THE AUSTRALIAN

Entomologist

published by

THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND

Volume 38, Part 2, 14 June 2011

Price: $8.00 per part

ISSN 1320 6133

THE AUSTRALIAN ENTOMOLOGIST |

ABN#: 15 875 103 670

The Australian Entomologist is a non-profit journal published in i four r parts: ani ly

by the Entomological Society of Queensland and is devoted to “entomology of the

Australian Region, including New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and islands of the

south-western Pacific. Articles are accepted from amateur and professional

entomologists. The journal is produced independently and subscription to the

journal is not included with membership of the society.

The Publications Committee

Editor: Dr D.L. Hancock Editorial Co-ordinator

Assistant Editors: Dr C.J. Burwell Dr F. Turco

Queensland Museum Business Manager

Dr F. Turco Dr G.B. Monteith

Queensland Museum (geoff.monteith@bigpond.com)

Subscriptions

Subscriptions are payable in advance to the Business Manager, The Australian

Entomologist, P.O. Box 537, Indooroopilly, Qld, Australia, 4068.

For individuals: A$33.00 per annum in Australia.

A$40.00 per annum in Asia-Pacific Region.

A$45.00 per annum elsewhere.

For institutions A$37.00 per annum in Australia.

A$45.00 per annum in Asia-Pacific Region.

A$50.00 per annum elsewhere.

Please forward all overseas cheques/bank drafts in Australian currency.

GST is not payable on our publication.

ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND

Membership is open to anyone interested in Entomology. Meetings are normally

held at the Ecosciences Precinct, Dutton Park, at 1.00pm on the second Monday of

March-June and August-December each year. Meetings are announced in the

Society's News Bulletin which also contains reports of meetings, entomological

notes, notices of other Society events and information on Members' activities.

Enquiries relating to the Society should be sent to the Honorary Secretary,

Entomological Society of Queensland, P.O. Box 537, Indooroopilly, Qld, 4068.

Cover: A male of Canungrantmictis morindana Brailovsky 2002 (Heteroptera:

Coreidae). This large (25-30mm) coreid bug is spectacular in appearance but

extremely cryptic in the field. Adults hang ventral side upwards among foliage of its

food plant, the twining vine Morinda jasminoides (RUBIACEAE). It was known

from a single old specimen labelled "northern NSW" in the British Museum until the

1980s when discovery of its food plant allowed it to be reliably collected and

described. It is now known to occur from Taree to Brisbane with an isolated

population at Carnarvon Gorge.

Illustration by Geoff Thompson, Queensland Museum.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2): 49-62 49

THE EFFECT OF A NEW PITFALL TRAP DESIGN ON THE

CAPTURE ABUNDANCE OF THREE ARTHROPOD TAXA

RICHARD BASHFORD and NITA RAMSDEN

Forestry Tasmania, GPO Box 207, Hobart, Tas 7001

(Email: dick. bashford@forestrytas.com.au)

Abstract

A guide-arm pitfall trap design, suitable for biodiversity studies in remote or difficult terrain

forest sites, was tested against a standard pitfall trap to determine effective capture of beetles,

ants and spiders of different size classes. Paired sets of traps were established at unshaded and

shaded sites within a Pinus radiata plantation and a Eucalyptus nitens plantation in Tasmania

and run for 6 months. Overall results show that the guide-arm trap design had a significant effect

on the capture abundance of beetles and large beetles, although a significant interaction existed

between trap type and site. Capture abundance of carabid beetles, ants and large ants was not

significantly affected by the guide-arm trap. Spider capture abundance was significantly higher

in the standard traps than in the guide-arm traps.

Introduction

Pitfall traps are one of the most commonly used techniques for sampling

ground-dwelling invertebrates (Greenslade 1964). Attempts at standardising

methodologies for biodiversity sampling have been documented (Toda and

Kitching 2002); however, the protocols used will vary depending on the aims

of the study (Hansen and New 2005). Variations in pitfall trap design include

the type of preservative (Weeks and McIntyre 1997), trap size and type

(Brennan et al. 2005, Borgelt and New 2005, Luff 1975), spatial arrangement

(Perner and Schueler 2004, Ward et al. 2001), length of trapping period

(Baars 1979) and site trap placement (Winer et al. 2001, Werner and Raffa

2000). The abundance and composition of the invertebrate catch will also be

influenced by vegetation cover (Topping and Sunderland 1992, Melbourne

1999), seasonality (French et al. 2001) and duration and frequency of

trapping. One of the trap design factors that influences the efficacy of the

invertebrate catches is the use of drift fences or barriers. Many studies have

been conducted using variations of these trap types (Durkis and Reeves

1982). The development of standardised sampling protocols, as suggested for

ants by Agosti and Alonso (2000), which incorporate trap designs, facilitates

comparisons between biodiversity studies.

In this study, the performance of a standard pitfall trap design (Bashford et al.

2001) was compared with that of a modified design utilising aluminium guide

arms to attempt to increase the abundance of invertebrates caught. Guiding

arms, previously referred to as ‘guide vanes’ (Durkis and Reeves 1982) or

‘drift fences’ (Brennan et al. 2005), help guide invertebrates into the pitfall

cup. The mean catch abundance for the two trap types was examined for

three arthropod taxa (beetles, ants and spiders), which are commonly used as

target groups in biodiversity surveys. This was done to determine if different

taxa respond differently to the guide arms. Within the beetle and ant groups,

50 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

the proportion of larger morphospecies was compared between the two trap

types to examine if the guide arm was biased towards catching larger

invertebrates. Carabid abundance and composition were also looked at to

determine any difference between catches of the two trap designs. Trap

performance was studied under two different conditions: two levels of

shading (shaded and unshaded) and two different vegetation types (pine and

eucalypt plantations).

A standardised trap of improved design that is easily transported and

assembled is required for the large number of biodiversity projects being

conducted in native and commercial forest areas in Australia. The design

presented in this paper enables a pack of ten traps to be easily transported by

one person and assembled in the field.

Methods

Three factors were incorporated into the trial design:

Site

Pitfall traps were established at two different sites: a fifteen year old Pinus

radiata plantation at Pittwater (147.5 E, -42.8 S) in southern Tasmania and an

eight year old Eucalyptus nitens plantation at Blackwood Creek (147.98 E,

-41.05 S) in northern Tasmania.

Vegetation cover

Within each site two areas were selected in which to place the traps. One area

was open with very little canopy closure, which we refer to as unshaded. The

other area had a closed canopy, which we refer to as shaded.

Trap type

Guide arm design

The guiding arm trap used in this study is a modification of a pitfall trap

design used extensively for biodiversity studies by Forestry Tasmania (Grove

2009). The trap consists of a directing arm bracket that is made from a

circular metal collar onto which four 10 mm diameter aluminium rods are

welded. The outer diameter of the aluminium collar is 100 mm. This guiding

arm bracket is attached to the standard pit trap tube (PVC pipe 90 mm

diameter x 150 mm long) with adhesive-backed 2 mm thick foam tape. The

bracket is then fixed to the trap tube using silicone sealant. Each of the four

guiding arms per trap is made from flat 3 mm thick aluminium. The arms are

450 mm in length and 40 mm wide, each with a 10 mm diameter eye at one

end. The plastic pitfall cup is a 90 mm diameter, 425 ml capacity, ‘Castaway

2100’ brand. A rain cover, consisting of a round plastic food container lid,

120 mm in diameter, supported by three 120 mm long bamboo skewers, is

placed 10 mm above the lip of the cup (Fig. 1). Rain covers prevent dilution

of the preservative fluid and have little impact on invertebrates entering the

trap (Work et al. 2002).

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 51

100 O.D. x 3

aluminium

collar.

4/10 dia. 90 O.D. P. V.C.

aluminium rods .

welded to collar. Fit adhesive backed 2mm

thick foam tape to tube

before installing Directing

Arm Bracket. ]

D ther

38mm | 40mm

E

BARRIER ARM S

BRACKET x

Eye to suit 10

dia. rod. |

( la. ro {b=

F 450mm

- TRAP TUBE

3mm aluminium 5

flat. Fix Barrier Arm Bracket

to Trap Tube using

silicone sealant.

BARRIER ARM

Make four per trap

Fig. 1. Modified invertebrate pitfall trap with barrier arms.

Standard design

The standard pitfall trap consists of a PVC pipe (150 mm length, 90 mm

diameter) inserted into the ground with the lip flush with the soil surface A

plastic cup (425 ml capacity and 90 mm lip diameter) is placed inside the

pipe and charged with 150 ml of preservative fluid. A rain lid similar to the

modified design is fitted above the cup.

52 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Trap establishment

All traps were established at the end of September 2007. At each site there

were four treatments: shaded/guide arm, shaded/standard, unshaded/guide

arm and unshaded/standard with two replicates per treatment. These eight

traps were set up in four pairs with each pair consisting of a guide-arm trap

and a standard pit trap which were set 1-2 metres apart. Each pair was

established 5 metres apart.

A hand auger was used to remove a soil core of similar size to the trap tube.

For standard pitfalls a tube was pushed into place so the top was level with

the soil surface. For guiding arm pitfalls, a tube and directing arm bracket

were placed into the cored hole so the top of the tube was level with the soil

and the arm bracket sat on the soil surface. Once the tubes were in place the

four guiding arms were placed onto the bracket so they were in a cross

arrangement (Fig. 2).

The plastic cups placed into the tubes had a radius slightly larger than the

tube so they sat level with the soil surface. Cups were filled with 150 ml of

ethylene glycol mixed with 5 ml of non-scented detergent and covered with

plastic rain covers.

Fig. 2. The components of the guide-arm trap include: the directing arm brackets

attached to the metal collar and trap tube, collection cup, preservative (ethylene

glycol) and rain cover.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 53

Sample collection and processing

Traps were open for 6 months and serviced every 2 to 3 weeks until the end

of March 2008. Over this period, Pittwater and Blackwood Creek had a total

of 13 and 16 sets of samples respectively. Beetles, spiders and ants were

removed from samples and counted. Within these groups, counts were made

of beetles more than 8 mm in length, carabid beetles and larger ants of the

genus Myrmecia (bull ants and jack jumpers). Only carabids were identified

to species level.

Data analysis

As the main aim of the research was to compare the performance of the two

pitfall trap designs, the factor of trap type was the focus of interest with

consideration of the interactions present with the other two factors. The mean

was taken of all samples for each trap. These means, for each invertebrate

group, were then put into the program Statgraphics to carry out a three-way

ANOVA. This analysis allowed us to determine the significance of

differences between levels of the three main factors of site, trap type and

level of shading, plus the interactions between each of six dependant

variables, mean numbers of total beetles, large beetles, carabids, mean

numbers of ants, larger ant species and spiders. The mean was taken of the

two replicates per treatment and presented in bar graphs with standard error

bars. Using the means per treatment, the ratio of specimens was calculated

between the guide-arm and standard traps for the shaded and unshaded areas

of each site. This was done to see if the ratio of specimen numbers was

similar between beetles and large beetles and ants and large ants.

Results

All beetles

The mean beetle abundances were greater in the guide-arm traps than

standard traps under all conditions (Fig. 3). The mean number of beetles

caught per trap with guide-arm traps (27.49 + 5.86 SE) was significantly

higher than for standard traps (12.41 + 5.86 SE) (Table 1); however, there

was a significant interaction between site and trap type, suggesting that the

effect of the guide arm is contingent on the sampled site (Table 1).

Overall catch abundance for all beetles was 3129 for Pittwater and 1101 for

Blackwood Creek. The mean number of beetles caught per trap at Pittwater

(31.3 + 5.86 SE) was significantly higher than at Blackwood Creek (8.6 +

5.86 SE) (Table 1). Guide-arm traps caught 2.01-4.35 times more total

beetles at Pittwater than standard traps and 1.41-1.85 times more beetles at

Blackwood Creek (Table 2), indicating that the guide-arm trap design was

more efficient at the Pittwater site and demonstrating how the effect of the

guide-arm is contingent on site.

Although the mean number of beetles caught per trap was significantly higher

in shaded areas (26.29 + 5.86 SE) than in unshaded areas (12.41 + 5.86 SE),

54 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

there was no significant second order interaction between trap type and

shade, suggesting that the effect of the guide arm is not contingent on shade.

Table 1. Summary table of the three-way ANOVA, showing significance of

differences between levels of the three main factors and their interactions for six

dependent variables. AIl factors that have P-values less than 0.05 have a statistically

significant effect on the dependant variables.

ETE Main factors Interaction effects

se [tae [sie [axe [axe | ose [arbre |

Beetles

Large beetles

Carabids

Ants

Large ants

Spiders

Large beetles

Results for large beetles (>8 mm) were generally similar to those for all

beetles. The mean large beetle abundance was greater in the guide-arm traps

than the standard traps under all conditions (Fig. 4). The mean number of

large beetles caught per trap with guide-arm traps (4.40 + 0.63 SE) was

significantly higher than for standard traps (1.65 + 0.63 SE); however, there

was a significant interaction between site and trap type, suggesting that the

effect of the guide arm is contingent on the sampled site (Table 1).

