
''Hemiolaus ceres'' is a butterfly in the Lycaenidae family. It is found on Madagascar. The habitat consists of forests.
Similar species: Moths And Butterflies
By Ferdy Christant
All rights reserved
Uploaded May 4, 2016. Captured Oct 16, 2015 10:08 in 6, Madagascar.
comments (13)
Dave Posted 9 years ago
Dave Posted 9 years ago
Dave Posted 9 years ago
The front wing rear profile. The cutback shape is unique.
The pointed profile of the rear wing trailing edge.
The bump on the rear wing trailing edge.
The comparative lengths of the trailers.
The difference in color shade between the front and rear wings.
Many of these chosen features are common amongst ceres, cobaltina and maryra.
Cobaltina has prominent black spots at rear wing trailing edge.
I failed to find a reliable image of maryra.
Dave Posted 9 years ago
http://www.neutron.phys.ethz.ch/Lepidoptera/Lycaenidae.htm
http://www.neutron.phys.ethz.ch/Lepidoptera/Collecting/2012-2013/Madagascar2013/AZ13-0490R.jpg
http://www.neutron.phys.ethz.ch/Lepidoptera/Collecting/2012-2013/Madagascar2013/AZ13-0479R.jpg
http://www2.nrm.se/en/lep_nrm/c/hypolycaena_cobaltina.html
http://www.metamorphosis.org.za/articlesPDF/1218/265%20Genus%20Hemiolaus%20Aurivillius.pdf
The other references that should be reliable are some old descriptions (most of them in French) and drawings.
http://ftp.funet.fi/index/Tree_of_life/insecta/lepidoptera/ditrysia/papilionoidea/lycaenidae/theclinae/hemiolaus/
http://archive.org/stream/illustrationsofd01hewi#page/n86/mode/1up
This is supposed to be the original description of H. ceres, however it was collected in South Africa so it should be H. caeculus instead. Plate 17 with the figure is missing.
Here the first reference says that in the second one H. caeculus should be H. cobaltina so all 3 species are described and drawn in the same paper.
http://archive.org/stream/rhopalocerathi00auri#page/316/mode/1up
http://archive.org/stream/histoirephysique1819gran#page/230/mode/1up
http://archive.org/stream/histoirephysique1819gran#page/231/mode/1up
http://archive.org/stream/histoirephysique1819gran#page/238/mode/1up
http://archive.org/stream/histoirephysique1819gran#page/n450/mode/1up
http://archive.org/stream/histoirephysique1819gran#page/n452/mode/1up
According to the descriptions both H. maryra and H. ceres have darker forewings and light blue hindwings. In H. ceres they are described as having violet and greenish reflections respectively. H. maryra has a small black line on the hindwings that is probably hidden between the wings. The other difference is in the spot in the base of the anal tail, but we cannot see it here. If you compare drawings 1 and 3 on plate 30a they are not so different.
In the first reference there is a ? is H. maryra = Iolaus ceres?
I agree it is probably not H. cobaltina. If H. ceres and H. maryra are different, we cannot see the different parts on this photo. Based on the colour difference, the hindwings are not greenish so it may be H. maryra but this is just speculating without a reliable reference. Posted 9 years ago
http://www.neutron.phys.ethz.ch/Lepidoptera/Collecting/2012-2013/Madagascar2013/AZ13-0490R.jpg
Everything matched Ferdy’s image, even the diagonal vein, just forward of the shaped trailing edge.
The female had enough similarities in the details to convince me that it was the same species; vein layout, trailer size and coloring. But with significant differences that cast doubt on the species, like the front wing trailing edge and the rear wing ocelli. Rear wing black edging, similar to the caeculus image.
I think the cobalt is out of the equation.
The caeculus image looks so close, but there are features that would account for species difference; the black edging of the rear wing, wrong sized trailers, dark patches on the front wing at rear inboard.
If the neutron ceres male is correct, then I believe Ferdy’s is a match. If the image names are in doubt, then we are screwed.
The drawings of ceres and maryra are disappointing, in that neither of them match the front wing trailing edge profile. The entomologist’s assistant needs a slap. I think the broadness of the front wing pattern could be significant, it could also be a wet season thing though.
This series of butterflies are obviously all evolved from the same stock before Madagascar split. The species may have split before Madagascar became isolated, or the central range of mountains could have promoted a species split, but I haven’t looked into this. DNA analysis of a proper collection is required to put this one to bed. But for now, it is all down to which images you trust.
Dave Posted 9 years ago
I think we have gone as far as we can with our web resources. We need to get input from a Madagascar expert.
DAve Posted 9 years ago