42

Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera 35:42–60,J.1996

Res. (2000)
Lepid.

A Survey of the Butterfly Fauna of Jatun Sacha, Ecuador

(Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea and Papilionoidea)

Debra L. Murray

Department of Entomology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803,

E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract. The first extensive butterfly survey of the upper Río Napo ba-
sin in eastern Ecuador was conducted from 1990 to 1993. A total of 811
species was recorded at Jatun Sacha Biological Reserve. Based on species
richness comparisons with a similar site in southern Peru and extrapola-
tions from ithomiine diversity, Jatun Sacha is estimated to have approxi-
mately 1300 species of butterflies. Species richness is compared with two
other Amazonian sites (Pakitza, Peru, 1300 species and Cacaulandia, Bra-
zil, 843 species). Species and generic compositions are more similar be-
tween Pakitza and Jatun Sacha than Cacaulandia. This similarity may be
due to environmental factors. A greater percentage of Nymphalidae and
a lower percentage of Hesperiidae and Lycaenidae occur at the two some-
what disturbed sites (Jatun Sacha and Cacaulandia) than the less disturbed
site (Pakitza). Of the 228 species common to all three sites, more nympha-
lid butterfly species were found than expected based on observed spe-
cies in each family.

KEY WORDS: Butterfly diversity, community similarities, estimations of spe-

cies richness

INTRODUCTION
The Amazon basin covers an area approximately 6 million square kilo-
meters and houses the world’s greatest diversity of plant and animal life
(Erwin 1988, Dinerstein et al. 1995). Insects are the most diverse taxon in
the neotropics, yet they have been poorly studied in this vast area (National
Academy 1992, Lamas 1989 and ref. therein, Raven 1988, Reid & Miller
1989). Even for taxonomically well known insect groups, such as the but-
terflies, there exist large gaps in our understanding of tropical species rich-
ness and factors influencing diversity (DeVries 1994, Ackery 1986). One
major hindrance is the lack of basic information available on natural his-
tory and species distributions for most Amazonian butterflies (Ackery 1986,
DeVries 1994, DeVries et al. 1997). Inventories from specific localities can
be useful in investigating changes in species compositions across landscapes,
but most of the current faunal information on Amazonian butterfly com-
munities are from Peru (Lamas 1985, 1989, Robbins et al. 1996) and areas
in Brazil (Brown 1984, 1991, Emmel & Austin 1990, Mielke 1994). There
are few published surveys of butterfly faunas in eastern Ecuador and Co-

Paper submitted 25 August 1997

35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 43

lumbia (Lamas 1981). Therefore our understanding of the patterns of but-

terfly diversity in these areas is very incomplete.
Biologically significant areas, such as along the eastern base of the Andes,
offer the opportunity to research factors influencing diversity and are of
particular importance to study. The eastern flank is postulated to be an area
very diverse in plant, bird, and butterfly life (Dinerstein et al. 1995, Robbins
& Opler 1996, Gentry 1988a). Gentry (1988b) found that areas of high rain-
fall and weakly defined wet and dry seasons correlated with areas of high
plant diversity. In Ecuador the only protected area in this zone is Jatun Sacha
Biological Station, located in the upper Napo basin. A flora survey at Jatun
Sacha found over 200 species of trees in one hectare plots on the reserve
(Neill & Palacios 1989). Surveys of the fauna on the reserve have found high
species richness as well, including an extensive bird survey, which has re-
corded over 500 species (B. Bochan, pers. comm.). This diversity at Jatun
Sacha suggests the area might be equally rich in butterflies.
Here I report a survey of the Jatun Sacha butterfly fauna, which can serve
as a baseline for studies of diversity patterns at Jatun Sacha. It can also be
used for comparative studies with other localities in the region (DeVries
1994, 1996). In this paper I compare and contrast the taxonomic composi-
tions at Jatun Sacha with two other sites in the Amazon basin.

STUDY SITES
Jatun Sacha Biological Station is located 30 km east of the base of the
Andes (01° 04’S; 77° 36’W) and lies between the confluence of the Napo
and Arahuno rivers, its natural boundaries. Elevation varies from 400m to
450m. The uplands, typified by steep, low hills and narrow ridges with small
streams in the valleys, comprise the majority of the land. There is also a
small tract (100 hectares) in the Rio Napo floodplain with alluvial soils and
seasonal flooding. The Holdridge system would classify the lowland forests
of this area as Tropical Wet Forest (Cañadas 1983). Rainfall data, recorded
since 1986, averages 3700mm annually, with no definite dry season. How-
ever, April through July are generally the wettest months and December
through February the driest months. Major floods of streams and rivers
occurs throughout the year but are more common during the wetter
months. Soil fertility is relatively rich for tropical wet forests, especially in
phosphorous and calcium, when compared to other lowland forest sites
(Clinebell et al. 1995). Storms are infrequent in the area but often cause
multiple treefalls, leaving the forest in various stages of succession (D. Neill
& W. Palacios, unpublished).
The land-use patterns in the vicinity of Jatun Sacha have undergone rapid
changes in the last decade. Before the early 1980’s the area was sparsely
populated by native Quichuans and accessed only by rivers. A road built in
1986 bisected the reserve at its northern end along the Río Napo and greatly
increased access to the area. The influx of small scale farmers and portable
sawmills resulted in deforestation in areas accessible by the road. Currently,
tracts of land owned by farmers adjacent to the road typically have 40 to 70
44 J. Res. Lepid.

percent of the land cleared. Tracts in the interior are more pristine, from
50 to 100 percent primary forest. Jatun Sacha continues to expand its re-
serve and purchases lands in a piecemeal fashion as funds and land become
available. Thus the reserve is a patchwork of habitats. Its central core is
mostly primary forest (70%), and its edges are a mosaic of primary forest,
secondary forest, scrub, and pasture land (D. Neill & W. Palacios, unpub-
lished).
A brief description is presented below of the two comparative sites, Pakitza
and Cacaulandia. More complete descriptions are available from Erwin
(1991) for Pakitza and Emmel and Austin (1990) for Cacaulandia. Pakitza
is a biological station in the Reserved Zone of Parque Nacional Manu. It is
located in Madre de Dios drainage basin in Peru along the foothills of the
eastern Andes in a similar geographical zone as Jatun Sacha. The butterfly
survey for Pakitza was comprehensive and yielded 1300 species (Robbins et
al. 1996). The survey from Cacaulandia was conducted on a private ranch
in Rondonia, Brazil. Located in the rolling hills and flat plains of the Ama-
zon basin, it has both intact forest and disturbed areas. A total of 843 spe-
cies of butterflies was recorded by Emmel and Austin (1990), although con-
tinued surveys have increased this total number to approximately 1500 spe-
cies (Austin & Emmel 1996, cited as “unpublished data”). The area of
Cacaulandia is ecologically less similar to Jatun Sacha than Pakitza, but faces
similar pressures from development.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The survey at Jatun Sacha was conducted from August 1990 to October 1993.
Hours in the field devoted to collection varied by month but covered all the months
of the year, with the exceptions of December 1990 and 1991, and October, 1992,
and data was not gathered to quantify collection effort. Collection was concentrated
in a 3 km area surrounding the station facilities. As the reserve accumulated more
land, a few specimens were taken in a 10 km area around the station. Specimens
were captured with hand held nets, butterfly traps baited with rotting fruits (DeVries
1987, 1988), artificial bait (Lamas et al. 1994), and by rearing field collected lar-
vae. Extensive use of butterfly traps at Jatun Sacha was conducted during an eco-
logical study that examined spatial and temporal diversity of the fruit feeding but-
terfly community (DeVries et al. 1997). Material from that study is included here.
The study took place from August, 1992 to October, 1993 and during that time,
baited traps were placed in both the canopy and understory for seven days a month,
a total of 105 trap days. Additional sources for species included donated specimens
or field records offered from various visiting scientists.
Identifications were conducted by comparison of my material to specimens in
the following institutions and museums: Allyn Museum of Entomology of Florida
Museum of Natural History, American Museum, Museum of Comparative Zoology,
and National Museum of Natural History. Various specialists identified particular
taxonomic groups: D. Harvey (Riodinidae), L. Miller (Satyrinae), S. Nicolay
(Hesperiidae), and R. Robbins (Lycaenidae). Due to time constraints in the prepa-
ration and identification, some specimen determinations are tentative and are des-
35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 45

Table 1. Taxonomic Compositions of Butterfly Families at Jatun Sacha,

Cacaulandia, and Pakitza. Number of species are listed in parenthesis
following the percentage of species within each family.

