Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 February 2024 | 16(2): 24786–24794

 

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

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8137.16.2.24786-24794

#8137 | Received 10 August 2022 | Final received 24 December 2023 | Finally accepted 31 January 2024

 

 

A preliminary assessment of butterfly diversity from Mekhliganj town, Cooch Behar District, West Bengal, India

 

 Abhirup Saha 1, Prapti Das 2 & Dhiraj Saha 3

 

1,2,3 Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Laboratory, Department of Zoology, University of North Bengal, Raja Rammohunpur, P.O. NBU, District Darjeeling, West Bengal 734013, India.

1 rs_abhirup@nbu.ac.in, 2 rs_prapti@nbu.ac.in, 3 dhirajsaha@nbu.ac.in (corresponding author)

 

 

Editor: Monsoon Jyoti Gogoi, Bokakhat, Assam, India.                        Date of publication: 26 February 2024 (online & print)

 

Citation: Saha, A., P. Das & D. Saha (2024). A preliminary assessment of butterfly diversity from Mekhliganj town, Cooch Behar District, West Bengal, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 16(2): 24786–24794. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8137.16.2.24786-24794

  

Copyright: © Saha et al. 2024. 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 study has not been funded by any commercial or non-commercial agencies.

 

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

 

Author details: Abhirup Saha is currently working as a research scholar in the Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Laboratory at the University of North Bengal. Concurrently, Prapti Das is pursuing her doctoral studies within the same laboratory. Both individuals are under the guidance of Professor Dhiraj Saha, who holds a professorial position within the Department of Zoology. Professor Dhiraj Saha completed his doctoral research on the tea pest prevalent in northern West Bengal. The focus of their laboratory’s current research endeavors lies in the examination of various mosquito vectors and their resistance profiles across different regions of north Bengal. Additionally, the laboratory diligently documents the diversity of different pollinator species within the surrounding vicinity. Professor Dhiraj Saha’s contributions to the field of entomology have been recognized with the prestigious Prof. T. N. Ananthakrishnan Award for Insect Research by the Society of Medical Arthropodologists (SOMA) during the 14th International Conference of Medical Arthropodology.

 

Author contributions: Conceptualization: AS and DS, Data curation: AS, Formal analysis: AS and PD, Investigation: AS, Methodology: AS, Software: AS, Supervision: DS, Validation: AS and PD, Visualization: AS, DS and PD, Writing-original draft: AS and PD, Writing- review and editing: AS, PD and DS. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

 

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to acknowledge Mr. Abhisekh Subba (Zoological Survey of India), Mr. Subhajit Das (Department of Zoology, University of North Bengal), and Mr. Alinda Ghosh (Cooch Behar Panchanan Barma University) for help in the preparation of figures.

 

 

 

Abstract: In the present study, butterfly diversity from Mekhliganj town, which is located on the Teesta River bank of Cooch Behar District, West Bengal, India was studied. A total of 55 species of butterflies were recorded from the two study sites, out of which 22 species were observed for the first time from Cooch-Behar District, not recorded earlier. Out of these, five recorded species were legally protected under the Wildlife (Protection) Act (WPA), 1972 like Chliaria othona, Lampides boeticus, and Hypolimnas misippus.  Therefore, efforts should be made for habitat conservation of the Teesta River bank.

 

Keywords: Butterfly diversity, checklist, conservation, diversity and abundance, environment, India, indicator species, Lepidoptera, Mekhliganj, pollinator species

 

Abbreviations: M—Moderate | R—Rare | VC—Very Common | WPA—Wildlife Protection Act | TA—Town Area | RB—River Bank.

 

 

Introduction

 

Butterflies play a number of critical roles in the maintenance of environmental quality in terrestrial ecosystems (Ghazoul 2002). Conservation biologists now utilize numerous species of butterflies to identify the important habitats that must be protected because they are highly sensitive to environmental parameters such as temperature, light, humidity, and rainfall (Spitzer et al. 1997; Thomas 2005; Bonebrake et al. 2010; Brereton et al. 2011). As an important pollinator, they face numerous conservation challenges as a result of the ongoing augmentation of anthropogenic activities such as industrialization, urbanization, usage of numerous pesticides in various agricultural, horticultural fields, deforestation along with monoculture plantation and overgrazing (Tiple et al. 2007; Roy et al. 2012, 2022).