The overall catch abundance of large beetles was 422 at Pittwater and 235 at

Blackwood Creek. The mean number of large beetles caught per trap at

Pittwater (4.21 + 0.63 SE) was significantly higher than at Blackwood Creek

(1.84 + 0.63 SE) (Table 1). The interaction between trap and site suggests

that the guide-arm trap was effective only within the Pittwater site. Guide-

arm traps caught 2.81-4.2 times more large beetles at Pittwater than standard

traps and 1.36-2.55 times more large beetles at Blackwood Creek (Table 2).

This indicates that the guide-arm trap design was more efficient at the

Pittwater site and demonstrates how the effect of the guide-arm is contingent

on site.

There was no significant second order interaction of mean large beetles

caught between trap type and shade.

Traps with guide arms, under each condition, increased the mean beetle catch

by 1.41-4.35 times and the mean large beetle catch by 1.36-4.2 times (Table

2). From these results it can be concluded that the guide-arm traps did not

influence the proportion of large beetles caught but generally increased the

total numbers in those traps.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Pitfall trap trial: Mean (nz2) total beetles per treatment with SE.

80.0

E Standard

5 Guide-arm

Mean no. per treatment

Shaded Unshaded Shaded Unshaded

Blackwood Creek Pittwater

Fig. 3. Mean (n = 2) total beetles per treatment with SE.

Pitfall trap trial: Mean (n=2) large beetles (>8mm) per treatment with SE.

m Standard

Mean no. per treatment

Shaded Unshaded Shaded Unshaded

Blackwood Creek Pittwater

Fig. 4. Mean (n = 2) large beetles (>8 mm) per treatment with SE.

55

56

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Meanno. per treatment

Shaded Unshaded

Blackwood Creek

Unshaded

Pittwater

BStandard

H Guide-arm

Mean no. per treatment

Shaded Unshaded

Blackwood Creek

Unshaded

Pittwater

Fig. 6. Mean (n = 2) ants per treatment with SE

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 57

Pitfall trap trial: Mean (n=2) large ants (Myrmecia spp.) per treatment with SE.

8.0 4 x aE pee ae ae ta : TUM uve

m Standard

"Lu Lee 5 Guide-arm —

t — ee

v

E

*

v

a

z

$ — € ban ear

c

E]

z e: T "-

: mim | — ee

Shaded Unshaded Shaded Unshaded

4.0 mS € x

Blackwood Creek Pittwater

Fig. 7. Mean (n = 2) large ants (Myrmecia spp.) per treatment with SE.

Pitfall trap trial: Mean (n=2) spiders per treatment with SE.

E Standard

mGuide-arm

Mean no. per treatment

Shaded Unshaded Shaded Unshaded

Blackwood Creek Pittwater

Fig. 8. Mean (n = 2) spiders per treatment with SE.

58 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Table 2. Means of the two reps per treatment and the proportion of catch by the two

trap types. BC = Blackwood Creek; PW = Pittwater; SH = Shaded; UN = Unshaded;

GA = Guide Arm; ST = Standard.

Treatment Beetles Ratio Large Ratio Carabids | Ratio

Beetles

BC SH GA

BC SH ST

BC UN GA

BC UN ST

PW SH GA

PW SH ST

PW UN GA

PW UN ST

mec pes A

Ants

BCSHGA ,

BCSHST

BC UN GA

BC UN ST

PWSH GA

PWSHST

PW UN GA

PWUNST

Carabids

Mean carabid abundance was greater in the guide-arm traps under three of

the conditions (Fig. 5); however, no significant difference existed between

levels for the main factor of trap type (Table 1). The overall catch abundance

of carabids was 81 for Pittwater and 138 for Blackwood Creek. Ten species

were captured, of which three (Harpharpax peronii (Castelnau), Homethes

elegans Newman and Simodontus australis (Dejean)) were common to both

sites. H. peronii was the most common species at both sites (Pittwater 43

specimens and Blackwood Creek 39 specimens). Fewer than 10 specimens of

all other species were collected, with 3 species being singletons. There was

no significant difference between the number of species collected in guide-

arm (9 species) or standard traps (8 species) and no significant interaction

existed between site and trap type (Table 1).

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 59

Although there was a significantly higher mean number of carabids caught

per trap in shaded areas (1.21 + 0.29 SE) than in unshaded areas (0.69 + 0.29

SE), there was no significant interaction between shade and trap type.

Ants

Mean ant abundance was greater in the guide-arm traps at Blackwood Creek

but not at Pittwater (Fig. 6). No significant difference existed between levels

for the main factor of trap type (Table 1). The overall catch abundance of

total ants for Pittwater was 3307 and for Blackwood Creek was 1846. The

mean number of ants caught per trap at Pittwater (32.8 + 10.08 SE) was

significantly higher than at Blackwood Creek (14.42 + 10.08 SE); however,

there was no significant second order interaction of mean ants caught

between trap type and site (Table 1). There was no significant second order

interaction between trap type and shade.

Large ants

Mean large ant abundance was greater in the guide-arm traps under all

conditions (Fig. 7); however, no significant difference existed between levels

for the main factor of trap type. The overall number of large ants caught was

6 at Pittwater and 407 at Blackwood Creek. The mean number of large ants

caught per trap at Blackwood Creek (3.18 + 0.92 SE) was significantly higher

than for Pittwater (0.06 + 0.92 SE) (Table 1); however, there was no

significant interaction between trap type and site. Although there was a

significantly higher mean number of large ants caught per trap in shaded

areas (2.44 + 0.92 SE) than in unshaded areas (0.79 + 0.92 SE), there was no

significant second order interaction between trap type and shade. Traps with

guide arms at Blackwood Creek, under both shaded and unshaded conditions,

increased the mean ant catch by 2.41-2.77 times and the mean large ant catch

by 1.12-2.52 times (Table 2). This indicates that the proportion of large ants

to overall ant catch remained the same between the two trap types.

Spiders

Mean spider abundance was greater in the guide-arm traps for only one

condition (Fig. 8). A significant difference existed between levels for the

main factor of trap type but the mean abundance was higher for the standard

traps (8.70 + 1.37 SE), rather than for the guide-arm traps (5.6 + 1.37 SE).

The overall abundance of spiders caught at Pittwater was 434 and at

Blackwood Creek was 1275. The mean number of spiders caught per trap at

Blackwood Creek (9.96 + 1.37 SE) was significantly higher than Pittwater

(4.33 + 1.37 SE); however, there was a significant interaction between site

and trap type, suggesting that the effect of the standard trap is contingent on

the sampled site (Table 1).

Although there was a significantly higher mean number of spiders caught per

trap in shaded (8.7 + 1.37 SE) than in unshaded areas (5.59 + 1.37 SE), there

was no significant second order interaction between trap type and shade.

60 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Discussion

The prime purpose of this study was to compare traps, with and without

guide arms, to determine which was most effective in capturing specific taxa.

Traps were tested in two different habitats and two shade levels to determine

if performance was consistent in a range of situations. It would be expected

that in two different habitats, such. as eucalypt and pine plantations, the

species composition and abundance would vary due to habitat differences. A

variable such as shade controls light intensity and reduces direct rainfall and

shadow movement, which would influence the behaviour patterns of different

species.

While mean catches of all groups except spiders were higher for the guide-

arm trap than the standard trap, this was only significant for beetles and large

beetles. The mean number of spiders captured was statistically higher for the

standard trap compared with the guide-arm trap.

The interactions found between trap and site for beetles and large beetles

indicate that when using this trap design it must be kept in mind that the

efficacy is dependent on site or shade levels. From the results it can also be

concluded that the guide-arm traps did not influence the proportion of large

beetles caught but generally increased the total numbers in those traps.

Significantly higher mean numbers of beetles, large beetles and ants were

present in the pine site at Pittwater, which may reflect a habitat preference for

these groups. This result contrasts with significantly higher means for large

ants and spiders present in the eucalypt site at Blackwood Creek. The mean

number of carabids at Blackwood Creek was not significantly higher than at

Pittwater. The significant interaction between trap and site for spiders

suggests that the standard trap was more effective than the guide-arm trap.

Although the guide-arm trap was not more effective at trapping ants or larger

ants across different conditions, it is interesting to note that even though

mean abundance of ants was greater at Pittwater, mean abundance of large

ants was greater at Blackwood Creek. This could be because the larger

Myrmecia species tend to nest in open, sunny sites or under a diffuse eucalypt

canopy rather than the denser pine canopy. Results indicate that at

Blackwood Creek the proportion of catches between the two trap types

remained the same for large ants and total ants. Guide-arms are therefore not

favouring the capture of large ants.

The difference in capture effectiveness between certain arthropod groups may

be influenced by the mobility of the invertebrates. Ground-dwelling beetles

are generally less mobile and move at a slower rate than ants or spiders;

therefore when they come into contact with the guide arm they would then be

guided in one direction or the other. However, when ants and spiders come in

contact with the guide arm their mobility may allow them to be guided in

either direction or to reverse their direction.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 61

Ground-dwelling beetles such as carabids are frequently used as indicator

species for biodiversity studies. This study demonstrates that when sampling

for beetles, including carabids, the guide arm design is effective at capturing

more individuals but not necessarily more species. Luff (1975) showed that

standard pitfall traps of a range of sizes captured about 7596 of the carabids

that contacted the perimeter of the trap. By increasing the number of beetles

likely to contact the edge of the trap by ‘guiding’ them towards the trap, we

can increase trap efficiency. Similar results of trap catch increase, by at least

an order of magnitude, were recorded by Winder et al. (2003) using barrier

arrays, particularly for some invertebrate groups such as carabid and

staphylinid beetles and lycosid spiders. Although mean catches were

significantly higher in shaded trap sites for all groups except ants (Table 1),

there was no significant interaction between trap type and shade.

Practical constraints on the transport and storage of the traps limited guide

arm length in this study, which was arbitrarily selected as the length (450

mm) that fitted into the storage containers selected to hold ten complete

guide-arm trap kits. We also found that having a rigid guide arm that fitted

flush with the litter/soil surface gave more consistent results in terms of

reduced trap disturbance than ‘dug-in’ flexible aluminium barriers. Hansen

and New (2005) found that traps with guide arms arranged in a simple cross

increased overall beetle catch, including carabids, by 3-8.7 times and the

number of morphospecies by 1.3-2.1 fold. Durkis and Reeves (1982) used

traps with a single pair of guide arms, at 180 degrees to each other, with the

collecting vial in the centre. This design proved useful as their study was

examining the directional movement of organisms between two habitat types.

Generally, increasing the length of guide arms progressively increases the

invertebrate catch (Hansen and New 2005).

Biodiversity studies within forests are often opportunistic, especially in

remote areas, occur at times of pest and disease incidence, or are part of

distribution studies. While many environmental factors, such as seasonality

or habitat type, cannot be controlled from one survey to the next, the use of

standard collection methodology allows some comparisons between surveys.

The guide-arm trap used in this study provides a cheap, easily transported and

assembled pitfall trap that can be used to obtain species records of ground-

dwelling taxa, especially in remote sites or those with difficult access.

Acknowledgements

We thank Forestry Tasmania personnel Steve Smedley for preparing the

technical drawing and Byron Garrod for manufacturing the pitfall trap units.

References

AGOSTI, D. and ALONSO, L.R. 2000. The ALL protocol: a standard protocol for the collection

of ground-dwelling ants. Pp 204-206, in: Agosti, D., Majer, J.D., Alonso, L.E. and Schultz, T.R.

(eds), Ants: standard methods for measuring and monitoring biodiversity. Smithsonian

Institution Press, Washington.

62 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

BAARS, M.A. 1979. Catches in pitfall traps in relation to mean densities of carabid beetles.

Oecologia 41: 25-46.

BASHFORD, R., TAYLOR, R., DRIESSEN, M., DORAN, N. and RICHARDSON, A. 2001.

Research on invertebrate assemblages at the Warra LTER Site. Tasforests 13(1): 109-118.

BORGELT, A. and NEW, T.R. 2005. Pitfall trapping for ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) in

mesic Australia: the influence of trap diameter. Journal of Insect Conservation 9: 219-221.

BRENNAN, K.E.C., MAJER, J.D. and MOIR, M.L. 2005. Refining sampling protocols for

inventorying invertebrate biodiversity: influence of drift-fence length and pitfall trap diameter on

spiders. Journal of Arachnology 33: 681-702.

DURKIS, T.J. and REEVES, R.M. 1982. Barriers increase efficiency of pitfall traps.

