final received 13 April 2012
Finally accepted 22 June 2012
Citation: Tiple, A.D.
(2012). Butterfly species diversity, relative abundance and status in Tropical
Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, centralIndia. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(7): 2713–2717.
Copyright: © AshishD. Tiple 2012. Creative Commons
Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in any medium
for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate
credit to the authors and the source of publication.
Acknowledgements: Thanks to Dr. K.C. Joshi and
Dr. Nitin Kulkarni, Senior
Scientist, Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur for valuable
suggestions and providing facilities. I am also thankful to Mr. Sanjay Paunikar, for his assistance during the field survey.
For figures, images, tables --
click here
The Tropical Forest
Research Institute (TFRI) Jabalpur is one of nine institutes under the Indian
Council of Forestry Research and Education. It lies on the bank of the Gour River on Mandla Road (79059’23.50”E & 21008’54.30”N) about 10km southeast
of Jabalpur. The campus is spread
over an area of 109ha amidst picturesque surroundings (Image 1); semi-arid with mean annual precipitation of 1358mm. The campus is
surrounded by agricultural fields with rural habitation. The water reservoir and the vegetation
planted around the institute have created a very good habitat and source of
attraction for many faunal species like insects, reptiles, birds and mammals (Tiple et al. 2010). The area has trees, shrubs, grasslands and small hills.
Butterflies are
generally regarded as one of the best taxonomically studied groups of insects
(Robbins & Opler 1997), yet even in genera
containing very common and widespread species, our understanding of true
species diversity may prove to be startlingly below common expectation (Ackery 1987; Tiple & Khurad 2009; Willmott et al.
2001).
Butterflies are an
important aspect of ecosystems for they interact with plants as pollinators and
herbivores (Tiple et al. 2006). Butterflies are also good indicators of
environmental changes as they are sensitive to habitat degradation and climate
changes (Kunte 2000).
The Indian
subcontinent hosts about 1,504 species of butterflies (Tiple2011) of which peninsular India and the Western Ghats host
351 and 334 species respectively. In Madhya Pradesh and Vidarbha of central India 177 species of butterfly species have been documented (D’Abreu 1931).
Subsequent works and
fauna volumes include several species from Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh
(Evans 1932; Talbot 1939, 1947; Wynter-Blyth
1957). In the recent past, several
researchers have studied butterflies from some districts and conservation areas
of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh (Singh 1977; Gupta 1987; Chaudhury1995; Chandra et al. 2000a,b; 2002; Singh & Chandra 2002; Siddiqui & Singh 2004; Chandra 2006). Chandra et al. (2007) recorded 174
species of butterflies belonging to eight families from Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.
The present study
was started to examine the diversity of butterflies from TFRI Campus, since there was no known published
checklist of butterflies in the TFRI campus.
Materials and
Methods
The findings
presented here are based on a bi-weekly random survey carried out from June
2008 to May 2009 at the TFRI campus. The observations were made from 0800hr to 1100hr, which is a peak time
for butterfly activity. Butterflies
were Primarily identified directly in the field or, in difficult cases,
following capture or photography. In critical conditions, specimens were
collected only with handheld aerial sweep nets. Each specimen was placed in a plastic
bottle and carried to the laboratory for further identification with the help
of a field guide (Wynter-Blyth 1957; Kunte 2000; Haribal 2002). All scientific names followed in the
present study are in accordance to Varshney (1983). The observed butterflies were
categorized in five categories on the basis of their abundance in the TFRI
campus. VC - very common (> 100
sightings), C - common (50–100 sightings), NR - not rare (15–50
sightings), R - rare (2–15 sightings), VR - very rare (1–2
sightings) (Tiple et al. 2006).
Results and
Discussion
A total of 66
species of butterflies belonging to 47 genera and five families viz.,—Papilionidae (5 species), Pieridae (9 species), Nymphalidae(25 species), Lycaenidae (18 species) and Hesperiidae (9 species)—were recorded. Among these 65 species, 24 (37%) were
commonly occurring, 16 (24%) were very common, 2 (3%) were not rare, 18 (27%)
were rare and 6 (9%) were very rare. The observed species and their status on the TFRI campus is presented in Table 1. Five of the recorded species (Table 1) come under the Indian Wildlife
(Protection) Act 1972 (Kunte 2000; Gupta
& Mondal 2005).
Among the 66 species
of butterflies, Papilio demoleus, Catopsilia pomona, Eurema hecabe, Danaus chrysippus, Euploea core, Hypolimnas misippus, Junonia lemonias, Melanitis leda, Tirumala limniace, Catochrysops strabo, Prosotas nora, Borbo cinnara, Pelopidas mathiaswere present throughout the year (January–December), whereas 53 species
were observed only from June-July till the beginning of summer
(April–May). Increasing
species abundance from the beginning of the monsoons (June–July) till
early winter (August–November) and decline in species abundance from late
winter (January–February) to the end of summer (Fig. 1) have also been reported by Tiple et al.
