Fluturat e Shqipërisë
Butterflies of Albania

Sylvain Cuvelier =
Anila Paparisto =

Last update: 17.iv.2024

9. Butterfly identification

Butterflies are important indicators of a healthy environment and ecosystem. They are flagship species for conservation in general and indicate a wide range of other invertebrates. A correct butterfly identification is important for understanding the distribution of each species, for nature management and for conservation purposes.
Unfortunately, this process can be tricky in a lot of cases. Within the same family, many species show mutual similarities in wing characteristics.
These differences can be subtle and ask for a good examination of the specimen. Some species are not separable on external morphology.
Depending on the characteristics, different research methods will be used.

For species that do not have similar taxa, visual identifcation in the field is sufficient.
Field photography of local species makes sense to collect evidence. In the table below these species are marked with

For similar species, it is recommended to net the butterflies.
In the species monographs, the similar species and their distinguishing characteristics, if there are any, are given.
Comparative figures are available for all the involved species (see: monographs)
An example: Polyommatus.
Different field guides give identification keys and they can be used in the field.
The specific characteristics can easily be investigated by gently taking the butterfly between the thumb and a finger (Fig 1a-c).
It also allows to photograph both sides of the butterfly or a part of an antennal club. After careful examination, the butterfly can be released.

1a. Investigation of the antennal club to distinguish Erebia medusa from Erebia oeme. Erebia medusa. Cerem, Albania. (Photograph: Sylvain Cuvelier )
1b. Investigation of the underside of a Colias specimen (Photograph: Sylvain Cuvelier )

For small specimens a Petri dish or transparant tube can be useful (Fig. 2)

2. Investigation of the underside of a Plebejus in a transparant tube. Albania (Photograph: Ken Bond )

Field photography has become very accessible and is a second option for similar species but only as second choice. It can be difficult to visualize the characteristics you are looking for and in most cases it is only possible to photograph the upper- or the underside.

For the species with subtle and small characteristics, sampling the specimen for further research is the best option.
The voucher specimens also need to be prepared, labeled, databased and stored in a reference collection.
Misja (2005) devoted a chapter to the material and how to collect, process samples and build a reference collection: "1. Pjesa e përgjithshme I.1. Grumbullimi i fluturave, përpunimi dhe formimi i koleksioneve.
A translation of this chapter is available including some additional information (entomological material)
Such a reference collection (public or private) remains the mainstay of entomology because it provides evidence and contains material for optimal control of the identification, dissections and genetic research (if the material is not too old). It can be included in studies concerning population genetics, molecular systematics etc.
Responsible collecting, following ethical guidelines, remains an essential way to make further progress in the scientific knowledge of the butterflies.

Cryptic species, for example the Leptidea triplet (Dincă V. et al., 2011), are not separable based on external morphology. Sampling for analysis is needed.
In many cases, there are subtle differences in the structure of the male and/or female genitalia (Fig. 3). Dissection will allow a correct identification.

Fig. 3. Dissection of ♂ Maniola jurtina during a training on 19.vii.2022 for biology students at the Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Biology, Tiranë (Photograph: AP)

In a limited number of cases, there are only differences in the DNA. In this case, mitochondrial DNA barcoding is needed for a correct identification.

There are now also a few photo recognition apps available based on artificial intelligence. This is still in its infancy and similar species cannot yet be properly identified despite good photos (Mølgaard & Cuvelier, 2021) We currently advise against its use.

