Journal of Threatened Taxa |
www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2024 | 16(7): 25516–25527
ISSN 0974-7907
(Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8930.16.7.25516-25527
#8930 | Received 27
January 2024 | Final received 30 April 2024 | Finally accepted 21 May 2024
Assemblages of frugivorous
butterflies in two urban parks in Quezon City, Philippines
Micael Gabriel A. Itliong
1, Nikki Heherson A. Dagamac
2 & Jade Aster T. Badon 3
1 The Graduate School, University
of Santo Tomas, España Blvd, Sampaloc, Manila, 1008
Philippines.
1,2 Initiatives for Conservation,
Landscape Ecology, Bioprospecting, and Biomodeling (iCOLABB), Research Center for the
Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Santo Tomas, España
Blvd, Sampaloc, Manila, 1008 Philippines.
2 Department of Biological
Sciences, College of Science, University of Santo Tomas, España
Blvd, Sampaloc, Manila, 1008 Philippines.
2 Research Center
for the Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Santo Tomas, Manila 1008,
Philippines.
3 Animal Biology Division,
Institute of Biol. Sciences, Univ. of the Philippines Los Baños,
Laguna, 4031, Philippines.
1 imicaelgabriel@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 nadagamac@ust.edu.ph,
3 jtbadon@up.edu.ph
Editor: Aisha Sultana, University of Delhi, Delhi,
India. Date of
publication: 26 July 2024 (online & print)
Citation: Itliong, M.G.A., N.H.A. Dagamac
& J.A.T. Badon (2024). Assemblages
of frugivorous butterflies in two urban parks in Quezon City, Philippines. Journal of Threatened Taxa 16(7):
25516–25527. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8930.16.7.25516-25527
Copyright: © Itliong 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 was funded by the DOST-SEI Accelerated Science and Technology Human Resource Development Program-National Science Consortium Component (ASTHRDP-NSC), through the Student Research Support Fund
(SRSF). NHAD has received small support from RCNAS and as a Balik Scientist of DOST-PCAARRD.
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Author details: Micael Gabriel A. Itliong, M.Sc., a graduate of the University of Santo Tomas Graduate School,
focused his master’s thesis on butterflies in Metro Manila’s urban parks.
Currently an instructor at the Polytechnic University of the
Philippines, he teaches Ecology and Invertebrate Zoology. His research
interests lie in Philippine butterflies, and he advocates for Philippine
biodiversity conservation as an active member of iCOLABB. Nikki Heherson A. Dagamac, Dr. rer. nat., assistant professor at the University of Santo Tomas’
Department of Biological Sciences, studies the evolution and ecology of slime molds in the Philippines and the
tropics. He now leads various conservation projects using ecological modeling and founder of iCOLABB (Initiatives for Conservation, Landscape Ecology, Bioprospecting, and Biomodeling). Jade Aster T. Badon, assistant professor at the
University of the Philippines Los Baños’ Animal Biology Division, holds
M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Entomology and Nematology from
the University of Florida. As president of PhiLep (Philippine Lepidoptera), he focuses his research on Philippine
butterfly biology.
Authors contributions: Concept, design, and supervision: MGAI, NHAD & JATB; Data collection & analysis: MGAI, NHAD & JATB; Manuscript writing MGAI,
NHAD & JATB; Manuscript review & comments: MGAI, NHAD & JATB;
Funding acquisition: MGAI.
Acknowledgements: We want to thank Cherry Lopez and
Sarah Agacaoili of La Mesa Ecopark
and Fides Sandoval and Melody Malano of Ninoy Aquino
Parks and Wildlife Center in Quezon City, Metro
Manila, for their authorization and assistance provided by these urban parks
played a crucial role in the successful implementation of this study on
butterfly diversity. The researchers would also like to thank Marietta Itliong, Nieves Itliong, and Mica
Itliong for their assistance during the data
gathering, Christian Elmarc Ocenar-Bautista
for his assistance in data analysis, and James Eduard Dizon
for generating the study site map. All identifications were validated by Dr. Jade Aster T. Badon, an
entomologist and butterfly systematist from the University of the Philippines,
with accompanying photographic vouchers. This collaboration hopes to contribute
substantially to the progress of Philippine Lepidoptera’s ecological study and
conservation efforts.
Abstract: Urban parks play a crucial role
in supporting biodiversity, yet limited research on urban insect diversity
poses challenges for conservation. Comprehensive biodiversity records are
essential for monitoring insect population trends. Despite their significance
as bioindicators, many urban parks lack baseline data on butterfly populations.
This study utilized bait traps to assess butterfly diversity in two Quezon City
parks: La Mesa Ecopark (LME) and Ninoy Aquino Parks
and Wildlife Center (NAPWC). Bait trapping facilitates
species identification and population trend monitoring without harming local
butterfly populations. From April to August 2023, two bait traps equipped with
fermented bananas and rum as lures were deployed in each park. A total of 145
individuals representing nine morphospecies of the Nymphalidae family were recorded. Differences in butterfly
diversity were noted between LME and NAPWC, with LME showing greater diversity.
However, sampling efforts at NAPWC may need expansion to ensure exhaustiveness,
potentially affecting comparison accuracy. Notably, four species observed in
both parks are endemic to the Philippines, while data on the IUCN Red lIst status of the remaining species are unavailable.
Keywords: Bait trap, biodiversity,
bioindicators, La Mesa Ecopark, Lepidoptera, Ninoy
Aquino Parks and Wildlife Center, Nymphalidae.
INTRODUCTION
Importance of studying butterfly
species in urban parks
Urban parks play a crucial
role in cities by providing a range of ecosystem services, such as biodiversity
preservation and urban climate regulation (Sadeghian
& Vardanyan 2013; Mexia
et al. 2018; Taylor et al. 2020; Sarı & Bayraktar 2023). Traditional efforts to combat global
biodiversity decline have focused mainly on conserving natural environments,
yet various flora and fauna persist in urban refuges (Gentili
et al. 2023). Promoting biodiversity in urban ecosystems enhances the
well-being of urban residents (Carrus et al. 2015;
Cameron et al. 2020; Marselle et al. 2021) and
contributes to conserving biodiversity in natural ecosystems (Savard et al.