(2007) and Tiple & Khurad(2009) in similar climatic conditions in this region of central India. They further demonstrated that most of
the species were noticeably absent in the disturbed and human impacted sites
(gardens, plantation and grassland) and there was no occurrence of unique
species in moderately disturbed areas comparable to those of less disturbed
wild areas. The present study site
is in constant disturbance due to the cutting of grasses, shrubs and trees for landscaping which may be the reason for the overall reduction of thenumber of species.
The findings of the
present study underline the importance of institutional estates as a preferred habitat for butterflies. If the landscaping and
maintenance of gardens are carefully planned, the diversity of butterflies may increase in the TFRI campus providing a rich ground for butterfly conservation as well as for research.
REFERENCE
Ackery, P.R. (1987). Diversity
and phantom competition in African acraeinebutterflies. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 30: 291–297.
Chandra,
K., R.M. Sharma, A. Singh & R.K. Singh (2007). A
checklist of butterflies of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh States, India. Zoos’
Print Journal 22(8): 2790–2798.
Chandra, K., R.K.
Singh & M.L. Koshta (2000a). On
a collection of butterflies (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera)
from Sidhi District, Madhya Pradesh, India. Records of Zoological Survey of India 98(4): 11–23.
Chandra, K., R.K.
Singh & M.L. Koshta (2000b). On
a collection of Butterfly fauna from PachmarhiBiosphere Reserve. Proceedings of National Seminar on Biodiversity
Conservation 8 Management with Special Reference on Biosphere Reserve, EPCO,
Bhopal, November, 72–77pp.
Chandra,
K., L.K. Chaudhary, R.K. Singh & M.L. Koshta (2002). Butterflies of Pench Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh. Zoos’
Print Journal 17(10): 908–909.
Chandra, K. (2006). The
Butterflies (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) of Kangerghati National Park (Chhattisgarh). Advancement
in Indian Entomology: Productivity and Health, Vol. II, 83–88pp.
Chaudhury, M. (1995). Insecta:
Lepidoptera, Fauna of Conservation Area: Fauna of IndravatiTiger Reserve. Zoological Survey of India 6: 45–52.
D’Abreu, E. A. (1931). The
Central Provinces Butterfly List. Records
of the Nagpur Museum Number VII, Government Printing City Press, 39pp.
Evans, W.H. (1932). The
Identification of Indian Butterflies. 2nd Edition. Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai, 454pp.
Gupta,
I.J. & D.K. Mondal (2005). Red Data
Book—Part II: Buttrflies of India. Zoological Society of India, Kolkata, 535pp.
Gupta,
I.J. 8 J.P.N. Shukla (1987). Butterflies
from Bastar district (Madhya Pradesh, India). Records of Zoological Survey of India, Occasional Paper 106:
1–74.
Haribal, M. (1992). The
Butterflies of Sikkim Himalaya and their Natural History. Sikkim Nature Conservation Foundation (SNCF), Sikkim, 217pp.
Kunte, K. (2000). Butterflies
of Peninsular India. Universities Press (Hyderabad) and Indian
Academy of Sciences (Bangalore), 254pp.
Siddiqui, A. & S.P.
Singh (2004). A checklist of the butterfly diversity
of Panna Forest (M.P). National
Journal of Life Sciences 1(2): 403–406.
Singh,
R.K. & K. Chandra (2002). An inventory of butterflies of
Chhattisgarh. Journal of Tropical Forestry 18(1):
67–74.
Singh, R.K. (1977). On
a collection of butterflies (Insecta) from Bastar district, Madhya Pradesh, India. Newsletter Zoological Survey of India 3(5): 323–326.
Talbot, G. (1939). The Fauna of
British India including Ceylon and Burma. Butterflies. Today and Tomorrow’s
Printers and Publishers, New Delhi, 600pp.
Talbot, G. (1947). The Fauna of
British India including Ceylon and Burma. Butterflies. Today and Tomorrow’s
Printers and Publishers, New Delhi, 506pp.
Tiple, A.D. (2011). Butterflies
of Vidarbha region Maharashtra, India; a review with
and implication for conservation. Journal of Threatened Taxa3(1): 1469–1477.
Tiple, A.D., N. Kulkarni, S. Paunikar & K.C.
Joshi (2010). Avian fauna of tropical forest research institute
Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India. Indian Journal of Tropical Biodiversity18(1): 1–9
Tiple, A.D. & A.M. Khurad (2009). Butterfly species diversity, habitats
and seasonal distribution in and around Nagpur City, central India. World Journal of Zoology 4(3): 153–162.
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 Lepidopteralogica28: 213–224.
Tiple, A.D., A.M. Khurad & R.L.H. Dennis (2007). Butterfly diversity
in relation to a human-impact gradient on an Indian university campus. Nota Lepidopteralogica 30(1):
179–188.
Varshney, R.K. (1983). Index Rhopalocera indicapart II. Common names of butterflies from India and neighbouring countries. Records
of the Zoological Survey of India. Occasional Paper
no. 47: 1–49.
Willmott, K.R., J.P.W. Hall
& G. Lamas (2001). Systematics of Hypanartia(Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Nymphalinae),
with a test for geographical speciation mechanisms in the Andes. Systematic Entomology 26: 369–399.
Wynter-Blyth, M.A. (1957). Butterflies
of the Indian Region. Bombay Natural History
Society, 523pp.