Entomological News 93: 8-12.

FRENCH, B.W., ELLIOTT, N.C., BERBERAT, R.C. and BURD, J.D. 2001. Effects of riparian

and grassland habitats on ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages in adjacent wheat

fields. Environmental Entomology 30(2): 225-234.

GREENSLADE, P.J.M. 1964. Pitfall trapping as a method for studying populations of Carabidae

(Coleoptera). Journal of Animal Ecology 33: 301-310.

GROVE, S.J. 2009. Beetles and fuelwood harvesting: a retrospective study from Tasmania’s

southern forests. Tasforests 18: 77-99.

HANSEN, J and NEW, T. 2005. Use of barrier pitfall traps to enhance inventory surveys of

epigaeic Coleoptera. Journal of Insect Conservation 9(2): 131-136.

LUFF, M.L. 1975. Some features influencing the efficiency of pitfall traps. Oecologia 19(4):

345-357.

MELBOURNE, B.A. 1999. Bias in the effect of habitat structure on pitfall traps: an

experimental evaluation. Australian Journal of Ecology 24(3): 228-239.

PERNER, J. and SCHUELER, S. 2004. Estimating the density of ground-dwelling arthropods

with pitfall traps using a nested-cross array. Journal of Animal Ecology 73: 469-477.

TODA, M.J. and KITCHING, R.L. 2002. Forest ecosystems. In: Nakashizuka, T. and Stork, N.

(eds), Biodiversity research methods: IBOY in Western Pacific and Asia. Trans Pacific Press,

Melbourne.

TOPPING, C.J. and SUNDERLAND, K.D. 1992. Limitations to the use of pitfall traps in

ecological studies exemplified by a study of spiders in a field of winter wheat. Journal of

Applied Ecology 29: 485-491.

WARD, D.F., NEW, T.R. and YEN, A.L. 2001. Effects of pitfall spacing on the abundance,

richness and composition of invertebrate catches. Journal of Insect Conservation 6(1): 47-53.

WEEKS, R.D. and MCINTYRE, N.E. 1997. A comparison of life versus kill pitfall trapping

techniques using various killing agents. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 82: 267-273.

WERNER, S.M. and RAFFA, K.F. 2000. Effects of forest management practices on the diversity

of ground-occurring beetles in mixed northern hardwood forests of the Great Lakes region.

Forest Ecology and Management 139(1-3): 135-155.

WINDER, L., HOLLAND, J.M., PERRY, J.N., WOOLEY, C. and ALEXANDER, C.J. 2003.

The use of barrier-connected pitfall trapping for sampling predatory beetles and spiders.

Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 98(3): 249-258.

WORK, T.T., BUDDLE, C.M., KORINUS, L.M. and SPENCE, J.R. 2002. Pitfall trap size and

capture of three taxa of litter-dwelling arthropods: implications for biodiversity studies.

Environmental Entomology 31: 438-448.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2): 63-73 63

FIRST RECORD OF JAMIDES ALEUAS PHOLES FRUHSTORFER,

1915 (LEPIDOPTERA: LYCAENIDAE: POLYOMMATINAE) FROM

NORTHERN CAPE YORK PENINSULA, AUSTRALIA, WITH

NOTES ON ITS LIFE HISTORY AND BIOLOGY

S.S. BROWN,, R.P. WEIR’, C.E. MEYER! and P.R. SAMSON‘

119 Kimberley Drive, Bowral, NSW 2576, stnac@bigpond.com

?1 Longwood Avenue, Leanyer, NT 0812

329 Silky Oak Avenue, Moggill, Qld 4070

"BSES Limited, PMB 57, Mackay Mail Centre, Qld 4741

Abstract

Jamides aleuas pholes Fruhstorfer, 1915 is recorded from northern Cape York Peninsula,

Australia for the first time. A previously overlooked record from Kiunga in Western Province,

Papua New Guinea is also noted. Notes on its life history and biology are presented and

compared with the Australian endemic subspecies J. a. coelestis (Miskin, 1891), previously

recorded from Shipton's Flat near Cooktown south to Paluma in the Wet Tropics area of

northern Queensland but with a new northerly record approximately 60 km north of Shipton's

Flat. Jamides aleuas pholes and J. a. coelestis are allopatric in Australia, with populations

geographically separated by some 550 km. The immature stages of J. a. pholes, like those of J. a.

coelestis, have been discovered on Arytera sp. (Sapindaceae) growing within the rainforest

understorey. Larvae of J. a. pholes were found to be associated with the ants Rhytidoponera

Mayr sp. (Ectatomminae) and Tetramorium pacificum Mayr (Myrmicinae).

Introduction

Jamides aleuas (C. & R. Felder, 1865) occurs from Aru Island through

mainland Papua New Guinea and northeastern Australia to the Bismarck

Archipelago (Tite 1960, Parsons 1998, Braby 2000). Parsons (1998)

recognised six of the nine subspecies originally identified by Tite (1960),

elevating J. allectus (Grose-Smith, 1894) to species status based on

morphological and genitalic differences and placing J. allectus jobiensis

(Tite, 1960) and J. allectus sarmice (Fruhstorfer, 1915) as subspecies of it.

Parsons (1998) only recorded the subspecies J. aleuas nitidus Tite, 1960 from

Papua New Guinea, where he noted it to be widespread throughout the

mainland. Jamides aleuas coelestis (Miskin, 1891) is endemic to Australia,

being restricted to northeastern Queensland from Shipton's Flat near

Cooktown to 30 km south-west of Ingham and Little Crystal Creek near

Paluma (Braby 2000). A single male of J. a. coelestis was collected on 31

May 2006 at Leggett's Crossing on the Endeavour River, 26 km northwest of

Cooktown, by Dr C. G. Miller and is recorded here as the new northern

record for the subspecies, extending its northern limit approximately 60 km

further north of Shipton's Flat. No other subspecies of J. aleuas has been

recorded previously from Australia.

In late April 2003, two males and two females of a Jamides Hübner, 1819,

whose identity was unknown to us at the time, were collected by one of us

(SSB) in the Lockerbie Scrub area of Cape York Peninsula. Later, in June

2003, the early stages of the butterfly were discovered by another of us (PRS)

64 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

in the same locality and successfully reared to adults. Further adults were

collected in September 2003 at Roma Flat, 8.9 km north of Lockerbie by

Robert Ham. In April and May 2004, May 2005 and June 2006, three of us

(SSB, RPW and CEM), together with Dr C. G. Miller, conducted extensive

surveys of the rainforest regions of northern Cape York Peninsula from

Lockerbie Scrub north to Pajinka and Somerset, determining that the species

is well established and widespread throughout the northern tip area, although

uncommon.

Comparison of our material from northern Cape York Peninsula with the type

specimens of J. a. nitidus (Figs 29-32), specimens in the Brandt Collection in

the Australian National Insect Collection, Canberra (ANIC) labelled as J. a.

nitidus (Figs 1-2, 9-10) and those labelled as J. a. pholes Fruhstorfer, 1915

(Figs 7-8, 15-16) from Papua New Guinea, show a close similarity to those

labelled as J. a. pholes in the Brandt Collection. The Brandt Collection

contains specimens labelled as J. a. pholes from Kiunga on the Fly River and

Rouku (north of Torres Strait), Papua New Guinea, although Parsons (1998)

did not record J. a. pholes from Papua New Guinea.

The type specimen of J. a. pholes is apparently lost, although Tite (1960)

applied the name to specimens from scattered localities in Dutch New Guinea

(now West Papua, Indonesia). Tite (1960) noted that the male is deep blue

above and that the white area on the forewing is variable in extent and in

some examples reduced almost to vanishing point. Tite (1960) recorded J. a.

pholes from Dorey Bay, Manokwari, Arfak, Weyland Mountains, Fak Fak,

Utakwa River and Schouten Island, all of which occur in West Papua. The

type specimen of J. a. nitidus (Figs 29-30) was assigned by Tite (1960) from

the Upper Aroa River, British New Guinea (now southern Papua New

Guinea) and is in The Natural History Museum, London (BMNH). Tite

(1960) separated J. a. nitidus from other members of the J. aleuas group by

the following distinguishing features: the broad black margins, 2-3 mm at the

forewing apex; the white area on the forewing having markedly blue-scaled

veins in the male; and the underside white cuneiform spots in both sexes

being often tinted with whitish-blue.

Some confusion surrounds the descriptions by Tite (1960) and Fruhstorfer

(1915) of J. a. nitidus and J. a. pholes with respect to the distribution of white

on the underside crescent markings. Both authors stated that each subspecies

may have white areas to a differing degree. Tite (1960) made the comment

that ‘another source of uncertainty is that Fruhstorfer’s pl. I and II in Arch.

Naturgesch. (81, A6) are incorrectly numbered; these double-page plates

should be renumbered from left to right horizontally across the page, when

the figures will be found to be consistent with the text. The arrangement of

species in the Brandt collection (ANIC) follows that of Tite. Brandt would

have been aware of Tite's descriptions and Tite's basis for separating J. a.

nitidus and J. a. pholes, as the arrangement of Brandt's collection was done

Figs 1-8. Jamides aleuas subspp., uppersides. (1) J. a. nitidus male, Rouku, PNG; (2)

J. a. nitidus female, Rouku, PNG; (3) J. a. coelestis male, Mowbray River, Qld; (4) J.

a. coelestis female, Mowbray River, Qld; (5) J. a. pholes male, Lockerbie, Qld; (6) J.

a. pholes female, Lockerbie, Qld; (7) J. a. pholes male, Kiunga, PNG; (8) J. a. pholes

female, Kiunga, PNG.

66 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

15 | GERE RES d

Figs 9-16. Jamides aleuas subspp., undersides. (9) J. a. nitidus male, Rouku, PNG;

(10) J. a. nitidus female, Rouku, PNG; (11) J. a. coelestis male, Mowbray River, Qld;

(12) J. a. coelestis female, Mowbray River, Qld; (13) J. a. pholes male, Lockerbie,

Qld; (14) J. a. pholes female, Lockerbie, Qld; (15) J. a. pholes male, Kiunga, PNG;

(16) J. a. pholes female, Kiunga, PNG.

—————U CC

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

67

18

20

fS

[ur e a =

€

22

Figs 17-22. Jamides aleuas subspp., male genitalia. (17-20) J. a. pholes: (17) valvae,

Lockerbie, Qld; (18) aedeagus, Lockerbie, Qld; (19) valvae, Kiunga, PNG; (20)

aedeagus, Kiunga, PNG. (21-22) J. a. coelestis: (21) valvae, Shipton's Flat, Qld; (22)

aedeagus, Shipton's Flat, Qld.

68 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

after 1960, when Tite published his taxonomic revision. The BMNH

collection was arranged according to Tite's description of the subspecies in

the J. aleuas group (E. D. Edwards pers. comm.) and that arrangement is

followed here.

Gotts and Pangemanan (2003 p. 247) illustrated J. a. pholes from Manokwari

in West Papua (formerly Irian Jaya) which, when compared with Brandt's

Papua New Guinea J. a. pholes labelled specimens and our material from

northern Cape York Peninsula (Figs 5-6, 13-14), are morphologically

identical. Males from northern Cape York Peninsula do not have the broad

black forewing apical margins present in males of J. a. nitidus and, in both

sexes, the marginal and sub-marginal spots on the hindwing underside are

brilliant metallic blue, as opposed to specimens of J. a. nitidus which are

white or whitish-blue and are easily distinguishable from specimens of J. a.

coelestis (Figs 3-4, 11-12), which occur some 550 km further south of

Lockerbie. The northern Cape York Peninsula specimens are therefore placed

with J. a. pholes, extending the known range for this butterfly approximately

300 km further south from Rouku, Papua New Guinea to the Australian

mainland. The presence of J. a. pholes in Papua New Guinea is also noted

here on the basis of J. a. pholes labelled specimens contained in the Brandt

Collection, ANIC, from Kiunga, North Fly Region, Western Province, Papua

New Guinea.

Life history

Larval food plant. The larval food plant in Australia is Arytera sp.

(Sapindaceae).

Hatched egg (Fig. 23). Diameter 0.9 mm. Flattened, strongly dished and

concave above, outer rim with large pits, small pits across upper surface.

Final instar larva (Fig. 25). Length 12.5 mm (n = 14). Body deeply divided

between segments; pale green, more whitish dorsally with green mid-dorsal

line; erect pale brown secondary setae; spiracles white; head pale brown;

prothoracic and anal plates green. Newcomer's organ and tentacular organs

present. Mature larvae turn olive-green, changing to pinkish-purple

immediately prior to pupation.

