Photo #3590: Papilio nephelus

16.01.2011 14:32, Peter Khramov

Continue talking of subspecies: now one can get subspecies info only at species description pages, reading descriptions or comments (as Dmitry and Alexandr have been adding such comments). But one can't tell looking at the image if there is any subspecies info or not (if subspecies was specified at all). I think, that now there is no need in individual subspecies pages. Nevertheless, we should get them more systematized. So, maybe there should be some special fields to add subspecies and forms info of every species. In this case one can see subspecies list and adjacent images at the species page. Search will also include subspecies and forms. Please, give opinion if interested in topic.

15.01.2011 2:22, Dmitriy Pozhogin

I've got ssp. ducenarius.

14.01.2011 20:49, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Evgeny, obviously subspecies is used till species nominative added. Right after that everything should get clear. At least one for sure should have it.

14.01.2011 18:35, Evgeny Komarov

Petr! There is no any additional subspecies info since no special form yet to put one. So as I can't see it at the very photo, I should every time click the image to go to the detailed info page. I tried to add it somehow uploading my last photos, but in the end can't see that at the photo page!

14.01.2011 17:50, Peter Khramov

As for classifying, yes, there is to be, subspecies will be classified somehow. Now we've got lack of its info and sometimes also of photos. For instance, this very nephelus is depicted there only once (ok, there is one more photo to publish). More info = better and properer subspecies classifying. Any ideas? Let's have a brainstorm, but please, in another topic.

14.01.2011 17:19, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Hey, what about subspecies classifying??? Look at nephelus guys, they are sooo different. Confusing.

14.01.2011 17:15, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Got it at my personal webpage.

14.01.2011 17:12, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Also add its underside, please. This crew is not easy one, so everyone should see that.

14.01.2011 16:47, Dmitriy Pozhogin

And "nephelus" should be parenthesized.

14.01.2011 16:43, Peter Khramov

Meh, my vote plus.

14.01.2011 16:36, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Think, better to leave that as nephelus subspecies.

14.01.2011 12:51, Peter Khramov

If I specify this as Papilio nephelus chaon, no drama? Cause as I can see, it's named such in nearly every reference. Or that's surely out of date?

14.01.2011 8:32, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Yes, but nowadays it's rather considered to be an individual species, see Wynter-Blyth, M. A., 1982; Butterflies of the Indian Region.

14.01.2011 8:21, Vasiliy Feoktistov

As Papilio nephelus chaon, Westwood, 1845?

14.01.2011 8:06, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Bingo finally!!! So easy case. Only Papilio chaon can have such underside! And it is in North India also!

14.01.2011 7:55, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Uploaded underside. Anyway, thanks!

14.01.2011 7:42, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Well, "India" sign should be removed then. If this one is Papilio sataspes, it's Sulawesi 99% sure.

14.01.2011 7:27, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Hm, hard to believe, really hard. Check your mail, sent helenus underside.

14.01.2011 5:39, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Sataspes is surely bigger than any helenus. I happened to catch last ones of machaon size.

14.01.2011 5:17, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Just for the record: my Indian helenus was shot from its underside, see #3019.

14.01.2011 5:13, Vasiliy Feoktistov

No way, can't be Helenus (way smaller), and yes, no label again.

14.01.2011 5:08, Dmitriy Pozhogin

No, Papilio sataspes can be in Indonesia only. If really caught in India, then it's Papilio helenus. Or no label again?