Butterfly diversity in natural and modified habitat at Bahorok District, Langkat Regency, North Sumatra

Keanekaragaman kupu-kupu di habitat alami dan habitat buatan di Kecamatan Bahorok, Kabupaten Langkat, Sumatera Utara

Abstract

Changes in the function of natural areas, rice fields, and plantations can reduce the number and diversity of butterflies, with environmental factors playing a significant role in shaping butterfly richness and diversity. This study aimed to identify differences in butterfly diversity and composition between natural and modified habitats and to examine the relationship between environmental factors and butterfly richness and diversity. This research was conducted from March to April 2021 using a modified exploration method (pollard walk) through direct observations of butterflies. Observations were conducted in two sessions from 08:00–12:00 and 13:00–17:00. The results of this study successfully found five butterfly families with 995 individuals in natural habitats (79 species), whereas, in modified habitats, as many as 627 individuals (29 species) were documented. Based on the Shannon Winner index (H’) and Margelaf richness index (R), the natural habitat was classified as high (H’ = 3.84, R = 11.2). Simpson’s index and evenness values of the two habitats were too different and classified as high. There were significant differences in butterfly abundance between the natural and modified habitats (t (164) = 2.441, p = 0.016). Among the biotic factors examined, only wind speed significantly affected butterfly abundance.

INTRODUCTION

Butterflies are a type of insect from the Order Lepidoptera that have a combination of very varied color patterns that are of great interest to the public. It is a pollinator of many species of flowers (Rizki et al., 2022). Butterflies have been used to show ecological examples of species responses to change, and because their ectotherm characteristics are a good group for observing the effects of extreme climate events, such as drought and heavy rainfall, they have been shown to damage butterfly survival, causing local extinction events (Zulaikha et al., 2022). The presence of butterfly species in high abundance indicates that the species plays an important role in its habitat; therefore, it can be used as an indicator of habitat conditions (Source not found, n.d.).

Increased human activities, such as burning fossil fuels, increasing carbon emissions, naturalization, and other practices, have exacerbated global warming. In addition to humans, such environmental changes affect all living things, including insects, and can be caused by several factors, such as loss of larval feeding habitat, nectar sources and overwintering habitat, adaptability and productivity problems in their new habitat, attacks by natural enemies, and changes in wind patterns. In addition, an increase in temperature can cause changes in butterfly morphology, such as a reduced wing size, which reduces flight activity (DH & E, 2022). Studies conducted in West Kotawaringin, Central Kalimantan found that butterfly diversity was affected by habitat degradation, whereas fragmentation did not significantly influence butterfly communities. Degraded habitats can lead to a decrease in the number of butterfly species and a shift in the composition of butterfly communities (Harmonis & Saud, 2017).

Several surveys of butterfly species richness and abundance along the artificial-rural gradient have found significant declines in butterfly diversity as the proportion of artificial land increases (Millah et al., 2023);(León-Cortés et al., 2019). Butterfly abundance can also be caused by warm and humid climatic conditions, abundant flowering plants, and fewer artificial habitats, and the effects vary greatly depending on life stage (Koneri et al., 2019). Natural vegetation is an important factor determining the dependence and survival of butterflies in a particular habitat. One butterfly habitat is a green open space, which decreases with the expansion of cities and artificialization. Not only does this affect the degradation of their habitat, but it also affects the decline in plant species diversity, water quality, and increases air and soil pollution.

Several studies have been conducted on butterfly diversity in the natural and modified habitats of Indonesia. One study conducted in Jember, East Java, investigated the impact of agroforestry management on butterfly diversity (Kuussaari et al., 2020). Another study in Langsa, Aceh examined butterfly diversity in an isolated urban forest (Setiawan et al., 2020). A study in Lombok Island, West Nusa Tenggara, analyzed the abundance and diversity of butterflies in the Lombok Island Botanical Forest Park (Ilhamdi et al., 2023). A study in Lumajang, East Java, analyzed butterfly community structures in various habitats (Odum, 1998). Finally, a study in Central Kalimantan investigated butterfly diversity in palm oil plantations (Noor & Zen, 2015). These studies show that butterfly diversity varies depending on the habitat type and management practices.