Jatun Sacha Cacaulandia Pakitza

Family
Hesperiidae 25% (198) 27% (231) 34% (442)
Papilionidae 3% (26) 2% (18) 2% (26)
Pieridae 3% (27) 4% (29) 2% (26)
Nymphalidae 38% (307) 33% (275) 28% (364)
Riodinidae 24% (194) 24% (203) 20% (260)
Lycaenidae 7% (59) 10% (87) 14% (182)

ignated with question marks. A synoptic collection has been deposited in the Museo
de Ecuatoriana Nacional in Quito, Ecuador.
For comparative work among the three sites, the percent of species occurring in
each family was tabulated, and a test for homogeneity across the families was calcu-
lated using a 2x2 contingency table. To compare similarity in species assemblages
between the three sites, coefficient of community indices (Pielou 1974) were cal-
culated in pairwise comparisons between Jatun Sacha and Pakitza, Jatun Sacha and
Cacaulandia, and Pakitza and Cacaulandia. Only those identified to species (spe-
cies similarities) or genus (generic similarities) were used in calculations. Lycaenidae
was not used in due to poor taxonomic resolution at the genus level and lack of
identifications in the Cacaulandia survey (59 of the 87 species were unidentified).
Using these adjusted species numbers, percentages were again calculated for fam-
ily compositions, which were used in contrasting the expected and observed spe-
cies common to all three sites.

RESULTS
A total of 811 species were recorded at the reserve by the end of 1993
(Appendix 1). The taxonomic composition of the butterfly fauna is as
follows: Hesperiidae, 198 spp. (25%), Papilionidae, 26 spp. (3%),
Pieridae, 27 spp. (3%), Nymphalidae, 307 spp. (38%), Riodinidae, 194
spp. (24%), and Lycaenidae, 59 spp. (7%). Within Nymphalidae, 56 spe-
cies of Ithomiinae are those reported by Beccaloni (1995), who con-
ducted a thorough study of this group. Temporal variations in richness
and abundance were generally noted for the butterfly families, although
quantitative data was collected only for the fruit-feeding nymphalids. The
fruit-feeders were more common during the wetter months (DeVries et al.
1997), and many specimens collected during this period were fresh, indi-
cating a recent emergence. During this same time period, other families
were observed to be much less abundant, although certain species could
be common (Eurybia dardus, Urbanus simplicius, “Thecla” tephraeus gr).
Hesperiidae, Riodinidae, and to some extent, Lycaenidae, were more abun-
dant as the rainfall decreased in August and September. Differences were
noted in the abundance of families and individual species from year to year,
46 J. Res. Lepid.

Table 2. Coefficient of Community Indices for Jatun Sacha, Pakitza, and

Cacaulandia.

Species similarities Generic similarities

Jatun Sacha-Pakitza 49 81
Jatun Sacha-Cacaulandia 45 75
Pakitza-Cacaulandia 38 6

especially among Riodinidae and Lycaenidae. Some species abundance

patterns were irregular. For example, I did not see Stalachtis euterpe until
January, 1993, when it was common for several months along the ridges in
the primary forest. Other examples include Metacharis regalis and Emesis
temesa.
Family compositions varied significantly among the three sites (p>0.05).
Jatun Sacha and Cacaulandia shared a greater similarity in family composi-
tions than any other pairwise comparisons (Table 1). The combination of
Riodinidae and Lycaenidae percentages is nearly identical in all three
sites (31% to 34%). However, the percentages of Lycaenidae are con-
siderably lower at Jatun Sacha, and to a lesser extent, Cacaulandia, than
at Pakitza. In contrast, Jatun Sacha shared a greater number of species
and genera with Pakitza rather than Cacaulandia. Coefficient of com-
munity values ranked Jatun Sacha and Pakitza with greatest similarity
and Pakitza and Cacaulandia with the least similarity (Table 2). Inter-
estingly, only 228 species were common to all three sites. Of those 228
species, Nymphalidae accounted for 53% (121 species) of the total num-
ber. Listed in order of abundance, the numbers of species for the other
butterfly families were: Hesperiidae (56), Riodinidae (32), Papilionidae
(12), and Pieridae (7). The number of observed overlapping nympha-
lid species was greater than expected when calculated using the family
percentages (minus unidentified species and Lycaenidae). For example,
the adjusted family compositions for Nymphalidae range from 33%
(Pakitza) to 43% (Jatun Sacha). Using the higher percentage, 98 spe-
cies of the total 228 were expected to be nymphalids, although 121 were
actually found to be overlapping. In contrast, the number of overlap-
ping hesperiid species was lower than expected.

DISCUSSION
The survey conducted at Jatun Sacha was aimed at developing a baseline
understanding of the butterfly community of the area. A large portion of
the fauna undoubtably remains unsampled. This conclusion is supported
by the fact that unrecorded species were collected up to the end of the sur-
vey time. In addition, preliminary identifications for certain groups have
probably underestimated the number of butterfly species actually collected.
Because field collection was not standardized, estimations of the total spe-
cies richness at Jatun Sacha can not be generated through rigorous statisti-
35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 47

cal programs (DeVries et al. 1997). Nonetheless, some estimation can be

made from comparisons of inventories at similar localities, such as at Pakitza.
Pakitza and Jatun Sacha are both located along the eastern edge of the low-
land rainforest and share similar elevation, temperature, and annual rain-
fall, although Jatun Sacha is more aseasonal than Pakitza. Given these simi-
lar environmental factors, it is estimated that 1200 to 1300 species poten-
tially occur at Jatun Sacha. This estimate is supported by applying the model
proposed by Beccaloni and Gaston (1995), in which total ithomiine rich-
ness from an area is used to predict overall species richness. Beccaloni and
Gaston found that ithomiines were, on average, 4.5% of the total species
for an area. Given 58 species of ithomiines at Jatun Sacha, approximately
1300 species of butterflies are predicted to occur there. This suggests that
a third of the fauna has yet to be recorded, illustrating the importance of
further survey work.
Comparing faunal lists from different study sites is confounded by differ-
ences in sampling methods and climatic and ecological factors (DeVries
1994). Misidentifications of species and nomenclature changes can also yield
misleading results. All of these factors could have influenced compari-
sons of the species assemblages between the Jatun Sacha, Pakitza, and
Cacaulandia, however differences in sampling methodologies was probably
most influential. Much of the early sampling in Cacaulandia was conducted
by participants in tour groups who may have selectively collected colorful
butterflies over some of the more drab species. Since the initial list of but-
terflies was published from Cacaulandia (Emmel & Austin 1990), the au-
thors have continued their sampling effort and have documented many
more species (Austin & Emmel 1996). Patterns of diversity reported here
may change when compared with the forthcoming update to the survey.
Sampling at Jatun Sacha used bait traps more extensively than Pakitza or
Cacaulandia. At Jatun Sacha, 189 species were trapped at rotting fruit (23%
of the butterfly fauna). At Pakitza, 130 species were trapped (10% of the
butterfly fauna) (Robbins et al. 1996). The survey at Pakitza was conducted
on a larger scale than the other two, with intense collecting and a greater
number of experts available to identify species, although field crews varied
with each sampling period. These differences in sampling have influenced
the species recorded, and consequently, the compositions of the various
groups.
Environmental variables, most notably climatic factors, are most often cor-
related with species richness and diversity (Wright et al. 1993). In this study
the hypothesis is supported by the results of the generic and species simi-
larities. Jatun Sacha and Pakitza had the highest coefficient of community.
Pakitza and Cacaulandia, although geographically closest among the three
sites were actually the most dissimilar. This underscores the importance of
local conditions on determining species compositions.
Disturbance is another factor influencing species compositions between
the three sites. Forest areas with mild disturbances, such as those that exist
in Cacaulandia and Jatun Sacha, can experience increases in butterfly di-
48 J. Res. Lepid.

versity in certain groups, such as Nymphalidae (Brown 1982; but see also
DeVries et al. 1997). Butterfly species common to open, disturbed areas are
rare or absent at Pakitza (Robbins et al. 1996), but are quite common at
Jatun Sacha along the road bisecting the reserve. The low species richness
of Hesperiidae and Lycaenidae recorded at Jatun Sacha and Cacaulandia
could also reflect disturbance, especially at Jatun Sacha. A lepidopterist who
has been collecting in the Upper Napo area since 1978 has noted a great
decrease in the species and abundance of the Hesperiidae over the last
decade as developmental pressures increased (S. Nicolay, pers. comm.).
From the comparisons of the overlapping species, nymphalid species were
most common and found at greater numbers than expected. This suggests
broader distributions of nymphalids than other butterfly families. This may
be due to the wide dispersing capabilities of many nymphalids, which have
been correlated with greater distributions (Hanski et al. 1993). It could also
reflect broader hostplant ranges for nymphalids or more specialized, and
hence, localized host use by other butterfly families. With our limited knowl-
edge of host use even in well studied areas such as Costa Rica (DeVries 1987,
1996; DeVries et al. 1994), examining these broader biogeographical pat-
terns must await further investigations (but see Ackery 1988).
Human influence outside of Jatun Sacha most likely has impacted the but-
terfly fauna. Species inventories conducted while the area contains a high
percentage of pristine forest could be compared with future inventories in
a potentially much more disturbed landscape. Because degradation of the
upper Napo basin will continue, there is a critical need for more research.
For too many species, little is known beyond their site records. A great deal
remains to be discovered to complete our understanding of the butterfly
fauna, not only in documentation of the species diversity, but also their
ecology, evolution, and population dynamics.