2000).
While the literature extensively
covers the impact of urbanization on prominent animal like birds and mammals
(Seress & Liker 2015; Isaksson 2018; Schmidt et al. 2020), research
focusing on invertebrates remains notably scarce, creating a concerning
knowledge deficit in biodiversity conservation. Despite evidence of insect
sensitivity to environmental change (Kellermann &
van Heerwaarden 2019; Harvey et al. 2023),
comprehensive data is still lacking. Butterflies are an exception, with
extensive research covering many species (Essens et
al. 2017). The conservation status of butterfly species is primarily assessed
by analyzing population trends and changes in range, relying on extensive and
systematic monitoring efforts spanning several decades.
Role of urban parks as crucial
habitats for butterflies
Concomitant with economic growth
engendered by urban development are significant alterations to
human-environmental interactions (Haase 2021). Urban
expansion, a hallmark of this expansion, demonstrably deteriorates
biodiversity, disrupts vital ecosystem functions, and alters microclimates
(Frank et al. 2017). However, recent research suggests that even seemingly
inconsequential urban greenspaces, such as parks, can possess significant
ecological value (Loures et al. 2007). Despite their
relatively small size and artificial composition, these urban parks play a
crucial role within the intricate network of the urban ecosystem, providing
essential ecosystem services (Davies et al. 2011).
Butterflies face a multitude of
challenges, such as habitat degradation (Geyle et al.
2021; Warren et al. 2021), climate change (Davies 2019; Crossley et al. 2021)
and pollution ( Shephard et al. 2020; Liu et al. 2021;
Parlin et al. 2022), resulting in a worldwide
decrease in butterfly populations. Assessing changes in butterfly populations
is challenging because natural fluctuations (e.g., short-term weather changes
(Oliver et al. 2015)) make it difficult to confirm actual decline (Van Strien et al. 1997). This raises serious concerns about
ecosystem function as well as human food security, since some species are
pollinators or otherwise agriculturally important (van der Sluijs
2020). Studies of butterfly populations underscore the need to assess trends in
insect populations, identify vulnerable species and potential pest species (Badon et al. 2023; Eastwood et al. 2006), and determine the
underlying causes of their decline. The majority of data so far has come from
Europe (Warren et al. 2021), United States (Wepprich
et al. 2019; Crossley et al. 2021; Grant et al. 2021), and Australia (Geyle et al. 2021; Sanderson et al. 2021).
The Philippines features a
remarkable diversity of butterflies, with a documented total of 927 species, of
which >300 are endemic (Treadaway 2012). The
archipelagic nature of the Philippines significantly contributes to shaping its
biological diversity (Brown et al. 2013). While it poses challenges for
conservation, it also provides opportunities for understanding unique
ecosystems. While species isolation can lead to speciation, some species are at
risk of extinction if their habitat becomes too fragmented. Moreover,
anthropogenic environmental changes provide novel ecological niches, which
modify selection in many ways to stimulate diversification-however, these
changes also frequently eliminate niches and result in extirpations (Ålund et al. 2023).
Understanding how increasing
urban sprawl affects biodiversity is imperative in conserving biodiversity in
urban green areas (Kuussaari et al. 2021). Among the
numerous threats to butterflies in the Philippines is habitat fragmentation
brought about by anthropogenic activities (Posa &
Sodhi 2006). However, despite the extensive effects
of urbanization on natural ecosystems, butterflies remain resilient components
within the urban landscape (Pignataro et al. 2023).
Moreover, there is a noticeable scarcity of data that looks into the butterfly
diversity in urban parks; thus, this research sought to compile a list of
butterflies found in two major urban parks in Quezon City. This study primarily
focuses on the efficacy of bait traps for capturing frugivorous butterflies,
aiming to gather data representative of the broader butterfly population in
urban areas.
METHODS
Study Sites
La Mesa Ecopark
The La Mesa Ecopark,
established in 1929, is an essential ecological reserve that serves as the
primary water source for Metro Manila. This 700-hectare reserve in Quezon City
includes a dam and an ecological reserve spanning 2,000 ha of contiguous forest
(Image 1). The La Mesa Ecopark is characterized by
its dense tree canopies, which provide ample shade, and the paved main trails,
which accommodate bicycles. Visitors can access the park via public
transportation, and sufficient parking is available (Masangkay
et al. 2016; Estoque et al. 2018).
The La Mesa Dam Reservoir, the only
major watershed in the metropolitan area, is protected and located adjacent to
the park. The park’s biodiversity surveys have revealed a diverse range of
species, including ants (Pag-Ong et al. 2022), slime molds (Macabago
et al. 2010), trees (Malabrigo et al. 2016), and
vertebrates (Estoque et al. 2018). The park used to
have a butterfly sanctuary, but it was closed during the 2020 pandemic. The
sanctuary, managed by a concessionaire, was intended to house butterflies bred
in captivity. There has yet to be a study on butterfly diversity within the
park, making it an appropriate study site to evaluate butterfly diversity in
urban areas.
Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife
Center
The Ninoy Aquino Parks and
Wildlife Center (NAPWC) was established in 1954 as part of the Quezon Memorial
Park. It spans over an area of 197.28 ha and is located at 14.6522°, 121.0453°
(Image 2). Despite being located beside a busy highway the park has a tranquil
atmosphere. It features an artificial lagoon that is surrounded by lush,
cultivated plants. Visitors can access the park through paved pathways and can
find shaded areas to relax and have picnics.
The NAPWC is a protected area
that is home to diverse tree species. It also has a rescue center that houses
various animals, including tigers, monkeys, birds, and snakes. Research
conducted within the park has primarily focused on animal diseases (Maluping et al. 2007; Lumabas et
al. 2018; Sioson et al. 2018; Gamalo
et al. 2019), bird surveys (Vallejo et al. 2009), and freshwater invertebrates
(de Leon et al. 2023) in the Philippines. However, there has been no study on
butterfly diversity in this park to date.
