Butterfly diversity and conservation in kon ka kinh national park

1

* Abstract
Kon Ka Kinh National Park belongs to Kon Tum Plateau and has high

value of diversity in Vietnam Forestry. Since the first survey in 1999, the butterflies
in Kon Ka Kinh is little known. We conducted the investigation to study their
butterfly population and factors affect butterfly distribution in a mountainous forest.
Pollard walk method with a hand-net method was used for observation. 323 species
were recorded, including 235 species in this survey. There were three new records
for Vietnam and three new records in Central Vietnam. Nymphalidae is the
dominating family. Our result indicated the impact of seasons, water resource,
elevation and forest type on butterfly diversity. Their diversity is higher in the rainy
season, where above ground water resource is highly available. The diversity
indexes also are higher at a lower elevation and disturbed forest area.

1


I.

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1

1.1.

Background ..................................................................................................... 1

1.2.

Aims, scope, research question ...................................................................... 5

II. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................... 6
2.1.

Systematics. .................................................................................................... 6

2.2.

Ecology and behaviors.................................................................................... 7

2.3.

Butterflies as an indicator of environment ..................................................... 8

2.4.

Factors influencing butterfly diversity ......................................................... 10

2.5.

Butterfly conservation: ................................................................................. 12

III. MATERIAL AND METHODS .......................................................................... 14
3.1.

Study area...................................................................................................... 14

3.2.

Transect selection: ........................................................................................ 17

3.3.

Data collection: ............................................................................................. 18

3.4.

Data analysis ................................................................................................. 19

IV. RESULTS ............................................................................................................ 21
4.1.

Butterflies in Kon Ka Kinh National Park ................................................... 21

4.1.1.

The butterfly fauna................................................................................. 21

4.1.2.

Ecological complexes of tropical butterflies in Kon Ka Kinh N.P. ..... 23

4.1.3.

Kon Ka Kinh butterfly in conservation ................................................. 24

4.1.4.

New distribution records: ...................................................................... 25

4.1.5.

Biogeographical features ....................................................................... 25

4.2.

Butterfly indexes in Kon Ka Kinh National Park ........................................ 26

4.3.

Factors influence to butterfly population distribution ................................. 28

V. DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................... 33
5.1.

Butterfly fauna in Kon Ka Kinh National Park............................................ 33

5.2.

Butterflies diversity along the transect ......................................................... 35

5.3.

Factors impact to butterfly diversity: ........................................................... 36

VI. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 38
VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENT ..................................................................................... 40
VIII.

APPENDIX ................................................................................................... 41

IX. REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 53


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1:Kon Ka Kinh national park map ................................................................................ 15
Figure 2: Average Monthly Temperature and Rainfall............................................................. 16
Figure 3: Percentage of butterfly species in each family recorded in Kon Ka Kinh N.P.
(with and without consideration of species abundance) and entirely in Vietnam .................... 22
Figure 4: Taxonomical compositions of butterflies in Kon Ka Kinh N.P. ............................... 23
Figure 5: Percentage of common and forest butterfly species recorded ................................... 24
Figure 6: Correspondence analysis ........................................................................................... 29
Figure 7: Butterfly rarefaction curve for seasons ..................................................................... 30
Figure 8: Butterfly rarefaction curve based on water condition ............................................... 31
Figure 9: Rarefaction curves by forest types and altitude factors ............................................. 31

LIST OF TABLE
Table 1: List of endemic species in Kon Ka Kinh National Park ............................................. 26
Table 2: Butterfly diversity indices .......................................................................................... 28
Table 3: Diversity permutation test .......................................................................................... 28


I. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Among invertebrate conservation group, the butterflies are among one of the
most popular focal groups. They are well known as indicators of tropical forest
ecosystems and their ecological condition. (Oostermeijer & Van Swaay, 1998).
Butterflies are a good group of insects for studying the effects of human activity. Under
pressure from population growth, the forest area is destroying to increase the
fragmentation and biodiversity loss.
A butterfly is a sensitive group with the changing of the environment