There are over 18,000 species of butterflies worldwide, out of which around 1,300 butterfly species are found in India (Samanta et al. 2017; Smetacek 2017). The northern region of West Bengal, which includes the districts of Cooch-Behar, Jalpaiguri, Darjeeling, Dakshin Dinajpur, Uttar Dinajpur, Alipurduar, Malda, and Kalimpong is well-known for its diverse fauna and flora (Pal 2017). However, very few studies of butterfly diversity from this area have been documented.

In this present study, butterfly diversity was studied in the town of Mekhliganj, which is located in the Cooch Behar District. Some authors have previously reported 66 species of butterflies from other areas of the Cooch-Behar District (Das et al. 2020; Roy et al. 2022), however, their diversity from Mekhliganj town remains undocumented and hence the present study was taken up. For this study, two geographically distinct sites were chosen.

 

 

Materials and Methods

 

The butterfly diversity was studied at two geographically different study locations in the Mekhliganj city. Mekhliganj is a municipal city in Cooch Behar District located in northern part of West Bengal, covering an area of 3.88 km2, situated between 26.35°N and 88.92°E (Directorate of Census Operations V, West Bengal 2011). Field studies for butterfly diversity was conducted between January 2020 to August 2021. During this time each study site was visited twice a month from 0800 h to 1200 h. Butterflies were surveyed and photographed in these study areas. Butterfly survey and counting was conducted using the Pollard walk method (Pollard 1977). Butterflies were counted within 5 m on both sides of the transect walk. Photographs of butterfly specimens were taken with a NIKON D3500 DSLR camera.

Site 1: Town area (TA) consisted of ephemeral water bodies, ponds, marshes, bushes, wetlands, trees and shrubs, tea gardens and agricultural lands that are adjacent to human populations. Site 2: River bank (RB) is located in the Teesta riverbank (120–130 m from the water), and comprised of shrubs, agricultural grounds, aquatic plants and grasses as well as a few human settlements. The study area locations are listed in the Table 1 and photographs are given in the Images 1 & 2.

Three short forms were used to examine the occurrence status of each butterfly species. Butterflies that were very common and plentiful were designated as VC (more than 100), moderately abundant butterflies were designated as M (more than 30) and rare butterflies were designated as R (less than 30). Not even a single butterfly was harmed or killed during this study.

The colour patterns and wing designs of common butterflies were used to identify them on the spot. Other butterflies were carefully identified through photographs. Standard guides of entomological specialists, published literatures (Samanta et al. 2017; Mukherjee & Mondal 2020), field guide books (Smetacek 2017) and some websites (Know your insects 2022; Butterflies of India 2022) were used to confirm the identification of the butterfly species. Data analysis & all the diversity indices like Shannon Weiner index, Margalef index, and evenness index were calculated using PAST software version 4.10.

 

 

Results

 

In the present study, a total of 55 species were recorded belonging to 44 genera of five families namely, Papilionidae, Hesperiidae, Pieridae, Lycaenidae, and Nymphalidae. Most number of species belonged to the family Nymphalidae (22 species) whereas least number of species belonged to the family Papilionidae (three species) (Image 3–5). A total of 53 species of butterflies were observed from TA whereas, 42 species were observed from RB (Table 2).

In both the study sites, family Nymphalidae was the most abundant: 21 species from TA (39%) & 19 species from RB (45%), followed by Lycaenidae: 11 species from TA (21%) & seven species from RB (17%), Pieridae: 10 species from TA (19%) & eight species from RB (19%), Hesperiidae: eight species from TA (15%) & six species from RB (14%), and Papilionidae: three species from TA (6%) & two species from RB (5%) (Table 3; Figures 1, 2). During the study period, some butterfly species were observed more frequently than  others. Family-wise occurrence of all the butterflies is summarized in Table 2.

Results showed that alpha diversity of TA was little higher than the RB (comparing Shannon Weiner index). Margalef index showed higher diversity in TA (6.967) compared to RB (5.865). On the other hand, dominance was more in RB (0.05728) than TA (0.04523). Evenness index for both the study sites were close to each other. The Berger-Parker index, which indicates single taxa dominance was higher in RB (0.1454) compared to TA (0.1182). Table 5 summarises the different diversity indices of the butterflies from the two study sites.