Sampling
Duration of the Study, Trap
Placement, and Monitoring Scheme
The
investigation, conducted over five months of April–August 2023, comprised systematic
weekly observations throughout both dry (April–May) and wet seasons
(June–August). La Mesa Ecopark (LME) facilitated 13
bait trapping sessions, while Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Center (NAPWC)
hosted ten sessions. Bait trapping sessions were subject to postponement during
inclement weather, and the frequency of sessions was overseen by the regulatory
constraints imposed by the respective management authorities of the urban
parks.
Traps were set up between 0800 h
and 1000 h in sunny conditions, equipped with rainproof plastic coverings to
keep captured butterflies dry in case of sudden rain. After a minimum of 24 h
placement, traps were retrieved, and captured butterflies and bycatches were
released before deploying fresh traps for subsequent sessions. Each urban park
had two traps, at least 200 m away from each other and positioned on sunlit
trees less frequented by park visitors’ areas to prevent disturbance and theft,
in strict adherence to the regulations stipulated in permits issued by the
respected administrative bodies responsible for park management.
Bait trapping facilitated the
evaluation of specimens caught and subsequent bait replacement. After
identifying and recording, butterflies and other insect bycatches were
released. The identification of butterflies at the species level and endemicity
in the Philippines was accomplished by consulting a wide range of relevant
taxonomic literature, including comprehensive publications by Page & Treadaway (2004), Schroeder & Treadaway
(2005), Treadaway & Schroeder (2012), Hardy &
Lawrence (2017), and Badon (2023). Additionally, the
website authored by Badon et al. (2013) entitled
“Philippine Lepidoptera” was employed as a resource for conducting image
comparisons and species identification, ensuring the research’s thoroughness
and reliability.
Bait trap Specifications and
Observation Method
This study employed modified Van Someren-Rydon traps (see Image 2), initially proposed by
DeVries et al. (1997). These traps, constructed from white nylon netting, are
cylindrical with dimensions measuring 38 cm in diameter and 100 cm in height.
The choice of these traps was based on their proven effectiveness in capturing
butterflies, as demonstrated in previous studies. To protect captured specimens
from dew and rain, two wire hoops, enclosed within plastic casings, are affixed
to the top end of each trap. A zippered aperture on the side was employed for
ease of insect removal, replacing the use of Velcro. Additionally, a 25 cm
diameter plywood sheet was affixed to the lower portion of the netting to serve
as an entrance for insects. Beneath this entrance, another plywood sheet of
identical dimensions was suspended using hooks, allowing for a five-inch
clearance for butterflies. Positioned centrally on the suspended plywood sheet
was a reusable plastic plate, 15 cm in diameter, intended for precise bait
placement.
The bait selection process relied
on prior research from the Philippines, selecting fermented banana as the
bait—a mixture of Tanduay Rhum, with a 40% alcohol
content by volume, and mature, fermented bananas. The preparation of this bait
mixture occurred two days before its use to ensure thorough fermentation. The
researchers deposit generous quantity of the bait mixture at each trap’s base
and left it undisturbed for a minimum of 24 hours to effectively monitor
captures.
Permits issued for both parks
stipulated minimal to no direct contact with wildlife, including butterflies.
Accordingly, captured butterflies were visually observed, photographed using a
smartphone camera, and documented. All butterflies and incidental catches were
released from the traps by gently tapping the exterior of the bait trap to
encourage flight. This tapping was done with hand to minimize any potential
harm to the butterflies. The zippered access was used to facilitate this
process. Additionally, bait replenishment occurred at the commencement of each
baiting session.
Diversity analyses
All ecological data analyses were
conducted using R version 3.6.0 (Team 2013) through RStudio
version 1.1.453 (Team 2016). Firstly, species accumulation curves (SAC) to
assess the adequacy of the sampling effort in this study and estimate species
diversity. SAC is a useful tool for evaluating the effectiveness of a fauna
survey in accurately representing the fauna population within a geographic area
(Thompson & Withers 2003; Ugland et al. 2003;
Colwell et al. 2004). The curve shows the cumulative species count in relation
to sampling effort and indicates the rate of new species discovery. A steep
initial slope suggests rich species diversity or limited sampling, while a
flattening curve indicates diminishing returns in species identification. This
study calculated SAC using R packages ggplot2 (Wickham & Wickham 2016) and iNEXT (Hsieh et al. 2016). Next, species diversity was
calculated using the Hill series of diversity indices (Hill 1973; Jost 2007). This approach considers species richness and
evenness based on the occurrence of butterfly species gathered during the rapid
assessment. The researchers used the R package iNEXT
(Hsieh et al. 2016) for these calculations as well.
RESULTS
Species richness
One-hundred-and-forty-five
individuals representing nine species of butterflies were recorded in La Mesa Ecopark and Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Center. All
were fruit-feeding nymphalids of the subfamilies Charaxinae, Nymphalinae, and Satyrinae. The subfamily Satyrinae
presented the highest abundance and number of species, followed by Nymphalinae in terms of abundance. The most dominant
species were Amathusia phidippus
pollicaris Butler, 1870 (N = 38, 26%), Hypolimnas bolina philippensis Butler, 1874 (N = 30, 22%) and Melanitis leda leda (Linnaeus, 1758) (N = 26, 17%).
Species diversity
The quantified alpha diversity,
which measures species richness and diversity within local habitats, is
essential for understanding the ecological dynamics of butterfly populations in
urban parks. Figure 2 presents box plots illustrating alpha diversity metrics
between two urban parks: La Mesa Ecopark (LME) and
Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Center (NAPWC). LME emerges to be more diverse
in terms of species richness and Shannon diversity.
DISCUSSION
Before this study, there was no
available data on what butterfly species occur in both parks; therefore,
inferring diversity and population changes over time is impossible. All of the
butterfly species recorded in both of the parks belong to the Nymphalidae family, which consists of around 7,200 species
that are distributed throughout all continents except Antarctica (Zhang et al.
2008; Yan et al. 2023) and are mostly known to be frugivorous. Although
alternative bait lures could have been employed, potentially leading to
different results, the choice was guided by previous butterfly trapping
research conducted in the Philippines (Toledo & Mohagan
2011; Gestiada et al. 2014; Mohagan
et al. 2018; Reeves & Daniels 2020). Nevertheless, the species accumulation
curve (see Figure 1) indicates adequate sampling was conducted in LME.