Pupa (Fig. 27). Length 11.2 mm, width 3.6 mm (n = 14). Pale brown

speckled with dark brown; a dark brown mid-dorsal line; thorax with dark

brown patches mid-dorsally on T1 and dorsolaterally on T2 and T3; abdomen

with a dark brown dorsolateral patch on first segment and dark brown

dorsolateral spots on posterior segments; attached by anal hooks and central

girdle.

Biology

Adults of J. a. pholes were encountered sporadically throughout the

rainforest regions of northern Cape York Peninsula. Males were found flying

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 69

Figs 23-28. Early stages of Jamides aleuas subspp. (23, 25, 27) J. a. pholes,

Lockerbie, Qld; (24, 26, 28) J. a. coelestis, Mowbray River, Qld. (23, 24) egg; (25,

26) larva; (27, 28) pupa. Scale bars: figs 23-24 = 0.5 mm; figs 25-28 = 5 mm

70 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

in areas of dappled sunlight in the rainforest understorey. The brilliant blue

dorsal surface of the wings made the males highly visible from approximately

30 m. Some males appeared to establish territories around small shrubs in and

immediately adjacent to sun-lit areas. The majority, though, were observed to

fly generally throughout the rainforest understorey with no preference for

sunny areas. This behaviour is in stark contrast to that of J. a. coelestis, the

adults of which tend to gravitate towards sunny patches in the rainforest or

along rainforest verges and have a much slower flight. The flight of J. a.

pholes was rapid and jerking, typical of the genus. One female was collected

as it circled a shrub in a darker part of the rainforest but no oviposition

behaviour was observed. Another female was collected as it rested on a twig,

again in a darker area of the rainforest. Hypochrysops theon medocus

(Fruhstorfer, 1908), Danis danis syrius Miskin, 1890, Candalides helenita

(Semper, [1879]) and Elymnias agondas (Boisduval, 1832) were found flying

in the same areas. Parsons (1998) noted a possible mimetic relationship

between J. aleuas and Danis danis (Cramer, [1775]), with the latter, he

believed, serving as a distasteful model.

An unhatched egg and six first to third instar larvae were first collected at

Lockerbie on 16 June 2003 by PRS, on a small single-stemmed larval food

plant (about 1 m high). The larvae were feeding openly on the large soft

bluish-purple juvenile leaves while the egg was on an unexpanded terminal

leaf. Only three juvenile leaves were present on this plant but these leaves

were sufficient to rear three larvae to maturity. The larvae grew very rapidly,

and all adults emerged by 4 July 2003.

In 2004, after extensive searching of the rainforest understorey on either side

of the road over a distance of some 12 km from Lockerbie, north through

Roma Flat to Pajinka and north-east to Somerset, 22 larvae of varying instars

were collected feeding on the juvenile leaves of the larval food plant. The

bluish-purple juvenile growth of the larval food plant is easily identifiable in

the rainforest understorey, with the leaves variable in size with some

observed up to 250 mm in length and dangling conspicuously towards the

ground. The larvae were often found inside crude shelters made by lightly

silking the outer edges of the leaves together. On several occasions, larvae

were found inside these crude shelters on plants which also had nests of the

green tree ant Oecophylla smaragdina Fabricius, 1775 (Formicinae). When

the shelters were opened the larvae were immediately attacked and killed by

the green tree ants. The larvae fed from the tip of the leaves up towards the

petiole. In 2004, larvae were found to be associated with the ants

Rhytidoponera Mayr sp. (Ectatomminae) and Tetramorium pacificum Mayr,

1870 (Myrmicinae). Larval colouration was distinctly cream on the juvenile

leaves, turning olive-green and then pinkish-purple the day prior to pupation.

After hatching, the larval duration was six to seven days and the pupal

duration six to eight days.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 71

The egg, larva and pupa are very similar in form to those of J. a. coelestis.

Larvae of J. a. coelestis collected at Mowbray River, near Mossman in 2005,

were attended by a different small black ant but were indistinguishable from

J. a. pholes larvae. During the pre-pupal stage the larval colouration closely

matched the colour of the immature leaves of the respective larval food

plants, being bluish-purple for J. a. pholes and pinkish-red for J. a. coelestis.

Figs 29-32. Jamides aleuas nitidus. (29-30) holotype male upper and undersides; (31-

32) ‘allotype’ female upper and undersides. Label data: Upp[er] Aroa R., Brit. N.G.,

March [19]03, [A.S.] Meek. Copyright BMNH, London.

Discussion

The Jamides aleuas pholes specimens (Figs 5-6, 13-14) from northern Cape

York Peninsula can be distinguished from J. a. coelestis (Figs 3-4, 11-12) by

the distinctly rounded forewing termen in both sexes, narrower black

marginal band on the male forewing, deeper blue on both sexes, more

restricted (or sometimes absent) white areas in the male forewing and the

shape and colour of the marginal and sub-marginal spots on the hindwing

underside. In J. aleuas coelestis these spots are extensively white to whitish-

blue, whereas in J. a. pholes they are brilliant metallic blue and much larger.

In J. aleuas nitidus (Figs 1-2, 9-10 and 29-32) these spots are generally

similar in colour to those of J. a. pholes but smaller, although some

72 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

specimens of J. a. nitidus have white dominant. The shape of the forewing in

both sexes of J. a. coelestis and the pale shining blue in the males clearly

separate it from J. a. pholes and J. a. nitidus and J. a. pholes has a white

central area on the antennal shaft which is absent in J. a. coelestis. Both J. a.

pholes and J. a. nitidus show a close similarity to the type specimen of J. a.

aleuas, with specimens of J. a. coelestis having evolved to a more distant

relationship to the type subspecies with regard to the features described

above.

The series of specimens of J. a. pholes (Figs 7-8, 15-16) in the Brandt

Collection, ANIC shows a consistent lack of any white in the hindwing

underside crescent areas, whereas those of J. a. nitidus have a predominance

of white in the sub-marginal row. The undersides of the specimens of J. a.

nitidus illustrated in Parsons (1998 pl. 70, 2045-2049) are very similar to the

Brandt J. a. pholes specimens and differ from the majority of Brandt's J. a.

nitidus specimens. The forewing upperside of the males of J. a. nitidus in the

Brandt Collection differs from those males of J. a. pholes from Papua New

Guinea, West Papua and the northern Cape York Peninsula area by the

broader black margins and wide white areas and is consistent with the J. a.

nitidus description provided by Tite (1960).

Tite (1960) claimed that specimens of J. a. pholes were lodged in the

Macleay Museum at Sydney University. This collection has been examined

and contains no specimens of J. a. pholes. There are, however, specimens of

J. nemophilus (Butler, 1876) from Darnley Island, Torres Strait, J. a.

coelestis and Psychonotus caelius (C. Felder, 1860), so some confusion may

have arisen with misidentification. A female of J. nemophilus was found in

the collection to be incorrectly labelled as J. a. coelestis. A single male in the

Australian Museum, Sydney from Lake Murray (19/11/1922) in central-

western Papua was examined and appeared to be J. a. pholes but was too

worn to be confirmed. The genitalia of that specimen were not examined.

Genitalia examinations of the northern Cape York Peninsula (Figs 17-18) and

Papua New Guinea (Figs 19-20) specimens of J. a. pholes and of J. a.

coelestis (Figs 21-22) showed very little difference. The general shape of the

valva was similar in all three, although the uncus was slightly more produced

in Papua New Guinea specimens of J. a. pholes. The aedeagus was similar in

all three. While illustrating a relationship between the northern Cape York

Peninsula and Papua New Guinea specimens of J. a. pholes, the genitalia by

themselves cannot be used to separate specimens of J. a coelestis from J. a.

pholes.

Jamides aleuas pholes and J. a. coelestis are allopatric in Australia with

populations being geographically separated by some 550 km. Further work

needs to be carried out on the taxonomic position of J. a. coelestis, given the

marked adult morphological differences between it and other subspecies of

the Jamides aleuas group.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 73

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Queensland Herbarium and Garry Sankowsky for

identification of the larval food plant, Dr Alan Andersen (CSIRO Darwin) for

ant identifications, Mr Ted Edwards (ANIC), who spent many hours with the

authors discussing this paper and whose invaluable help and access to ANIC

data and specimens is greatly appreciated, Dr Steve Johnson for his helpful

comments, Dr C. G. Miller for his assistance in the field and for helpful

comments on the initial drafts of this manuscript, and John Chainey (BMNH)

for providing the images of the J. a. nitidus type specimen for comparison.

References

BRABY, M.F. 2000. Butterflies of Australia: their identification, biology and distribution.

CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne; xxvii + 976 pp.

FRUHSTORFER, H. 1915. Revision der Gattung Lampides auf Grand anatomischer

Untersuchungen. Archiv für Naturgeschicthe 81 (A6): 1-46, 24 figs.

GOTTS, R. and PANGEMANAN, N. 2003. Mimika butterflies. PT Freeport Indonesia, Timika,

Indonesia; 287 pp.

PARSONS, M.J. 1998. The butterflies of Papua New Guinea: their systematics and biology.

Academic Press, Sydney; xvi + 736 pp, 162 pls.

TITE, G.E. 1960. The Jamides euchylas complex (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) and two new

species of the genus Jamides (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural

History) Entomology 9(5): 321-336, 25 figs, 1 pl.

74 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

A MOSAIC GYNANDROMORPH OF CRESSIDA CRESSIDA

CRESSIDA (FABRICIUS, 1775) (LEPIDOPTERA: PAPILIONIDAE)

FROM TORRES STRAIT, QUEENSLAND

S.S. BROWN|!, C.E. MEYER), A.I. KNIGHT? and A.L. BROWN!

!19 Kimberley Drive, Bowral, NSW 2576, stnac@bigpond.com

729 Silky Oak Ave, Moggill, Old 4070

370 Exton Road, Exton, Tas 7303

Abstract

A gynandromorph of Cressida cressida cressida (Fabricius, 1775) is recorded and illustrated

from Dauan Island, Torres Strait.

Introduction

Nielsen (2010) provided a summary of gynandromorphism in Ornithoptera

Boisduval (Papilionidae) in which he discussed the current understanding of

the ‘mechanism leading to gynandromorphism’. This present note illustrates

a mosaic gynandromorph of Cressida cressida cressida (Fabricius, 1775) that

was collected (by SSB) while feeding at flowers on Dauan Island, Torres

Strait on 8 January 2011. The right side and body are male, the left forewing

predominately female and the left hind wing a mosaic of both sexes.

The specimen (Figs 1-2) was flying with other C. c. cressida adjacent to the

football field at the western end of the island. In flight, it appeared no

different from other specimens of that species and the discovery that it was a

gynandromorph was only made on close inspection after capture.

Figs 1-2. Gynandromorph of Cressida cressida cressida: upper and undersides.

Acknowledgement

We thank the community of Dauan Island, Torres Strait for permission to

visit their island.

Reference

NIELSEN, J.E. 2010. A review of gynandromorphism in the Genus Ornithoptera Boisduval,

(Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Australian Entomologist 37(3): 105-112.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2): 75-88 75

NEW BUTTERFLY, HAWKMOTH (LEPIDOPTERA) AND

DRAGONFLY (ODONATA) RECORDS FROM VEGETATED

CORAL CAYS IN THE SOUTHERN GREAT BARRIER REEF,

QUEENSLAND

CHRIS J. BURWELL'?, ANDREW MCDOUGALL?’, AKIHIRO

NAKAMURA!” and CHRISTINE L. LAMBKIN!

! Biodiversity Program, Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane, Old 4101

"Environmental Futures Centre and Griffith School of Environment, Griffith University, Nathan,

Qld 4111

Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment and Resource

Management, PO Box 3130, Redhill, Rockhampton, Qld 4701

Abstract

New butterfly, hawk moth and dragonfly records for the vegetated coral cays of the Capricornia

Cays, including the first data from Lady Elliot and North Reef Islands, are presented and

previously published records summarised. In total, 46 butterfly, 10 dragonfly and 4 hawk moth

species are known from the islands, with 10 butterfly and three hawk moth species newly

recorded: Jamides phaseli (Mathew), Prosotas dubiosa (Semper) and Psychonotis caelius (C. &

R. Felder) (Lycaenidae); Danaus affinis (Fabricius) and Junonia orithya Linnaeus

(Nymphalidae); Graphium eurypylus (Linnaeus), Papilio aegeus Donovan and Papilio demoleus

Linnaeus (Papilionidae); Delias nigrina (Fabricius) and Eurema alitha (C. & R. Felder)

(Pieridae); Hippotion celerio (Linnaeus), Theretra margarita (Kirby) and Macroglossum

prometheus (Boisduval) (Sphingidae). New dragonfly records comprise two species of Ischnura

Charpentier (Coenagrionidae), three species of Orthetrum Newman, two species of Diplacodes

Kirby and Tramea loewii Kaup (all Libellulidae). The four largest and most floristically diverse

islands of the Capricornia Cays, North West, Lady Elliot, Heron and Masthead Islands, have the

most diverse butterfly faunas with 27, 23, 20 and 15 species respectively. All 10 dragonfly

species recorded from the Capricornia Cays are known from Lady Elliot Island (including 8

species known only from the island), which has a substantial ephemeral water body. In addition,

four butterfly species are recorded from Bushy Island in Redbill Reef off the coast of Mackay,

the first published data from this coral cay.