Based on this background, research is needed on differences in butterfly diversity in the Bahorok District area because it is still not widely explored and there is limited research. Finally, a study on butterfly diversity was conducted at this location. This study is the first record and is expected to provide detailed information for better management and conservation of butterflies in the area. Comparison of butterfly habitats that have changed functions from natural (Buffer Areas) to modified habitats. This study aimed to identify differences in butterfly diversity and composition between natural and modified habitats, and to examine the relationship between environmental factors and butterfly richness and diversity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sampling location and time

This exploratory study was conducted at several locations sampled from natural and modified habitats. This research was conducted from March to April 2021 with site conditions having a temperature range between 27.7-29.5 oC, relative humidity values ranging from 76-89.5%, wind speed values at each location ranging from 0.1-0.9 M/S, and the altitude of each location ranges from 36-194 meters above the sea level. This research used the pollard walk method, where the field directly made exploratory observations related to butterflies found (Harmonis et al., 2022). Determination of the research area was carried out based on the type of habitat and vegetation structure that existed in several places that became natural habitats which is a buffer zone of Gunung Leuser National Park, Bahorok District, Langkat Regency, North Sumatra namely in river Landak, river Berkail and river Simpang; and modified habitat samples is at Teladan Park, Gajah Mada Park, and Cadika Park (Figure 1 and Figure 2).

Figure 1.Sattelite image map of the study site at natural habitat and modified habitat.

Figure 2.Overview of the study site habitat. Natural habitats: A: Simpang River, B: Berkail River, and C: Landak River; Modified habitats: D:Gajah Mada Park; E: Teladan Park; F: Cadika Park

Sampling procedure

Sampling was collected using exploration methods and line transect. For each sample, the observation location had a transects length of 1000 m (following the path of the riverbank), and the distance to the right and left was as long as 2 m.

Observations were made with two replications (total distance of 1000 m) in one location, namely morning and afternoon. If it is not successfully identified, then in the field, images were captured using a camera, and identified at the Medan State University, Biosystematics Laboratory. Observations were made from 08.00-11.00 WIB and 13.00-16.00 WIB according to the time of active butterfly activity (Marabuto et al., 2022).

Spesies identification

Butterfly identification guidebooks such as those by (Aprilia et al., 2020), The Butterflies of the Malay Peninsula by (Corbet & Pendlebury, 1992), and The Butterflies of Jambi (Sumatra, Indonesia): An Efforts Field Guide by (Purnamasari & Santosa, 2018). Journal article by (Wei et al., 2022).

Abiotic factor measurement

The observed environmental parameters were divided into physical factors, including altitude, temperature, humidity (hygrometer), and wind speed (anemometer).

Data analysis

Species richness and abundance data were analyzed using the Shannon-Wiener index, dominance, evenness, and species richness indices using the following formula. The effect of habitat on butterfly abundance was analyzed using a t-test with the R-Studio software. Butterfly species diversity was calculated using the Shannon-Wiener diversity index with the following formula (Panjaitan et al., 2021):

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \displaystyle H' = - \sum p_i \ln p_i; \quad p_i = n_i/N \end{document} , in which

H’: Shannon Winner diversity index; Pi: proportion of species I to individuals of all species; N: total number of individuals of all species; Ni: number of individuals of each species; Ln: natural logarithm. The diversity index (H′) (Magurran, 2004) is classified as follows: low: H′ ≤ 1.0; moderate: 1.0 < H′ ≤ 3.0; and high: H′ ≥ 3.0. To determine the dominant, medium-dominant, or non-dominant butterfly species in an observation using the dominance index (D), the formula used by (Odum, 1998) was as follows:

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \displaystyle D = \sum (n_i/N)^2 \end{document} , in which

D: butterfly species dominance index; Pi: number of butterfly species; N: number of individuals of all butterfly species. The classification of dominance index (D) (Tustiyani et al., 2020) is as follows: low: 0.00 < D ≤ 0.5; moderate: 0.50 < D ≤ 0.75; and high: 0.75 < C ≤ 1.

The Evenness index (e) was calculated using the (Magurran, 2004) equation, with the following formula:

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \displaystyle e = H'/\ln(S) \end{document} , in which

e: value of the Shannon evenness index; H: value of the Shannon-Wiener diversity index; and S: number of species recorded. Species evenness was grouped into three categories: e > 0.6 = high species evenness, even distribution of species; e = 0.3-0.6 = medium species evenness, even distribution of species; and e < 0.3 = low species evenness, uneven species distribution.

To measure species richness in the observation unit, the approach used was the Margalef Diversity index in (Magurran, 1988). Margalef’s richness index was calculated.