Conversely, the curve has yet to reach its asymptote in NAPWC, implying that
further sampling efforts could reveal additional species. Various factors could
contribute to the species accumulation curve failing to reach the asymptote.
The most evident explanation is the possibility that the sampling effort has
yet to achieve full exhaustiveness. Another plausible scenario is that the
baits used might not be effective in attracting butterflies. However, it is
more probable that the constraints of time imposed by park authorities impeded
the optimal number of bait trapping, and increasing
the sampling effort beyond the confines stipulated by the park might have
facilitated the capture of additional butterfly species.
Among the butterfly species, only
three occur in both parks (see Table 3), namely, Hypolimnas
bolina philippensis
Butler, 1874, Melanitis atrax
atrax (C. & R. Felder, 1863), and Melanitis leda leda (Linnaeus, 1758). Both parks have recorded three
unique butterfly species (see Table 2). NAPWC exclusively recorded Charaxes solon (Fabricius,
1793), Junonia hedonia
ida (Cramer, 1775), and an individual Athyma gutama gutama (Moore, 1858). La Mesa Ecopark,
on the other hand, recorded three satyrine species: Amathusia phidippus pollicaris Butler, 1870, Discophora
ogina ogina (Godart, 1824), and Mycalesis
igoleta C. & R. Felder, 1863.
As indicated by the abundance data
presented in Table 4, it is anticipated that a greater number of species would
be observed during the wet season. This trend is commonly associated with the
wet season’s propensity to foster lush vegetation and abundant flowering
plants, consequently offering substantial food sources for both butterfly
larvae and adults.
It is worth discussing the
presence of D. ogina in LME. According to
Schroeder & Treadaway (2005), species under this
genus can be found in forests. They may be attracted to lights and ripened
fruits such as pineapple, sometimes flying towards lowland areas. This
occurrence and behavior were observed in the Balinsasayao
Twin Lakes Natural Park (a Montane Forest). The species were attracted to the
bait trap (bananas with Tanduay rhum).
It was also observed near the Sierra Madre in Baler, Aurora, where it got
attracted to household lights. The presence of D. ogina
in LME may indicate isolation caused by urbanization, or there may be habitat
corridors that connect LME to the mountains of Sierra Madre on the east.
The findings depicted in Figure 2
highlight a contrast between the LME and NAPWC in terms of species richness and
diversity. Notably, the LME site demonstrates a considerably higher level of
Shannon and Simpson diversity than NAPWC. However, it is crucial to reiterate
the caution when interpreting this discrepancy, given the ongoing nature of
sampling efforts at NAPWC, as indicated by the species accumulation curve
depicted in Figure 1. This curve underscores that the sampling conducted at
NAPWC may still need to be exhaustive, potentially impacting the accuracy of
the comparison. Therefore, it’s essential to approach these findings with
caution. Nevertheless, the T-test results presented in Table 5 underscore a
statistically significant difference in the number or diversity of observed
butterflies between the two urban parks.
It is worth noting that LME is
situated adjacent to a semi-natural landscape, suggesting that preserving
natural habitats surrounding the city will be crucial for successfully
preserving urban butterfly species (Koh et al. 2004). This result is consistent
with previous studies conducted in Singapore (Koh & Sodhi
2004), southern China (Sing et al. 2016), and Brazil (Brown & Freitas
2002), which found that urban parks connected to forests had a greater
diversity of butterfly species than standalone parks with limited space or
lacking diverse flora. It is also expected that LME would have the most
butterfly species, as Mohagan et al. (2011) have
emphasized that butterflies prefer forested habitats over disturbed areas.
Challenges and opportunities in
conservation
Utilizing bait traps for
butterfly diversity assessment presents several advantages over the
conventional insect net sampling technique. This approach allows researchers to
target a more specific subset of local butterfly populations. The presence or
absence of butterfly species in both study sites may offer insights into the
type of habitat these species inhabit. Notably, the occurrence of endemic
species in urban parks carries significant implications for public awareness
and biodiversity conservation (Padrón et al. 2020; Koethe et al. 2023) The presence of endemic butterfly
species in these urban parks, as evidenced in Table 2, serves as an indicator
of the overall ecological health and habitat integrity (Pe’er
& Settele 2008; Miller III et al. 2011) —a trend
observed among invertebrates in general (Paoletti
1999; Gerlach et al. 2013). Thus, the presence of these species within urban
parks underscores the critical importance of preserving natural habitats within
urban environments. Habitat alterations, as noted by de Carvalho (Santos et al.
2020) and Uehara-Prado et al. (2007), can influence the diversity of
frugivorous butterflies, potentially explaining the disparities in abundances
and species presence or absence between LME and NAPWC. Consequently, long-term
monitoring of butterflies in these parks is essential to establish baseline
data regarding their occurrence and abundance.
CONCLUSION
The findings of this study
emphasize the importance of urban parks in sustaining butterfly diversity,
including the presence of endemic species. To ensure the survival of butterfly
populations, it is important to focus on preserving and restoring
interconnected natural forests and facilitating gene flow among butterfly
populations. Monitoring schemes should be implemented to track butterfly
populations in these parks as they are sensitive to environmental changes. Bait
trapping is an effective method for monitoring butterfly populations in urban
parks. However, due to urban management protocols, the use of fermented bananas
as bait is limited. Therefore, future research should explore the efficacy of
alternative lure bait traps in urban park settings. Butterflies are considered
umbrella species and can serve as vital conservation indicators for these
remaining refuges. Protecting these species is vital in the face of increasing
urbanization risks. Urgent measures must be taken to safeguard these unique
habitats and ensure the preservation of butterfly populations within urban
parks. Integrating scientific data into urban planning and management processes
is essential to understand the ecological significance of these habitats and
devise effective conservation strategies.
