









































Pa
ge

 
1



Pa
ge

 
1

American Journal of  
Life Science and Innovation (AJLSI)

Diversity and Relative Abundance of  Entomofauna of  Four Ecologically 
Different Areas of  Chittagong University Campus, Bangladesh

Md. Ikram Ansar Tuhin1, Munira Nasiruddin1, Zannatul Nayem1*

Volume 2 Issue 2, Year 2023
ISSN: 2833-1397 (Online)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajlsi.v2i2.1380
https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Article Information ABSTRACT

Received: March 11, 2023

Accepted: May 02, 2023

Published: May 04, 2023

The present study was conducted to find the relative abundance and diversity of  insects in 
the four areas of  the Chittagong University (CU) campus from January 2018 to December 
2018. The entire study found six orders - Odonata, Orthoptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, 
Diptera, and Hymenoptera. Three families under Odonata, two under Orthoptera, four 
under Coleoptera, five under Lepidoptera, five under Diptera, and three under Hymenoptera 
were collected from the four study spots. Among them, fifteen species of  Odonata, seven 
species of  Orthoptera, seven species of  Coleoptera, thirty-five species of  Lepidoptera, five 
species of  Diptera, and four species of  Hymenopteran were identified. The highest number 
of  insects (478) were collected in January 2018, whereas the lowest number of  insects (404) 
were collected in August 2018. The highest abundance (1598) of  insects was found in spot 
1 (ground area) and the lowest (990) in spot 2 (hilly area). Lepidoptera (2688) was the most 
dominant order in the four studied spots, followed by Odonata (1453), Orthoptera (505), 
Coleoptera (223), Diptera (202), and Hymenoptera (186). During the study period, the 
highest species richness was observed in Spot 3 (2.61 ± 0.01) and lowest in Spot 2 (2.03 ± 
0.008); the highest species diversity was observed in Spot 1 (1.36 ± 0.02) and lowest in Spot 
2 (1.09 ± 0.01); and the highest species evenness was observed in Spot 1 (0.53 ± 0.006) and 
lowest in Spot 2 (0.47 ± 0.006). Compared with the previous study, it can be concluded 
that the species diversity and abundance of  Odonata, Orthoptera, and Lepidoptera were 
increased, whereas the diversity and abundance of  Coleoptera and Hymenoptera were 
decreased. The abundance and diversity of  insects depended on seasonal fluctuation and 
ecological and environmental conditions.

Keywords

Entomofauna, Ecological 
Area, Insect Diversity, Insect 
Abundance, Diversity Indices

INTRODUCTION
Insects have been an immensely successful animal 
group, with possibly 2-10 million species on earth today. 
Although evidence suggests that many insects died out 
at the end of  the Cretaceous, most have survived many 
geological events over the last few millions of  years. This 
is now changing, with the human impact estimated to 
threaten the survival of  a quarter of  all insect species. In 
the agricultural ecosystem, biodiversity is important for 
food production and other ecological services, including 
the recycling of  nutrients, regulation of  microclimate and 
local hydrological processes, suppression of  undesirable 
organisms, and detoxification of  harmful chemicals. So, 
the task is now urgent to conserve this immense variety 
of  life which is so vital to many ecosystem functions. 
Threats are many and varied, with habitat destruction 
the worst threat, especially in the tropics where most 
insect diversity lives. Other threats include invasive alien 
organisms, certain biological control practices, the use of  
pathogens, genetically modified crops, and global climate 
change. Chittagong University (CU) Campus is enriched 
with diverse insect fauna. The present investigation 
was undertaken to study the abundance and diversity 
of  insects in four ecologically different sites of  the CU 
Campus, which were also widely separated by distance. 
The insects included in the study belonged to the orders- 
Odonata, Orthoptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera 
and Hymenoptera. Several works on insect diversity and 
abundance abroad and in our country. Amin et al. (2018) 

research on the functional and group abundance of  
insects on Eggplant. In total 488 insects were collected 
from the eggplant field, which belonged to 20 species 
in 21 families and 10 orders. The abundance, richness 
and diversity of  pest, predator, pollinator and other 
categories of  insects differed significantly and the pest 
revealed the highest abundance and richness compared 
to others. Rahman et al. (2017) studied the abundance and 
diversity of  beneficial insect and spider species in the rice 
ecosystem in the Sylhet region. Many beneficial insect 
and spider species were found abundant at all growing 
stages in both rice fields. Siregar et al. (2016) studied the 
diversity and abundance of  insect pollinators in three 
different agricultural land uses, i.e., oil palm plantation, 
rubber plantation, and jungle-rubber in Jambi, Sumatera. 
A total of  497 individuals of  insect pollinators were 
collected by them which belonged to 43 species in three 
orders (Hymenoptera, Diptera, and Lepidoptera). Siddiki 
(2015) studied the insect diversity and composition 
during the wet and dry seasons in three forest types of  
Johor, Malaysia. They focused on ten common insect 
orders. A total of  929 insects were found in the study 
of  Balakrishnan et al. (2014) on diversity of  some insect 
fauna in different coastal habitats of  Tamil Nadu, 
southeast coast of  India. Zou (2014) focused on two 
distinct taxa: ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and 
geometrid moths (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) to study 
the diversity patterns along environmental gradients in 
the temperate forests of  Northern China. Hong et al. 