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \displaystyle D_{mg} = S - 1/\ln N \end{document} , in which

Dmg: Margalef Richness index; S: number of species; N: number of individuals.

The effects of abiotic factors (wind speed, temperature, humidity, and height of the location) on the number of butterflies were analyzed using correlation analysis with SPSS version 29.02.0

RESULTS

Diversity and abundance of butterflies in natural and modified habitats

The results of butterfly research in each habitat showed differences in the number of species and individuals. In The results of butterfly research in each habitat showed differences in the number of species and individuals. In modified habitats, the number of species reached 29, and the number of individuals reached 627 butterfly individuals. In natural habitats, the number of species reached 79, with the number of individuals reaching 995 butterfly individuals included in five families, namely Papilionidae, Nymphalidae, Hesperidae, Lycanidae, and Pieridae. The most common family was Nymphalidae, with 34 species, while the least common family was Hesperidae, with 8 species. The Family Pieridae had the highest number of individuals in both habitats, with a total of 540 individuals. The most abundant butterfly individual in all habitats was Leptosia nina (135 individuals), followed by Eurema hecabe (100 individuals).

Based on theresults ofthe Shannon-Wiener diversity index (H′) presented in Table 1, the natural habitat (H′ = 3.84) showed a high level of species diversity, whereas the modified habitat (H′ = 2.88) showed a moderate level of species diversity. Dominance index (D) values Table 1 for natural (D = 0.97) and modified habitats (D = 0.92) were relatively the same and fell into the high dominance category. Evenness index (E) Table 1 also showed relatively similar values between the two habitat types, with E = 0.88 for the natural habitat and E = 0.85 for the modified habitat, both indicating a high level of evenness. In addition, the Margalef species richness index showed that the natural habitat (R = 11.2) had much higher species richness than the modified habitat (R = 4.49).

The effect of natural and modified habitat on the abundance of butterfly

Based on the independent t-test, the results showed a significant difference between the average abundance of butterflies in natural and modified habitats (t (164) = 2.441, p = 0.016).

The results showed that the natural habitats supported a higher butterfly abundance than to modified habitats Figure 3. The mean value of butterfly abundance in natural habitats is 11.99, whereas in modified habitats, it was 6.16. The diagram shows that the median abundance in the natural habitats was higher than that in the modified habitats. In addition, the distribution of data in natural habitats also showed greater variation, with the presence of several outlier values that illustrated a very high abundance in certain locations.

Table 1.Diversity and abundance of butterflies in natural and modified habitats

Family	Spesies	Number of individuals		Total
		Natural habitats	Modified habitats
Papilionidae	Papilio polytes	1	25	26
	Papilio memnon	4	1	5
	Papilio helemus	3	0	3
	Papilio demolius	3	0	3
	Graphium sarpedon	49	20	69
	Graphium agamemnon	11	25	36
	Graphium antiphotes	5	0	5
	Graphium doson	2	0	2
	Lamproptera meges	11	0	11
Nympalidae	Athyma perius	11	0	11
	Cyrestis nivea	4	0	4
	Vagrens regista	2	0	2
	Hypolimnas bolina	27	44	71
	Cupha erymantis	16	0	16
	Cirrochroa sp.	10	0	10
	Cirrochroa emalea	11	0	11
	Polyura athamas	16	0	16
	Polyuria schreber	1	0	1
	Neptis hylas	25	25	50
	Neptis harita	5	0	5
	Lexias pardalis	4	0	4
	Tanecia lapis	2	0	2
	Thaumantis klugius	2	0	2
	Elymnias hypermnestra	21	25	46
	Elymnias nesaea	4	24	28
	Melanitis leda	4	5	9
	Melanitis phedima	5	0	5
	Moduza procris	3	0	3
	Chersonesia rahria	7	0	7
	Amathusia phidivus	0	2	2
	Mycalesis mineus	7	2	9
	Mycalesis perseus	15	0	15
	Mycalesis fuscum	3		3
	Euploea mulciber	18		18
	Euploea core	4		4
	Euploea rhadamanthus	2		2
	Euthalia aconthea		12	12
	Parantica agleoides	11		11
	Parantica aspasia	5		5
	Orsotriena medus	17		17
	Ragadia macuta	10		10
	Parthenos slvia	4		4
	Ideopsis vulgaris	4		4
Pieridae	Eurema hecabe	88	12	100
	Eurema blanda	54	9	63
	Catopsilia pomona	31	20	51
	Delias hyparete	8	6	14
	Delias pasithoe	7		7
	Leptosia nina	27	108	135
	Appias libythea	17	44	61
	Appias lyncida	75		75
	Appias aegis	8		8
	Cepora nadina	22		22
	Aphrissa statira	4		1
Hesperidae	Suastus gremius		9	9
	Parnara bada		4	4
	Cepherenes trichopepla		1	1
	Ancistroides nigrita	4		4
	Astictopterus jama	7		7
	Pseudocalodenia dan	6		6
	Taratrocera archias	3		3
	Tagiedes gana	2		2
Lycanidae	Arophala centaurus		4	4
	Yipthima baldus	47	7	54
	Yipthima inicha	2		2
	Junonia almana	16	3	19
	Junonia orithya	8		8
	Junonia atlites	4	21	25
	Junonia ipthita	6		6
	Junonia hedonia	5		5
	Zizina otis	8	26	34
	Phitecorp corvus	2		2
	Drupadia ravindra	9		9
	Drupadia sp.	1		1
	Faunis canens	1		1
	Chilades pandava	40	15	55
	Jamides alecto	24	12	36
	Catopchrysops strabo	26		26
	Caleta roxus	17		17
	Prosotas nora	8		8
	Hemiargus ceraunus	22		22
	Zeltus amasa	12		12
	Curetis Saronis	5		5
Total number of individuals		995	627	1.506
Total number of species		79	29
Shannon-Wiener (H’)		3.84	2.88
Index Simson (D)		0.97	0.92
Evenness (E)		0.88	0.85
Richness (R)		11.2	4.49