Table 1. Geographical coordinates for bait
traps at La Mesa Ecopark (LME) and Ninoy Aquino Parks
and Wildlife Center (NAPWC).
|
Study Site |
Bait Trap
One |
Bait Trap
Two |
||||
|
Latitude |
Longitude |
Elevation |
Latitude |
Longitude |
Elevation |
|
|
LME |
14.711944 |
121.072778 |
60 m |
14.711389 |
121.077222 |
70 m |
|
NAPWC |
14.649167 |
121.043889 |
40 m |
14.6525 |
121.043333 |
50 m |
Table 2. List of nymphalids
recorded in La Mesa Ecopark (LME) and Ninoy Aquino
Parks and Wildlife Center (NAPWC). The species’ endemicity is based on whether
they have only been recorded in the Philippines, as indicated in the relevant
taxonomic literature.
|
Subfamily |
Scientific name |
Common name |
Endemicity in the Philippines |
IUCN Status |
|
Charaxinae |
Charaxes solon (Fabricius, 1793) |
Black Rajah |
Native |
Not Available |
|
Nymphalinae |
Hypolimnas bolina philippensis Butler, 1874 |
Great Egg-fly |
Non-endemic |
Not Available |
|
Nymphalinae |
Junonia hedonia ida (Cramer, [1775]) |
Brown Pansy |
Non-endemic |
Not Available |
|
Nymphalinae |
Athyma gutama gutama (Moore, 1858) |
Sergeant |
Endemic |
Not Available |
|
Satyrinae |
Amathusia phidippus pollicaris Butler, 1870 |
Palm King |
Non-endemic |
Not Available |
|
Satyrinae |
Discophora ogina ogina (Godart, [1824]) |
Duffer |
Endemic |
Not Available |
|
Satyrinae |
Melanitis atrax atrax (C. & R.
Felder, 1863) |
Evening Brown |
Endemic |
Not Available |
|
Satyrinae |
Melanitis leda leda (Linnaeus, 1758) |
Common Evening Brown |
Non-endemic |
Least Concern |
|
Satyrinae |
Mycalesis igoleta C. & R. Felder, 1863 |
Igoleta Bush Brown |
Endemic |
Not Available |
Table 3. Occurrence and number of
individual butterflies recorded in LME (La Mesa Ecopark)
and NAPWC (Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Center), recorded from April to
August 2023.
|
|
Species |
LME |
NAPWC |
|
1 |
Charaxes solon (Fabricius, 1793) |
0 |
3 |
|
2 |
Hypolimnas bolina philippensis Butler, 1874 |
9 |
23 |
|
3 |
Junonia hedonia ida (Cramer, [1775]) |
0 |
3 |
|
4 |
Athyma gutama gutama (Moore, 1858) |
0 |
1 |
|
5 |
Amathusia phidippus pollicaris Butler, 1870 |
38 |
0 |
|
6 |
Discophora ogina ogina (Godart, [1824]) |
9 |
0 |
|
7 |
Melanitis atrax atrax (C. & R.
Felder, 1863) |
13 |
2 |
|
8 |
Melanitis leda leda (Linnaeus, 1758) |
24 |
2 |
|
9 |
Mycalesis igoleta C. & R. Felder, 1863 |
18 |
0 |
Table 4. Number of species recorded in each Nymphalidae subfamily in the two urban parks: LME (La Mesa Ecopark) and NAPWC (Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife
Center). Dry season—April–May | rainy season—June–August.
|
Nymphalidae Subfamily |
LME |
NAPWC |
||
|
Dry |
Wet |
Dry |
Wet |
|
|
Charaxinae |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
Danainae |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
Morphinae |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
Nymphalinae |
3 |
4 |
1 |
7 |
|
Satyrinae |
3 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
|
Number of species |
9 |
11 |
2 |
12 |
Table 5. Comparison of Shannon diversity
index between LME (La Mesa Ecopark) and NAPWC (Ninoy
Aquino Parks and Wildlife Center) using Hutcheson t-Test.
|
|
LME |
NAPWC |
|
Abundance |
111 |
34 |
|
Species Richness |
6 |
6 |
|
Shannon Diversity |
0.002647 |
0.036779 |
|
t value |
2.627909081 |
|
|
Degree of freedom |
39 |
|
For
figures & images - - click here for full PDF
REFERENCES
Ålund, M., M. Cenzer,
N. Bierne, J. Boughman, J. Cerca, M. Comerford, A. Culicchi, B. Langerhans, S. McFarlane, M. Möst, H. North, A. Qvarnström, M.
Ravinet, R. Svanbäck &
S. Taylor (2023).
Anthropogenic Change and the Process of Speciation. Cold Spring Harbor
Perspectives in Biology 16(5): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a041455
Badon, J.A.T. (2023). A Naturalist’s Guide to the
Butterflies of the Philippines. John Beaufoy
Publishing, 176 pp.
Badon, J.A.T., D.E.M. General &
D.J. Lohman (2023). The larval host plant and ant associate of Nacaduba
pavana georgi (Lepidoptera:
Lycaenidae) in Negros, Philippines. Tropical
Lepidoptera Research 33(22): 124–129.
Brown, K.S.,
& A.V.L. Freitas (2002). Butterfly communities of urban forest fragments in Campinas, São
Paulo, Brazil: structure, instability, environmental correlates, and
conservation. Journal of Insect Conservation 6(4): 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024462523826
Brown, R.M.,
C.D. Siler, C.H. Oliveros, J.A. Esselstyn, A.C. Diesmos, P.A. Hosner, C.W. Linkem, A.J. Barley, J.R. Oaks & M.B. Sanguila (2013). Evolutionary processes of
diversification in a model island archipelago. Annual Review of Ecology,
Evolution, and Systematics 44: 411–435. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160323
Cameron,
R.W., P. Brindley, M. Mears, K. McEwan, F. Ferguson, D. Sheffield, A.
Jorgensen, J. Riley, J. Goodrick & L. Ballard
(2020). Where the
wild things are! Do urban green spaces with greater avian biodiversity promote
more positive emotions in humans? Urban ecosystems 23: 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-020-00929-z
Carrus, G., M. Scopelliti,
R. Lafortezza, G. Colangelo, F. Ferrini,
F. Salbitano, M. Agrimi, L. Portoghesi,
P. Semenzato & G. Sanesi
(2015). Go greener,
feel better? The positive effects of biodiversity on the well-being of
individuals visiting urban and peri-urban green areas. Landscape and Urban
Planning 134: 221–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.10.022
Colwell,
R.K., C.X. Mao & J. Chang (2004). Interpolating, extrapolating,
and comparing incidence-based species accumulation curves. Ecology
85(10): 2717–2727.
