Morphinae - Addendum

The following species were recorded from Indo-Chinese region in the past publications, however were omitted from the list by the reason written below.

Aemona lena lena (Atkinson,1871)
Aemona lena f.lena ; Dubois & Vitalis de Salvaza,1924 : 32. (Tonkin: Dien-Bien-Phu)
Aemona lena ; Metaye,1957 : 99. (N)
Aemona lena lena ; Monastyrskii,2011 : 84, pl.18, figs.1a,(ST,♂),1b,(ST,♂Un). (by literature)
Aemona lena lena ; Monastyrskii & Devyatkin,2015 : 28. (by literature)
>>> No reliable specimens are known. Therefore I would like to put this subspecies on hold until a reliable specimen is discovered.

Aemona amathusia amathusia (Hewitson,1867)
Aemona amathusia amathusia ; Nishimura,1999 : 3. (Chiang Rai: Chiang Khong)
"Aemona amathusia amathusia ; Ek-Amnuay,[2007] : 312, pl.128, figs.A7,♂(Myanmar),♂(Myanmar,Un),♀(Myanmar)."
"Aemona amathusia amathusia ; Ek-Amnuay,2012 : 312, pl.128, figs.N153,♂(Myanmar),♂(Myanmar,Un),♀(Myanmar)."
Aemona amathusia amathusia ; Kimura et al.,2016 : 141. (by literature)
[ LAOS ]
Aemona amathusia f.amathusia ; Dubois & Vitalis de Salvaza,1924 : 32. (Pou-Mi / Xieng-Kong)
Aemona amathusia amathusia ; Osada, Uémura & Uehara,1999 : 212, not fig. (List only)
Aemona lena salweena ; Uémura,2005 : 4.
>>> The record from Thailand is based on an old specimen in NHML. The specimens illustrated by Ek-Amnuay ([2007],2012) are from Kachin, Myanmar. And no reliable specimens are known from Laos too. Therefore I would like to put this species on hold until a reliable specimen is discovered.

Stichophthalma camadeva camadevoides de Niceville,1899
Stichophthalma camadeva camadevoides ; Godfrey,1930 : 258-259. (Chiang Mai: Doi Suthep)
Stichophthalma camadeva camadevoides ; Pinratana,1983 : 50, pl.28, fig.8,♀. (Chiang Mai: Doi Suthep)
"Stichophthalma camadeva camadevoides ; Ek-Amnuay,[2007] : 314, pl.129, figs.A8,♂[♀],♂[♀](Un). ("Wang Chin" [N.Myanmar or India])"
"Stichophthalma camadeva camadevoides ; Ek-Amnuay,2012 : 314, pl.129, figs.N154,♀,♀(Un). ("Wang Chin" [N.Myanmar or India])"
>>> The specimen illustrated by Ek-Amnuay ([2007],2012) seems from N.Myanmar or India and the locality of "Wang Chin" is incorrect. Godfrey collection in the department of agriculture Thailand preserved two female specimens that Godfrey recorded at "Doi Suthep, 1921.March". However, the record, like that of Papilio elephenor, is considered to be a locality error. It was probably mixed specimens from India or N.Myanmar.

Stichophthalma howqua (Westwood,1851)
"Stichophthalma howqua ; Ek-Amnuay,[2007] : 314, pl.129, figs.A9,♂,♂(Un). (Phu Khieo?)"
"Stichophthalma howqua ; Ek-Amnuay,[2007] : 314, pl.129, figs.N155,♂,♂(Un). (Phu Khieo?)"
>>> It was recorded from an unreliable specimen and "Phu Khieo ?", the locality of specimen, was just an imagination. It is considered to be incorrect data. Therefore I deleted the species from the list.

Reeves, P.A.,1966 : Notes on the Butterflies of Khao Yai National Park. Part1.
Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 21:1-20.

Reeves, P.A.,1967 : Notes on the Butterflies of Khao Yai National Park. Part 2.
Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 22(1/2):119-130.

Reeves, P.A.,1967 : Notes on the Butterflies along the Kwai Noi Between Sai Yok and Wang Po.
Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 22(1/2):143-149.

Reeves reported the above lists, but his identification was based on Malaysian literature and all species and subspecies names were Malaysian ones. Moreover no specimens were shown in his list. It is considered most of these species and subspceis should be continental ones. However For some species, it is possible that Malaysian species and subspecies are actually distributed which may cause additional confusion. Therefore I omitted all of these records.


A Check list of Butterflies in Indo-China, Chiefly from THAILAND, LAOS & VIETNAM. Copyright © Y.Inayoshi.