Figure 3.Number of individual with natural and modified habitats

Abundance of butterflies in natural and modified habitats by family

The abundance of butterfly individuals in five families (Hesperidae, Lycaenidae, Nymphalidae, Papilionidae, and Pieridae) was analyzed based on natural and modified habitats using an independent t-test. The results showed that of the five families analyzed, only the Family Lycaenidae showed a significant difference in abundance between natural and modified habitats (t = 2.54, p = 0.016). The other families showed no significant differences, as summarized below: Hesperidae, no significant difference (t = 0.664, p = 0.518). Nymphalidae: not significant (t = 1.95, p = 0.056), although there was a trend towards higher abundance in the natural habitats. Papilionidae: not significant (t = 0.314, p = 0.758). Pieridae: not significant (t = 0.981, p = 0.338). The diagram shows the distribution of individual abundances for each family by habitat. The Family Lycaenidae had clear differences in abundance between natural and modified habitats, whereas the other families showed no significant differences Figure 4.

The correlation of environmental factors and the number of individuals in natural and modified habitats

Based on the results of the correlation analysis of the number of butterflies with environmental factors, there were variations in positive and negative correlations. The most significant correlation occurred in the artificial environment with a wind speed 0.998. Environmental temperature did not significantly impact the number of butterflies in either habitat or was negatively correlated Tabel 2. The higher the temperature, the lower the number of butterflies.

Figure 4.Abundance of butterflies in natural and modified habitats by family.

Tabel 2.The correlation of environmental factors and the number of individuals in natural and modified habitats

Habitat	Environmental parameters
	Temperature (º C)	Humidity (%)	Height of the place (m dpl)	Wind speeds (m/s)
Natural habitats	-0.039	0.885	0.885	-0.039
Modified habitats	-0.038	0.726	0.824	0.998*

DISCUSSION

The observations show that most of the Nymphalidae were found, namely, 35 species in natural and modified habitats. (Aprilia et al., 2020) stated that many members of Nymphalidae are polyphagous. This polyphagous nature means that if the main host is unavailable, butterflies can still use other plants suitable for larval feeding. Various flowers and host plants invite butterflies to lay eggs on suitable host plants, usually called nectaring. Similar research results in several locations, such as SM Dangku and Sembilang National Parks (Aprilia et al., 2020) and on the Sriwijaya University campus (Setiawan et al., 2020). Based on a study by (Nikmah et al., 2021), it was discovered that the Nymphalidae family had the highest proportion of species in all habitat types. This is because this family has the most species in the Rhopalocera suborder, so the possibility of encountering more various species from this family is even greater. This is in accordance with the statement of (Setiawan et al., 2020) that Nymphalidae has the highest number of species in the Rhopalocera suborder. The occurrence of butterflies in a certain place has a preference for certain host plants and flowers.