 

 

Discussions

 

As per our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind from this town and will shed some light on the region’s ecosystem health and macro fauna conservation needs. Previously, three studies regarding butterfly diversity in Cooch Behar District were carried out. Thirty-three species out of a total 55 species of butterflies recorded during this study were also reported in those studies (Das et al. 2020; Roy et al. 2022). Whereas, 22 species were observed for the first time from Cooch Behar District, which were not recorded by previous authors (Das et al. 2020; Roy et al. 2022). These are – Parnara guttatus, Iambrix salsala, Telicota bambusae, Telicota colon, Matapa aria, Pseudocoladenia dan & Oriens gola from family Hesperiidae; Rapala manea, Chliaria othona, Spalgis epius, Zizina otis, Cheritra freja, Lampides boeticus & Jamides celeno from family Lycaenidae; Mycalesis perseus, M. visala, Ariadne merione, Junonia lemonias, Acraea issoria, Pantoporia sandaka & Moduza procris from family Nymphalidae, and Gandaca harina from family Pieridae.

Moreover, the number of species recorded in this study is consistent with other studies regarding butterfly diversity in various locations of West Bengal with similar landscape patterns (Ghosh & Siddique 2005; Mukherjee et al. 2015; Ghosh & Saha 2016; Mandal 2016; Mukherjee et al. 2016; Dey et al. 2017; Samanta et al. 2017; Das 2018; Pahari et al. 2018; Mahata et al. 2020; Mukherjee & Mondal 2020). The number of species recorded from the two study sites differed slightly maybe because TA was topographically more diverse than RB and also maybe TA was more suitable to support the host plants of the recorded butterfly species.

A total of five species were found to be included under the Wildlife (Protection) Act (WPA), 1972 (Table 4), viz., Chliaria othona included under schedule I and Lampides boeticus included under schedule II from family Lycaenidae; Euploea core included under schedule IV and Hypolimnas misippus included under schedule II from family Nymphalidae and Appias libythea included under schedule IV from family Pieridae.

The high diversity of butterfly fauna of Mekhliganj indicates the presence of preferable vegetation for different butterfly species. However, gradual urbanization of the town can lead to the disposal of host plants of butterflies resulting in decreased butterfly diversity.

 

 

Conclusion

 

The present study is a  preliminary record of butterfly diversity from Mekhliganj town of Cooch Behar District. As the current study was restricted to  two sites only, butterfly diversity may vary in other sites of the town. However, this study will  help to get an idea  of  the diversity of butterflies from the study area. Moreover, first report of 22 butterfly species like Parnara guttatus, Iambrix salsala, Telicota bambusae, Rapala manea, Chliaria othona, Spalgis epius, Zizina otis, Cheritra freja, Ariadne merione, Junonia lemonias, Acraea issoria, Pantoporia sandaka, Moduza procris, and Gandaca harina. from this region shows that there is need of more studies on diversity of Lepidoptera in other sites of Mekhliganj as well as entire Cooch Behar District. Investigating the butterfly fauna is crucial for recognizing and safeguarding diverse habitats facing potential anthropogenic changes, as these insects serve as potential pollinators for their nectar plants and indicate the condition of the overall ecosystem health.

 

Table 1. A brief representation of the selected sampling sites with their habitat types and locations.

Sampling site

Location

Description

 

TA

26.358°N, 88.906°E

Ephemeral water bodies, ponds, wetlands, shrubs, small and large trees, agricultural lands in close proximity to human settlements.

RB

26.359°N 88.896°E

Riverbed (120–130 meter far from water), bushes, agricultural lands, aquatic plants and grasses, few human settlements.

 

 

Table 2. Checklist of the butterflies reported from Mekhliganj.

 

Family

Common name

Scientific name

Occurance

Status

 

 

 

 

TA

RB

 

1

Papilionidae

Common Mormon

Papilio polytes

√

√

VC

Lime Butterfly

Papilio demoleus

√

√

M

Tailed Jay

Graphium agamemnon

√

-

R

2

Hesperiidae

Grass Demon

Udaspes folus

√

√

VC

Straight Swift

 

Parnara guttatus

√

√

VC

Chestnut Bob

Iambrix salsala

√

-

R

Dark Palm Dart

Telicota bambusae

√

√

M

Pale Palm Dart

Telicota colon

√

√

M

Common Redeye

Matapa aria

√

√

M

Fulvous Pied Flat

Pseudocoladenia dan

√

-

R

Common Dartlet

Oriens gola

√

√

VC

3

Pieridae

Mottled Emigrant

Catopsilia pyranthe

√

√

VC

Common Emigrant

Catopsilia pomona

√

√

VC

Striped Albatross

Appias libythea

√

√

VC

Eastern Striped Albatross

Appias olferna

√

√

VC

Common Grass Yellow

Eurema hecabe

√

√

VC

Tree Yellow

Gandaca harina

√

√

M

The Common Jezebel

 