Acknowledgements. I thank the following for contributing specimens to the list: Dave
Arenholz, George Beccaloni, Marion Murray, Andrew Neild, Stan Nicolay, Carla
Penz, Karina Soria, Alejandro Suárez, Gabriel Tapuy, and the students of the Save
the Rainforest. The survey list would not have been possible without the time and
effort to identify specimens by Stan Nicolay (Hesperiidae), George Beccaloni
(Ithomiinae), Lee Miller (Satyrinae), Don Harvey, Dave Arenholz, and Phil DeVries
(Riodinidae), and Bob Robbins (Lycaenidae). This manuscript was improved by
changes suggested by George Beccaloni (Natural History Museum), Chris Carlton
(Louisiana State University), Phil DeVries (University of Oregon), Sam Messier
(University of Colorado), David Neill (Missouri Botanical Garden), Dorothy Prowell
(Louisiana State University), and Bob Robbins (National Museum of Natural His-
tory). This work was possible through the support of Fundacíon Jatun Sacha and
the United States Peace Corps.

LITERATURE CITED
ACKERY, P.R. 1986. Systematic and faunistic studies on butterflies. Pp. 9–21 in R.I.
Wright & P.R. Ackery (eds.) The Biology of Butterflies. Academic Press, London.
35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 49

——. 1988. Hostplants and classification: A review of nymphalid butterflies.

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 33:95-203.
A USTIN , G.T. & E MMEL , T.C. 1996. Nymphalidae of central Rondonia, Brazil:
Melitaeinae, with descriptions of two new species. Tropical Lepidoptera
7(2):133–142.
BECCALONI, G.W. 1995. Studies on the ecology and evolution of neotropical ithomiine
butterflies (Nymphalidae: Ithomiinae). Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of
London. 251 pp.
BECCALONI, G.W. & K.J. GASTON. 1995. Predicting the species richness of neotropical
forest butterflies: Ithomiinae (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) as indicators.
Biological Conservation 71:77–86.
BROWN Jr., K.S. 1982. Historical and ecological factors in the biogeography of
aposematic Neotropical Lepidoptera. American Zoologist 22:453-471.
——. 1984. Species diversity and abundance in Jaru, Rondonia (Brazil). News of
the Lepidopterists’ Society 1984:45-47.
——. 1991. Conservation of neotropical environments: insects as indicators. Pp.
349–404 in N.M. Collins & J.A. Thomas (eds.) Conservation of Insects and their
Habitats. Academic Press, London.
CAÑADAS, C.L. 1983. El Mapa Bioclimático y Ecológico del Ecuador. Quito, MAG-
PRONAREG.
CLINEBELL, R.R., O.L. PHILLIPS, A.H. GENTRY, N. STARK & H. ZUURING. 1995. Prediction
of neotropical tree and liana species richness from soil and climatic data.
Biodiversity and Conservation 4(1):56–90.
DEVRIES, P.J. 1987. The Butterflies of Coast Rica and their Natural History. Volume
I : Papilionidae, Pieridae, Nymphalidae. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
——. 1988. Stratification of fruit-feeding nymphalid butterflies in a Costa Rican
rainforest. Journal of Research on Lepidoptera 26(1–4):98–108.
——. 1994. Patterns of butterfly diversity and promising topics in natural history
and ecology. Pp. 187–194 in L.A. McDade, K.S. Bawa, H.S. Hespenheide, & G.S.
Hartshorn (eds.) La Selva, Ecology and Natural History of a Neotropical
Rainforest. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
——. 1996. The Butterflies of Coast Rica and their Natural History. Volume II:
Riodinidae. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
DEVRIES, P.J., IA. CHACON, & D. MURRAY. 1994. Towards a better understanding of
host use and biodiversity in riodinid butterflies (Lepidoptera). Journal of
Research on Lepidoptera 31:103–126.
D E V RIES , P.J., D. M URRAY , & R. L ANDE . 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 62:343–
364.
DINERSTEIN, E., D.M. OLSON, D.J. GRAHAM, A.L. WEBSTER, S.A. PRIMM, M.P. BOOKBINDER,
& G. LEDEC. 1995. A Conservation Assessment of the Terrestrial Ecoregions of
Latin America and the Caribbean. World Wildlife Fund and the World Bank,
Washington D. C.
E MMEL , T.C. & G.T. A USTIN . 1990. The tropical rain forest butterfly fauna of
Rondonia, Brazil: Species diversity and conservation. Tropical Lepidoptera 1:1–
12.
50 J. Res. Lepid.

ERWIN, T.L. 1988. The tropical forest canopy: the heart of biotic diversity. Pp. 123–
129 in E.O. WILSON (ed.) Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.
——. 1991. Natural history of the carabid beetles at the BIOLAT biological station,
Río Manu, Pakitza, Peru. Revista Peruana de Entomologia 33:1–85.
E VANS , W.H. 1951. A Catalogue of the American Hesperiidae Indicating the
Classification and Nomenclature Adopted in the British Museum (Natural
History). Part I. Introduction and Group A, Pyrrhopyginae. British Museum,
London, 92 pp.
——. 1952. A Catalogue of the American Hesperiidae Indicating the Classification
and Nomenclature Adopted in the British Museum (Natural History). Part II.
Groups B-D, Pyrginae. British Museum, London, 178 pp.
——. 1953. A Catalogue of the American Hesperiidae Indicating the Classification
and Nomenclature Adopted in the British Museum (Natural History). Part III.
Groups E-G, Pyrginae. British Museum, London, 246 pp.
——. 1955. A Catalogue of the American Hesperiidae Indicating the Classification
and Nomenclature adopted in the British Museum (Natural History). Part IV.
Groups H-P, Hesperiinae and Megathyminae. British Museum, London, 499 pp.
F ORSTER , V.W. 1964. Beiträge zur kenntnis der insektenfauna Boliviens XIX.
Veröffentlichungen der Zoologischen Staatssammlung München. Band 8.
GENTRY, A.H. 1988a. Changes in plant community diversity and floristic composition
on environmental and geographical gradients. Annuals of the Missouri Botanical
Gardens 75:1–34.
——. 1988b. Tree species richness of upper Amazonian forests. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 85:156–159.
HARVEY, D.J. 1987. The Higher Classification of the Riodinidae (Lepidoptera).
Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, Texas. 216 pg.
——. 1991. Higher classification of Nymphalidae. Appendix B. Pp. 255–272 in H.
F. Nijhout (ed.) The Development and Evolution of Butterfly Wing Patterns.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.
H ANSKI , I., J. K OUKI , & A. H ALKKA . 1993. Three explanations of the positive
relationship between distribution and abundance of species. In R.E. Ricklefs &
D. Schluter (eds.) Species Diversity in Ecological Communities: Historical and
Geographic Perspectives. University of Chicago Press, London.
KLOTS . 1933. A generic revision of the Pieridae (Lepidoptera). Entomologica
Americana 12:139–242.
LAMAS, G. 1981. La fauna de mariposas de la Reserva de Tambopata, Madre de Dios,
Peru (Lepidoptera, Papilionoidea y Hesperioidea). Revista de la Sociedad
Mexicana de Lepidopterologia 6(2):23–40.
——. 1985. Los Papilionoidea (Lepidoptera) de la Zona Reservada Tambopata,
Madre de Dios, Peru. I.: Papilionidae, Pieridae y Nymphalidae (en parte). Revista
Peruana de Entomologia 27:59–73.
——. 1989. Un estimado del grado de cobertura geográfica de la colecta de
mariposas (Lepidoptera) en el Perú. Revista Peruana de Entomologia 31:61–
67.
L AMAS, G., O.H. MIELKE , & R.K. R OBBINS . 1994. The Ahrenholz technique for
attracting tropical skippers (Hesperiidae). Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society
47:80–82.
35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 51