Crossley,
M.S., O.M. Smith, L.L. Berry, R. Phillips-Cosio, J. Glassberg, K.M. Holman, J.G. Holmquest,
A.R. Meier, S.A. Varriano & M.R. McClung (2021). Recent climate change is
creating hotspots of butterfly increase and decline across North America. Global
Change Biology 27(12): 2702–2714.
Davies, W.J.
(2019). Multiple
temperature effects on phenology and body size in wild butterflies predict a
complex response to climate change. Ecology 100(4): e02612. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2612
Davies, Z.G.,
J.L. Edmondson, A. Heinemeyer, J.R. Leake & K.J. Gaston (2011). Mapping an urban ecosystem
service: quantifying above-ground carbon storage at a city-wide scale. Journal
of Applied Ecology 48(5): 1125–1134.
de Leon, J.
R., D.T. Tordesillas, S. Souissi, G.A. Cuadrasal, S.K.P. Guinto, E.Z.C. Rizo
& R.D.S. Papa (2023). Temperature as main driver of the growth of an endemic Philippine
freshwater copepod (Copepoda: Calanoida:
Diaptomidae). Journal of Crustacean Biology 43(2):
ruad031. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcbiol/ruad031
DeVries,
P.J., D. Murray & R. Lande (1997). Species diversity in vertical,
horizontal, and temporal dimensions of a fruit-feeding butterfly community in
an Ecuadorian rainforest. Biological journal of the Linnean
Society 62(3): 343–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1997.tb01630.x
Eastwood, R.,
S.L. Boyce & B.D. Farrell (2006). The provenance of Old World Swallowtail butterflies, Papilio
demoleus (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae),
recently discovered in the New World. Annals of the Entomological Society of
America 99(1): 164–168. https://doi.org/10.1603/0013-8746(2006)099[0164:TPOOWS]2.0.CO;2
Essens, T., F. Langevelde,
R. Vos, C. Swaay & M. Wallisdevries
(2017). Ecological
determinants of butterfly vulnerability across the European continent. Journal
of Insect Conservation 21: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-017-9972-4
Estoque, R.C., Y. Murayama, R.D. Lasco, S. W. Myint, F.B. Pulhin, C. Wang, M. Ooba & Y. Hijioka
(2018). Changes in
the landscape pattern of the La Mesa Watershed–The last ecological frontier of
Metro Manila, Philippines. Forest Ecology and Management 430: 280–290.
Gamalo, L.E., J. Dimalibot,
K.A. Kadir, B. Singh & V.G. Paller (2019). Plasmodium knowlesi
and other malaria parasites in long-tailed macaques from the Philippines. Malaria
Journal 18(1): 1–7.
Gentili, R., L. Quaglini,
G. Galasso, C. Montagnani, S. Caronni, E. Cardarelli & S. Citterio
(2023). Urban refugia
sheltering biodiversity across world cities. Urban Ecosystems 27:
219–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-023-01432-x
Gerlach, J.,
M. Samways & J. Pryke (2013). Terrestrial invertebrates as
bioindicators: an overview of available taxonomic groups. Journal of Insect
Conservation 17: 831–850.
Gestiada, E.C., M.L. Castillo, N.C. Bantayan & J.B. Balatibat
(2014). Butterfly
species diversity and habitat heterogeneity across altitudinal gradients of Mt.
Banahaw de Majayjay,
Philippines. Ecosystems and Development Journal 5(1): 3–10.
Geyle, H.M., M.F. Braby,
M. Andren, E.P. Beaver, P. Bell, C. Byrne, M.
Castles, F. Douglas, R.V. Glatz & B. Haywood (2021). Butterflies on the brink:
identifying the Australian butterflies (Lepidoptera) most at risk of
extinction. Austral Entomology 60(1): 98–110.
Grant, T.J.,
N. Krishnan & S.P. Bradbury (2021). Conservation risks and benefits
of establishing monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus)
breeding habitats close to maize and soybean fields in the north central United
States: A landscape-scale analysis of the impact of foliar insecticide on
nonmigratory monarch butterfly populations. Integrated Environmental
Assessment and Management 17(5): 989–1002.
Haase, D. (2021). Continuous integration in urban
social-ecological systems science needs to allow for spacing co-existence. Ambio 50(9): 1644–1649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-020-01449-y
Hardy, P.B.
& J.M. Lawrence (2017). Field Guide to Butterflies of the Philippines. Siri Scientific
Press, 448 pp.
Harvey, J.A.,
K. Tougeron, R. Gols, R.
Heinen, M. Abarca, P.K. Abram, Y. Basset, M. Berg, C.
Boggs & J. Brodeur (2023). Scientists’ warning on climate change and insects. Ecological
Monographs 93(1): e1553. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1553
Hill, M.O.
(1973). Diversity and
evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54(2):
427–432.
Hsieh, T., K.
Ma & A. Chao (2016). iNEXT: an R
package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity (H ill numbers).
Methods in Ecology and Evolution 7(12): 1451–1456.
Isaksson, C.
(2018). Impact of
Urbanization on Birds, pp. 235–257. In: Tietze, D.T. (ed.). Bird Species:
How They Arise, Modify and Vanish. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91689-7_13
Jost, L. (2007). Partitioning diversity into
independent alpha and beta components. Ecology 88(10): 2427–2439.
Kellermann, V. & B. van Heerwaarden (2019). Terrestrial insects and climate
change: adaptive responses in key traits. Physiological Entomology 44(2):
99–115.
Koethe, S., N. Bakanov,
C. Brühl, L. Eichler, T. Fickel,
B. Gemeinholzer, T. Hörren,
A. Lux, G. Meinel, R. Mühlethaler,
L. Schäffler, C. Scherber, F. Schneider, M. Sorg,
S. Swenson, W. Terlau, A. Turck & G.
Lehmann (2023). Recommendations
for effective insect conservation in nature protected areas based on a
transdisciplinary project in Germany. Environmental Sciences Europe 35:
2–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-023-00813-5
Koh, L.P.,
R.R. Dunn, N.S. Sodhi, R.K. Colwell, H.C. Proctor
& V.S. Smith (2004). Species coextinctions and the biodiversity crisis. Science 305:
1632–1634.