Delias eucharis

√

 

-

 

M

Red-Spot Jezebel

Delias descombesi

√

-

R

Psyche

Leptosia nina

√

√

VC

Asian Cabbage White

Pieris canidia

√

√

M

4

Lycaenidae

Slate Flash

Rapala manea

√

-

R

Common Pierrot

Castalius rosimon

√

√

VC

Orchid Tit

Chliaria othona

√

-

R

Apefly

Spalgis epius

√

-

M

Common Hedge Blue

Acytolepis puspa

√

-

R

Pale Grass-Blue

Pseudozizeeria maha

√

√

VC

Lesser Grass-Blue

Zizina otis

√

√

VC

4

Lycaenidae

Common Imperial

Cheritra freja

√

√

M

Pea Blue

Lampides boeticus

-

√

M

Lime Blue

Chilades lajus

√

√

M

Common Cerulean

Jamides celeno

√

√

M

Dark Cerulean

Jamides bochus

√

-

M

5

Nymphalidae

Common Bushbrown

Mycalesis perseus

√

√

VC

Long-brand Bushbrown

Mycalesis visala

√

√

VC

Common Four-ring

Ypthima huebneri

√

√

VC

Common Five-ring

Ypthima baldus

√

√

VC

Common Baron

Euthalia aconthea

√

√

M

Plain Tiger

Danaus chrysippus

√

√

M

Striped Tiger

Danaus genutia

√

√

M

Blue Tiger

Tirumala limniace

√

√

M

Common Palmfly

Elymnias hypermnestra

√

√

VC

Common Castor

Ariadne merione

-

√

R

Common Indian Crow

Euploea core

√

√

M

Common Evening Brown

Melanitis leda

√

√

VC

Common Leopard

Phalanta phalantha

√

-

R

Grey Pansy

Junonia atlites

√

√

M

Peacock Pansy

Junonia almana

√

√

VC

Lemon Pansy

Junonia lemonias

√

√

M

Common Sailor

Neptis hylas

√

√

M

Yellow Coster

Acraea issoria

√

-

R

Danaid Eggfly

Hypolimnas misippus

√

√

M

Great Eggfly

Hypolimnas bolina

√

-

R

Extra Lascar

Pantoporia sandaka

√

√

M

Commander

Moduza procris

√

√

R

VC—Very Common | M—Moderate | R—Rare.

 

 

Table 3. Relative abundance of different butterfly families from the study sites.

Family

Total number of genera recorded from both the sites

Total number of species

 

 

TA

RB

Hesperiidae

07

08

06

Nymphalidae

16

21

19

Pieridae

07

10

08

Lycaenidae

11

11

07

Papilionidae

02

03

02

 

 

Table 4. List of butterflies from Mekhliganj included under Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (WPA).

 

Family

Common name

Scientific name

WPA Schedule (1972)

1

Lycaenidae

Orchid Tit

Chliaria othona

I (Part IV)

Pea Blue

Lampides boeticus

II (Part II)

2

Nymphalidae

Danaid Eggfly

Hypolimnas misippus

II (Part II)

Common Indian Crow

Euploea core

IV

3

Pieridae

Striped Albatross

Appias libythea

IV

 

 

Table 5. Site-wise diversity indices for butterfly species from Mekhliganj.

 

Town Area

River Bank

Taxa_S

53

42

Simpson_1-D

0.9548

0.9427

Shannon_H

3.461

3.23

Dominance_D

0.04523

0.05728

Evenness_e^H/S

0.601

0.6017

Margalef

6.967

5.865

Berger-Parker

0.1182

0.1454

 

 

For figures & images - - click here for full PDF

 

 

 

References

 

Bonebrake, T.C., L.C. Ponisio, C.L. Boggs & P.R. Ehrlich (2010). More than just indicators: a review of tropical butterfly ecology and conservation. Biological conservation 143(8): 1831–1841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.044

Brereton, T., D.B. Roy, I. Middlebrook, M. Botham & M. Warren (2011). The development of butterfly indicators in the United Kingdom and assessments in 2010. Journal of Insect Conservation 15(1): 139–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-010-9333-z

Butterflies of India (2022). https://www.ifoundbutterflies.org/. Accessed 29 March 2022.