Introduction

Between March 2008 and April 2009, the Queensland Museum and

Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service conducted invertebrate surveys of

vegetated coral cays in the southern Great Barrier Reef (Burwell et al. 2010).

These comprised the islands of the Capricorn and Bunker Groups and Lady

Elliot Island slightly further to the south-east (collectively referred to as the

Capricornia Cays hereafter) and Bushy Island to the north. Here we report on

the butterflies, hawk moths and dragonflies recorded during these surveys

and compile previously published records of these groups from the islands.

Fourteen islands of the Capricorn and Bunker Groups and Lady Elliot Island

(the Capricornia Cays) comprise the largest group of vegetated coral cays in

the Great Barrier Reef. Located at the southern end of the GBR between

23°11’S (North Reef Island) and 24°07’S (Lady Elliot Island), they vary in

size from 4 (East Hoskyn Island) to 105 hectares (North West Island). Bushy

Island (20°57’S, 150°05’E; 7.3 hectares) within Redbill Reef is located about

70 km east of Mackay and about 310 km north of North Reef Island.

76 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Previous records of the butterflies of individual islands in the Capricorn and

Bunker Groups can be found in several papers: Heron (Chadwick 1962,

Fletcher 1973), Masthead (Hacker 1975, Reeves 1999), North West

(Musgrave 1926, Reeves 1969), Erskine (Reeves 1971) and West Hoskyn

(Reeves 1973). Summaries of the butterfly fauna of the Capricornia Cays can

be found in Reeves (1978, 1984) and Duckworth and McLean (1986), who

tabulated butterfly records from all islands of the Great Barrier Reef. A total

of 36 butterfly species has been recorded from the islands of the Capricornia

Cays, but there are no published records from Lady Elliot and North Reef

Islands, nor from Bushy Island.

Only a single hawk moth species, Hippotion velox (Fabricius), has been

previously recorded from islands of the Capricornia Cays: North West

(Musgrave 1926), Heron (Fletcher 1973) and Masthead (Hacker 1975).

Records of dragonflies from the Capricornia Cays are very limited; Reeves

(1999) recorded two species from Masthead Island, while Fletcher (1973)

noted a single unidentified damselfly attracted to light on Heron Island.

Methods

All 14 vegetated cays of the Capricorn and Bunker Groups and Lady Elliot

Island (Capricornia Cays) were visited by Queensland Museum and/or

Queensland Parks and Wildlife staff between 28 March 2008 and 30

November 2009 (Table 1). On each island, between three and eight sites were

sampled; however, only a single site was sampled on East Fairfax Island

(Table 1, see Burwell et al. 2010 for precise site details). Vegetation of the

islands generally consists of a closed forest of Pisonia grandis R.Br. in the

interior fringed by more open woodland of Casuarina equisetifolia L. and/or

mixed shrubland of Argusia argentea (L.f) Heine, Pandanus tectorius

Parkinson and Scaevola taccada (Gaertn.) Roxb. around the circumference

(Walker 1991). Patches of open grassland and herbland occur near the beach

or in the interior of some islands. Survey sites were chosen to sample the

variety of habitat types present on each island. Where possible, at least one

site was established in each of Pisonia forest, Casuarina woodland and

beachside vegetation. Sites were also situated in other distinctive vegetation

types or in disturbed areas such as in the vicinity of resort or research station

infrastructure and within camping areas (Table 1).

At each site pitfall traps (four 45 mm diameter, 120 ml vials and one 1 litre

ice-cream container filled with 90% ethanol) and a Malaise trap (Sharkey

type, Sante) were operated for 36-48 hours and two person hours of hand

collecting was conducted. In addition, at each island an automated

Pennsylvania light trap was operated for two nights at one (most islands) or

rarely two locations (Lady Elliot and North West Islands) (Table 1).

Miscellaneous hand collecting during the day, particularly hand netting of

butterflies and dragonflies, was carried out on most islands for a minimum of

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) TI

Table 1. Summary of sampling dates and intensity, and habitat types sampled during

surveys of the Capricornia Cays and Bushy Island in 2008 and 2009. ‘Other’ habitat

types include grassland/4rgusia (Lady Elliot, East Fairfax, East Hoskyn, Wreck,

Erskine), Pandanus (Lady Elliot, Wilson), Lantana (Lady Elliot), campsites (North

West (2), Masthead, Lady Musgrave), research and resort facilities (Heron, Wilson,

One Tree) and Pisonia grandis plantings (Tryon Island).

Number of sampling sites

8 S 8a Sg

Island Survey dates E ¥ t E 8 5 B $

fp og o6 P

> o Hd

Lady Elliot 28-31 Mar. 2 2 1 3 2

Wilson 29 Apr.-1 May 1 0 1 2 1

Wreck 29 Apr.-1 May 1 1 1 1 1

East Fairfax 10-15 May 0 0 0 1 1

West Fairfax 10-15 May 1 1 1 0 1

East Hoskyn 10-15 May 1 0 1 1 1

West Hoskyn 10-15 May 1 1 1 0 1

Lady Musgrave 10-15 May 1 1 1 1 1

Tryon 20-23 Aug. 1 1 1 1 1

One Tree 23-25 Sept. 1 1 1 1 1

Masthead 5-8 Oct. 2 2 2 1 1

Erskine 6-8 Oct. 1 0 1 1 1

North West 9-11 Oct. 1 2 3 2 2

Heron 7-10 Nov. 1 1 1 1 1

Bushy 18-20 Dec. 1 1 1 0 1

one person hour, but often for much longer, especially on Lady Elliot and

Heron Islands. Butterfly species observed but not captured on each island

were also recorded.

On Bushy Island, three sites were sampled, using the same methodology

outlined above, between 18 and 20 December 2009 (Table 1). In addition,

North Reef, Tryon, North West, Wreck, and Masthead Islands were visited

by Andrew McDougall between 12 and 17 September 2009 and species of

butterflies observed were recorded and, where possible, photographed.

All specimens are deposited in the insect collection of the Queensland

Museum, Brisbane. Nomenclature used here follows Braby (2000) for

butterflies, Moulds (1996) for hawk moths and Theischinger and Endersby

(2009) for dragonflies.

78 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Results

We recorded 33 butterfly species from the Capricornia Cays, with four of

these also collected from Bushy Island (Table 2). There are 10 new records

for the Capricornia Cays: Jamides phaseli (Mathew) (Fig. 1c), Prosotas

dubiosa (Semper), Psychonotis caelius (C. & R. Felder) Danaus affinis

(Fabricius), Junonia orithya Linnaeus, Graphium eurypylus (Linnaeus),

Papilio aegeus Donovan, Papilio demoleus Linnaeus, Delias nigrina

(Fabricius) (Fig. 1d) and Eurema alitha (C. & R. Felder). All new records

were from Lady Elliot Island, except for P. aegeus from Masthead and Lady

Elliot Islands, P. demoleus from North West Island, and E. alitha from

Wilson Island.

Ten dragonfly species were recorded during the survey (Table 2), all of

which were collected from Lady Elliot Island, including eight new records

for the Capricornia Cays: Ischnura aurora (Brauer), I. heterosticta

(Burmeister), Diplacodes bipunctata (Brauer), D. trivialis (Rambur),

Orthetrum caledonicum (Brauer), O. sabina (Drury), O. serapia Watson and

Tramea loweii Kaup. Additional dragonflies were collected only from Lady

Musgrave (I. aurora) and North Reef Islands (Z aurora and Pantala

flavescens (Fabricius)).

Of the four species of hawk moth collected (Fig. 2, Table 2), Hippotion

celerio (L.) (Erskine L), Theretra margarita (Kirby) (Erskine I. and Lady

Elliot I.) and Macroglossum prometheus (Boisduval) (North Reef I.) are new

for the Capricornia Cays, while Hippotion velox was the most widespread

species, recorded from 9 of the 15 islands.

Discussion

Butterflies

Our surveys bring the total number of butterfly species recorded from the

Capricornia Cays to 46. The majority of these are vagrants or migrants that

have flown or been blown in by winds from the mainland. For example,

Fletcher (1973) described the appearance of several well known migratory

species on Heron Island the day after a shift in the wind direction from

predominantly easterly (from the open sea) to north-westerly (from the

mainland).

Species that appeared the next day included Belenois java (Linnaeus),

Euploea core (Cramer) Danaus chrysippus (Linnaeus) and Catopsilia

pomona (Fabricius). In addition, there was a noticeable increase in the

numbers of Zizina labradus (Godart). We witnessed a similar event while

surveying Heron Island, where specimens of B. java were rarely seen during

the first day of sampling but were common on the following two days. As

there are no larval food plants of the caper white on Heron Island (Batianoff

et al. 2009), the butterflies must have originated from the mainland.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 79

Table 2. Butterfly, hawk moth, dragonfly and damselfly species recorded from the

coral cays of the Capricornia Cays and Bushy Island. Numbers within cells are the

numbers of specimens collected during the survey by the Queensland Museum and

Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service in 2008 and 2009. S — indicates an

observation only (i.e. no specimens were collected); * indicates the species has been

previously recorded from that island; ^ indicates that the species has not previously

been recorded from the Capricornia Cays.

Species

Bushy

East Hoskyn

West Hoskyn

Erskine

Heron

Lady Elliot

Masthead

North Reef

North West

One Tree

Tryon

Wilson

Wreck

Fairfax (West)

Lady Musgrave

BUTTERFLIES

Hesperiidae

Ocybadistes walkeri sothis wo gw s 3 S 3 14

Waterhouse * *

Suniana sunias rectivitta v

(Mabille)

Papilionidae

Graphium eurypylus 1

lycaon (C. & R. Felder) ^

Papilio aegeus aegeus 2 S

Donovan ^

Papilio demoleus L. ^ S

Pieridae

Appias paulina ega o JL € M

(Boisduval)

Belenois java (L.) V B » a

*

Catopsilia pomona (Fabr.) v jl = e *

Catopsilia gorgophone v

gorgophone (Boisduval)

Delias aganippe (Donovan) wi

Delias nigrina (Fabricius) ^ S

Elodina padusa (Hewitson) E

Elodina parthia v

(Hewitson)

Eurema alitha (C. & R. 1

Felder) ^

Eurema hecabe hecabe (L.) : ES 1 * 2

Eurema smilax smilax e

(Donovan)

Pieris rapae (L.) e

80

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Species

Nymphalidae

Acraea andromacha

andromacha (Fabricius)

Danaus affinis (Fabricius) ^

Danaus petilia (Stoll)

Danaus plexippus (L.)

Euploea core corinna

(W.S. Macleay)

Euploea tulliolus tulliolus

(Fabricius)

Hypolimnas bolina nerina

(Fabricius)

Hypolimnas misippus

(Linnaeus)

Junonia orithya albicincta

Butler ^

Junonia villida calybe

(Godart)

Melanitis leda bankia

(Fabricius)

Polyura sempronius

sempronius (Fabricius)

Tirumala hamata hamata

(W.S. Macleay)

Vanessa kershawi (McCoy)

Lycaenidae

Candalides erinus erinus

(Fabricius)

Catochrysops panormus

platissa (Herrich-Scháffer)

Catopyrops florinda halys

(Waterhouse)

Jamides phaseli (Mathew) ^

Lampides boeticus (L.)

