Butterfly fauna of Daroji Sloth Bear Sanctuary, Hospet, Bellary District, Karnataka, India

Journal of Research in Biology An International Scientific Research Journal Original Research Butterfly fauna of Daroji Sloth Bear Sanctuary, Hospet, Bellary District, Karnataka, IndiaJournal of Research in Biology Authors: ABSTRACT: Harisha MN and Butterflies were enumerated during February 2010 to January 2012 using Hosetti BB*. pollard walk method to assess the species diversity in the tropical thorn dry deciduous Institution: (Deccan Plateau) scrub jungle with granite boulder outcrop habitats of Daroji Sloth 1. Department of Post Bear Sanctuary, Bellary District, Karnataka. This area, a total of 5,587.30 hectares is being proposed for the conservation of threatened species of Indian subcontinent the Graduate studies and Sloth bear, Melursus ursinus and announded as a Sanctuary. A total of 41 butterfly research in Wildlife species belonging to Hesperiidae, Papilionidae, Pieridae, Lycaenidae and Nymphalidae families were recorded. Two species of butterflies recorded from this region have a Management, Kuvempu protected status under the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. Habitat destruction in terms of mining activity can be a potential threat to this area and is suggested to be University, Jnana Sahyadri, Shankaraghatta- 577451, Shimoga, Karnataka. the reason for the reduction of species richness and abundance of butterflies in * Department of Post impacted areas of the study site. This study provides support for long-term Graduate studies and conservation of these fragmented scrub forest to ensure biodiversity protection. research in Applied Zoology, Kuvempu University, Jnana Sahyadri, Shankaraghatta- Keywords: 577451, Shimoga, Deccan Plateau, Hypolimnas misippus, Pachliopta hector, Karnataka. Lampides boeticus, Indian Wildlife Protection Act 1972, Daroji Sloth Bear Sanctuary. Corresponding author: Article Citation: Hosetti BB. Harisha MN and Hosetti BB. Butterfly fauna of Daroji Sloth Bear Sanctuary, Hospet, Bellary District, Karnataka, Email: India. [email protected] Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(2): 840-846 Dates: Received: 02 Feb 2013 Accepted: 09 Feb 2013 Published: 02 Apr 2013 Web Address: This article is governed by the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ http://jresearchbiology.com/ documents/RA0331.pdf. licenses/by/2.0), which gives permission for unrestricted use, non-commercial, distribution and reproduction in all medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Journal of Research in Biology 840-846 | JRB | 2013 | Vol 3 | No 2 An International Scientific Research Journal www.jresearchbiology.com

Harisha and Hosetti., 2013INTRODUCTION The sanctuary located between 15°14' to 15°17' N More than half of earth’s diversity comprises the latitude and 76°31' to 76°40' E longitude at an elevation of 647 m above mean sea level with the temperatureinsects. Butterflies (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) plays an ranged between 20°-43°C. The sanctuary is close to theimportant role in both ecological and economical Hampi a renowned world heritage site in Bellary district.benefits to human beings. They increase aesthetic value Sanctuary area belongs to Deccan Plateau scrub jungleand actively involved in pollination thus help in seed characterized by vast stretches of undulating plains withsetting of plants. Butterflies enhance earth’s beauty due intermittent parallel chains of hills, mostly bare andto their diverse colors on their wings (May, 1992). Due stony, granite boulder outcrops. This habitat makes theto their beauty and ecological significance butterflies are sloth bears to live comfortably in unique geographicalthe well studied group throughout the world (Ghazoul, location.2002). The habitat of butterflies is very specific and theiroccurrence is seasonal (Kunte, 1997). They are also MATERIAL AND METHODSconsidered as the good indicators of habitat quality A study of butterfly diversity was conductedincluding anthropogenic disturbances (Kocher andWilliams, 2000). Butterflies always attracted the from February 2010 to January 2012 to compare withattention of researchers, ecologists and conservationist earlier reports and to record their status and abundance.by their community assemblage and the influencing The survey was conducted to once in a month for afactors. period of two years from February 2010 to January 2012. Butterflies were recorded by direct visual observation Butterflies are broadly considered as potent and identified by using various field guides (Gay et al.,ecological indicators (Erhardt, 1985; Brown, 1991; 1992; Antram, 2002; Wynter-Blynth, 1957, Kunte, 2000;Kremen, 1992) and are sensitive to the temperature, Sharma et al., 2005).humidity, and light levels and also to the habitatdisturbance (Balmer and Erhardt, 2000). The relationship The line transect method developed by thebetween plants and butterflies is highly complex and Institution of Terrestrial Ecology (Pollard, 1979) wasco-evolved (Ehrlich and Raven, 1964), since the followed to monitor the diversity. The butterflies werebutterflies depend on plants for the food and completion encountered along a fixed transect route of 2 km andof their life cycle, contrary to this many of the recorded regularly at an interval of every 15 day pereconomically important plant species are pollinated by month in the study period. Based on the visualbutterflies (Borges et al., 2003). In view of the above, observation i.e., presence-absence scoring methodthere is a need to conserve butterflies. Even though the made during the entire study period. On the basis oftropic is abund with diverse fauna including insects, the percentage of occurrence the status of butterflies wasdata on the diversity of insects both in natural and man determined and categorized into three groups such 1-6%made habitats still lacking. This situation prompted us to as rare (R), 7-18% as Common (C) and >18% as verydocument the butterfly diversity in Daroji Sloth Bear common (VC).Sanctuary India.STUDY AREA RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The study revealed the presence of 41 species of Daroji Sloth Bear Sanctuary (5,587.30 hectares)is unique sanctuary in Karnataka, and is the only butterflies, belonging to five families. The familysanctuary for sloth bear situated in North Karnataka. Papilionidae is represented by 6 species; Lycaenidae 7841 Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(2): 840-846