Guidelines for identifying the Albanian butterfly species

1. Visual: the butterfly can be dentified with certainty in the field as there are no closely similar species. : photographic evidence is preferred for local species. 2. Net (+) / sampling: for a correct identification, specific characteristics need to be examined. 3. Genitalia: a correct identification based on external characteristics is impossible. The diifferences in genitalia allow a correct identification. 4. Barcoding: only DNA barcoding allows a correct identification. Barcoded Albanian specimen(s) including the link to BOLDSYSTEMS or GENBANK (up to 4) Visual ( photo) Net (+ ) / sampling Genitalia Barcoding ( Albania) Papilionidae Iphiclides podalirius OK Papilio alexanor OK Papilio machaon OK Parnassius apollo OK Driopa mnemosyne OK Allancastria cerisyi OK Zerynthia polyxena OK           Hesperiidae Gegenes nostrodamus Versus G. pumilio Alternative possibility Gegenes pumilio Versus G. nostrodamus Alternative possibility Hesperia comma OK Ochlodes sylvanus OK Thymelicus acteon Net. Versus other Thymelicus Thymelicus lineola Net. Versus other Thymelicus Thymelicus sylvestris Net. Versus other Thymelicus Carterocephalus palaemon OK Heteropterus morpheus OK Carcharodus alceae Net. Versus all Muschampia. Muschampia floccifera Versus M. orientalis Muschampia lavatherae Net. Versus other Muschampia. Muschampia orientalis Versus M. floccifera Erynnis marloyi Net. Versus E. tages Erynnis tages Net. Versus E. marloyi Muschampia alta OK Muschampia tessellum OK Pyrgus alveus both sides. Can still be difficult. Versus other Pyrgus Pyrgus andromedae both sides. Can still be difficult. Versus other Pyrgus Pyrgus armoricanus both sides. Can still be difficult. Versus other Pyrgus Pyrgus carthami both sides. Can still be difficult. Versus other Pyrgus Pyrgus cinarae both sides. Can still be difficult. Versus other Pyrgus Pyrgus malvae both sides. Can still be difficult. Versus other Pyrgus Pyrgus serratulae both sides. Can still be difficult. Versus other Pyrgus Pyrgus sidae Net Spialia orbifer OK Spialia phlomidis Net           Pieridae Colias alfacariensis OK Colias aurorina OK Colias caucasica OK Colias croceus OK Gonepteryx cleopatra ♂ ♀ net or sampling Gonepteryx farinosa ♂ ♀ net or sampling Gonepteryx rhamni ♂ ♀ net or sampling Leptidea duponcheli Net Leptidea juvernica Versus L. sinapis Alternative possibility Leptidea sinapis Versus L. juvernica Alternative possibility Anthocharis cardamines ♂ ♀ net Anthocharis damone ♂ ♀ net Anthocharis gruneri ♂ ♀ net Aporia crataegi OK Euchloe ausonia Net Euchloe penia OK Pieris balcana Net or sampling No use vs. P. napi Pieris brassicae OK Pieris ergane Net. Versus other Pieris Pieris krueperi Net. Versus other Pieris Pieris mannii Net. Versus other Pieris Pieris napi Net. Versus other Pieris No use vs. P. balcana Pieris rapae Net. Versus other Pieris Pontia chloridice Net. Versus E. ausonia Pontia edusa Net           Lycaenidae Lycaena alciphron ♂ ♀ net Lycaena candens ♂ ♀ net Lycaena dispar OK Lycaena ottomanus ♂ ♀ net. Versus L. virgareae Lycaena phlaeas OK Lycaena thersamon ♂ ♀ net Lycaena tityrus OK Lycaena virgaureae ♂ ♀ net. Versus L. ottomanus Agriades dardanus ♂ ♀ net Aricia agestis ♂ ♀ net If doubt with A. artaxerxes Aricia anteros ♂ ♀ net Aricia artaxerxes ♂ ♀ net If doubt with A. agestis Cacyreus marshalli OK Celastrina argiolus OK Cupido alcetas ♂ net - ♀ difficuilt versus C. decolorata No use vs. C. decolorata Cupido argiades Net Cupido decolorata ♂ net - ♀ difficult versus C. alcetas No use vs. C. alcetas Cupido minimus Net. ♀ difficult versus ♀ C. osiris Cupido osiris ♂ Difficult for ♀ versus ♀ C. minimus Cyaniris semiargus Net Eumedonia eumedon Net Glaucopsyche alexis Net Iolana iolas OK Kretania sephirus Net Lampides boeticus OK Leptotes pirithous OK Lysandra bellargus ♂ ♀ net Lysandra coridon ♂ ♀ net Phengaris alcon OK Phengaris arion OK Plebejus argus Net or sampling. Versus other Plebejus If doubt with other Plebejus Plebejus argyrognomon Net or sampling. Versus other Plebejus If doubt with other Plebejus Plebejus idas Net or sampling. Versus other Plebejus If doubt with other Plebejus Polyommatus admetus Net Polyommatus amandus Net Polyommatus damon Net Polyommatus daphnis Net Polyommatus dorylas Net Polyommatus eros Net Polyommatus escheri Net Polyommatus icarus Net Polyommatus (aroaniensis) lurae No major differences Only possibility Polyommatus (aroaniensis) orphicus No major differences Only possibility Polyommatus ripartii No major differences Possibility Polyommatus thersites