Leptotes plinius

pseudocassius (Murray)

Bushy

East Hoskyn

West Hoskyn

Erskine

Heron

Lady Elliot

Lady Musgrave

Masthead

* = *—

North Reef

North West

*

One Tree

*

Tryon

Wilson

*

Wreck

Fairfax (West)

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 81

Erskine

Heron

Lady Elliot

Masthead

North Reef

North West

One Tree

Tryon

Wilson

Wreck

Species

Bushy

East Hoskyn

West Hoskyn

Lady Musgrave

Fairfax (West)

*

Nacaduba berenice berenice

(Herrich-Schiffer)

Nacaduba biocellata * S *

biocellata (C. & R. Felder)

Nacaduba kurava parma

Waterhouse & Lyell

Prosotas dubiosa dubiosa 7

(Semper) ^

Psychonotis caelius 4

taygetus (C. & R. Felder) ^

Theclinesthes miskini

miskini (T.P. Lucas)

Zizeeria karsandra 1 li $9 2 i 1 St, 4

(Moore) * * * * *

Zizina labradus labradus 2 0 2 il 2 * *

(Godart) *

Zizula hylax attenuata

(T.P. Lucas)

Total butterfly species a 32.17 ij rz) 7)910.g d fü S g EA

HAWK MOTHS

Sphingidae

Hippotion velox (Fabricius) ib 4 JE A 1 1 14 1 3

*

Hippotion celerio (L.) ^

Theretra margarita (Kirby) ^ 2 2

Macroglossum prometheus 1

(Boisduval) ^

Total hawk moth species () (0 ji o s i 2 i i il 1 (0 w M il

ODONATA (Dragonflies and Damselflies)

Coenagrionidae

Ischnura aurora (Brauer) ^ 1 1 1

Ischnura heterosticta 3

(Burmeister) ^

Aeshniidae

Anax papuensis (Burmeister) 3

82 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

g E m E w p A

iiirrifliiicrige

Species áv:ünglif5fBc55£i

nF m 3 "^ r4 S

Libellulidae

Diplacodes bipunctata (Brauer) ^ 2

Diplacodes trivialis (Rambur) ^ 1

Orthetrum caledonicum

(Brauer) ^

Orthetrum sabina (Drury) ^ 1

Orthetrum serapia Watson ^ 2

Pantala flavescens (Fabr.) 1 s jl

Tramea loewii Kaup ^ 3

Total dragonfly species D O if) ( arm jg Y 2» Tn A. i) 1) () 10

The islands with by far the most diverse recorded butterfly faunas are North

West, Lady Elliot, Heron and Masthead Islands, with 27, 23, 20 and 15

species respectively. This is partly due to these islands having had their

butterfly faunas surveyed previously (North West, Heron, Masthead), or to a

disproportionate amount of time spent targeting butterflies in our survey

(Heron and especially Lady Elliot Islands). However, these islands are also

among the largest in area and the four islands with the most diverse floras

within the Capricornia Cays (Batianoff et al. 2009). Migrating or vagrant

butterflies may be more likely to make landfall due to the larger size of these

islands and they may remain longer because of a greater likelihood of nectar

sources being available. However, five butterfly species have been confirmed

or strongly suspected to breed on islands in the Capricornia Cays: one

hesperiid and four species of lycaenid (Reeves 1984).

Of the two skipper species recorded from the Capricornia Cays (Table 1),

Ocybadistes walkeri Heron is widespread and known from 10 of the 15

islands (including four new islands from our survey). As noted by Reeves

(1971) this species is almost certainly resident. Reeves (1971) suggested that

its likely food plant on Erskine Island was the grass Sporobolus virginicus

(L.) Kunth (Poaceae), although he later found its larvae feeding on another

grass species, Thuarea involuta (G.Forst.) R.Br. ex Sm. (Poaceae) on West

Hoskyn Island (Reeves 1973). This latter grass is common on Erskine Island

and is found widely across the Capricornia Cays. It has been recorded from

all 15 islands except One Tree and East Fairfax (Batianoff et al. 2009), where

O. walkeri has not been recorded.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 83

Three papilionid species are newly recorded from the Capricornia Cays, all

probable vagrants. Both Papilo aegeus and Papilio demoleus have larvae that

feed on citrus. Citrus species are naturalised, but rare, on Lady Musgrave

Island (Batianoff et al. 2009) and grow as garden plants on Lady Elliot Island

at least, so these butterfly species may be able to establish short-term

breeding populations. However, high levels of inbreeding in small

populations, in P aegeus at least, may preclude the establishment of

permanent populations (Orr 1994). No known food plants of Graphium

eurypylus are recorded from the Capricornia Cays.

Our survey brings the number of pierids recorded from the Capricornia Cays

to twelve, two of which are new: Delias nigrina from Lady Elliot Island,

based on a photographic record by AM (Fig. 1d), and Eurema alitha based on

a single specimen from Wilson Island. This latter species has been confused

with Eurema hecabe in the past (Braby 1997) and some of the previous

records of E. hecabe from the Capricornia Cays may refer to E. alitha.

Fourteen nymphalid species are now known from the Capricornia Cays, two

of which are newly recorded here: Junonia orithya and Danus affinis. Six of

these species have larval food plants on the islands (Batianoff et al. 2009)

but, as yet, none has been found to breed there.

Fourteen lycaenid species are now known from the Capricornia Cays (see

Figs la-c), three newly recorded here: Jamides phaseli (Fig. 1c), Prosotas

dubiosa and Psychonotis caelius. According to Reeves (1984), four lycaenids

are known to breed within the Capricornia Cays: Catopyrops florinda

(Butler), Leptotes plinius (Fabricius), Zizeeria karsandra (Moore) and

Candalides erinus (Fabricius) (Fig. 1a).

On West Hoskyn Island, Reeves (1973) found many eggs of the speckled

line-blue, Catopyrops florinda on its food plant, Caesalpinia bonduc (L.)

Roxb. Catopyrops florinda has been recorded from six islands, including

Tryon, Heron and Masthead Islands, where Caesalpinia bonduc is not known

to occur (Batianoff et al. 2009). It is likely that the butterfly breeds on one of

its other food plants, Pipturus argenteus (G.Forst.) Wedd., on these islands.

Reeves (1978) also observed females of the Plumbago blue, Leptotes plinius,

ovipositing on their food plant, Plumbago zeylanica L., on West Hoskyn

Island. Plumbago zeylanica has a fairly restricted distribution in the

Capricornia Cays and is known from 5 islands: Erskine, Masthead, One Tree,

and East and West Hoskyn (Batianoff et al. 2009), but the butterfly has yet to

be recorded from Erskine and Masthead Islands. We also failed to collect

Leptotes plinius on Bushy Island despite the occurrence of P. zeylanica there

(Walker et al. 1991).

On North West Island, Reeves (1969) found eggs of the spotted grass-blue,

Zizeeria karsandra, on its food plant, Tribulus cistoides L. and he later found

many eggs and larvae on the same plant on Erskine Island (Reeves 1971).

84 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

During the current survey, specimens of Z. karsandra were collected from all

nine islands of the Capricornia Cays where Tribulus cistoides is known to

occur (Batianoff et al. 2009). In addition, this species was also collected from

Bushy Island, where T. cistodes has been recorded previously (Walker et al.

1991).

Reeves (1984) listed the small dusky-blue, Candalides erinus, as breeding on

islands of the Capricornia Cays and previously noted that adults were closely

associated with their food plant Cassytha filiformis L. on North West (Reeves

1969), Masthead (Reeves 1999) and Erskine Islands (Reeves 1971). Of the

six islands where Cassytha filiformis occurs, Candalides erinus is known

from all but North Reef Island. We also collected Candalides erinus from

Bushy Island, where Cassytha filiformis also occurs (Walker et al. 1991).

Fig. 1. Butterfly species photographed on islands of the Capricornia Cays. a,

Candalides erinus erinus (Lycaenidae); b, Catochrysops panormus platissa

(Lycaenidae); c, Jamides phaseli (Lycaenidae); d, Delias nigrina (Pieridae). All

DM by Andrew McDougall, from Tryon Island (a) and Lady Elliot Island (b-

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 85

Hawk Moths

Hippotion velox (Fig. 2b) is distributed from India and Sri Lanka, through

south-east Asia to Australia, New Caledonia and Fiji (Common 1990) and

apparently Tonga (Pestnet 2010). Within Australia it occurs in the Northern

Territory and from Thursday Island, Queensland to north-eastern New South

Wales (Common 1990). In Australia its larvae have been recorded feeding on

three species of Pisonia (Nyctaginaceae): the vine P. aculeata L. (Dodd

1902), the bird-lime tree, P. umbellifera (J.R.Forst. & G.Forst.) Seem.

(Moulds 1984) and P. grandis (Smith et al. 2004, Freebairn 2007). Outside

Australia larval food plants include Alocasia macrorrhizos (L.) G.Don (as

Alocasia indica) (Araceae) and Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam. (sweet potato,

Convolvulaceae) in Fiji (Robinson 1975) and species of Morinda L.

(Rubiaceae), Pisonia L., Brassica L. (Brassicaceae) and Colocasia (Araceae)

in Papua New Guinea (Mackey 1975).

Fig. 2. Hawk moth (Sphingidae) species recorded from the Capricornia Cays. a,

Hippotion celerio ftom Erskine Island; b, Hippotion velox from One Tree Island; c,

Macroglossum prometheus from North Reef Island; d, Theretra margarita (specimen

from Toowoomba but this species recorded from Lady Elliot and Erskine Islands).

Photographs by Geoff Thompson (QM).

The broad distribution of Hippotion velox across the Capricornia Cays (9

islands) is due to the wide availability of its host plant Pisonia grandis, which

occurs on all 15 islands of the region (Batianoff et al. 2009). Outbreaks of

Hippotion velox larvae occasionally cause large-scale defoliation of Pisonia

grandis forest on coral islands of the Capricornia Cays and elsewhere in the

86 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Pacific. Documented outbreaks have occurred on cays in the Coral Sea:

South Magdelaine Cay in 2001 and North East Herald Islet in 2002 and 2007

(Smith et al. 2004, Freebairn 2007). An outbreak of what appeared to be H.

velox also caused the complete defoliation of Pisonia grandis forest on

Maninita Island (6.5 ha), Tonga, in May and June 2002 (Pestnet 2010).

During our surveys we observed just small numbers of H. velox larvae only

on One Tree, Heron and North West Islands. However, outbreaks of larvae

caused extensive defoliation of Pisonia grandis trees on Wilson Island in

2008 and Masthead Island in July 2010 (John Olds pers. comm.).

Very small numbers of three additional hawk moth species were collected in

the survey, all representing new records for the Capricornia Cays. Single

specimens of Hippotion celerio (Fig. 2a), captured in a light trap from

Erskine Island, and Macroglossum prometheus (Fig. 2c), captured in a light

trap from North Reef Island, were probably vagrants as there are no recorded

larval food plants (see Moulds 1981, 1984, 1998) of the species on these

islands (Batianoff et al. 2009). Two specimens of Theretra margarita (Fig.

2d) were collected in light traps from Erskine and Lady Elliot Islands. The

larval food plants of this species are apparently unknown and we are unable

to speculate whether they are vagrants or from resident populations.

Dragonflies and damselflies

Not surprisingly, the dragonfly and damselfly fauna of the Capricornia Cays

is depauperate, with only 10 species recorded from our survey. Most are

strong-flying species and/or species that are known to disperse or be blown

long distances from their larval breeding sites. Seven are distributed

throughout most or all of Australia with the other three occurring in northern

and eastern Australia: Diplacodes trivialis occurring as far south as southern

NSW, Orthetrum sabina as far south as south-eastern Queensland and

Orthetrum serapia as far south as Rockhampton, central Queensland

(Theischinger and Endersby 2009).

Dragonflies and damselflies are probably regular visitors to islands of the

Capricornia Cays, but the absence of permanent water bodies means that they

are unable to establish resident populations. However, on Lady Elliot Island

there is a sizable depression which fills with rainfall and might provide

temporary larval habitat for some dragonflies and damselflies. All 10 odonate

species we collected from Lady Elliot Island are known to breed in temporary

water bodies (Watson ef al. 1991, Theischinger and Hawking 2006). We

recorded only two dragonfly species from other islands: Ischnura aurora

from Lady Musgrave and North Reef Islands and Pantala flavescens from

North Reef Island.

Acknowledgements

We thank numerous Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (QPWS),

Queensland Museum (QM) and Queensland Herbarium (QM) staff and

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 87

volunteers for their assistance and company in the field, including John Olds,

John Augusteyn, Caleb Bailey, Alan Hollis, Dean Boswell, Lee Case, Daniel

Beard, Andrew Congram, Bruce Knuckey, Leanne Brown, Carolyn Williams,

Damon Shearer, Oliver Lanyon, Andrew Bates, Andy Davis and Charles

Coleman (QPWS), Federica Turco and Susan Wright (QM), the late George

Batianoff and David Halford (QH) and Mark Hallam. Thanks to the staff of

the One Tree Island research station (University of Sydney) for their help in

arranging transport to and accommodation on the island. Kym Thompson,

Theresa Chard, Amy Wilkinson, Dave Watson, Belle Inslay, Leesa Beatson

and Nick Smith of the QPWS assisted in the planning and logistics of the

fieldwork. We also thank Susan Wright and Karin Koch (QM) for their help

in pinning and databasing specimens.

References

BATIANOFF, G.N., NAYLOR, G.C., OLDS, J. and NELDNER, V.J. 2009. Distribution

patterns, weed incursions and origins of terrestrial flora at the Capricorn-Bunker Islands, Great

Barrier Reef, Australia. Cunninghamia 11: 107-121.

BRABY, M.F. 1997. Occurrence of Eurema alitha (C. & R. Felder) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in

Australia and its distinction from E. hecabe (Linnaeus). Australian Journal of Entomology 36:

153-157.