(Mecenero, 2015). In many representatives of this group, the specific characteristics of
coloration, wing pattern, and genital morphology may demonstrate biogeographical
information and provide useful parameters for studying the geographic variability of
species. Butterflies represent a suitable object for solving the problems related to the
specific features of geographic, landscape, seasonal, and climatic distribution of species
(A. Monastyrskii, 2007b). Among many reasons that could be named to justify the use
of this group as an object for solving the above problems, the following are most
important: (1) The butterfly taxonomy is well-developed (De Jong, Vane-Wright, &
Ackery, 1996; Rod & Ken, 1988); (2) They are present in practically all the known
tropical habitats of Vietnam (A. Monastyrskii & Holloway, 2013; A. L. Monastyrskii
& Devyatkin, 2015); (3) Their life cycle is often associated with specific host plants
and some other groups of insects and vertebrate animals. The changes in the vegetation
are always accompanied by the changes in the taxonomic composition of primary
consumers, including butterflies (Dover, 1996; Ehrlich & Raven, 1964); (4) Butterflies
can be easily observed and counted in nature, and can therefore be used for
demonstrating seasonal changes in abundance (Pollard, 1975; Pyle, Hughes, &
Institute, 1992); (5) The boundaries of distribution ranges of butterflies can be vertified
with a satisfactory degree of precision based on museum collections and illustrated

1


guides; (6) In many representatives of this group, the specific traits of coloration, wing
pattern, and genital morphology provide the biogeographical information and provide
convenient parameters for studying the geographic variability of species (Benedick et
al., 2007; Dover, 1996; Gilbert & Singer, 1975)
During the last twenty years, butterflies have been successfully utilized by many
national and international programs for conservation activity as a perfect tool
supplementing

the

main

methodology

for

the

assessment

of

natural

resources(Bonebrake, Ponisio, Boggs, & Ehrlich, 2010; T. New, Pyle, Thomas,
Thomas, & Hammond, 1995; T. R. New, 1997). Practically nearly all conservation
projects implemented in Vietnam from 1993 have included butterfly study into
biodiversity research programs. These faunistic surveys showed a high level of
butterfly diversity and character of species distributions (A. Monastyrskii, 2007a; A. L.
Monastyrskii & Devyatkin, 2015). There were discovered a high number of species
which have been described as new to science. Many of these new species are endemics
to Vietnam and were found very locally (A. L. D. Monastyrskii, Alexey, 2000, 2012).
The majority of endemic species are characterized by restricted ranges and are located
in some topographically isolated mountain areas including mountain massifs of
Vietnamese central highlands: Central Truong Son Range; Kon Tum Plateau, and for
example, Kon Ka Kinh and Ngoc Linh national parks.
Kon Ka Kinh is an isolated mountain massif located in Gia Lai Province of Kon
Tum Plateau. It is situated within Endemic Bird Area and supports six restricted-range

bird species(Le, 2000). Kon Ka Kinh is also a globally important site for the
conservation of amphibian diversity. This area supports a number of amphibian
endemics (Tordoff, Tran, Nguyen, & Le, 2004). The National park also promotes a
high variety of insects, in particular butterflies. During the only two-months survey in
March/April 1999 conducted by BirdLife International, there were recorded over 200
butterfly species. Eight species collected at that time were previously unknown to

2


science, and they have been described as new to science (A. L. Monastyrskii &
Devyatkin, 2015). Unfortunately, since 1999 there were no additional organized
surveys that may be extended our knowledge on faunistic, biogeographic, ecological
and conservation aspects of this topographically isolated area
In French colonial times (before 1945), the forests here were not exploited or
impacted. Roads and vehicles were not in good conditions, so forest products could not
be transported to the market. In 1964, American troops landed in the National Park
area. They occupied and developed military bases on many hills. They exploited and
depleted around 1000 hectares of primary forests for different purposes (Le, 2000).
Following the Birdlife report (Le, 2000), in 1980, the Mang Yang forestry
company was established and managed the forest in the region. During this time, the
main task of the company was logging. Each year, the company harvested
approximately 15,000-20,000 m3. Exploitation is carried out from this area to other
areas. An activity of forest logging has gravely affected and depleted the forest
resources. The majority of secondary forests today are a consequence of this period.
Besides these activities, illegal logging also occurred. This contributed significantly to
forest degradation in Kon Ka Kinh forest.
In 2002, Kon Ka Kinh National Park was established. The logging activities
have been prohibited completely. Instead of logging, forest protection, reforestation,
enrichment planting, and restoration activities have been promoted. However, illegal

logging has still occurred in some remote places with fewer forest rangers and larger
trees. During this time, forest resources have also been affected by the activities of the
local people as farming, grazing, harvesting of forest products such as honey, orchids
and so on.
Kon Ka Kinh forms part of a contiguous landscape of natural habitats in northeastern Gia Lai province which supports some of the most intact faunal and floral
communities in the central Truong Son. The Park maintains a range of montane habitat