Net. Versus P. icarus and ♀ forma icarinus Pseudophilotes bavius Net. Versus P. vicrama Pseudophilotes vicrama Net. Versus P. bavius Scolitantides orion OK Uns Net to see underside Tarucus balkanica OK Uns Net to see underside Callophrys rubi OK Favonius quercus OK Satyrium acaciae Net. Versus other Satyrium Satyrium ilicis Net. Versus other Satyrium Satyrium pruni Net. Versus other Satyrium Satyrium spini Net. Vversus other Satyrium Satyrium w-album Net. Versus other Satyrium Thecla betulae OK           Riodinidae Hamearis lucina OK           Nymphalidae Apatura ilia Net. Versus A. metis Apatura iris OK Apatura metis Net. Versus A. ilia Charaxes jasius OK Danaus chrysippus OK Argynnis pandora OK Argynnis paphia OK Boloria dia OK Boloria euphrosyne Net. Versus potential B. selene Boloria graeca Net. Versus B. pales Boloria pales Net. Versus B. graeca Boloria titania OK Brenthis daphne Net. Versus B. ino and B. hecate Brenthis hecate Net. Versus B. daphne and B. ino Brenthis ino Net. Versus B. daphne and B. hecate Fabriciana adippe Net. Versus F. niobe and S. aglaja Fabriciana niobe Net. Versus F. adippe and S. aglaja Issoria lathonia OK Speyeria aglaja Net. Versus F. adippe and F. niobe Libythea celtis OK Limenitis camilla Net. Versus L. reducta Limenitis reducta Net. Versus L. camilla Neptis rivularis OK Neptis sappho OK Agalis io OK Aglais urticae OK Araschnia levana OK Euphydryas aurinia OK Euphydryas maturna OK       Melitaea arduinna Net. Versus M. cinxia and M. phoebe Melitaea athalia Versus M. aurelia /M. diamina Melitaea aurelia Versus M. athalia Melitaea cinxia Net. Versus M. arduinna Melitaea diamina Net. Versus dark M. athalia If doubt versus dark M. athalia Melitaea didyma Net. Versus M. trivia Melitaea ornata Doubts about reliability vs. M. phoebe Melitaea phoebe Doubts about reliability vs. M. ornata Melitaea trivia Net. Versus M. didyma Nymphalis antiopa OK Nymphalis polychloros Net. Versus N. xanthomelas Nymphalis vau-album OK Nymphalis xanthomelas Net. Versus N. polychloros Polygonia c-album Net. Versus P. egea Polygonia egea Net. Versus P. c-album Vanessa atalanta OK Vanessa cardui OK Aphantopus hyperantus OK Arethusana arethusa OK Brintesia circe OK Chazara briseis OK Coenonympha arcania Net. Versus C. orientalis Coenonympha glycerion Net. Versus C. rhodopensis Coenonympha leander Net. Versus C. orientalis Coenonympha orientalis Net. Versus C. arcania and C. glycerion Coenonympha pamphilus Net. Versus other Coenonympha Coenonympha rhodopensis Net. Versus C. glycerion Erebia aethiops Net. Versus E. pronoe and bigger Erebia Erebia alberganus Net. Versus other bigger Erebia Erebia cassioides OK Net. Versus E. ottomana If doubt with E. ottomana Erebia epiphron OK Net if doubt Erebia euryale Net. Versus E. ligea No use vs. E. ligea Erebia gorge Net. Versus E. rhodopensis Erebia ligea Net. Versus E. euryale No use vs. E. euryale Erebia medusa Net. Versus E. oeme If doubt with E. oeme Erebia melas OK Net if doubt Erebia oeme Net. Versus E. medusa If doubt with E. medusa Erebia ottomana Net. Versus E. cassioides If doubt with E. cassioides Erebia pandrose OK Net if doubt Erebia pronoe Net. Versus E. aethiops and bigger Erebia Erebia rhodopensis Net. Versus E. gorge Erebia triarius Net. Versus bigger Erebia Hipparchia fagi Versus H. syriaca No use vs. H. syriaca Hipparchia fatua Net. Versus H. statlinus Hipparchia semele Versus H. senthes & H. volgensis No use vs. H. senthes or H. volgensis Hipparchia senthes Versus H. semele & H. volgensis No use vs. H. semele or H. volgensis Hipparchia statillinus Net. Versus H. fatua Hipparchia syriaca Versus H. fagi No use vs. H. fagi Hipparchia volgensis Versus H. semele & H. senthes No use vs. H. semele or H. senthes Hyponephele lupinus Net. Versus H. lycaon Hyponephele lycaon Net. Versus H. lupinus Kirinia climene Net. ♂ versus ♂ M. jurtina. ♀ versus ♀ K. roxelana Kirinia roxelana Net. Versus K. climene Lasiommata maera Net. Versus L. petropolitana Lasiommata megera OK Lasiommata petropolitana Net. Versus L. maera Maniola jurtina ♂ net. Versus ♂ K. climene Melanargia galathea Net. Versus other Melanargia Melanargia larissa Net. Versus other Melanargia Melanargia russiae Net. Versus other Melanargia Minois dryas Net. Versus S. ferula Pararge aegeria OK Proterebia phegea Net. Versus E. medusa Pseudochazara amalthea OK Pseudochazara amymone Net. Versus P. tisiphone Pseudochazara geyeri OK Pseudochazara tisiphone Net. Versus P. amymone Pyronia cecilia Net. Versus P. tithonus Pyronia tithonus Net. Versus P. cecilia Satyrus ferula Net. Versus M. dryas

Contact