Harisha and Hosetti., 2013Common Silverline Butterfly Lemon Pansy Butterflyspecies; Nymphalidae 15 species; Pieridae 12 species; fragmentation, grazing pressure and change in land useand Hesperidae by single species. The checklists of all pattern are mainly responsible for diversity loss of boththe species observed with their status are given in butterflies and plants. Along with the above, miningTable 1. Out of 41 species recorded during the present activity can also be treated as potential threat toinvestigation, 28 species have already been reported by biodiversity loss in this area. Lycaenidae familyNeginhal et al., (2003); Madhav Gadgil et al., (2011) and members are largely affected both in terms of abundancefound during present study period. It is likely that many and diversity since they feed on grasses, which is lostmore species could be added to the list on further due to grazing.exploration of this area. Analysis on the status ofbutterflies shows that 15 were rare, 12 were common and Apart from butterflies, other threatened14 were very common, similar pattern was reported in wildlife recorded in the study area during the presentthe Tiger-Lion Safari, Thyavarekoppa of Shimoga, survey were, Sloth Bear, Melursus ursinusKarnatka (Pramod et al., 2007). (Vulnerable; Garshelis et al., 2008), Indian Python, Python molurus molurus and Jackal, Canis aureus and Butterflies are sensitive to changes in the habitat Yellow-throated Bulbul, Pycnonotus xantholaemus aand climate, which influence their distribution and globally threatened species and restricted to the southernabundance (Wynter-Blyth, 1957). Two specie viz,- Deccan plateau (BirdLife International, 2001), LeopardPachliopta hector L and Hypolimnas misippus L Panthera pardus listed as a \"Near Threatened\" speciesrecorded in this region have a protected status under the on the IUCN Red List (Henschel et al., 2008). Indianschedule I part IV of Indian Wildlife Protection Act,1972 (Arora, 2003) and Lampides boeticus under Peacock Pansy, ButterflySchedule IV (Gupta et al., 2005). Similar patternhas been reported from Melghat region of Maharashtraand Ankua Reserve Forest of Jharkhand(Mamata Chandraker et al., 2007) and Jogimatti stateforest of Chitradurga (Harish et al., 2009). The conservation activities such as themonitoring and mapping of biodiversity played a keyrole in determining the status of the diversity(Margules and Pressey, 2000). The habitatJournal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(2): 840-846 842