3


types. The important forest area are 2,000 ha of mixed coniferous and broadleaf forest
containing Fokienia hodginsii, situated above 1,300 m. The National Park is
characterized by a very high diversity of animals and plants. There are 1,022 vascular
plant species, belonging to 568 genera recorded in the National Park. Kon Ka Kinh
also supports some globally threatened mammal species, including grey-shanked douc,
yellow-cheeked crested gibbon and tiger. Kon Ka Kinh is located within the Kon Tum
Plateau Endemic Bird Area, and supports some amphibian species endemic to the
Annamite Mountains, including four species assessed as globally threatened (Le,
2000).
The buffer zone of Kon Ka Kinh National Park has belonged to seven
communities. There are 71% Ba Na ethnic and 27% Kinh in total 27,200 people.
Economic development influences forest protection. Whole 1,300 ha wet rice and
2,900 ha hill rice, the result from an investment in 1999 demonstrated that forest land is
one of the most important resources, that can be cleared for agriculture. (Le, 2000)
From the establishment of the Park, many new species were found: A new
record of gibbon species N. annamensis in Kon Ka Kinh (Van Ngoc Thinh, Thanh, &
Roos, 2010), new reptile and amphibian species (Tao, Matsui, & Eto, 2014). A new
flora taxon, Kerivoula kachinensis, also was described from Kon Ka Kinh
(Vislobokov, Nuraliev, Kuznetsov, & Kuznetsova, 2016). Eight new butterfly species
were described from the survey in 1999 (A. L. Monastyrskii & Devyatkin, 2015; A. L.

D. Monastyrskii, Alexey, 2012)
The butterfly of Vietnam is the results of combing the fauna group from
Holarctic, Indo – Malayan regions and Indo – Burmese (A. Monastyrskii, 2007b). They
resemble the butterfly fauna of neighboring countries. The local butterfly fauna is
fascinating and unique in Kon Ka Kinh National Park. According to the first survey
undertaken in 1999 the local butterfly fauna includes over 200 species (Le, 2000).
Thirteen species (~6.5%) are endemics to eastern Indochina, demonstrating links with

4


Sino-Himalayan, Indo-Burmese and Sundanian faunas (A. Monastyrskii & Holloway,
2013). We supposed that a new survey would bring further information on the
composition of the local butterfly fauna, its endemic portion, and unknown taxa. Such
monitoring comparative study is rather important because it will be carried out in time
of climate change. Conducting a further study will show if there is any evidence to
suggest that changes in environmental conditions, and have affected butterfly species
in the region (Menéndez et al., 2007). Therefore, after 20 years, it was necessary to
carry out the research on “Butterfly diversity and conservation in Kon Ka Kinh
National Park.”
1.2.

Aims, scope, research question



Aim:

The aim of the study is the to determine the diversity and factors impact to
butterflies in Kon Ka Kinh national park



Objectives:

The specific objectives of the research are:
1. To apprise the butterfly recorded in Kon Ka Kinh National Park;
2. To compare the butterfly diversity indices in different typical habitat;
3. To determine the factors afecting to butterflies’ diversity


Question:

The study will answer the following questions:
-

What is butterfly population in Kon Ka Kinh N. P at present?

-

How is the diversity of butterfly fauna in Kon Ka N.P?

-

What are the factors impacting to butterfly diversity in the tropical

rainforest?

5

II. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.

Systematics.