BRABY, M.F. 2000. Butterflies of Australia: their identification, biology and distribution. 2

Vols. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

BURWELL, C.J., NAKAMURA, A., LAMBKIN, C.L., RAVEN, R.J. and WRIGHT, K. 2010.

Invertebrates of the Capricornia Cays: human impacts, pest species and their interactions with

native fauna. Unpublished report for the Queensland Government Department of Environment

and Resource Management Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service. Queensland Museum,

Brisbane; 198 pp.

CHADWICK, C.E. 1962. Some insects and terrestrial arthropods from Heron Island,

Queensland. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 87: 196-199.

COMMON, LF.B. 1990. Moths of Australia. Melbourne University Press; Carlton, Australia.

DODD, F.P. 1902. Notes and observations—hawk moth pupating in branches of trees. Scent

organs of Hepialidae. Entomologist 35: 73.

DUCKWORTH, B.G. and MCLEAN, J.A. 1986. Notes on a collection of butterflies from the

islands of the Great Barrier Reef, Queensland. Australian Entomological Magazine 13: 43-48.

FLETCHER, B.S. 1973. Observations on a movement of insects at Heron Island, Queensland.

Journal of the Australian Entomological Society 12:157-160.

FREEBAIRN, C. 2007. The scale insect Pulvinaria urbicola and the hawkmoth Hippotion velox

on Pisonia grandis on NE Herald Islet Coringa-Herald Nation Nature Reserve: May 2006.

Report to the Department of Environment and Water Resources.

HACKER, H. 1975. Insects on Masthead Island, May 1934. The Queensland Naturalist 21: 65-

66.

MACKEY, A.P. 1975. The hawk moths of Port Moresby: a photographic checklist with notes on

the species. Occassional Papers, Biology Department, University of Papua New Guinea, No. 4.

MOULDS, M.S. 1981. Larval food plants of hawk moths (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae) affecting

commercial crops in Australia. General and Applied Entomology 13: 69-80.

88 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

MOULDS, M.S. 1984. Larval food plants of hawk moths (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae) affecting

garden ornamentals in Australia. General and Applied Entomology 16: 57-64.

MOULDS, M.S. 1996. Sphingidae. Pp 266-270, in: E.S. Nielsen, E.S., Edwards, E.D. and

Rangsi, T.V. (eds), Checklist of the Lepidoptera of Australia. Monographs on Australian

Lepidoptera. Vol. 4. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

MOULDS, M.S. 1998. New larval food plants for Australian hawk moths (Lepidoptera:

Sphingidae). Australian Entomologist 25: 13-22.

MUSGRAVE, A. 1926. The biology of North-west Islet, Capricorn Group. (E) Insects.

Australian Zoologist 4: 241-246.

ORR, A.G. 1994. Inbreeding depression in Australian butterflies: some implications for

conservation. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 36: 179-184.

PESTNET. 2010. Hippotion velox. http://portal.cbit.uq.edu.au/pestnet/Summaries/Crops/

Treespalmsbrpandanus/Trees/Pisonia/PisoniaHippotionveloxTonga/tabid/1492/Default.aspx.

REEVES, D.M. 1969. Notes on some butterflies from North West Island, Capricorn Group. The

Queensland Naturalist 19: 103-105.

REEVES, D.M. 1971. Notes on some butterflies from Erskine Island, Capricorn Group. The

Queensland Naturalist 20: 54-55.

REEVES, D.M. 1973. Notes on some butterflies from Hoskyn Island, Bunker Group. The

Queensland Naturalist 20: 118-120.

REEVES, D.M. 1978. Butterflies. P. 25, in: Mather, P. and Bennett, I. (eds), A coral reef

handbook: a guide to the fauna, flora and geology of Heron Island and adjacent reefs and cays.

The Great Barrier Reef Committee, Brisbane.

REEVES, D.M. 1984. Butterflies. Pp 135-136, in: Mather, P. and Bennett, I. (eds), A coral reef

handbook: a guide to the fauna, flora and geology of Heron Island and adjacent reefs and cays.

2nd edn. The Australian Coral Reef Society, Brisbane.

REEVES, D.M. 1999. Butterflies (Lepidoptera) and dragonflies (Odonata) on Masthead Island,

Capricorn Group, Queensland, 20-27 May, 1998. The Queensland Naturalist 37: 40-42,

ROBINSON, G.S. 1975. Macrolepidoptera of Fiji and Rotuma: a taxonomic and biogeographic

study. Classey, Faringdon, UK.

SMITH, D., PAPACEK, D., HALLAM, M. and SMITH, J. 2004. Biological control of

Pulvinaria urbicola (Cockerell) (Homoptera: Coccidae) in a Pisonia grandis forest on North

East Herald Cay in the Coral Sea. General and Applied Entomology 33: 61-68.

THEISCHINGER, G. and ENDERSBY, I. 2009. Identification guide to the Australian Odonata.

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW, Sydney.

THEISCHINGER, G. and HAWKING, J. 2006. The complete field guide to dragonflies of

Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

WALKER, T.A. 1991. Pisonia islands of the Great Barrier Reef. Part I. The distribution,

abundance and dispersal by seabirds of Pisonia grandis. Atoll Research Bulletin 350: 1-23.

WALKER, T.A., CHALOUPKA, M.Y. and KING, B.R. 1991. Pisonia islands of the Great

Barrier Reef. Part II. The vascular floras of Bushy and Redbill Islands. Atoll Research Bulletin

350: 24-30.

WATSON, J.A.L., THEISCHINGER, G. and ABBEY, H.M. 1991. The Australian dragonflies:

a guide to the identification, distributions and habitats of Australian Odonata. CSIRO

Publications, Canberra.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2): 89-90 89

A NOTE ON THE IDENTITY OF COLOBOSTRELLA BIANGULATA

DE MEIJERE (DIPTERA: TEPHRITIDAE: PHYTALMIINAE)

DAVID L. HANCOCK

8/3 McPherson Close, Edge Hill, Cairns, Qld 4870

Abstract

Colobostrella biangulata de Meijere, allegedly from Sumatra, is placed in the new combination

Paraphasca biangulata (de Meijere) and compared with its only known congener, P. taenifera

Hardy from Papua New Guinea.

Introduction

Colobostrella biangulata de Meijere, a species of tephritid fruit fly currently

included in genus Sophira Walker in the Sophira complex of genera in Tribe

Acanthonevrini (Norrbom et al. 1999), was described from a single female

from Gunung [Mount] Talamau in Sumatra (de Meijere 1924). It was

transferred to the combination Sophira (Parasophira) biangulata by Hardy

(1980), who noted the atypical presence of distinct secondary scutellar setae

(i.e. three distinct pairs, the middle pair shorter than the others); in Sophira

and related genera the secondary scutellar setae are very weak or absent.

However, a review of the Sophira complex of genera, currently under way,

has shown that this species clearly belongs in Paraphasca Hardy, a genus

referred to Tribe Phascini (Korneyev 1999) and known elsewhere only from a

single species found only in Papua New Guinea (Hardy 1986). The listed

characters of C. biangulata, including the concave face, pair of dark upper

occipital vittae, wing pattern (very similar to that of the genotype P. faenifera

Hardy), short stigma (about half length of cell c and ending well before the

line of the R-M crossvein), distinctly arcuate last portion of vein M and

secondary scutellar setae 2/5 length of apicals, clearly place it in this genus. It

must be assumed that the distinct costal seta above the apex of vein Sc and

the intrapostalar setae on the scutum (both characteristics of the tribe

Phascini) are abraded on the type (and only known specimen) or are

secondarily lacking. It should also be noted that a dark medial vitta on the

scutum, present in C. biangulata, is only rarely observed within the Sophira

complex and not within Sophira or closely allied genera.

Paraphasca biangulata (de Meijere), comb. n. differs from P. taenifera

Hardy in characters noted in the following key. The transverse wing band

from the costa in cell rj, across the R-M crossvein, is entire in P. biangulata

(see de Meijere 1924, Hardy 1980) and in a female of P. taenifera from

Kerowagi, Chimbu Province recorded and illustrated by Hancock and Drew

(2003), or interrupted below the middle of cell dm in the type series of P.

taenifera (10 specimens, of both sexes, including a female from Kerowagi)

(see Hardy 1986). Despite the wing pattern variation seen in P. taenifera, P.

biangulata has a yellowish rather than hyaline wing base and certainly

represents a different species.

90 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Key to species of Paraphasca

1 Scutum with a black band along posterior margin; wing with transverse

brown band from stigma continuous to below cell bcu (Papua New

Guinea oeeeceneronennoneoneccenedacoedeauotienGanonogaregonaantm P. taenifera Hardy

- Scutum with 3 longitudinal black vittae; wing with transverse brown band

from stigma medially interrupted, leaving an isolated patch at base of cell

CUT (Sumatrays) Ree P. biangulata (de Meijere)

Discussion

The presence of Paraphasca biangulata in Sumatra is anomalous. Tribe

Phascini is known otherwise only from the Papuan Region and appears

confined to the island of New Guinea (Hancock and Drew 2003). Unless

further material comes to light, it must be surmised that the species either (a),

was artificially introduced to Sumatra prior to June 1917, when Edward

Jacobson collected it (de Meijere 1924), or (b), that it is a somehow

mislabelled specimen from elsewhere, possibly the Indonesian Province of

West Papua.

Tribe Phascini contains the following six genera (Hancock and Drew 2003):

Diarrhegmoides Malloch (1 sp.), Othniocera Hardy (3 spp), Paraphasca

Hardy (2 spp) Phasca Hering (6 spp), Stigmatomyia Hardy (1 sp.) and

Xenosophira Hardy (2 spp). For species descriptions and illustrations see

Hardy (1980, 1986). Nothing is known of their biology; although specimens

of most genera, including Paraphasca, have been collected in bamboo

thickets and this host suspected (Hardy 1986), others have been collected on

Nothofagus, Cordyline and Musa (wild bananas) or in montane moss forest

(Hardy 1986) and there is currently no evidence of breeding in bamboo. It is

possible that they breed beneath the bark of fallen or damaged trees.

References

de MEIJERE, J.C.H. 1924. Studien über südostasiatische Dipteren XV, Dritter Beitrag zur

Kenntnis der sumatranischen Dipteren. Tijdschrift voor Entomologie 67(Supplement): 1-64.

HANCOCK, D.L. and DREW, R.A.I. 2003. New species and records of Phytalmiinae (Diptera:

Tephritidae) from Australia and the south Pacific. Australian Entomologist 30(2): 65-78.

HARDY, D.E. 1980. The Sophira group of fruit fly genera (Diptera: Tephritidae:

Acanthonevrini). Pacific Insects 22: 123-161.

HARDY, D.E. 1986. Fruit flies of the subtribe Acanthonevrina of Indonesia, New Guinea, and

the Bismarck and Solomon Islands (Diptera: Tephritidae: Trypetinae: Acanthonevrini). Pacific

Insects Monograph 42: 1-191.

KORNEYEV, V.A. 1999. Phylogenetic relationships among higher groups of Tephritidae. Pp

73-113, in: Aluja, M. and Norrbom, A.L. (eds), Fruit flies (Tephritidae): phylogeny and

evolution of behavior. CRC Press, Boca Raton; xviii + 944 pp.

NORRBOM, AL. CARROLL, L.E., THOMPSON, F.C., WHITE, I.M. and FREIDBERG, A.

1999. Systematic database of names. Pp 65-251, in: Thompson, F.C. (ed.), Fruit fly expert

identification system and systematic information database. Myia 9: ix + 524 pp.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2): 91-95 91

NEW DISTRIBUTION RECORDS FOR SEVERAL BUTTERFLY

SPECIES, INCLUDING DEUDORIX DEMOCLES (MISKIN)

(LEPIDOPTERA: LYCAENIDAE), FROM WESTERN CAPE YORK

PENINSULA

MARK HOPKINSON

PO Box 188, Redlynch, Qld 4870

Abstract

Deudorix democles democles (Miskin), Ypthima arctoa arctoa (Fabricius), Euploea darchia

niveata (Butler) and Euchrysops cnejus cnidus Waterhouse & Lyell are newly recorded from

Kowanyama, Cape York Peninsula, and Zizina labradus (Godart) is newly recorded from Weipa.

Specimens of D. democles from Kowanyama are discussed and illustrated.

Introduction

The known distribution of the white-spotted flash butterfly, Deudorix

democles democles (Miskin), was previously restricted to northeastern

Queensland. Its distribution was described by Abrahams ef al. (1995) as

occurring widely throughout the Peninsula south to Undara Crater. However,

Braby (2000) more precisely described its distribution as occurring from

Prince of Wales Island to the Basilisk Range near Innisfail on the eastern

coast, extending inland through Chillagoe to Undara lava tubes near Mt

Surprise. The type locality is the Basilisk Range near Johnstone River, now

known as Innisfail.