Harisha and Hosetti., 2013 Table 1. List of butterflies along with their status in the Daroji Sloth Bear Sanctuary, Bellary. StatusSl.No Common name Scientific name Family: Papilionidae Graphium sarpedon (Linnaeus) R 1 Common Blue Bottle Pachliopta hector (Linnaeus) VC 2 Crimson Rose* Pachliopta aristolochiae (Fabricius) R 3 Common Rose Graphium Agamemnon (Linnaeus) C 4 Tailed Jay Papilio polymnestor (Cramer) R 5 Blue Mormon** Papilio polytes (Linnaeus) C 6 Common Mormon Spindasis vulcanus (Fabricius) R Family: Lycaenidae Castalius rosimon (Fabricius) VC 7 Common Silverline Jamides celeno (Cramer) VC 8 Common Pierrot Jamides bochus (Stoll) C 9 Common Cerulean Zizeeria karsandra (Moore) VC 10 Dark Cerulean Lampides boeticus (Linnaeus) C 11 Dark Grass Blue Freyeria trochylus (Kollar) C 12 Pea Blue 13 Grass Jewel Ariadne merione (Cramer) R Acraea violae (Fabricius) VC Family: Nymphalidae Tirumala linniace (Cramer) VC 14 Common Castor Danaus chrysippus (Linnaeus) R 15 Tawny Coaster Danaus genutia (Cramer) C 16 Blue Tiger Euploea core (Cramer) VC 17 Plain Tiger Hypolimnas misippus (Linnaeus) C 18 Striped Tiger Junonia lemonias (Linnaeus) VC 19 Indian Common Crow Junonia almana (Linnaeus) C 20 Danaid Eggfly** Junonia hierta (Fabricius) C 21 Lemon Pansy Junonia iphita (Cramer) C 22 Peacock Pansy Junonia atlites (Linnaeus) R 23 Yellow Pansy Melanitis leda (Linnaeus) VC 24 Chocolate Pansy Neptis hylas (Moore) VC 25 Grey Pansy Phalanta phalantha (Drury) VC 26 Common Evening Brown Ypthima baldus (Fabricius) VC 27 Common Sailor 28 Common Leopard Pieris canidia (Linnaeus) C 29 Common Four Ring Colotis danae (Linnaeus) R Anaphaeis aurota (Fabricius) VC Family: Pieridae Catopsilia Pomona (Fabricius) C 30 Indian Cabbage White Delias eucharis (Drury) R 31 Crimson Tip Eurema hecabe (Linnaeus) VC 32 Pioneer Hebomoia glaucippe (Linnaeus) R 33 Common Emigrant Ixias Marianne (Cramer) R 34 Common Jezebel** Ixias pyrene (Linnaeus) R 35 Common Grass Yellow Colotis fausta (Olivier) R 36 Great Orange Tip Colotis amata (Fabricius) R 37 White Orange Tip Pareronia valeria (Joicey & Talbot) C 38 Yellow Orange Tip 39 Large Salmon Arab Spialia galba (Fabricius) R 40 Small Salmon Arab 41 Common Wanderer Family: Hesperiidae 42 Indian SkipperVC-Very common; C-Common; R-Rare, *-Endemic to Western Ghats; **-Endemic to Peninsular India and Sri Lanka843 Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(2): 840-846

Harisha and Hosetti., 2013Chameleon, Chamaeleo zeylanicus is listed in Schedule New Delhi, 85pp.II of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972. Balmer O and Erhardt A. 2000. Consequences ofCONCLUSION succession on extensively grazed grassland for central The presence of all these species indicates that European butterfly communities: Rethinking conservation practices. Conservation Biology 14: 746-this forest is rich and unique habitat that hold animal 757.diversity that is typical of ‘undisturbed tropical drydeciduous scrub forests’. Disturbances in the form of Birdlife International. 2001. Threatened Birds of Asia.anthropogenic activities such as open cast mining, BirdLife International Red Data Book. Birdlifeconstruction of roads, movement of heavy vehicles, International, Cambridge, U. K.: Birdlife International.firewood collection, etc. can result in habitatfragmentation, population loss and cause local Borges RM, Gowda V and Zacharias M. 2003.extinctions that would seriously affect the distribution of Butterfly pollination and highcontrast visual signals in aforest butterflies. Based on the results of this study, it is low-density distylous plant. Oecologia. 136, 571-573.recommended that long-term conservation of thesefragmenting tropical Deccan scrub forest habitats in Brown KS. 1991. The conservation of insects and theirBellary Forest Division is to protect the biodiversity habitats, pp. 350-403. In: Conservation of Neotropicalwhich can be achieved through ‘good mining practices’ Environments: Insects as Indicators. 15th Symposium ofand strict vigilance. the Royal Entomological Society.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Ehrlich PR and Raven PH. 1964. Butterflies and We are grateful to ACF and RFO of Daroji Sloth plants: a study in co-evolution. Evolution 18: 586-608.Bear Sanctuary, Bellary Forest Division who have Erhardt A. 1985. Diurnal Lepidoptera: Sensitiveencouraged and directed this work from the beginning. indicators of cultivated and abandoned grassland.I also thank the two forest watchers Putteshi and Journal of Applied Ecology. 22: 849-861.Anjinappa for their support and assistance in the field.MNH is thankful to UGC, New Delhi for sanctioning Garshelis DL, Ratnayeke S and Chauhan NPS. 2008.(RGNF) Fellowship, to research team of Panchavati Melursus ursinus. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red ListResearch Academy for Nature (PRANA) Trust, of Threatened Species. Version 2010.2.Linganamakki, Sagar (Tq), Shivamogga for support and <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 13 Augustalso to Kuvempu University for facilities. 2010.REFERENCES Ghazoul J. 2002. Impact of logging on the richness andAntram CB. 2002. Butterflies of India. A Mittal diversity of forest butterflies in a tropical dry forest inPublication, New Delhi. 226pp. Thailand. Biodivers Conserv. 11: 521-541.Arora K. 2003. Forest Laws. The Wildlife ProtectionAct, 1972 as amended by the Wild (Protection)Amendment Act, 2002. Professional Book Publishers,Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(2): 840-846 844