The diversification of butterflies which is believed to be at around the K–T
extinction event, about 100–60 million years ago (Boggs & Dau, 2004). More than
60% of all species on the planet are insects (May, 1992), and butterflies are
undoubtedly one of the best-known groups of insects. They are also relatively easy to
identify and diverse, which makes them well-suited as biodiversity indicators. Butterfly
(Rhopalocera) has belonged to Lepidoptera order of Insecta class. The estimated
number of the butterflies is about 13000 -20,000 species in total 160,000 Lepidoptera
species (Torben Bjørn Larsen, 2005; T. R. New, 1997; Rod & Ken, 1988). This group
of Lepidoptera was generally represented in three super-families which are skippers
(Hesperioidea), true butterflies (Papilionoidea), and butterfly-moths (Hedyloidea)
without clubbed antennae was suggested recently (Scoble, 1986). At the same time, the
modern progress in the molecular analysis has allowed developing a new phylogenetic
tree that strongly contradicts the traditional hypothesis (Kawahara & Breinholt, 2014)
Recently, the trending of the butterfly’s systematic study is moving to molecular
analysis. However, morphology still plays an essential role in butterfly phylogenetic.
Butterfly morphology presents their evolution and evaluating the evolutionary
scenarios of phylogenetic trees. (Simonsen, de Jong, Heikkilä, & Kaila, 2012).
Butterfly species recorded in Vietnam was increasing from 455 species in 1957
(Metaye, 1957) to 992 species in a checklist in 2003, and up to 1181 species in the
newest checklist in 2015(A. L. Monastyrskii & Devyatkin, 2015). Based on
morphology characters, all butterfly fauna belongs to 6 families (De Jong et al., 1996;
Espeland et al., 2018). That includes Papilionidae – 69; Pieridae – 57; Nymphalidae –
418; Riodinidae – 31; Lycaenidae – 318; and Hesperiidae – 288. The total number of
species-level taxa is 1277 (A. L. Monastyrskii & Devyatkin, 2015).

6


Some critical taxonomical works and researches have been done relating to the
butterfly of Vietnam. In 2009, Callaghan review 29 Riodinid taxa, which were found in
Vietnam. It provided information about taxonomy, diagnosis, behavior habitat and
range. It also presented on biogeography data of each taxon and compared with
distribution in Indo-China (Callaghan, 2009)
Taxonomical works reveal unknown or poorly studied butterflies researching
process of which may include a description of new taxa and revision notes. The
extensive study was undertaken on the general Scobura, Hidari, Celaenorrhinus, and
Potanthus (Devyatkin, 2004; A. L. Monastyrskii & Devyatkin, 2015).
Monastyrkii revised butterflies fauna of Vietnam on his book series “Butterflies of
Vietnam”: volume 1 - Nymphalidae (Satyrinae), volume 2 - Papilionidae, and volume 3
– Nymphalidae (Danainae, Amathusiinae) (A. Monastyrskii, 2007a; A. L.
Monastyrskii, 2005, 2011). Six species discovered in Kon Ka Kinh during the survey
in 1999 were determined as new to science (A. L. D. Monastyrskii, Alexey, 2000,
2012): Delias vietnamensis (Pieridae, Pierinae); Lethe konkakini, L. melisana, Faunis
bicoloratus, Aemona kontumei, A. simulatrix, Stichophthalma eamesi, (Nymphalidae,
Satyrinae), Dodona katerina (Riodinidae).
2.2.

Ecology and behaviors

Temperate montane butterfly prefers feeding on mud, herbivore dung, and
carnivore dung (Boggs & Dau, 2004), while tropical species feed on a wide variety of
sources including fruit, carrion, and pollen (K. C. Hamer et al., 2006). Pollen feeding
butterflies, probably are a result of selection for longer adult lifespan (Bonebrake et al.,
2010). Female adults of Eurema species have a reproductive diapause phase with larval
host plant conditions. They are sensitive to the change in rainfall and photoperiod

(Gilbert & Singer, 1975; Jones & Rienks, 1987).
A large number of Lycaenidae butterfly is a close relationship with ant species
(Thomas, Elmes, Wardlaw, & Woyciechowski, 1989). The symbiosis between

7


butterflies and ant usually are mutually beneficial. However, an ant can be parasitic,
and competitive. If a host ant species becomes extinct, it will bring the affiliated
butterfly to go along with it (Bonebrake et al., 2010; Koh et al., 2004).
The evolution of butterflies supports defense from their predators in multiple
ways, such as toxins in Euploea mulciber (Wei, Lohman, Peggie, & Yen, 2017), faked
head - Spindasis lohita (Torben B Larsen, Van Hao, & Van Lap, 2005), or bird dung
form in caterpillars. For non-poisonous species, mimicry is the efficient way of hiding
their predators. Mimicry has an essential effect on the habitat distribution of tropical
butterflies (R. I. Hill, 2010). The first research on mimicry in butterfly had been
studied on Heliconiines, Ithomiines, Papilionids, and Pierids (Bates, 1862; Bonebrake
et al., 2010). A huge of poisonous and aposematic butterflies fly leisurely, that allows
them to show their characteristic warning colors and patterns (Torben B Larsen et al.,
2005)
In butterfly fauna, many eggs are laid on the underside of the leaves. After a few
days, small larvae will eat their eggs cover and enter into the world (Rod & Ken,
1988). The caterpillar is immature. This is feeding time, and they have several stages.
When the larva reaches their full size, they will change the stage, and become a pupa.
Many male specimens often push itself out of its chrysalis before the female, so that
the sex ratio in population changes during the flight season (Gilbert & Singer, 1975; T.
R. New, 1997)
Temperature impact on butterfly activity. Therefore, a thermoregulatory
behavior is complex and involves a range of postures and activities, because of the
butterfly need to elevate their body temperature for flight requirement (T. R. New,

1997)
2.3.

