This should be Satyrium ilicis:
![Image](http://upload9.postimage.org/341752/YSATilici_2973.jpg)
These may be anything, but for now they are Polyommatus escheri.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
![Image](http://upload9.postimage.org/341785/YPOLesche_2754.jpg)
![Image](http://upload9.postimage.org/341790/YPOLesche_2755.jpg)
![Image](http://upload9.postimage.org/341797/YPOLesche_2806.jpg)
![Image](http://upload9.postimage.org/341801/YPOLesche_2804.jpg)
The male is from ~1800 m and the female from ~1300 m.
And if those were too easy, the last two will fix that.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Image](http://upload9.postimage.org/341837/YPLEBEJUS_3022.jpg)
![Image](http://upload9.postimage.org/341848/YIMG_2619.jpg)
Again, any help is appreciated!
No surprise there...padfield wrote:OK - here are my best guesses:
1 - ilicis (confident)
Right. I admit I did not work enough with this one. The two pictures are of the same butterfly. I'll have to dig more into books tomorrow.padfield wrote:2 - bellargus (confident)
3 - bellargus again (note that escheri doesn't have a cell spot)
They are the same. Books again.padfield wrote:4 - tough one (female blues usually are!) If it's the same as 5 then I'd tend to plump for thersites for them both. If not, then I'd probably admit defeat.
5 - as 4
Wow! I have to get better acquinted with this part of the Genus - we only have P. idas and P. argus.padfield wrote:6 - argus (pretty much a definite)
To me it looks something between those as well. Unfortunately I don't have any picture of the underside of this one. I really have no opinion as the only one I've seen more than fleetingly is M. athalia.padfield wrote:7 - diamina (wheeleri? - but it doesn't have the dumbell mark Tolman describes). If not one of those unheavily marked diamina forms, then I'd have to go for athalia - but the forewing doesn't look right for this.
Oh well. It's really too late to check them today...padfield wrote:I'll do some more thinking when I see what you think of these ideas...
I agree.padfield wrote: 2 - bellargus (confident)
3 - bellargus
Well, thersites or even golgus, but it does have very little orange and the underside is surprisingly light. On the other hand, I don't have a better candidate either.padfield wrote:4 - tough one (female blues usually are!) If it's the same as 5 then I'd tend to plump for thersites for them both.
I quess the black border is wide enough for that.padfield wrote:6 - argus (pretty much a definite)
I don't like diamina - it just doesn't look like it - but one of Lewington's athalias is pretty close. The britomartis fits as well, though it would be quite a find there.padfield wrote:7 - diamina (wheeleri? - but it doesn't have the dumbell mark Tolman describes). If not one of those unheavily marked diamina forms, then I'd have to go for athalia - but the forewing doesn't look right for this.
Got it! These are a bit overwhelming after being used to exactly three possibilities...padfield wrote:I would rule out golgus, incidentally, for your female blue, because the underside is clearly not Plebicula (the white submarginal area on the forewing is obvious in Plebicula species).
No idea. I have some pictures of the location and they do not show it. That doesn't mean it is not there, though. I guess I'll put it up as thersites with a disclaimer.padfield wrote:It is true that thersites females usually have some blue on, but this is more true for the first generation. Did you notice the flowers? Thersites is always found in close proximity to sainfoin - I have never known an exception to this rule.
I see what you mean. That seems to be one place that is lost in set specimen - at least the two on my pages are not that clear. On the other hand, the living specimen is most clear.padfield wrote:Border width can be dodgy with idas/argus. I have a theory which seems to hold in the vast, vast majority of cases, but hasn't yet been patented.