Harisha and Hosetti., 2013Gay TI, Kehimkar D and Punitha JC. 1992. Common Karnataka. Status of Karnataka Biodiversity.Butterflies of India. Oxford University Press, Oxford. SAHYADRI E-NEWS: Issue XI. Sahyadri: Western Ghats Biodiversity Information System ENVIS @CES,Gupta I J. and Mondal DK. 2005. Red Data Book, Part Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. http://II: Butterflies of India. Zoological Society of India, w w w. c es . i i s c. er n et. in / bi od i v er s i t y/ s a h ya d r i _ en ews /Kolkata. newsletter/issue11/hotspot/index.htm.Harish MN, Hosetti BB and Shahnawax A. 2009. Mamata Chandraker, Sachin Palekar and SangitaA checklist of Butterfly from Jogimatti State Forest, Chandrakar. 2007. Butterfly Fauna of Melghat Region,Chitradurga, Karnataka. Journal of Insect environment. Maharashtra. Zoos’ Print Journal. 22(7): 2762-2764.15(3):113-116. Margules CR and Pressey RL. 2000. SystematicHenschel P, Hunter L, Breitenmoser U, Purchase N, conservation planning. Nature. 405: 243-253.Packer C, Khorozyan I, Bauer H, Marker L,Sogbohossou E, Breitenmoser-Würsten C. 2008. May PG. 1992. Flower selection and the dynamics of\"Panthera pardus\". IUCN Red List of Threatened lipid reserves in two nectarivorous butterflies. Ecol.73Species. Version 2011.2. International Union for (6): 2181-2191.Conservation of Nature. Neginhal SG, Harish R Bhat, Pramod S and KarthikKunte K. 1997. Seasonal patterns in butterfly abundance G. 2003. Biodiversity Hotspot Report for Daroji Bearand species diversity in four tropical habitats in the Sanctuary. http://www.ces.iisc.ernet.in/biodiversity/northern Western Ghats. J. Biosci. 22: 593-603. sahyadri_enews/newsletter/issue11/hotspot/hotspots/ Daroji.htm.Kunte K. 2000. India-A Life scape Butterflies of Pramod Kumar MPM, Hosetti BB, Poornesha HCPeninsular India. Indian Academy of Sciences, and Raghavendra Gowda HT. 2007. Butterflies of theBangalore, Universities Press. 270pp. Tiger-Lion Safari, Thyavarekoppa, Shimoga, Karnataka. Zoos’ print Journal. 22(8):2805.Kocher SD and Williams EH. 2000. The diversity andabundance of North American butterflies, vary with Pollard E. 1979. A national scheme for monitoring thehabitat disturbance and geography. J. Biogeogr. 27: 785- abundance of butterflies. The First Three Years British794. Entomological and Natural History Society. Proceedings and Transations. 12:77-99.Kremen C. 1992. Assessing the indicator properties ofspecies assemblages for natural area monitoring. Sharma RM and, Radhakrishna C. 2005. Insecta:Ecological Applications 2: 203-217. Lepidoptera (Rhopalocera and Grypocera) Fauna of Melghat Tiger Reserve Conservation Area Series, 24.Madhav Gadgil, Geetha Gadagkar, Harish R Bhat, Aoological Survey of India, Kolkata. 377-400.Prema Iyer, Ramachandra TV, Yogesh Gokhale.2011. Checklist of Butterflies of Daroji Bear Sanctuary,845 Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(2): 840-846

Harisha and Hosetti., 2013 Wynter-Blynth MA. 1957. Butterflies of the Indian Region, Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay-523. 72.Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(2): 840-846 Submit your articles online at www.jresearchbiology.com Advantages Easy online submission Complete Peer review Affordable Charges Quick processing Extensive indexing You retain your copyright [email protected] www.jresearchbiology.com/Submit.php. 846