While the difference in the family Nymphalidae was not statistically significant, there was a trend that natural habitats supported higher abundance compared to modified habitats. This trend requires further research to determine whether these results are consistent across sites or whether they are local variations. According to (Lestari et al., 2015), in North Lawu, Central Java, the Nymphalidae Family is the most common butterfly found in both the number of species and individuals, accounting for 46.7% of all butterflies obtained. (Sabran et al., 2021) explained that the life of butterflies of the Nymphalidae Family is supported by many food plants, both larval and imago.

The abundance of the Papilionidae Family was higher in modified habitats. A study by (Han et al., 2021) reported that urban parks and green open spaces often support butterfly survival more than forests. One of the main reasons for this is the increased availability of flowering plants in these open spaces, which provide a necessary source of nectar for adult butterflies. This study also showed that the conservation and design of urban green spaces play an important role in maintaining butterfly diversity. Habitat fragmentation in urban areas leads to the creation of smaller and more open pockets of habitats, which indirectly favors the presence of butterflies. In urban environments Papilionidae and other butterfly species tend to be more adaptable to various environmental conditions and abundant resources, such as host plants and nectar (León-Cortés et al., 2019).

The findings of this study indicate that the Pieridae family has the highest number of individuals compared with other butterfly families. This prevalence is attributed to the cosmopolitan nature of the Pieridae Family and the availability of a wide variety of plants that serve as food sources. The cosmopolitan nature of Pieridae makes its species and individuals common across different environments (Wei et al., 2022). Furthermore, butterflies of the Pieridae Family can tolerate extreme environmental conditions, enabling them to thrive in diverse habitats (Rohman et al., 2019).

CONCLUSION

The abundance and diversity of species and individuals were higher in natural habitats. An independent t-test showed a significant difference in the average number of butterfly individuals between those found in natural and modified habitats. Based on the results of the t-test analysis, only the Family Lycaenidae showed a significant difference in abundance between natural and modified habitats. Among the five families found, the Nymphalidae Family had the highest number of species, and the Pieridae Family had the highest number of individuals. Based on the values of the Shannon-Winner index (H’) and Margalaf richness index (R), the natural habitat was classified as high. In the Simpson index and evenness, the values of the two habitats were too different and classified as high.