MIELKE, C.G., 1994. Papilionoidea e Hesperioidea (Lepidoptera) de Curitiba e Seus

Arredores, Paraná, Brasil, com notas taxonõmicas sobre Hesperiidae. Revista
Brasileria de Zoologia 11(4):759–776.
NATIONAL ACADEMY. 1992. Conserving Biodiversity: A Research Agenda for Developing
Agencies. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.
NEILL, D. & W. PALACIOS. 1989. Arboles de la Amazonia Ecuatoriana: Lista preliminar
de especies. Direccíon National Forestal, Quito.
PIELOU, E.C. 1974. Population and Community Ecology. Gordon and Breach Science
Publishers, New York.
RAVEN, P. H. 1988. Our diminishing tropical forests. Pp. 119–122 in E.O. Wilson
(ed.) Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington D. C.
REID, W.V. & K.R. MILLER. 1989. Keeping options alive: The Scientific Basis for
Conserving Biodiversity. World Resources Institute.
ROBBINS, R.K., G. LAMAS, O.H., H. MIELKE, D.J. HARVEY, & M.M. CASAGRANDE. 1996.
Taxonomic composition and ecological structure of the species-rich butterfly
community at Pakitza, Parque Nacional del Manu, Peru. In D. E. Wilson & A.
Sandoval (eds.) La Biodiversidad del Sureste del Peru: Manu, Biodiversity of
Southeastern Peru. Editorial Horizonte, Lima, Peru. In press.
ROBBINS, R.K. & P.A. Opler. 1996. Butterfly diversity and a preliminary comparison
with bird and mammal diversity. In D.E. Wilson, M.L. Reaka-Kudla, & E.O.
Wilson (eds.) Biodiversity II. National Academy of Sciences Press, Washington
D.C.
TYLER, H., K.S. BROWN, & K. WILSON. 1994. Swallowtail Butterflies of the Americas: A
Study in Biological Dynamics, Ecological Diversity, Biosystematics, and
Conservation. Scientific Publishers, Inc., Gainesville, FL.
WRIGHT, D.H., D.J. CURRIE, & B.A. MAURER. 1993. Energy supply and patterns of
species richness on local and regional scales. In R.E. Ricklefs & D. Schluter (eds.)
Species Diversity in Ecological Communities: Historical and Geographic
Perspectives. University of Chicago Press, London.

APPENDIX 1

The following is a list of the butterflies collected at Jatun Sacha Biological

Station. A question mark (?) following a name indicates questionable iden-
tification of the species. Species designated as “unknown” could not be iden-
tified to genus or species. The list follows the higher taxonomic classifica-
tion of Evans (1951, 1952, 1953, 1955) for Hesperiidae, Tyler et al. (1994)
for Papilionidae, Klots (1933) for Pieridae, Harvey (1991) for Nymphalidae,
Forster (1964) for Satyrinae, and Harvey (1987) for Riodinidae.
Hesperiidae 198

Pyrrhopyginae: 4
Elbella theseus Bell, 1933
Passova passova Evans, 1951
Pyrrhopyge proculus cintra Evans, 1951
Pyrrhopyge aziza lexos Evans, 1951
52 J. Res. Lepid.

Pyrginae: 107 Helias phalaenoides phalaenoides

Achylodes thraso thraso (Hübner, 1807) (Hübner, 1812)
Achylodes busirus heros (Ehrmann, Heliopetes alana (Reakirt, 1868)
1909) Hyalothyrus neleus neleus (Linnaeus,
Aguna coelus (Cramer, 1782) 1852)
Aguna clina Evans, 1952 Mictris crispus crispus (Herrich-
Aguna arunce (Hewitson,1867) Schäffer, 1869)
Anastrus obscurus narva Evans, 1953 Milanion hemes pemba Evans, 1953
Anastrus sempiternus simplicior Morvina morvus Plötz, 1884
(Möschler, 1876) Mylon cajus (Plötz, 1884)
Anisochoria pedaliodina Butler, 1870 Mylon illineatus illineatus (Mabille &
Antigonus nearchus (Latreille, 1824) Boullet, 1917)
Antigonus mutilatus Hopffer, 1874 Mylon menippus (Fabricius, 1776)
Antigonus erosus (Hübner, 1812) Narcosius mura (Williams, 1927)
Astraptes fulgerator azul Reakirt, 1866 Narcosius colossus (Herrich-Schäffer,
Astraptes alardus alardus (Stoll, 1790) 1869)
Astraptes talus (Cramer, 1777) Nisoniades castolus (Hewitson, 1878)
Astraptes fulgor (Hayward, 1938) Nisoniades bessus hecales (Hayward,
Astraptes alector hopfferi (Plötz, 1882) 1940)
Astraptes cretatus cretatus (Hayward, Ouleus fridericus fridericus (Geyer,
1939) 1832)
Astraptes anaphus anaphus (Cramer, Ouleus calavius calavius (Godman &
1777) Salvin, 1895)
Autochton neis (Plötz, 1882) Ouleus matria Evans, 1953
Autochton longipennis (Geyer, 1832) Paches trifasciatus Lindsey, 1925
Bolla mancoi (Lindsey, 1925) Pellicia dimidiata dimidiata (Herrich-
Bolla cupreiceps (Mabille, 1889) Schäffer, 1870)
Bungalotis erythus Cramer, 1775 Phanus vitreus (Cramer, 1782)
Cabrius procas purda Evans, 1952 Phareas coeleste Westwood, 1852
Calliades zeutus (Möschler, 1879) Phocides metrodorus metrodorus Bell,
Camptopleura auxo (Möschler, 1878) 1932
Carrhenes fuscescens Mabille, 1891 Plumbago plumbago (Plötz, 1884)
Celaenorrhinus jao (Mabille, 1889) Polyctor polyctor polyctor (Prittwitz,
Celaenorrhinus shema shema 1868)
(Hewitson, 1877) Polythrix eudoxus (Cramer, 1782)
Celaenorrhinus syllius (Felder & Felder, Polythrix ceculus (Herrich-Schäffer,
1862) 1869)
Charidia lucaria pocus Evans, 1953 Porphyrogenes passalus passalus
Chrysoplectrum perniciosus perniciosus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869)
(Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Potamanaxas hirta hirta (Weeks, 1901)
Cycloglypha caeruleonigra Mabille, Potamanaxas flavofasciata flavofasciata
1904 (Hewitson, 1870)
Cyclosemia pedro Williams & Bell, 1940 Pyrdalus corbulo (Stoll, 1781)
Cyclosemia lathaea Hewitson, 1878 Pyrgus oileus Linnaeus, 1767
Dyscophellus euribates euribates Pythonides assacla Mabille, 1883
(Cramer, 1782) Pythonides herrenius Geyer, 1838
Dyscophellus sp. Pythonides jovianus jovianus (Stoll,
Dyscophellus ramusis Stoll, 1781 1782)
Ebrietas evanidus (Mabille, 1897) Quadrus deyrollei porta Evans, 1952
Ebrietas infanda (Butler, 1876) Quadrus cerialis (Cramer, 1782)
Entheus priassus telemus Mabille, 1898 Sostrata festiva (Erichson, 1848)
Epargyreus socus dicta Evans, 1952 Sostrata pusilla pusilla (Godman &
Eracon paulinus (Cramer, 1782) Salvin, 1895)
Gorgythion begga plauta (Möschler, Spathilepia clonius (Cramer, 1775)
1867) Spioniades artemidas (Cramer, 1782)
Haemactis sanguinalis (Westwood, Staphylus balsa (Bell, 1937)
1852) Staphylus lizeri (Hayward, 1938)
35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 53