Koh, L.P.
& N.S. Sodhi (2004). Importance of reserves,
fragments, and parks for butterfly conservation in a tropical urban landscape. Ecological
Applications 14(6): 1695–1708.
Kuussaari, M., M. Toivonen,
J. Heliölä, J. Pöyry, J. Mellado, J. Ekroos, V. Hyyryläinen, I. Vähä-Piikkiö
& J. Tiainen (2021). Butterfly species’ responses to
urbanization: differing effects of human population density and built-up area. Urban
Ecosystems 24: 515–527.
Liu, Y., M.J.
Wooster, M.J. Grosvenor, K.S. Lim & R.A. Francis (2021). Strong impacts of smoke polluted
air demonstrated on the flight behaviour of the
painted lady butterfly (Vanessa cardui L.). Ecological
Entomology 46(2): 195–208.
Loures, L., R. Santos & T.
Panagopoulos (2007). Urban Parks and Sustainable City Planning-The Case of Portimão, Portugal. WSEAS Transactions on Environment
and Development 3(10): 171–180.
Lumabas, J.L.C., F.G M. Tomwong, P.M.V. Cabero &
R.J.S. Vitor II (2018). Determination of hematological
and serum biochemical values and detection of Chlamydophila psittaci
antibodies in captive hornbills at the Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Nature
Center. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology 8(4):
575–575.
Macabago, S.A., N.H. Dagamac
& T.E. Dela Cruz (2010). Diversity and Distribution of
Plasmodial Myxomycetes (Slime Molds) from La Mesa Ecopark,
Quezon City, Philippines. Biotropia 17(2):
51–61. https://doi.org/10.11598/btb.2010.17.2.76
Malabrigo Jr, P.L., C.L. Tiburan Jr, M.A. Galang & I. Saizen (2016). Tree diversity at La Mesa Watershed in Luzon, a
reforested urban watershed. Asian Journal of Biodiversity 6(2): 22–40.
Maluping, R.P., R.B. Oronan
& S.U. Toledo (2007). Detection of Chlamydophila psittaci antibodies
from captive birds at the Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Nature Center, Quezon
city, Philippines. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine 14(1):
191–193.
Marselle, M.R., S.J. Lindley, P.A. Cook
& A. Bonn (2021). Biodiversity and health in the urban environment. Current
environmental health reports 8(2): 146–156.
Masangkay, F.R., G.D. Milanez,
N.E.R. Chua, F.M.N. Angulo, P.D.M. Aquino, D.N.D. Calucin
& G.R.O. Urtal (2016). Water-borne coccidians
in Philippine water sheds: a national inceptive study. Asian Journal of
Biological and Life Sciences 5(2): 112–119.
Mexia, T., J. A. Príncipe, A. Anjos,
P. Silva, N. Lopes, C. Freitas, M. Santos-Reis, O. Correia,
C. Branquinho & P. Pinho
(2018). Ecosystem
services: Urban parks under a magnifying glass. Environmental Research
160: 469–478.
Miller III,
D.G., J. Lane & R. Senock (2011). Butterflies as potential
bioindicators of primary rainforest and oil palm plantation habitats on New
Britain, Papua New Guinea. Pacific Conservation Biology 17(2): 149–159.
Mohagan, A.B., D.P. Mohagan
& A.E. Tambuli (2011). Diversity of butterflies in the
selected key biodiversity areas of Mindanao, Philippines. Asian Journal of
Biodiversity 2(1): 121–148. https://doi.org/10.7828/ajob.v2i1.95
Mohagan, A.B., S.G. Remulta
B., D.J.B. Mohagan, D.P. Mohagan,
V.B. Amoroso, H.C. Porquis & J.A. Escarlos Jr (2018). Species composition and status of
butterflies across vegetation types in Mt. Pinamantawan
Sto. Domingo, Quezon, Bukidnon, Philippines. Asian
Journal of Biodiversity 9(1): 118–135. https://doi.org/10.7828/ajob.v9i1.1237
Oliver, T.H.,
M.S. Heard, N.J. Isaac, D.B. Roy, D. Procter, F. Eigenbrod,
R. Freckleton, A. Hector, C.D.L. Orme & O.L.
Petchey (2015). Biodiversity
and resilience of ecosystem functions. Trends in ecology & evolution 30(11):
673–684.
Padrón, P., A. Vélez,
N. Miorelli & K. Willmott (2020). Urban areas as refuges for
endemic fauna: description of the immature stages of Catasticta
flisa duna (Eitschberger & T. Racheli, 1998)(Lepidoptera: Pieridae) and
its ecological interactions. Neotropical Biodiversity 6(1): 109–116.
Pag-Ong,
A.I., D. Nisperos & R. Flores (2022). Diversity and relative abundance
of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in the National
Capital Region, Philippines. Asia Life Sciences 31(1): 1–21.
Page, M.
& C. Treadaway (2004). Papilionidae
of the Philippine Islands: Butterflies of the World. Verlag Goecke
& Evers, Germany, 71 pp.
Paoletti, M.G. (1999). Using bioindicators based on
biodiversity to assess landscape sustainability. Elsevier 1–18. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-50019-9.50004-2
Parlin, A.F., S.M. Stratton & P.A.
Guerra (2022). Oriented
migratory flight at night: Consequences of nighttime light pollution for
monarch butterflies. Iscience 25(5):
104310. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.isci.2022.104310
Pe’er, G. & J. Settele
(2008). The rare
butterfly Tomares nesimachus
(Lycaenidae) as a bioindicator for pollination
services and ecosystem functioning in northern Israel. Israel Journal of
Ecology and Evolution 54(1): 111–136.
Pignataro, T., G. Lourenço,
M. Beirão & T. Cornelissen (2023). Wings are not perfect: increased
wing asymmetry in a tropical butterfly as a response to forest fragmentation. The
Science of Nature 110: 28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-023-01856-7
Posa, M.R.C. & N.S. Sodhi (2006). Effects of anthropogenic land use on forest birds and
butterflies in Subic Bay, Philippines. Biological Conservation 129(2):
256–270.