References

1. DH Al Baraj, E Ögür. The effect of global warming on migration of butterflies. Selcuk Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences. 2022; 36:79-82. DOI
2. Aprilia I., Doni S., Muhammad I., Guntur P., Indra Y., Larissa D.S.. ZSL Indonesia: Palembang; 2020.
3. Awaludin R., Kandyarucita G., Manurung A.P.A., Wiprayoga I.P.P., Feriani K.G., Vanya K., Setyaningrum M.N.. Karakter komunitas arthropoda sebagai konsekuensi alih fungsi lahan di kawasan sekitar situ cisanti. 2019.
4. Ballmer Gregory R.. Life History and Ecology of the San Emigdio Blue Butterfly (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae. 2022. Publisher Full Text
5. Chazot N., Faurby S., Swaay C., Ekroos J., Wahlberg N., Bacon C.D., Antonelli A.. Large-scale assessment of habitat quality and quantity change on declining European butterflies. bioRxiv. 2022; 2022(09)DOI
6. Corbet A.S., Pendlebury H.M.. The butterflies of the Malay Peninsula. Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 1992; 27(42)DOI
7. Frenne PJ Lenoir, M Luoto, BR Scheffers, F Zellweger, J Aalto, MB Ashcroft, DM Christiansen, G Decocq, PauwKD Govaert S., C Greiser, E Gril, A Hampe, T Jucker, KlingesDH Koelemeijer I.A., JJ Lembrechts, R Marrec, MeeussenC Ogée J., TyystjärviV Vangansbeke, K Hylander. Forest microclimates and climate change: Importance, drivers and future research agenda. 2021. DOI
8. Fang S.Q., Li Y.P., Pan Y., Wang C.Y., Peng M.C., Hu S.J.. Butterfly diversity in a rapidly developing urban area: A case study on a University Campus. 2023. DOI
9. Han D., Zhang C., Wang C., She J., Sun Z., Zhao D., Bian Q., Han W., Yin L., Sun R., Wang X., Cheng H.. Differences in response of butterfly diversity and species composition in urban parks to land cover and local habitat variables. 2021. DOI
10. Harmonis H., Saud O.R.. Effects of habitat degradation and fragmentation on butterfly biodiversity in West Kotawaringin, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. BiodiversitasJournal of Biological Diversity. 2017; 18:500-506. DOI
11. Harmonis H., Rahim A., Hidayat H.A., Saud O.R., Wilujeng M., Sampe R., Kartika K.F., Aminudin Butar, T.B.. Diversity of butterflies in the tropical wetland of Kayan-Sembakung Delta, North Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity. 2022; 23:3303-3312. DOI
12. Ilhamdi M.L., Al Idrus A., Santoso D., Hadiprayitno G., Syazali M., Hariyadi I.. Abundance and diversity of butterfly in the Lombok Forest Park, Indonesia. BiodiversitasJournal of Biological Diversity. 2023; 24:708-715. DOI
13. Karmakar Prasun, A Mishra, C Borah, A Deka. Diversity and spatial distribution of butterflies in different macrohabitat of North East India. International Journal of Tropical Insect Science. 2022; 42:3671-86. DOI
14. Koneri R., Nangoy M.J., Siahaan P.. The abundance and diversity of butterflies (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) in Talaud Islands, North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity.20:3275–3283. 2019. DOI
15. Kurnianto A.S., Haryadi N.T., Dewi N., Miftachurrohmi M., Rohmana A., I AmalG, Septiadi L., Firdaus A.S., Magvira N.L.. Edge effects at multifunctional agro-landscapes in Jember, Indonesia, on the augmentation of butterfly diversity. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity.24:2231–2241. 2023. DOI
16. Kuussaari M., Toivonen M., Heliölä J., Pöyry J., Mellado J., Ekroos J., Hyyryläinen V., Vähä-Piikkiö I., Tiainen J.. Butterfly species’ responses to artificialization: Differing effects of human population density and buil-up area. Artificial Ecosyst. 2020; 24:515-527. DOI
17. León-Cortés J.L., U Caballero, ID Miss-Barrera, M Girón-Intzin. Preserving butterfly diversity in an ever-expanding urban landscape? A case study in the highlands of Chiapas, México. Journal of Insect Conservation.23:405–418. 2019. DOI
18. Lestari F.D., Rizma D.A.P., Muhammad R., Atika D., Purwaningsih. Keanekaragaman kupu-kupu Lawu Utara Karanganyar Jawa Tengah. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Masyarakat Biodiversitas Indonesia. 2015; 1:1284-1288.
19. Li X.Y., Yang Y.C., He Z.S., Yang G.J.. Diversity of butterflies community and its invironmental factors in Helan Mountain Nature Reserve, Ningxia. Journal of Environmental Entomology. 2020; 42:660-673. DOI
20. Lourenço G.M., Luna P., Dáttilo Guevara R., RW Freitas, AVL Ribeiro, S.P.. Temporal shifts in butterfly diversity: Responses to natural and anthropic forest transitions. Journal of Insect Conservation.24:353–363. 2020. DOI
21. Nikmah M., Zazili H., Indra. Keanekaragaman kupu-kupu (Lepidopetara: Rhopalocera) di Desa Pulau Panas Kecamatan Tanjung Sakti Pumi Lahat Sumatera Selatan, Sainmatika. Jurnal Ilmiah Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam. 2021; 18:76-87. DOI