Tarsoctenus praecia plutia (Hewitson, Eutychide subcordata subcordata

1857) (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869)
Tarsoctenus papias Hewitson, 1857 Eutychide complana (Herrich-Schäffer,
Tarsoctenus corytus corba Evans, 1952 1869)
Telemiades epicalus sila Evans, 1953 Flaccilla aecas Stoll, 1781
Telemiades centrides Hewitson, 1870 Hylephila phylaeus phylaeus (Drury,
Telemiades amphion misitheus 1773)
(Mabille, 1888) Justinia phaetusa phaetusa (Hewitson,
Telemiades penidas (Hewitson, 1867) 1866)
Typhedanus undulatus (Hewitson, Lento lento Mabille, 1878
1867) Lycas boisduvalii Ehrmann, 1909
Typhedanus orion (Cramer, 1779) Metron nr. chrysogastra
Urbanus teleus (Hübner, 1821) Mnasilus allubita Butler, 1877
Urbanus simplicius (Stoll, 1791) Moeris vopiscus vopiscus (Herrich-
Urbanus pronus Evans, 1952 Schäffer, 1869)
Urbanus virescens (Mabille, 1877) Moeris striga Geyer, 1832
Urbanus viterboana viterboana Molo mango mango (Guenee, 1865)
(Ehrmann, 1907) Molo petra Evans, 1955
Urbanus pronta Evans, 1952 Morys geisa geisa (Möschler, 1878)
Urbanus esta Evans, 1952 Mucia sp.
Urbanus doryssus doryssus (Swainson, Nastra insignis (Plötz, 1882)
1831) Niconiades nikko Hayward, 1948
Urbanus dorantes dorantes (Stoll, 1791) Nyctelius nyctelius (Latreille, 1824)
Urbanus albimargo takuta Evans, 1952 Orses cynisca (Swainson, 1821)
Urbanus procne (Plötz, 1881) Oxynthes corusca (Herrich-Schäffer,
Xenophanes tryxus (Cramer, 1782) 1869)
Panoquina fusina fusina (Hewitson,
Hesperiinae: 87 1868)
Anatrytone sarah (Burnes, 1994) Panoquina evadnes (Stoll, 1781)
Anthoptus epictetus (Fabricius, 1793) Papias proximus (Bell, 1934)
Arita arita (Schaus, 1902) Papias integra Mabille, 1891
Aroma aroma Hewitson, 1867 Paracarystus menestries rona (Hewitson,
Artines aepitus (Geyer, 1832) 1866)
Callimormus radiola radiola (Mabille, Parphorus decora (Herrich-Schäffer,
1897) 1869)
Carystina lysiteles Mabille, 1891 Parphorus storax storax (Mabille, 1891)
Carystoides sicania orbius (Godman, Penicula crista Evans, 1955
1901) Penicula criska jon Nicolay, 1980
Carystoides lila Evans, 1955 Penicula bryanti (Weeks, 1906)
Chloeria psittacina Felder, 1867 Perichares philetes dolores (Reakirt,
Cobalopsis potaro (William & Bell, 1868)
1931) Phanes almoda (Hewitson, 1866)
Cobalopsis nero (Herrich-Schäffer, Pompeius pompeius (Latreille, 1824)
1869) Quinta cannae (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869)
Cobalus virbius virbius (Cramer, 1777) Racta sp.
Conga chydea (Butler, 1870) Saliana salius (Cramer, 1776)
Corticea corticea corticea (Plötz, 1883) Saliana esperi Evans, 1955
Cymaenes tripunctata alumna (Butler, Saliana antoninus Latrielle, 1824
1877) Saliana triangularis (Kaye, 1913)
Cymaenes cavalla Evans, 1955 Saturnus tiberius suffuscus (Hayward,
Cynea megalops (Godman, 1900) 1940)
Damas clavus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Sodalia sodalis Butler, 1877
Decinea percosius (Godman, 1900) Talides sergestus Cramer, 1775)
Decinea sp. Talides sinois sinois Hübner, 1819
Decinea derisor (Mabille, 1891) Telles arcalaus (Cramer, 1782)
Ebusus ebusus (Cramer, 1782) Thargella caura caura (Plötz, 1882)
Eutocus quichua Lindsey, 1925 Thespias dalman Latreille, 1824
54 J. Res. Lepid.

Thoon sp. Parides chabrias chabrias (Hewitson,

Thoon ponka Evans, 1955 1852)
Thoon taxes (Godman, 1900) Protesilaus telesilaus telesilaus (Felder
Thoon modius (Mabille, 1889) & Felder, 1864)
Thracides phidon (Cramer, 1779) Protographium agesilaus autosilaus
Thracides smaragdulus (Herrich- (Bates, 1861)
Schäffer, 1869) Protographium thyastes thyastinus
Vehilius stictomenes stictomenes Butler, (Oberthür, 1880)
1877 Pterourus zagreus neyi (Niepelt, 1909)
Vehilius illudens Mabille, 1891
Vehilius vetula (Mabille, 1878) Pieridae 27
Vehilius inca (Scudder, 1872) Aphrissa statira (Cramer, 1777)
Venas caeruleans (Mabille, 1828) Archonias bellona (Cramer, 1776)
Vettius phyllus phyllus (Cramer, 1777) Charonias eurytele (Hewitson, 1853)
Vettius richardi (Weeks, 1906) Cunizza hirlanda (Stoll, 1791)
Vettius artona (Hewitson, 1868) Dismorphia theucharila (Doubleday,
Vettius marcus marcus (Fabricius, 1787) 1848)
Xeniades orchamus orchamus (Cramer, Dismorphia amphiona Cramer, 1780
1777) Enantia melite (Linnaeus, 1763)
Zenis jebus melaleuca (Plötz, 1882) Enantia lina (Herbst, 1792)
Eurema daira (Godart, 1819)
Papilionidae: 26 Eurema sp.
Battus crassus crassus (Cramer, 1777) Eurema albula (Cramer, 1776)
Battus polydamas polydamas (Linnaeus, Eurema xanthochlora (Kollar, 1850)
1758) Itaballia pisonis (Hewitson, 1861)
Battus belus varus (Kollar, 1850) Itaballia demophile (Linnaeus, 1763)
Eurytides dolicaon ? Leptophobia aripa (Boisduval, 1836)
Heraclides torquatus torquatus Leucidia brephos (Hübner, 1809)
(Cramer, 1777) Moschoneura pinthaeus (Linnaeus,
Heraclides thoas cinyras (Ménétriés, 1758)
1857) Patia oresis (Boisduval, 1836)
Heraclides isidorus flavescens Perrhybis pyrrha (Cramer, 1782)
(Oberthür, 1880) Perrhybis lorena (Hewitson, 1852)
Heraclides hyppason hyppason Phoebis rurina (Felder & Felder, 1861)
(Cramer, 1776) Phoebis philea (Linnaeus, 1763)
Heraclides chiansiades chiansiades Phoebis argante (Fabricius, 1775)
(Westwood, 1872) Phoebis trite (Linnaeus, 1758)
Heraclides astyalus phanias (Rothschild Pieriballia mandella (Felder & Felder,
& Jordan, 1906) 1861)
Heraclides androgeus androgeus Pyrisitia venusta (Boisduval, 1836)
(Cramer, 1776) Pyrisitia nise (Cramer, 1776)
Mimoides ariarathes gayi (Lucas, 1852)
Mimoides xynias (Hewitson, 1867) Nymphalidae 307
Mimoides pausanias pausanias
(Hewitson, 1852) Heliconiinae 22
Parides anchises drucei (Butler, 1874) Actinote sp.
Parides aeneas bolivar (Hewitson, 1850) Actinote pellenea Hübner, 1821
Parides vertumnus bogotanus (Felder & Agraulis vanillae (Linnaeus, 1763)
Felder, 1864) Dione juno (Cramer, 1780)
Parides neophilus olivencius (Bates, Dryadula phaetusa (Linnaeus, 1758)
1861) Dryas iulia (Fabricius, 1775)
Parides erithalion guillerminae Eueides tales (Cramer, 1776)
(Pischedda & Racheli, 1986) Eueides aliphera (Godart, 1819)
Parides sesostris sesostris (Cramer, Eueides isabella isabella (Cramer, 1782)
1780) Eueides lampeto acacetes Hewitson,
Parides lysander brissonius (Hübner, 1869
1819) Eueides lybia (Fabricius, 1775)
35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 55

Eueides vibilia (Godart, 1819) Baeotus amazonicus (Riley, 1919)