Its life history was described by Waterhouse (1938), based on information

and pupae provided to him by two entomologists, L. Franzen and M. J.

Manski, who first collected the immature stages of this species on berries of

the scrambler Strychnos minor (Loganiaceae) near the Barron River, Cairns.

Monteith and Hancock (1977) recorded it breeding in Strychnos lucida R.Br.

Discussion

While on a recent visit to Kowanyama on 30 July 2010, a cursory inspection

of the town’s ‘Magnificent Creek’ area revealed a tree with orange globular

berries that captured the author’s attention. The tree was identified as the

strychnine bush, Strychnos lucida (Loganiaceae), a small, deciduous tree up

to 5 m in height that usually grows in monsoon vine thickets on sand and

rocky limestone outcrops. The tree is distributed from northern Queensland

through the Northern Territory and into NW Western Australia (Abrahams et

al. 1995).

The fruit were examined for signs of activity of the lycaenid butterfly genus

Deudorix Hewitson and the first fruit examined yielded an unhatched pupa.

Further low-hanging fruit were examined and these yielded a number of

larvae and pupae, along with several empty pupal cases (Fig. 1).

Some of the pupae were attended by small black Crematogaster ants. Further

examination of the riparian thickets along the creek edges revealed a number

92 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

of the larval food plant trees. While time did not permit an extensive search

for more trees, local resident Viv Sinammon (pers. comm.) confirmed that

the trees were very common along Magnificent Creek. No adults were

sighted during the visit, which was not unusual given that the adults are

rarely seen (Braby 2000).

On first examination, the larvae and pupa appeared to resemble the D.

democles that the author had previously collected in Strychnos fruit near

Chillagoe. The larvae and pupae were taken back to Cairns along with some

spare fruit to be reared in captivity.

It was noted that although the closely related species Deudorix smilis

dalyensis (Le Souef & Tindale, 1970) also utilises Strychnos lucida as its host

plant, the known distribution of that species is currently confined to the

Northern Territory (Braby 2000).

The first adults began to emerge on 4 August 2010 and proved to be D.

democles (Fig. 2). They appeared to show some minor variation in the extent

of blue on the upperside and the extent of white colouration on the underside.

Comparison with specimens bred from Chillagoe also showed some minor

variation, as shown in Figs 3-12. It is interesting to note that of the 14 adults

that emerged, 12 were male. Voucher specimens are retained in the author's

personal collection (MHC).

En. 25 ^

Figs 1-2. Deudorix democles. (1) unhatched pupa inside empty husk of berry; (2)

adult female, emerged 4 August 2010.

The distribution map shown below (Fig. 13) represents a combination of the

distribution data of Dunn and Dunn (2006) overlayed on the distribution map

of Braby (2004). The Kowanyama population extends the species distribution

from the known populations around Lakefield National Park and Chillagoe to

the western side of the Cape, a distance of some 250 km. This species is

likely to be more widely distributed throughout Cape York Peninsula than

present records indicate. Irregular survey in the remote western areas of the

Cape means our knowledge of the distribution of D. democles and other

butterflies remains incomplete; most butterfly records from this area emanate

from the study of Hancock and Monteith (2004).

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 93

ve ve wi

Figs 3-12. Adult Deudorix democles democles. (3-8) males from Kowanyama, Qld;

(9-10) females from Kowanyama, Qld; (11) male from Saltwater Creek, 50 km E of

Musgrave, Qld (Lakefield National Park); (12) male from near Chillagoe, Qld.

Other new records from Kowanyama

Hancock and Monteith (2004) provided 17 new records for butterfly species

from Kowanyama, based on a field trip there from 7-14 January 1977. In

addition to their list of new and confirmed species, three additional species

(Ypthima arctoa arctoa (Fabricius), Euploea darchia niveata (Butler) and

Euchrysops cnejus cnidus Waterhouse & Lyell) are added here (Table 1),

together with an additional record (Zizina labradus (Godart)) for Weipa.

94 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

Fig. 13. Existing distribution map of Deudorix democles with new range extension.

Table 1. New records for butterflies from Kowanyama and Weipa, western Cape

York Peninsula.

Family / Species Comments

NYMPHALIDAE

Ypthima arctoa arctoa Found commonly along Magnificent Creek,

(Fabricius) Kowanyama.

Euploea darchia niveata Single adult observed at close range, Magnificent

(Butler) Creek, Kowanyama.

LYCAENIDAE

Euchrysops cnejus cnidus Common and widespread in Kowanyama.

Waterhouse & Lyell

Zizina labradus labdalon? Hancock and Monteith (2004) recorded this species

Waterhouse & Lyell from Kowanyama, but not Weipa. A specimen of

Zizina labradus (Godart) was observed in Kowanyama

but its subspecific status was not confirmed. Many

specimens of Z. labradus were observed in the

township of Weipa in November 2005.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2) 95

Acknowledgement

I thank the Manager of the Kowanyama Aboriginal Land and Natural

Resources Management Office, Viv Sinnamon, for identification of the

Strychnos lucida tree.

References

ABRAHAMS, H., MULVANEY, M., GLASCO, D. and BUGG, A. 1995. Areas of conservation

significance on Cape York Peninsula. Office of the Co-ordinator General of Queensland

Australian Heritage Commission, March 1995; Cape York Peninsula Land Use Strategy

(published online).

BRABY, M.F. 2000. Butterflies of Australia: their identification, biology and distribution.

Volume 2. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne; xxvii + 976 pp.

BRABY, M.F. 2004. The complete field guide to butterflies of Australia. CSIRO Publishing,

Collingwood; xx + 340 pp.

DUNN, K.L. and DUNN, L.E. 2006. Review of Australian butterflies — 1991: Annotated version.

(CD-ROM). Published by the authors, Melbourne, Australia.

HANCOCK, D.L. and MONTEITH, G.B. 2004. Some records of butterflies (Lepidoptera) from

western Cape York Peninsula, Queensland. Australian Entomologist 31(1): 21-24.

MONTEITH, G.B. and HANCOCK, D.L. 1977. Range extensions and notable records for

butterflies of Cape York Peninsula, Australia. Australian Entomological Magazine 4(2): 21-38.

WATERHOUSE, G.A. 1938. Notes on Australian butterflies in the Australian Museum. No. I.

Records of the Australian Museum 20(3): 217—222.

96 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (2)

RECENT LITERATURE

Compiled by Max Moulds (msmoulds@bigpond.net.au) & Editor

ANDERSON, S.J. and BRABY, M.F.

2009 Invertebrate diversity associated with tropical mistletoe in a suburban landscape from

northern Australia. Northern Territory Naturalist 21: 2-23.

BOWMAN, D.M.J.S., BROWN, G.K., BRABY, M.F., BROWN, J.R., COOK, L.G., CRISP,

M.D., FORD, F., HABERLE, S., HUGHES, J., ISAGI, Y., JOSEPH, L., McBRIDE, J.,

NELSON, G. and LADIGES, P.Y.

2010 Biogeography of the Australian monsoon tropics. Journal of Biogeography 37: 201-216.

BRABY, M.F.

2008 Taxonomic review of Candalides absimilis (C. Felder, 1862) and C. margarita (Semper,

1879) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), with descriptions of two new subspecies. The Beagle,

Records of the Museums and Art Galleries of the Northern Territory 24: 33-54.

2009 Rectification of the type status for Philiris ziska titeus D'Abrera, 1971 (Lepidoptera:

Lycaenidae). The Beagle, Records of the Museums and Art Galleries of the Northern

Territory 25: 121-123.

2010 Conservation status and management of the Gove Crow, Euploea alcathoe enastri

Fenner, 1991 (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae), a threatened tropical butterfly from the

indigenous Aboriginal lands of north-eastern Arnhem Land, Australia. Journal of Insect

Conservation 14: 535-554.

2010 The merging of taxonomy and conservation biology: a synthesis of Australian butterfly

systematics (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea and Papilionoidea) for the 21" century. Zootaxa

2707: 1-76.

BRABY, M.F., LANE, D.A and WEIR, R.P.

2010 The occurrence of Appias albina albina (Boisduval, 1836) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae:

Pierinae) in northern Australia: phenotypic variation, life history and biology, with

remarks on its taxonomic status. Entomological Science 13: 258-268.

CANFIELD, M.R. and PIERCE, N.E.

2010 Facultative mimicry? The evolutionary significance of seasonal forms in several Indo-

Australian butterflies in the family Pieridae. Tropical Lepidoptera 20: 1-7.

CORBIN, T.A. and GOONAN, P.M.

2010 Habitat and water quality preferences of mayflies and stoneflies from South Australian

streams. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 134: 5-18.

DUFFY, M.P., NAHRUNG, H.F., LAWSON, S.A. and CLARKE, A.R.

2008 Direct and indirect effects of egg parasitism by Neopolycystus Girault sp. (Hymenoptera:

Pteromalidae) on Paropsis atomaria Olivier (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Australian

Journal of Entomology 47(3): 195-202.

DUNN, K.L.

2010 Winter butterfly observations near Melbourne CBD. Magazine of the Butterfly and Other

Invertebrates Club 57: 19-26.

EASTWOOD, R.G., BRABY, M.F., SCHMIDT, D. and HUGHES, J.M.

2008 Taxonomy, ecology, genetics and conservation status of the pale imperial hairstreak

(Jalmenus eubulus) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), a threatened butterfly from the brigalow

belt, Australia. Invertebrate Systematics 22: 407-423.

FAITHFULL, I.

2010 Lampides boeticus (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) oviposits on Broom spp. (Fabaceae:

Genisteae) in Victoria. Victorian Entomologist 40: 61-64.

ENTOMOLOGICAL NOTICES

Items for insertion should be sent to the editor who reserves the right to

alter, reject or charge for notices.

NOTES FOR AUTHORS

Manuscripts submitted for publication can be submitted as either hardcopies

or electronically. Three copies (double spaced text and illustrations) of

hardcopy manuscripts should be submitted. Manuscripts submitted in digital

format should be sent in Microsoft Word. Digital illustrations should be sent

initially as low resolution images in a separate Word file, as low resolution

JPEGs, or as low resolution PDF files, with figure numbers indicated clearly

for each figure. Digital manuscripts may be sent via email to

federica.turco@qm.qld.gov.au Hardcopy manuscripts and digital

manuscripts on disc should be sent to:

The Editorial Co-ordinator

The Australian Entomologist

D: Box 537;

Indooroopilly, Qld, 4068

Authors should refer to recent issues for layout and style. All papers will be

forwarded to two referees and the editor reserves the right to reject any

paper considered unsuitable.

It is editorial policy that usage of taxonomic nomenclature will comply with

the mandatory provisions of the International Code of Zoological

Nomenclature.

Papers longer than twenty printed pages will not normally be accepted.

Publication costs are $25 per page. This covers unlimited use of colour

which is encouraged. These costs include the supply of a pdf copy of the

paper and 10 hardcopy reprints to the senior author. Papers occupying one

printed page or less may be accepted without charge if no reprints are

required. Reprints may be supplied for one page papers at the normal cost,

by arrangement. Page charges may be reduced at the discretion of the

Publications Committee. An application for reduction must be made, with

reasons, at the time of acceptance of the manuscript.

Further information for authors is given on the ESQ website at

http://www.esq.org.au/Authors%20guide%201.html

Printed by ABC Printing, 2 Dorsey Street, Milton, 4064.

THE AUSTRALIAN

Entomologist

Volume 38, Part 2, 14 June 2011

xxx

CONTENTS

BASHFORD, R. and RAMSDEN, N.

The effect of a new pitfall trap design on the capture abundance

of three arthropod taxa.

BROWN, S.S., MEYER, C.E., KNIGHT, A.I. and BROWN, A.L.

A mosaic gynandromorph of Cressida cressida cressida

(Fabricius, 1775) (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) from

Torres Strait, Queensland.

BROWN, S.S., WEIR, R.P., MEYER, C.E. and SAMSON, P.R.

First record of Jamides aleuas pholes Fruhstorfer, 1915

(Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae: Polyommatinae) from northern

Cape York Peninsula, Australia, with notes on its life history

and biology. 63

BURWELL, C.J., McDOUGALL, A., NAKAMURA, A. and LAMBKIN, C.L.

New butterfly, hawkmoth (Lepidoptera) and dragonfly

(Odonata) records from vegetated coral cays in the southern

Great Barrier Reef, Queensland. 75

HANCOCK, D.L.

A note on the identity of Colobostrella biangulata de Meijere

(Diptera: Tephritidae: Phytalmiinae).

HOPKINSON, M.

New distribution records for several butterfly species,

including Deudorix democles (Miskin) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae),

from western Cape York Peninsula.

RECENT LITERATURE

ISSN 1320 6133