22. Magurran A.E.. Princeton University Press: Jersey; 1988.
23. Magurran A.E.. Blackwell Publishing: Oxford; 2004.
24. Mahata A., Panda R.M., Dash P., Naik A., Naik A.K., Palita S.K.. Microclimate and vegetation structure significantly affect butterfly assemblages in a tropical dry forest. 2023. DOI
25. Matsumoto K., Noerdjito W.A., Fukuyama K.. Restoration of butterflies in Acacia mangium plantations established on degraded grasslands in East Kalimantan. Journal of Tropical Forest Science. 2015; 27:47-59.
26. Marabuto E., Pires P., Romão F., Lemos P., Merckx T.. Iberian Peninsula. Nota Lepidopterologica. 45:101–118. 2022. DOI
27. Merckx T., Dyck H.. Urbanization-driven momogenization is more pronounced and happens at wider spatial scales in nocturnal and mobile flying insects. Global Ecology Biogeography. 2019; 28:1440-1455. DOI
28. Millah N., Leksono A.S., Yanuwiadi B.. Butterfly (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidae) diversity and structure community in Lumajang, East Java, Indonesia. 2023. DOI
29. Odum E.P.. Sinauer Associates: Sunderland; 1998.
30. Panjaitan R., Purnama H., Djunijanti P., Damayanti B., Stefan S., Jochen D.. LIPI Press: Jakarta; 2021.
31. Purnamasari I., Santosa Y.. Butterfly diversity on different types of land cover in oil palm plantations (Case study: PT. AMR, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. AIP Conference Proceedings. 2018; 2019(040009)DOI
32. Noor R., Zen S.. Studi keanekaragaman kupu-kupu di bantaran Sungai Batanghari Kota Metro sebagai sumber belajar biologi materi keanekaragaman. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi. 2015; 6:71-78. DOI
33. Rizki U.Z., Lianah L., Hidayat S.. Analysis of the diversity of butterfly (Rhopalocera) based on environmental conditions in Muria Kudus Tourism Area Central Java. 2022. DOI
34. Rohman F., Muhammad A.E., Linata R.A.. Universitas Negeri Malang: Malang; 2019.
35. Rutten G., Ensslin A., Hemp A., Fischer M.. Vertical and horizontal vegetation structure across natural and modified habitat types at Mount Kilimanjaro. 2015. DOI
36. Sabran M., Lembah R.T.T., Wahyudi Baharuddin, H Trianto, M Suleman, S.M.. Jenis dan kekerabatan kupu-kupu (Lepidoptera) di Taman Hutan Raya Sulawesi Tengah. Journal of Tropical Biology. 2021; 9:46-55. DOI
37. Sari H.P.E., Persada A.Y., Mustaqim W.A., Putri K.A., Wafa I.Y.. Butterfly diversity from isolated lowland area: An assessment in Langsa Urban Forest, Langsa, Aceh, Indonesia. Journal of Tropical Biodiversity and Biotechnology.8:74610. 2023. DOI
38. Setiawan D., Yustian I., Aprilia I.. FMIPA Universitas Sriwijaya: Jambi; 2020.
39. Sheikh T., Pandey R., De R., Khan A.A.. Checklist of Lycaenidae butterflies with five new records from Uttar Pradesh, India. International Journal of Tropical Insect Science. 2024; 44:2203-2212. DOI
40. Skórka P., Nowicki P., Witek Lenda M., M Śliwińska, EB Settele, J Woyciechowski, M.. Different flight behaviour of the endangered scarce large blue butterfly Phengaris teleius (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) within and outside its habitat patches. Landscape Ecology.28:533–546. 2013. DOI
41. Sulistyani T.H., Rahayuningsih M.. 9–17: Life Science.3; 2014.
42. Sumah A.S.W., Apriniarti M.S.. Kupu-kupu Papilionidae (Lepidoptera) Di Kawasan Cifor. 2019. DOI
43. Tustiyani I., Utami V.F., Tauhid A.. Identifikasi keanekaragaman dan dominasi serangga pada tanaman bunga matahari (Helianthus annuus l.) Dengan teknik yellow trap. Agritrop: Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Pertanian. 2020; 18:89-97. DOI
44. Ubach A., Páramo F., Prohom M., Stefanescu C.. and butterfly responses: A framework for understanding population dynamics in terms of species’ life-cycles and extreme climatic events. 2022. DOI
45. Vane-Wright R.I., Jong R.. The butterflies of Sulawesi: Annotated checklist for a critical island fauna. Zoologische Verhandelingen.343:3–267. 2003.
46. Wei F., Huang W., Fang L., He B., Zhao Y., Zhang Y., Shu Z., Su C., Hao J.. Spatio-temporal evolutionary patterns of the Pieridae butterflies. 2022. DOI
47. Zerlin R.R., Elissetche J.C., Campbell T.A., Patrock R.J., Wester D.B., Rideout-Hanzak S.. Extreme weather impacts on butterfly populations in Southern Texas, USA. Journal of Insect Conservation. 2023; 28:89-102. DOI
48. Zulaikha S., Pratiwi N.Q., Syarif A.M., Bahri S.. Diversity and community structure of butterflies (Superfamily: Papilionoidea) at The Selogiri Waterfall Area, Banyuwangi Regency, East Java. BIOTIK: Jurnal Ilmiah Biologi Teknologi dan Kependidikan. 2022; 10:94-103. DOI