Butterflies as an indicator of environment

The methodology of watching and observation for tropical butterflies represents
in a number of scientific monographs and papers (e.g., (Basset et al., 2011; Pyle et al.,

8


1992)). The butterflies are less abundant or are narrowing their distribution than they
used to be (T. R. New, 1997). Although butterflies cannot represent for some lifestyles
and habitats, example, few butterflies have predacious or parasitic larvae; no species is
aquatic; and very few feeds on decaying wood (T. New et al., 1995), their caterpillars
are depended on a hostplants, they are coevolution, so sensitive group reflect the
changing of environment (Ehrlich & Raven, 1964; Mukherjee, Banerjee, Saha, Basu, &
Aditya, 2015; Rusman, Atmowidi, & Peggie, 2016). Especially, diversity of forested
species population can present for disturbing habitat (Ghazoul, 2002). Therefore,
studying on butterfly pattern population can be used as the indicator of forest
disturbance (J. Hill, Hamer, Lace, & Banham, 1995).
Butterfly species diversity was uncorrelated with disturbance of forest in
general. However, there is a strong relationship between rare species diversity and
environmental quality (Hayes, Mann, Monastyrskii, & Lewis, 2009; Rod & Ken,
1988). According to butterfly ecology and behavior, fruit-baited trapping method
denote butterfly fauna is still well remained in the small isolated primary forest rather
than disturbed forest (Daily & Ehrlich, 1995)
Long-term studies of butterfly communities at different sites in Vietnam have
defined a group of the common butterfly species. This group includes about 105-110
diurnal butterfly species belonging to six families (A. L. Monastyrskii & Devyatkin,

2002). All of these species are very widely distributed in Vietnam and common in
adjacent countries (A. Monastyrskii, 2010). They comprise the most typical inhabitants
of degraded forest habitats, secondary vegetation, agricultural lands and urban areas at
low elevations (V. L. Vu & Yuan, 2003). Flight periods typically occur throughout the
year. The group includes a number of eurytopic, opportunistic and migratory species,
which also often happen in ruderal areas and near the primary forest. Their larvae
usually feed on a variety of plant species, most of which are also common. As a whole,
species within the group are characterized by high levels of abundance and ease of

9


recording. For these reasons, species in the group are considered suitable indicator
species for assessing levels of disturbance in natural habitats.
Results of butterfly surveys carried out at sites throughout Vietnam indicate that
the proportion of common butterfly species of the butterfly fauna in primary and virgin
tropical forest habitats rarely exceeds 20-25% (A. Monastyrskii, 2010). In lightly
disturbed and secondary forest habitats, percentages of common butterflies may vary
between 25-45% (Spitzer, Jaros, Havelka, & Leps, 1997; Spitzer, Novotny, Tonner, &
Leps, 1993). In the poor quality forest, bamboo and mixed secondary forest, levels of
common butterflies may vary between 45-50% and are in many cases higher. Highest
proportions of common butterfly species are usually found in secondary vegetation in
the vicinity of roads and cultivated areas and can exceed 60% of the entire butterfly
fauna in these habitats (Fahrig & Rytwinski, 2009; A. Monastyrskii, 2010)
2.4.

Factors influencing butterfly diversity

There are many factors affecting butterfly diversity (Menéndez et al., 2007;
Spitzer et al., 1997). Non- flora factor, including shelter, isolation, the width of

hedgebank or grass verge, and uncultivated habitats effect on butterfly assemblages
(Dover, 1996). In the scope of research, data were analyzed by the following factors:
season; availability of water resources; habitat type richness, and elevation.
In the tropical rainforest, temperature and rainfall, and day-length vary only
within very narrow margin throughout the year. Butterfly community is represented by
an enormous range of species (Rod & Ken, 1988). Many studies demonstrate the
relationship between seasons and butterfly diversity. The most significant
differentiating factor between temperate and tropical zone is winter temperature.
During the winter, tropical butterflies do not face to very cold and harsh temperature as
in temperate zone. However, in the tropical season, the humidity is different.
Therefore, some butterflies have two forms: a dry season and a wet season form
(Bonebrake et al., 2010).

