BUTTERFLY FAUNA OF SAYAP-KINABALU PARK, SABAH: A ...

ASEAN Review of Biodiversity and Environmental Conservation (ARBEC) August 1998
BUTTERFLY FAUNA OF SAYAP-KINABALU PARK, SABAH: A PRELIMINARY
SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT
M.I. Zaidi & J.P. Kayau, (Zoology Department, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi,
Malaysia)
Comparable concurrent sampling was conducted in 2 locations; one near Sayap station, within
Kinabalu Park area; and the other near Kg. Sayap.1km outside the park area. Analysis of the
specimen records indicates the Sayap sectors of the area is relatively richer in butterfly species
than outside the park area (35:27 species). Species diversity value (H=3.17) corresponds to the
mean value known for a conserved virgin forest (H=3.37±0.19). The H value found for the
nearby outside the park area (H=2.79) is lower and corresponds to the mean value known for a
log-over forest (H=2.98±0.24). The 35 species found are all new records for the Sayap sector of
the park Of these 35 species, 4 (Junonia atlites atlites Linnaeus, Caleta elna elvira, Fruhstorfer,
Hypolycaena othona minima, Druce and Petrelaea dana de Niceville) are new records for
Kinabalu Park.
INTRODUCTION
For Kinabalu Park, records of its butterfly species (Barlow et al., 197 1; Otsuka, 1988;
Maruyama, 1989) have been mostly based on specimens collected from its Kundasang and
Poring sectors. To date, there is no published record of butterfly species for the Sayap sector of
the park. Thus, the Sayap Scientific Expedition (June 2-8, 1992) has provided an opportunity to
carry out a preliminary survey and assessment of the butterfly fauna of the Sayap sector of the
park, and the results are presented in this paper.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Comparable sampling, in terms of effort (2 man days), coverage ( 1 sq.km covering open and
forested areas) and gadget (butterfly net) as used by Zaidi & Abin (1993), was concurrently
conducted in 2 locations: one in the vicinity of the Sayap station, within the park area; and the
other, near Kg. Sayap, 1 krn outside the park area. On the second day of this 2 day sampling
(June 6-7, 1992) the sampling personnels (one in each location) were swapped between the 2
sampling locations so as to even out sampling bias and efficiency.
For each location, the specimens obtained were killed in killing bottles containing chloroform
wetted cotton balls and individually kept in triangular paper envelops. The envelops were
accordingly labelled before being packed to be brought back to the laboratory.
Curing, sorting and identification of the specimens were carried in the laboratory. Species
identification were based on a number of publications which include Corbet et al. (1978),
Fleming (1983) and Otsuka (1988). However, for species classification, that of Otsuka (1988)
Article IV, August 1998 Page 1

ASEAN Review of Biodiversity and Environmental Conservation (ARBEC) August 1998
was used.
For each location, the Shanon-Weaver index of species diversity (H) (Magurran, 1983; Krebs,
1985), as in Zaidi & Abin (1993), was calculated to be used as statistical in assessing the
butterfly fauna.
The butterfly specimens are presently kept in the Entomology Laboratory of the Sabah branch
campus of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and a representative set is lodged at Taman Sabah.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The sampling period of this study is undoubtedly short. However, as a preliminary work, the
results do provide some interesting information, especially with regard to the diversity of the
butterfly species within the Sayap sector of Kinabalu Park.
Table I shows that, with one 2-man-day sampling, a total of 35 species were able to be recorded
for Location A, the Sayap sector of the Kinabalu Park area. All of these 35 species are new
records for the Sayap sector of the park. Previously, there has been no publication of butterfly
species from sectors of the park.
Comparisons of records (Barlow et al., 1971; Otsuka,1988; Maruyama,1989) also showed that 4
of these 35 species are new records for Kinabalu Park (Table 1). This seems to indicate that, for
Kinabalu Park, these 4 species could be endemic to its Sayap sector, since they have not been
recorded previously in its Kundasang or Poring sectors.
Table I also shows that, with comparable concurrent sampling, fewer species (27 species) were
able to be recorded in Location B, 1 km outside that, as a conserved area, the Sayap sector of the
park is relatively richer in butterfly species than its vicinity,
Table 1
Butterfly specimens obtained from the concurrent sampling in the 2 locations: Location A
(near Sayap Station, within Kinabalu Park area) and Location B (near KG. Sayap, Ikm
outside the park area).
Family/species Location A Location B
PAPELIONIADEA
1. Lamproptera meges meges Zinken 1 2
2. Papilio karna carnatus Rothschild 1 0
PIEREDAE
3. Appias pandione whiteheadi Grose-Smith 3 2
Article IV, August 1998 Page 2