Reeves, L.E.
& J.C. Daniels (2020). Conservation value of secondary forest habitats to endemic frugivorous
butterflies at Mount Kanlaon, Negros Occidental,
Philippines. Journal of Insect Conservation 24(6): 913–926.
Sanderson,
C., M.F. Braby & S. Bond (2021). Butterflies Australia: a national
citizen science database for monitoring changes in the distribution and
abundance of Australian butterflies. Austral Entomology 60(1): 111–127.
Santos,
A.D.C., P.C.L. Sales, D.B. Ribeiro & P.R.R. Silva (2020). Habitat conversion affects beta
diversity in frugivorous butterfly assemblages. Studies on Neotropical Fauna
and Environment 55(3): 180–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650521.2019.1710335
Sarı, E.N. & S. Bayraktar (2023). The role of park size on
ecosystem services in urban environment: a review. Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment 195(9): 1072. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11644-5
Savard,
J.P.L., P. Clergeau & G. Mennechez
(2000). Biodiversity
concepts and urban ecosystems. Landscape and Urban Planning 48(3):
131–142. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00037-2
Schmidt, C.,
M. Domaratzki, R. Kinnunen,
J. Bowman & C. Garroway (2020). Continent-wide effects of
urbanization on bird and mammal genetic diversity. Proceedings of the Royal
Society B 287(1920): 20192497. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.2497
Schroeder,
H.G. & C.G. Treadaway (2005). Nymphalidae IX, Amathusiini
der Philippinen, Amathusiini
of the Philippine Islands (Nymphalidae: Morphinae). Verlag Goecke & Evers,
Germany, 32 pp.
Seress, G.
& A. Liker (2015). Habitat urbanization and its effects on birds. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 61(4):
373–408.
Shephard,
A.M., T.S. Mitchell, S.B. Henry, K.S. Oberhauser,
M.E. Kobiela & E.C. Snell-Rood (2020). Assessing zinc tolerance in two
butterfly species: consequences for conservation in polluted environments. Insect
Conservation and Diversity 13(2): 201–210.
Sing, K.W.,
W.F. Jusoh, N.R. Hashim
& J.J. Wilson (2016). Urban parks: refuges for tropical butterflies in Southeast Asia? Urban
ecosystems 19: 1131–1147.
Sioson, J.C.C., N.A.V. Tacuboy & R.J.S. Vitor II
(2018).
Determination of the hematological values and detection of Chlamydophila psittaci antibodies in captive Palawan Hill Mynah at the
Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Nature Center. National Journal of
Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology 8(1): 107–107.
Taylor, L.,
E.H. Leckey, P.J. Lead & D.F. Hochuli (2020). What visitors want from urban
parks: diversity, utility, serendipity. Frontiers in Environmental Science 8:
595620. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.595620
Thompson,
G.G. & P.C. Withers (2003). Effect of species richness and relative abundance on
the shape of the species accumulation curve. Austral Ecology 28(4):
355–360.
Toledo, J.
& A.B. Mohagan (2011). Diversity and Status of
Butterflies in Mt. Timpoong and Mt. Hibok-hibok, Camiguin Island,
Philippines. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Journal 6: 103–110.
Treadaway, C. & H. Schroeder (2012). Revised checklist of the
butterflies of the Philippine Islands (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera).
Entomologischer Verein
Apollo 20: 1–64.
Uehara-Prado,
M., K.S. Brown Jr & A.V.L. Freitas (2007). Species richness, composition
and abundance of fruit-feeding butterflies in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest:
comparison between a fragmented and a continuous landscape. Global Ecology
and Biogeography 16(1): 43–54.
Ugland, K.I., J.S. Gray & K.E. Ellingsen (2003). The species–accumulation curve
and estimation of species richness. Journal of animal ecology 72(5):
888–897.
Vallejo,
B.M., A.B. Aloy & P.S. Ong (2009). The distribution, abundance and
diversity of birds in Manila’s last greenspaces. Landscape and Urban
Planning 89(3): 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.10.013
van der Sluijs, J.P. (2020). Insect decline, an emerging
global environmental risk. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 46:
39–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.08.012
van Strien, A., R. Van De Pavert, D.
Moss, T. Yates, C. VanSwaay & P. Vos (1997). The statistical power of two
butterfly monitoring schemes to detect trends. Journal of Applied Ecology 34(3):
817–828. https://doi.org/10.2307/2404926
Warren, M.S.,
D. Maes, C.A. van Swaay, P.
Goffart, H. Van Dyck, N.A. Bourn, I. Wynhoff, D. Hoare & S. Ellis (2021a?). The decline of butterflies in
Europe: Problems, significance, and possible solutions. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 118(2): e2002551117. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.200255111
Warren, M.S.,
D. Maes, C.A.M. van Swaay,
P. Goffart, H. Van Dyck, N.A.D. Bourn, I. Wynhoff, D. Hoare & S. Ellis (2021b?). The decline of butterflies in
Europe: Problems, significance, and possible solutions. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 118(2): e2002551117. https://doi.org/doi:10.1073/pnas.2002551117
Wepprich, T., J.R. Adrion,
L. Ries, J. Wiedmann &
N.M. Haddad (2019). Butterfly abundance declines over 20 years of systematic monitoring in
Ohio, USA. PLoS ONE 14(7): e0216270. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216270
Wickham, H.
& H. Wickham (2016). Package ‘ggplot2’. Create elegant data visualisations
using the grammar of graphics. Version 2(1): 1–189.
Yan, Z.T.,
Z.H. Fan, S. He, X.Q. Wang, B. Chen & S.T. Luo (2023). Mitogenomes of Eight Nymphalidae Butterfly Species and Reconstructed Phylogeny
of Nymphalidae (Nymphalidae:
Lepidoptera). Available online 14 December 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes14051018
Zhang, M., Y.
Zhong, T. Cao, Y. Geng, Y. Zhang, K. Jin, Z. Ren, R. Zhang, Y. Guo & E. Ma (2008). Phylogenetic relationship and
morphological evolution in the subfamily Limenitidinae
(Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Progress in Natural
Science 18(11): 1357–1364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnsc.2008.03.025