10


The butterfly diversity indexes are higher in pristine forest areas (J. Hill et al.,
1995). In the same forest type, canopy has higher butterfly species richness than
understory, example in Ecuadorian rainforest (DeVries, Murray, & Lande, 1997) or in
Bornean rain forest (Schulze, Linsenmair, & Fiedler, 2001). There are significant
differences between diversity indices calculated for butterfly assemblages occurring at
lower and higher elevations. The values of diversity indices in butterfly communities at
lower elevations are usually higher than at high mountain areas (V. L. Vu & Yuan,
2003).
Groundwater supply influence on butterfly distribution (Oostermeijer & Van
Swaay, 1998). The proportion of forest species in dense forest is higher than the
community in steam trails. In the opposite trend, the common species is higher in
stream areas. Besides, the stream sides are the higher number of individual number,
while the disturbed forest contains the greatest species number (Hayes et al., 2009; L.
V. Vu & Quang Vu, 2011)

The proportion of the rare butterfly species often decreases from the natural
primary forest to the stream sides, while the percentage of common species increase
from the natural forest to the stream sides. The stream sides have the greatest
individual number, while the disturbed forest contains the greatest species number (L.
V. Vu & Quang Vu, 2011).
The Vietnamese butterflies also are influenced by geographical factors such as
isolation, continuity of habitat (A. Monastyrskii, 2010; A. Monastyrskii & Holloway,
2013; Spitzer et al., 1993). The forest preferred species that have a smaller range of
distribution of endemic type, whereas common species are wide distribution (Spitzer et
al., 1993). Butterflies in lowland forest areas are higher diversity than mountainous
forest. They are also similar to higher diversity in dry and transitional season, lower in
the wet season (A. Monastyrskii, 2007b). However, richness in species is not reflected
in abundance in numbers of individual, for a characteristic of these rainforests in the

11


relatively small sample of each species which can be seen on the wing in any single
period, so that no one species appears conspicuously abundant or dominant (Rod &
Ken, 1988).
The result from Spitzer pointed out that temporal change in forest butterfly
species of Vietnam is determined by relatively higher seasonality of species with
biogeographical affinities to the seasonal `East Himalayan' region (Spitzer et al., 1993).
2.5.

Butterfly conservation:

Insect and butterfly extinction is less well known, but butterflies are over half of
the described species in the world. Its studies have been used as models of tropical
insect diversity (DeVries et al., 1997; Groombridge, 1992). However, at present,

lacking knowledge of metapopulational theory in tropical butterfly population studies
or conservation efforts lead to a paucity of population studies in the tropics (Bonebrake
et al., 2010).
Only 4 butterfly species are known to have gone extinct over the past 150
years(IUCN, 2018), despite over 80% destruction of the forest in the area, but many
risks are threatening to butterfly (Bonebrake et al., 2010). Threats to tropical butterfly
fauna include habitat loss, global climate change, invasive species, pollution, and
exploitation and harvest activities. Because of shifting usage purpose, forest land
become agriculture land, plantation forest or rubble plantation that destroy the habitat
(J. K. Hill, 1999; T. R. New, 1997; Sodhi & Brook, 2006)
In 2006, in IUCN Red List database, there are 43 are butterflies (CR: 1, EN: 14,
VU: 28) from South East Asia (Koh, 2007). All of them belonged to only two families
Papilionidae and Nymphalidae. In 2018, 65 species were listed in categories: EW, RE,
CR, EN, VU, LR/cd, NT or LR/nt. The total 253 butterflies in the world were listed in
the above categories (IUCN, 2018).
In Vietnam, there are ten species were listed in Vietnam Data Red book:
Stichophthalma uemurai, Zeuxidia masoni, Kallima albofasciata, Baysa crassipess,

12


Papilio elephenor, Papilio noblei, Teinopalpus aureus, Teinopalpus imperialis,
Troides helena, and Troides aeacus (Ban et al., 2007).

13


III.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

3.1.