Das, D. (2018). Butterfly (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) diversity in relation to habitat utilization at Jagannath Kishore College, Purulia, West Bengal (India). Journal of Insect Biodiversity 7(1): 1–16.  https://doi.org/10.12976/jib/2018.07.1.1

Das, D., A. Sen & P. Mitra (2020). Major fauna of Rasik Beel Wetland Complex (WB). Zoological Survey of India 343: 1–76.

Dey, P., A. Pyra & K. Mandal (2017). A study on butterfly diversity in Singur, West Bengal, India. E-planet 15(1): 73–77.

Directorate of Census Operations V, West Bengal (2011). District Census Handbook Koch Bihar, Census of India 2011, Series 20, Part XII A pp.593–595.

Ghazoul, J. (2002). Impact of logging on the richness and diversity of forest butterflies in a tropical dry forest in Thailand. Biodiversity & Conservation 11(3): 521–541. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014812701423

Ghosh, S. & S. Saha (2016). Seasonal diversity of butterflies with reference to habitat heterogeneity, larval host plants and nectar plants at Taki, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, India. World Scientific News 50: 197–238.

Ghosh, S. & S. Siddique (2005). Butterfly diversity in and around urban Kolkata. Records of the Zoological Survey of India 104(3–4): 111–119.

Know your insects (2022). https://www.knowyourinsects.org/. Electronic version accessed 21 January 2022.

Mahata, A., N.P. Mishra & S.K. Palita (2020). Butterflies (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) of the undivided Midnapore District, West Bengal, India: a preliminary report. Journal of Threatened Taxa 12(17): 17347–17360. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5142.12.17.17347-17360

Mandal, S. (2016). Butterflies of the rice research station and adjoining locality in Chinsurah, West Bengal, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 8(5): 8804–8813. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2815.8.5.8804-8813

Mukherjee, K. & A. Mondal (2020). Butterfly diversity in heterogeneous habitat of Bankura, West Bengal, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 12(8): 15804–15816. https://doi.org/10.11609/jot.5136.12.8.15804-15816

Mukherjee, S., G. Aditya, P. Basu & G.K. Saha (2016). Butterfly diversity in Kolkata metropolis: a synoptic check list. Check List 12(2): 1858. https://doi.org/10.15560/12.2.1858

Mukherjee, S., S. Banerjee, G.K. Saha, P. Basu & G. Aditya (2015). Butterfly diversity in Kolkata, India: An appraisal for conservation management. Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity 8(3): 210–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2015.08.001

Pahari, P.R., N.P. Mishra, A. Sahoo & T. Bhattacharya (2018). A study on the butterfly diversity of Haldia industrial belt and adjacent rural area in Purba Medinipur district, West Bengal, India. World Scientific News 97: 207–224.

Pal, A. (2017). Dragonflies and damselflies of University of North Bengal campus, West Bengal, India with new distribution record of Agriocnemis kalinga Nair & Subramanian, 2014. Journal of Threatened Taxa 9(12): 11067–11073.

Pollard, E. (1977). A method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. Biological conservation 12(2): 115–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(77)90065-9

Roy, G.C., A. Miah, S. Roy, D. Roy, D. Kar, S. Banerjee & M. Gupta (2022). Diversity and Abundance of butterfly as an environmental indicator at Dinhata Subdivision, Cooch Behar, West Bengal, India. Notulae Scientia Biologicae 14(1): 11156. https://doi.org/10.15835/nsb14111156

Roy, U.S., M. Mukherjee & S.K. Mukhopadhyay (2012). Butterfly diversity and abundance with reference to habitat heterogeneity in and around Neora Valley National Park, West Bengal, India. Our Nature 10(1): 53–60. https://doi.org/10.3126/on.v10i1.7751

Samanta, S., D. Das & S. Mandal (2017). Butterfly fauna of Baghmundi, Purulia, West Bengal, India: a preliminary checklist. Journal of Threatened Taxa 9(5): 10198–10207. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2841.9.5.10198-10207

Smetacek, P. (2017).  A naturalist’s guide to the butterflies of India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. 1st ed. John Beaufoy Publishing Limited.

Spitzer, K., J. Jaros̆, J. Havelka & J. Leps̆ (1997). Effect of small-scale disturbance on butterfly communities of an Indochinese montane rainforest. Biological Conservation 80(1): 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(96)00079-1

Thomas, J.A. (2005). Monitoring change in the abundance and distribution of insects using butterflies and other indicator groups. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360(1454): 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2004.1585

Tiple, A.D., A.M. Khurad & R.L. Dennis (2007). Butterfly diversity in relation to a human-impact gradient on an Indian university campus. Nota Lepidopterologica 30(1): 179.