Heliconius erato lativitta Butler, 1877 Batesia hypochlora (Felder & Felder,
Heliconius hecale quitalena Hewitson, 1862)
1853 Biblis hyperia (Cramer, 1780)
Heliconius elevatus elevatus Nöldner, Callicore cynosura (Doubleday, 1847)
1901 Callicore lyca (Doubleday, 1847)
Heliconius wallacei Reakirt, 1866 Callicore hystaspes (Fabricius, 1782)
Heliconius sara (Fabricius, 1793) Callicore hesperis (Guérin, 1844)
Heliconius melpomene aglaope Felder Callicore eunomia (Hewitson, 1853)
& Felder, 1862 Callicore cyllene (Doubleday, 1847)
Heliconius numata euphone Felder & Catacore kolyma (Hewitson, 1852)
Felder, 1862 Catonephele acontius acontius
Laparus doris (Linnaeus, 1771) (Linnaeus, 1758)
Neruda aoede bartletti Druce, 1876 Catonephele numilia numilia (Cramer,
Philaethria dido (Linnaeus, 1763) 1776)
Colobura dirce (Linnaeus, 1758)
Nymphalinae 20 Diaethria clymena (Cramer, 1776)
Anartia amathea (Linnaeus, 1758) Dynamine geta (Godman & Salvin,
Anartia jatrophae (Linnaeus, 1763) 1878)
Anthanassa drusilla (Felder & Felder, Dynamine racidula (Hewitson, 1852)
1861) Dynamine zenobia (Bates, 1865)
Castilia perilla (Hewitson, 1852) Dynamine glauce (Bates, 1865)
Castilia angusta (Hewitson, 1868) Dynamine gisella (Hewitson, 1852)
Castilia ofella (Hewitson, 1864) Dynamine athemon (Linnaeus, 1758)
Eresia clara clara Bates, 1864 Dynamine artemisia (Fabricius, 1793)
Eresia eunice eunice (Hübner, 1807) Dynamine anubis (Hewitson, 1859)
Eresia nauplius (Linnaeus, 1758) Ectima iona (Doubleday, 1848)
Eresia sp. Ectima lirides (Staudinger, 1885)
Eresia perna Hewitson, 1852 Eunica eurota eurota (Cramer, 1776)
Eresia pelonia pelonia Hewitson, 1852 Eunica sophonisba agele Seitz, 1915
Hypanartia lethe (Fabricius, 1793) Eunica norica occia Fruhstorfer, 1909
Junonia evarete (Cramer, 1870) Eunica alpais alpais (Godart, 1824)
Metamorpha elissa Hübner, 1819 Eunica mygdonia mygdonia (Godart,
Phyciodes sp. 1824)
Phyciodes aveyrana (Bates, 1864) Eunica marsolia fasula Fruhstorfer, 1909
Siproeta stelenes Linnaeus, 1758 Eunica amelia erroneata Oberthür,
Tegosa claudina (Eschscholtz, 1821) 1916
Telenassa burchelli (Moulton, 1909) Eunica clytia (Hewitson, 1852)
Haematera pyramus (Fabricius, 1782)
Limenitidinae 78 Hamadryas laodamia laodamia
Adelpha boeotia (Felder & Felder, (Cramer, 1777)
1867) Hamadryas arinome arinome (Lucas,
Adelpha delinita (Fruhstorfer, 1913) 1853)
Adelpha iphiclus (Linnaeus, 1758) Hamadryas amphinome amphinome
Adelpha erotia (Hewitson, 1847) (Linnaeus, 1767)
Adelpha cytherea (Linnaeus, 1758) Hamadryas feronia feronia (Linnaeus,
Adelpha celerio (Bates, 1864) 1758)
Adelpha boreas (Butler, 1866) Hamadryas chloe chloe (Stoll, 1791)
Adelpha sp. 3 Historis acheronta (Fabricius, 1775)
Adelpha sp. 2 Historis odius (Fabricius, 1775)
Adelpha lerna (Hewitson, 1847) Marpesia furcula (Fabricius, 1793)
Adelpha melanthe (Bates, 1864) Marpesia iole (Drury, 1782)
Adelpha sp. 1 Marpesia chiron (Fabricius, 1775)
Asterope degandii (Hewitson, 1850) Marpesia berania (Hewitson, 1852)
Baeotus japetus (Staudinger, 1885) Marpesia crethon (Fabricius, 1776)
Baeotus deucalion (Felder & Felder, Marpesia petreus (Cramer, 1776)
1860) Marpesia themistocles (Fabricius, 1793)
56 J. Res. Lepid.

Nessaea obrina lesoudieri Le Moult, Apaturinae 8

1933 Doxocopa cherubina (Felder & Felder,
Nessaea hewitsonii hewitsonii (Felder & 1867)
Felder, 1859) Doxocopa clothilda (Felder & Felder,
Nica flavilla (Godart, 1824) 1867)
Panacea prola (Doubleday, 1848) Doxocopa cyane (Latreille, 1813)
Panacea procilla (Hewitson, 1854) Doxocopa felderi (Godman & Salvin,
Panacea regina (Bates, 1864) 1884)
Paulogramma pyracmon (Godart, 1824) Doxocopa laure (Drury, 1773)
Peria lamis (Cramer, 1780) Doxocopa pavon (Latreille, 1809)
Pyrrhogyra neaerea (Linnaeus, 1758) Doxocopa sp.
Pyrrhogyra otolais (Bates, 1864) Doxocopa agathina (Cramer, 1777)
Pyrrhogyra crameri (Aurivillius, 1882)
Smyrna blomfildia (Fabricius, 1782) Morphinae 8
Temenis pulchra (Hewitson, 1861) Antirrhea avernus (Hopffer, 1874)
Temenis laothoe (Cramer, 1777) Antirrhea sp.
Tigridia acesta (Linnaeus, 1758) Morpho achilles (Linnaeus, 1758)
Vila azeca (Doubleday, 1848) Morhpo adonis (Cramer, 1776)
Morpho deidamia (Hübner, 1819)
Charaxinae 26 Morpho hecuba (Linnaeus, 1771)
Agrias claudina (Godart, 1824) Morpho menelaus (Linnaeus, 1758)
Agrias hewitsonius Bates, 1860 Morpho rhetenor (Cramer, 1776)
Agrias amydon Hewitson, 1854
Archaeoprepona licomedes (Cramer, Brassolinae 15
1777) Brassolis sophorae (Linnaeus, 1758)
Archaeoprepona demophoon (Hübner, Caligo illioneus (Cramer, 1776)
1814) Caligo idomeneus (Linnaeus, 1758)
Archaeoprepona demophon (Linnaeus, Caligo eurilochus (Cramer, 1776)
1758) Caligo placidianus (Staudinger, 1887)
Archaeoprepona amphimachus (Fabri- Caligo euphorbus (Felder & Felder,
cius, 1775) 1862)
Coenophlebia archidona Felder & Catoblepia xanthicles (Godman &
Felder, 1862 Salvin, 1881)
Consul fabius aequatorialis (Butler, Catoblepia berecynthia (Cramer, 1777)
1875) Catoblepia xanthus (Linnaeus, 1758)
Fountainea ryphea ryphea (Cramer, Eryphanis polyxena (Meerburgh, 1780)
1776) Opoptera aorsa (Godart, 1824)
Fountainea eurypyle (Felder & Felder, Opsiphanes quiteria (Cramer, 1782)
1862) Opsiphanes invirae (Hübner, 1808)
Hypna clytemnestra (Cramer, 1777) Opsiphanes cassiae (Linnaeus, 1758)
Memphis morvus (Fabricius, 1775) Selenophanes cassiope (Cramer, 1776)
Memphis florita (Druce, 1877)
Memphis sp. Satyrinae 68
Memphis philumena philumena Amphidecta calliomma (Felder &
(Doubleday, 1849) Felder, 1862)
Memphis arachne (Cramer, 1776) Amphidecta pignerator (Butler, 1867)
Memphis xenocles (Westwood, 1850) Bia actorion (Linnaeus, 1763)
Memphis offa (Druce, 1877) Caeruleuptychia coelica (Hewitson,
Memphis oenomais (Boisduval, 1870) 1869)
Memphis polycarmes (Fabricius, 1775) Caeruleuptychia nr. pencillata
Prepona pheridamas (Cramer, 1777) Caeruleuptychia sp. 2
Prepona laertes (Hübner, 1814) Caeruleuptychia aegrota (Butler 1867)
Prepona pylene Hewitson, 1854 Caeruleuptychia pilata (Butler, 1867)
Siderone marthesia (Cramer, 1777) Caeruleuptychia sp. 1
Zaretis itys (Cramer, 1777) Cepheuptychia cephus (Fabricius, 1775)
Chloreuptychia herseis (Godart, 1824)
Chloreuptychia chloris (Cramer, 1782)
35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 57