Study area

Kon Ka Kinh National Park was formed by the name of the highest peak, Kon
Ka Kinh Mount (1750m). The park is located in two districts: Mang Yang and KBang.
It contains parts of five communes: Ha Dong, Ayun, Kroong, Kon Pne, and Dak
Roong. It is bounded by the coordinates 14º03' to 14º36’N and 108º12' to 108º32’E.
The altitude range is from 570m (at Ba river) to 1750m (Kon Ka Kinh peak). The
geology of Kon Ka Kinh is determined by metamorphic rocks, principally gneiss
characteristics (Le, 2000)
Hydrology:
There are two main watersheds belonged to two rivers: Ba and Dak Pne River.
The stream and river in Park are often shot, narrow, and fast flowing. Because of
stream influence to butterfly distribution (Spitzer et al., 1993), so in this research, the
survey was conducted in both two watersheds:
- Ba River: it contains two transects (number 4 and 5). The Ba River has a highly
seasonal flow during three months October, November, and December
- Dak Pne River: watershed cover three transects (number 1, 2 and 3)

14


Figure 1:Kon Ka Kinh national park map
Meteorology:
There are two regular seasons in Kon Ka Kinh National Park: the dry season,
from December to April, and the wet season from May to November (Le, 2000). In the
dry season, the average temperature in the hottest month (April) is 23.6 oC. The total
rainfall in the dry season is about 25% - 30% total annual rainfall. In the wet season,
the average temperature of the hottest month (August) is 25.1 oC. The highest rainfall is

427.44mm in October (World Bank Group, 2016) see on Figure 2

15


Figure 2: Average Monthly Temperature and Rainfall
at location (14.23,108.37) from 1991-2015(World Bank Group, 2016)
Social and economic condition:
Timber extraction was banned from April 1999. Although it was not caused by
shifting cultivation, it increased the forest degradation in the National Park. Harvesting
none-timber forest product is focusing on honey, rattans, Litsea bark, and Amomum
fruit (Le, 2000). However, the price of honey was ten time increased (compare with
price in 1999), up to VND 300000 per liter (in 2018).
Tourism:
The beauty of nature attracts tourists in Kon Ka Kinh National Park.
Surrounding of magnificent of Kon Ka Kinh top, there are several waterfalls and peace
of landscapes. Six tourist routes are developing in the Park (Thang Long et al., 2016).
Tourist development influence to transect 1, transect 2, and transect 3, but do not affect
to transect 4 and 5.

16


3.2.

Transect selection:

Choosing transect was based on the main features characterized by a particular
ecosystem. According to result from the previous study on altitude and forest types in
Kon Ka Kinh National Park (Le, 2000). this research was surveyed at five transects. It

represented for 5 different habitats in the Park:
- Transect 1: flat area in valley, riverine and disturbed forest. The surveys were
conducted following the tourist trail. It started from the point (14.20773N;
108.317198E) to Frankfurt station (14.220347N; 108.317172E). The transect is
regularly influenced by economic development. During the survey in 2018, we met
both Vietnamese tourists and local people. The range of elevation from 800 – 1000m.
The transect is 3-5m width and 1.5km length. In this trail, because survey cross
streams, the groundwater is a factor influence butterfly distribution.
- Transect 2: is defined as logging trail. Since 1980, Mang Yang forestry
company was established and managed the forest in the region. This trail was affected
by forest harvesting until 2002, Kon Ka Kinh national park was established.
Nowadays, this trail was closed for collection, but it is still affected by local people. In
this transect, none of the streams was cross, so groundwater flow does not influence the
butterfly population. The elevation variation of transect 2 is from 1000m to 1150m
- Transect 3: was performed in the disturbed forest in the past, but now it was
well protected since Kon Ka Kinh national park established. The altitude of the transect
is from 1200m to 1500m. The typical area in this transect is defined as near primary
forest in steep gradient.
- Transect 4: was defined as primary forest trails. This trail crosses the many
streams, so the habitat was impacted by water sources. The intermittent observation in
transect 4 ensure the similar characters of primary forest and water condition. Its
elevation is from 1200m to 1500m

17


Transect 5: was described the high mountainous primary forest. This area was
determined as untouched area and is located in Kon Ka Kinh mountain area. The
transect started from camping site (14.332232N, 108.406921E) to Kon Ka Kinh peak
(14.320913N, 108.397784E)

3.3.