ASEAN Review of Biodiversity and Environmental Conservation (ARBEC) August 1998
4. Eurema hacabe hecabe Linnaeus 7 17
5. Eurema lacteola lacteola Distant 1 4
6. Eurema tosinia nabalua Corbet & Pendlebury 0 1
7. Eurema ada ada Distant & Pryer 0 4
DANAIDAE
8. Euploea sylvester tyrianthia Moore 1 0
9. Euploea mulciber portia Fruhstorfer 1 0
10. Faunis gracilis gracilis Butler 1 0
11. Mycalesis marginata pitan Staudinger 1 1
12. Mycalesis horsefieldi hermana Fruhstorfer 0 1
13. Ragadia makuta umbrata Fruhstorfer 0 1
14. Taenaris horsefieldii occulta Grose-Smith 1 0
15. Ypthima pandocus sertorius Fruhstorfer 7 7
NYMPHALIDAE
16. Athyma leucoporus cresina Fruhstorfer 0 1
17. Cethosia hypsea hypsea Doubleday 0 2
18. Cirrochroa orissa orissa C&R Felder 0 1
19. Cyrestis maenalis seminigra Grose-Smith 2 3
20. Euthalia iapis ambalika Moore 0 1
21. Junonia atlites atlites Linnaeus* 1 0
22. Lexias dirtea chalcenoides Fruhstorfer 1 0
RIODINIDAE
23. Paralaxita damajanti Iola Niceville 0 1
LYCAENIDAE
24. Caleta elna elvira Fruhstorfer 1 0
25. Catopyrops ancyra almore Druce 3 0
26. Celastrina algernoni kadasanensis Barlow 1 1
27. Celastrina lavendularis placidina Fruhstorfer 4 1
28. Hypolycaena othona mimim Druce * 4 1
Article IV, August 1998 Page 3

ASEAN Review of Biodiversity and Environmental Conservation (ARBEC) August 1998
29. Hypolycaena merguia skapane Druce 0 1
30. Lonolyce helicon merguiana Moore 0 1
31 Jamides caeruleus caeruleus Druce 1 0
32. Monodontides musina musina Snellen 1 0
33. Niphanda cymbia reter Druce 1 1
34. Prosotas nora superdates Fruhstorfer 2 0
35. Petrelaea dana de Niceville * 1 0
36. Plautella cossaea plauta Druce 1 0
37. Udara dilecta paracatiu Fruhstorfer 2 1
38. Udara placidula placidula Druce 1 0
39. Uda camanae strophis Druce 2 0
HESPERIDA
40 Burara gomata ialita Fruhstorfer 0 1
41. Koruthaialus sindu sindu C&R Felder 1 1
42. Potanthus omaha maesina Evans 1 1
43. Libythea myrrha boornensis Fruhstorfer 0 1
Total No of Specimens 55 61
Total No of Species 31 27
H Value 3.17 2.78
* new record for Kinabalu Park
Comparison of the Shanon-Weaver index figures (Zaidi & Abin,1993) shows that: the diversity
of butterfly species within the Sayap sector of Kinabalu Park area (H=3.17) is almost the same as
the mean value found for Kuala Lompat (H = 3.37 ± 0.19) a conserved virgin forest in Pahang,
while for Location B the figure (H=2.79) is lower than the mean value found for Semenyih (H =
2.98 0.24), a 15-year-old logged-over forest in Selangor; and the mean value for Kuala
Lompat has also been found to be significantly higher than that found for Semenyih.
Thus, as a short preliminery work, the results do provide relatively sound indication that the
diversity of butterfly species within the Sayap sector of Kinabalu Park is higher than its nearby
outside area. This could be statistically confirmed, if such comparable concurrent sampling could
be made possible to be carried out for more occasions, in the near future.
Article IV, August 1998 Page 4

ASEAN Review of Biodiversity and Environmental Conservation (ARBEC) August 1998
CONCLUDING REMARK
This short preliminary work has shown some interesting features of the butterfly fauna of the
Sayap sector of the park area and it should be continued for more sampling occasions. If such is
possible, the present faunal list is likely to be extended and many more species could be
discovered as new records for Kinabalu Park.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We thank the Government of Malaysia for the financial support through the IRPA Grant No. 04-
07-03-007; the Director of Sabah Park and the expedition committee, for allowing us to carry out
this work during the expedition.
REFERENCE
Barlow, H.S., H.J. Banks and J.D. Holloway
[1971] "A collection of Rhopalocera (Lepidoptera) from Mt. Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia."
Oriental Insects. 5(3):269-296.
Corbet, A.S., H.M. Pendlebury and J.N. Eliot
[1978] The butterflies of the Malay Peninsula. Third edition. The Malayan Nature Society.
Fleming, W.A.
[ 1983] Butterflies of West Malaysia and Singapore. Second edition, revised by Alex
McCarthney. Longman.
Krebs, C.J.
[1985] Ecology: the experimental analysis of distribution and abundance. Harper & Row
Publisher.
Magurran, A.E.
[ 1988] Ecological diversity and its measurement. Croom Helm.
Maruyama K.
[ 1989] "The hesperid butterflies (Lepidoptera) of Mt. Kinabalu. A report of the expedition
of butterfly collecting in Kinabalu National Park. Borneo Is. Sabah Malaysia." Kawasaki,
Japan.
Otsuka, K.
[ 1988] Butterflies of Borneo. Vol. 1. Tobishima Corporation, Tokyo.
Zaidi, M.I. and S. Abin
[ 1993] "Fauna kupu-kupu kesan pembalakan dan penenggelaman." Prosiding Simposiurn
Biologi ke IV, 26-27 Nov. 199 1, Kuala Lumpur (in press).
Article IV, August 1998 Page 5