Chloreuptychia tolumnia (Cramer, Taygetis virgilia (Cramer, 1776)

1777) Taygetis rufomarginata (Staudinger,
Chloreuptychia arnaca (Fabricius, 1776) 1888)
Chloreutychia agatha (Butler, 1867) Taygetis thamyra (Cramer, 1779)
Cissia proba (Weymer, 1911) Taygetis laches (Fabricius, 1793)
Cissia terrestris (Butler, 1867) Taygetis mermeria (Cramer, 1776)
Cissia penelope (Fabricius, 1775) Yphthimoides erigone (Butler, 1867)
Cissia sp. 2 Yphthimoides renata (Cramer, 1782)
Cissia myncea (Cramer, 1782)
Cissia sp. 1 Danainae 4
Cithaerias aurora (Felder & Felder, Danaus plexippus (Linnaeus, 1758)
1862) Lycorea ilione (Cramer, 1776)
Erichthodes erichtho (Butler, 1867) Lycorea pasinuntia brunnea Riley, 1919
Euptychia sp. 3 Lycorea cleobaea atergatis Doubleday,
Euptychia sp. 4 1847
Euptychia sp. 1
Euptychia picea (Butler, 1867) Ithomiinae 58
Euptychia sp. 2 “Hypoleria” orolina orolina (Hewitson,
Haetera piera (Linnaeus, 1758) 1861)
Hermeuptychia hermes (Fabricius, “Hypoleria” seba oculata Haensch, 1903
1775) “Pseudoscada” florula aureola
Magneuptychia analis (Godman, 1905) (Hewitson, 1855)
Magneuptychia tricolor (Hewitson, Aeria eurimedea negricola (Felder &
1850) Felder, 1865)
Magneuptychia modesta (Butler, 1867) Callithomia lenea zelie Guérin, 1844
Magneuptychia alcinoe (Felder & Callithomia alexirrhoe butes Godman &
Felder, 1867) Salvin, 1898
Magneuptychia ocypete (Fabricius, Ceratinia tutia poecila (Bates, 1862)
1776) Ceratiscada hymen (Haensch, 1905)
Magneuptychia ayaya (Butler, 1867) Dircenna loreta loreta Haensch, 1903
Magneuptychia nr. helle 1 Forbestra equicola equicoloides
Magneuptychia nr. helle 2 (Godman & Salvin, 1898)
Magneuptychia nr. inani Forbestra olivencia juntana (Haensch,
Magneuptychia libye (Linnaeus, 1767) 1903)
Magneuptychia sp. Godyris zavaleta matronalis (Weymer,
Manataria hyrnethia (Fruhstorfer, 1912) 1883)
Megeuptychia antonoe (Cramer, 1776) Godyris dircenna dircenna (Felder &
Pareuptychia hesionides (Forster, 1964) Felder, 1862)
Pareuptychia ocirrhoe (Fabricius, 1776) Heterosais nephele nephele (Bates,
Pareuptychia sp. 1862)
Pierella lena (Linnaeus, 1767) Hyalyris coeno norellana (Haensch,
Pierella lamia (Sulzer, 1776) 1903)
Pierella hortona (Hewitson, 1854) Hypoleria lavinia chrysodonia (Bates,
Pierella astyoche (Erichson, 1848) 1862)
Posttaygetis penelea (Cramer, 1777) Hypoleria sarepta aureliana (Bates,
Pseudodebis sp. 1862)
Pseudodebis valentina (Cramer, 1780) Hyposcada anchiala ecuadorina Bryk,
Pseudodebis marpessa (Hewitson, 1862) 1953
Splendeuptychia nr. itonis Hyposcada illinissa ida Haensch, 1903
Splendeuptychia itonis (Hewitson, Hyposcada kena kena (Hewitson, 1872)
1862) Hypothyris moebiusi unicolora
Splendeuptychia sp. 1 (Tessmann, 1928)
Taygetis celia (Cramer, 1780) Hypothyris mamercus mamercus
Taygetis armillata (Butler, 1868) (Hewitson, 1869)
Taygetis sosis (Hopffer, 1874) Hypothyris euclea intermedia (Butler,
Taygetis cleopatra (Felder & Felder, 1873)
1867) Hypothyris anastasia honesta (Weymer,
58 J. Res. Lepid.

1883) Alesa sp.

Hypothyris moebiusi moebiusi (Haensch, Alesa telephae (Boisduval, 1836)
1903) Amarynthis meneria (Cramer, 1776)
Hypothyris semifluva satura (Haensch, 1903) Ancyluris aulestes (Cramer, 1777)
Hypothyris anastasia bicolor (Haensch, 1903) Ancyluris meliboeus (Fabricius, 1777)
Hypothyris fluonia berna (Haensch, 1903) Anteros acheus (Stoll, 1781)
Ithomia salapia salapia Hewitson, 1853 Anteros allectus Westwood, 1851
Ithomia salapia travella Haensch, 1903 Argyrogrammana sp. 3
Ithomia amarilla amarilla Haensch, 1903 Argyrogrammana sp. 1
Ithomia agnosia agonsia Hewitson, 1855 Argyrogrammana sp. 2
Mechanitis mazaeus mazaeus Hewitson, 1860 Argyrogrammana trochilia Westwood,
Mechanitis mazaeus fallax Butler, 1873 1851
Mechanitis mazaeus visenda Butler, 1877 Calospila trinitatis (Lathy, 1932)
Mechanitis messenoides messenoides Felder Calospila parthaon (Dalman, 1823)
& Felder, 1865 Calospila sp.
Mechanitis polymnia dorissides Staudinger, Calospila maeonides ?
1844 Calospila rhodope (Hewitson, 1853)
Mechanitis lysimnia elisa (Guérin, 1844) Calospila emylius (Cramer, 1775)
Melinaea mnasias abtigua Brown, 1977 Calydna punctata Felder & Felder, 1861
Melinaea menophilus cocana Haensch, 1903 Caria trochilus Erichson, 1818
Melinaea marsaus monthone Hewitson, 1860 Caria sponsa Staudinger, 1888
Melinaea maelus maenois Hewitson, 1869 Caria mantinea (Felder & Felder, 1861)
Methona curvifascia curvifascia Weymer, 1883 Caria nr. mantinea
Methona confusa psamathe Godman & Chalodeta theodora (Felder & Felder,
Salvin, 1898 1862)
Napeogenes achaea achaea (Hewitson, 1869) Chalodeta chaonitis (Hewitson, 1866)
Napeogenes aethra aethra (Hewitson, 1869) Chalodeta lypera (Bates, 1868)
Napeogenes inachia avila Haensch, 1903 Chamaelimnas briola Bates, 1868
Napeogenes stella (Hewitson, 1855) Charis nr. anius
Napeogenes sylphis caucayaensis Fox & Real, Charis cleonus (Stoll, 1782)
1971 Charis anius (Cramer, 1776)
Napeogenes pharo pharo (Felder & Felder, Charis sp.
1862) Cremna actoris (Cramer, 1776)
Oleria gunilla lota (Hewitson, 1872) Crocozona caecias (Hewitson, 1866)
Oleria tigilla tigilla (Weymer, 1899) Cyrenia martia Westwood, 1851
Oleria sexmaculata sexmaculata (Haensch, Emesis ocypore (Geyer, 1837)
1903) Emesis nr. lucinda 1
Oleria lerda lerda (Haensch, 1909) Emesis nr.lucinda 2
Oleria agarista agarista (Felder & Felder, Emesis sp.
1862) Emesis temesa (Hewitson, 1877)
Oleria assimilis assimilis (Haensch, 1903) Emesis fatima (Cramer, 1780)
Pseudoscada timna timna (Hewitson, 1855) Emesis lucinda (Cramer, 1775)
Pteronymia vestilla sparsa Haensch, 1903 Eshtemopsis celina Bates, 1868
Scada reckia ethica (Hewitson, 1861) Eunogyra satyrus Westwood, 1851
Thyridia psidii ino Felder & Felder, 1862 Eurybia silaceana Stichel, 1924
Tithorea harmonia hermias Godman & Eurybia latifasciata Hewitson, 1869
Salvin, 1898 Eurybia lamia (Cramer, 1777)
Eurybia nicaeas Fabricius, 1775
Riodinidae 194 Eurybia sp.
Adelotypa amasis (Hewitson, 1870) Eurybia jemima Hewitson, 1869
Adelotypa alector Butler, 1867 Eurybia dardus Fabricius, 1787
Adelotypa senta (Hewitson, 1853) Eurybia cyclopia Stichel, 1910
Adelotypa sp. 1 Euselasia uria (Hewitson, 1855)
Adelotypa sp. 2 Euselasia urites gr.
Adelotypa sp. 3 Euselasia mirania (Bates, 1868)
Adelotypa sp. 4 Euselasia sp. 1
Alesa amesis (Cramer, 1777) Euselasia sp. 4
35:42–60, 1996 (2000) 59