Data collection:

There are some methods for butterfly’s observation: visual encounter surveys
(VES), line transects distance sampling (LTDS), and fruit-baited traps (FBT). FBT had
low efficient, less suitable for comparing butterfly assemblages (Basset et al., 2011).
VES is more efficient for recorded butterflies individually. LTDS provide a quick
method to evaluate the butterfly density (Kral, 2018). The data on butterfly
assemblages were collected using the transect method described by Pollard (Pollard,
1975). This standard protocol was modified by Spitzer (Basset et al., 2011; Spitzer et
al., 1993). Transect counts provide an index of population size and therefore can be
used to measure changes in abundance
One full observation will include one pass. The observation will be executed out
along each transect from 9 am to 3 pm at a speed of approximately 20 m per min, and
all observed butterflies will be recorded. Species that require further identification or
taxonomical study will be collected using a butterfly hand-net.
For butterfly identification, we follow the system in the book “Butterflies of
Vietnam”. This system based on newer taxonomic classification by morphological and
molecular analysis (A. L. Monastyrskii & Devyatkin, 2015). During the transect, I and
experts observed both two side to record butterfly abundance.
The study was conducted in both dry and wet season. In the dry season, the
survey was carried from 31st March to 12th April. During this survey, the rain did not
happen all the time. It contrasts to the study in the wet season when the rain occurred
every day after 3pm

18


3.4.

Data analysis

Butterfly species diversity indices (Shannon_H, Menhinick, Margalef indices,
Equitability_J and Fishers α) and dominance indices (Dominance_D; Simpson_1-D;
BergerParker) were calculated by the following formulas:
Simpson biodiversity index
∑
Where

is the number of individuals displaying one trait; and

= the total

number of all individuals (Simpson, 1949)
Buzas and Gibson's evenness

Where H (Shannon index) = -sum((ni/n)ln(ni/n)) and S = number of taxa

(Hammer, 2001).
Margalef diversity index:

where S is the number of species, and N is the total number of individuals in the
sample (Gamito, 2010; Margalef, 1958).
Fisher’s log-series
(

)

where S is the number of taxa, n is the number of individuals and α is Fisher's

alpha (Fisher, Corbet, & Williams, 1943; Hammer, 2001).
Individual rarefaction:

19


It will estimate how many taxa expect to find in a sample with a smaller total
number of individuals (Hammer, 2001). Rarefaction curves are species distribution
as a function of an individual from a sample (Checa Villafuerte, 2016)
Let N be the total number of individuals in the sample, s the total number of
species, and Ni, the number of individuals of species number i. The expected
number of species E(Sn) in a sample of size n and the variance V(Sn) are then given
by

Many programs could be used to calculate for diversity indexes. In this study,
data was analyzed by Past program version 3.2 (Hammer, 2001)
Data will be analyzed using Correspondence Analysis (CA) ordination to
calculate the relative significance of spatial and temporal variability in their
compositions. Assemblage data were calculated by Correspondence Analysis that is a
direct ordination method relating the composition of samples to variables (season,
transect and vertical level) (Hammer, 2001).

20


IV.

RESULTS
4.1.

Butterflies in Kon Ka Kinh National Park

4.1.1. The butterfly fauna
A total of 323 butterfly species were recorded at Kon Ka Kinh National Park,
including 235 species recently recorded during our survey in 2018 (Appendix 1). These
species belong to six butterfly families. Nymphalidae is the dominant family during the
observation (Figure 3). Percentage of number of species recorded in each family
included Nymphalidae - 41.8%; Lycaenidae - 21.1%; Hesperiidae - 19.0%; Pieridae 8.4%; Papilionidae - 5.9%; and Riodinidae - 3.8%. Percentage of the butterfly species
will slightly change if we consider the species abundances recorded. The ranking of
butterfly families based on a percentage of species number and their abundance looks
similar to preceding analysis: Nymphalidae, Lycaenidae, Pieridae, Hesperiidae,
Papilionidae, and Riodinidae (Figure 3)

21


60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%
Nymphalidae

Lycaenidae

Hesperiidae
without

within

Pieridae

Papilionidae

Riodinidae

Vietnam

Figure 3: Percentage of butterfly species in each family recorded in Kon Ka Kinh
N.P. (with and without consideration of species abundance) and entirely in
Vietnam
During the transect (see Figure 4), the number of the recorded taxon is highest
in transect 1 (163 species) and lowest in transect 3 (41 species).
Flat valley and riverine forest (transect 1) are characterized by highest species
richness (163 spp.) whereas the lowest species richness was observed at previously
disturbed forest area (41 spp.) (Figure 4). Nymphalidae is the dominant family in all
five transects. The highest percentage of this family occurred in transect 5, with
53.45%

22