Euselasia sp. 2 Mesosemia sp. 4

Euselasia sp. 3 Mesosemia melpia (Hewitson, 1869)
Euselasia pellonia Stichel, 1919 Mesosemia gertraudis Stichel, 1910
Euselasia orfita (Cramer, 1777) Mesosemia ulrica (Cramer, 1777)
Euselasia opalescens (Hewitson, 1855) Mesosemia nr. thetys
Euselasia sp. 8 Mesosemia nr. tenebricosa
Euselasia lysias gr. Mesosemia magate?
Euselasia melaphaea (Hübner, 1823) Mesosemia nina (Herbst, 1793)
Euselasia lysimachus (Staudinger, 1888) Metacharis lucius (Fabricius, 1793)
Euselasia sp. 5 Metacharis nr. regalis
Euselasia sp. 6 Metacharis regalis Butler, 1867
Euselasia euriteus (Cramer, 1777) Methone cecilia (Cramer, 1777)
Euselasia issoria Hewitson, 1869 Monethe albertus Felder & Felder, 1862
Euselasia hygenius gr. Mycastor nealces (Hewitson, 1871)
Euselasia hahneli Butler, 1874 Napaea melampia (Bates, 1867)
Euselasia gelanor (Stoll, 1780) Notheme eumeus (Fabricius, 1781)
Euselasia sp. 7 Nymphidium baoetia (Hewitson, 1853)
Euselasia fabia? Nymphidium cachrus (Fabricius, 1787)
Euselasia everitus (Hewitson, 1855) Nymphidium caricae (Linnaeus, 1758)
Euselasia euryone (Hewitson, 1856) Nymphidium leucosia (Hübner, 1806)
Euselasia nr. euriteus Nymphidium nr. derufata
Euselasia crotopus gr. 2 Nymphidium nr. lisimon
Euselasia euoras (Hewitson, 1856) Nymphidium sp.
Euselasia eumenes (Hewitson, 1855) Nymphidium mantus (Cramer, 1775)
Euselasia eumedia (Hewitson, 1855) Nymphidium minuta gr.
Euselasia eulione (Hewitson, 1856) Nymphidium omois Hewitson, 1865
Euselasia crotopus gr. 1 Pandemos pasiphae (Cramer, 1775)
Euselasia crinon Stizhel, 1919 Parcella amarynthina (Felder & Felder,
Euselasia arbas (Stoll, 1782) 1865)
Euselasia anica gr. Parnes philotes Westwood, 1851
Hyphilaria parthenis (Westwood, 1851) Parnes nycteis Westwood, 1851
Hyphilaria nicia (Hübner, 1819) Perophthalma tullius Fabricius, 1787
Ithomiola cascella (Hewitson, 1870) Rhetus periander (Cramer, 1777)
Juditha molpe (Hübner, 1808) Riodina lysippus (Linnaeus, 1798)
Lasaia agesilas (Latreille, 1813) Sarota sp. 2
Lasaia sp. Sarota acantus (Stoll, 1782)
Lasaia pseudomeris Clench, 1972 Sarota chrysus (Stoll, 1782)
Leucochimona nr. philemon Sarota sp. 3
Leucochimona hyphea (Cramer, 1776) Sarota sp. 1
Lyropteryx apollonia Westwood, 1851 Semomesia sp.
Melanis xarifa (Hewitson, 1853) Setabis sp.
Mesene nola Herrich-Schäffer, 1893 Setabis epitus (Cramer, 1780)
Mesene hya Westwood, 1851 Setabis salvini?
Mesophthalma idotea (Westwood, 1851) Setabis buckleyi (Grose-Smith, 1898)
Mesosemia sp. 3 Stalachtis euterpe (Linnaeus, 1758)
Mesosemia steli Hewitson, 1858 Stalachtis calliope (Linnaeus, 1758)
Mesosemia philocles Linnaeus, 1758 Symmachia probetor (Stoll, 1782)
Mesosemia sp. 2 Symmachia sp.
Mesosemia judicialis Butler, 1874 Symmachia calligraphia (Hewitson,
Mesosemia sp. 1 1867)
Mesosemia eumene (Cramer, 1776) Symmachia accusatrix Westwood, 1851
Mesosemia nr. judicialis Symmachia asclepia Hewitson, 1870
Mesosemia loruhama Hewitson, 1869 Synargis gela (Hewitson, 1853)
Mesosemia cippus (Hewitson, 1859) Synargis sp.
Mesosemia nr. cyanira Synargis abaris (Cramer, 1776)
Mesosemia nr. ephyne Synargis chaonia (Hewitson, 1853)
Mesosemia sp. 5 Synargis orestesa (Cramer, 1780)
60 J. Res. Lepid.

Syngaris ochra (Bates, 1868) Janthecla leea Venables & Robbins,

Syrmatia aethiops Staudinger, 1888 1991
Teratophthalma phelina (Felder & Janthecla sista Hewitson, 1867
Felder, 1862) Lamprospilus orcidia (Hewitson, 1874)
Themone pais (Hübner, 1820) Mithras nautes (Cramer, 1779)
Theope sp. Ocaria ocrisia (Hewitson, 1869)
Theope eudocia Westwood, 1851 Ocaria thales (Fabricius, 1793)
Theope lycaenina Bates, 1868 Panthiades bitias (Cramer, 1777)
Theope nr. thootes Panthiades aeolus (=pelion) (Fabricius,
Theope virgilius (Fabricius, 1793) 1775)
Thisbe fenestrella Lathy, 1932 Pseudolycaena marsyas (Linnaeus,
Xynias christalla Grose-Smith, 1902 1758)
unknown (8) Rekoa palegon (Cramer, 1780)
Siderus leucophaeus (Hübner, 1818)
Lycaenidae 59 Strymon ziba (Hewitson, 1868)
“Thecla” hemon (Cramer, 1775) Theclopsis lydus (Hübner, 1819)
“Thecla” bosora Hewitson, 1870 Theclopsis gargara Hewitson, 1868
“Thecla” orobia (Hewitson, 1867) Theritas mavors (Hübner, 1818)
“Thecla” gigantea Hewitson, 1867 Thestius pholeus (Cramer, 1777)
“Thecla” maculata (Lathy, 1936) Tmolus echion (Linnaeus, 1767)
“Thecla” cupentus (Stoll, 1781) Zizula cyna (Edwards, 1881)
“Thecla” gibberosa (Hewitson, 1867)
“Thecla” tephraeus gr.
“Thecla” ophia Hewitson, 1868
“Thecla” tephraeus (Geyer, 1837)
“Thecla” phegeus (Hewitson, 1865)
“Thecla” nr. gadira
“Thecla” nr. augustinula
“Thecla” carteia Hewitson, 1870
“Thecla” ergina or ligurina
“Thecla” aruma (Hewitson, 1877)
“Thecla” nr. mycon
“Thecla” nr. empusa
“Thecla” hesperitis (Butler and Druce,
1877)
Arawacus dolylas (Cramer, 1776)
Arawacus aetolus (Sulzer, 1776)
Arcas imperialis (Cramer, 1775)
Calycopis anapa Field, 1967
Calycopis indigo (Druce, 1907)
Calycopis isobeon complex
Calycopis cerata (Hewitson, 1877)
Calycopis xenata (Hewitson, 1877)
Calycopis pisis complex 3
Calycopis pisis complex 2
Calycopis atnius complex
Calycopis calus (Godart, 1824)
Calycopis centoripa Hewitson, 1868
Calycopis pisis complex 1
Celmia celmus (Cramer, 1775)
Chalybs janias (Cramer, 1779)
Contrafacia imma Prittwitz, 1865
Cyanophrys amyntor ?
Electrostrymon ecbatana Hewitson, 1868
Eumaeus minijas (Hübner, 1809)
Evenus gabriela (Cramer, 1775)
Hypostrymon asa Hewitson, 1873