1 Department of  Zoology, University of  Chittagong , Bangladesh
* Corresponding author’s e-mail: zannatul.nayem29@gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.54536/ajlsi.v2i2.1380
https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
2

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

(2012) worked on insect diversity of  Mt. Oseosan where 
a total 446 species of  108 families belonging to 11 orders 
were identified. Park et al. (2012) surveyed insect diversity 
of  Yeonpyeong-do Island in Korea and the total of  209 
species of  65 families under 10 orders were identified. 

Aim and Objectives
1. To study the morphological and structural 

characteristics of  Insect species from the four selected 
sampling sites in CU Campus. 

2. To investigate the abundance of  identified species of  
the selected sampling sites during one year study period.

3. To investigate the variation in abundance among the 
species of  the four selected Spots.

4. To investigate the Shanon-Weiner diversity of  the 
orders in the sampling sites.

5. To investigate community dominance of  the 
identified species in the sampling sites.

6. To know and use fundamental concepts and 
information in areas of  abundance and diversity of  Insects.

METHODOLOGY
The present study was conducted in the CU campus, 
which is situated in close proximity of  Sitakunda hill 
forest. The area lies between about 22o27’30’’ and 
22o29’0’’ North latitudes and 91o46’30’’ and 91o47’45’’ 
East longitudes. The campus is dominated by hills, valleys, 
creeks and streams, lakes, crop fields, and grass and fallow 
lands. This is the junction of  hills and plains adorned with 
hilly streams. These features constitute a suitable habitat 
for insect diversity. Approximately 72% of  the total land is 
constituted by hillocks, which are 15-90 m high. The rest 
of  the land is valley and/or plain. 
The campus consists of  many secondary forests with 
woody trees, flowering plants, fruit plants, medicinal plants, 
herbs, and shrubs. The campus area has received great 
attention in various aspects of  biodiversity and species 
richness, particularly for insects, birds, and wild mammals. 
During the study period, samplings were done for one 
year, from January-2018 to December-2018. A collection 
of  data was done once in a month from four ecologically 
different areas in the four-terminal area (North, East, 
South and West) of  CU Campus (spot-1: Garden Area, 
spot-2: Hilly Forest area, spot-3: Botanical Garden with 
Hilly Stream, spot-4: Pond area with agricultural crop 
field). Figure-1 shows the four studied spot in a map. Spot-
1 was located at the northern side of  the campus. There 
was beautiful flower garden in front of  the agricultural 
field which consisted of  many flowering plants like- Golap 
(Rosa sinensis), Gada (Tagetes erecta), Togor (Tabernaemontena 
divaricata), Hasna-hena (Cestrum nacturnum), Kamini 
(Murraya paniculata), Belly (Jesminus sambac), herbs, shrubs, 
and few tall trees such as- Mahagoni (Sweitenia mahagoni), 
Teak (Tectona grandis), Neem (Azadirachta indica), Jarul 
(Lagerstroemia speciosa), Krishnochura (Delonix regia), etc. 
Plenty of  small plants were available, especially Mikania 
micrantha, Asparagus racemosus, and so on. Some wild 
flowering plants, including Lantana camara and Ficus 

benghalensis were also found in this semi-hilly area. Spot-
2 was the hilly forest area on the campus’s eastern side. 
There was a dense growth of  bush, tall and short trees, 
herbs, shrubs, and also wild flowering trees. Many kinds 
of  valuable trees such as- Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus citriodora), 
Jarul (Lagerstroemia speciosa), Bamboo (Bambusa sp.), Cycas 
(Cycas pectinata), Hortoki (Terminalia chebula), Polash (Butea 
monosperma), Nagessor (Mesua nagassarium), Teak (Tectona 
grandis), Debdaru (Polytthia longifolia), Krishnochura 
(Delonix regia), Garjon (Dipterocarpus turbinatus), Akashmoni 
(Accacia racemosus) were seen throughout the entire 
area. Wildflowers and grassland were also found in this 
hilly forest area. Spot-3 was an ideal botanical garden 
established on the southern side beside a hilly stream with 
more than 10,000 plants of  about 400 species comprising 
over 150 families of  both exotic and indigenous species 
of  timber, medicinal, fruits, spices, beverage, latex, 
orchids, novelty etc. have been preserved or are growing 
naturally and used as experimental materials. Many kinds 
of  flower plants such as- Joba (Hibiscus rosa-sinensis), 
Chondromollika (Chrysanthemum coronarium), Golap (Rosa 
sinensis), Gada (Tagetes erecta), Togor (Tabernaemontena 
divaricata), Hasna-hena (Cestrum nacturnum), Rongon (Ixora 
coccinea), Bakul (Mimusops elengi), Gondhoraj (Gardenia 
jasuninoides), Kamini (Murraya paniculata), Dahlia (Dahlia), 
Belly (Jesminus sambac), Rojonigondha (Polianthes tuberose) 
etc. were planted in the garden which increased the 
beauty of  the garden. Spot-4 was situated at the western 
and south-western parts of  the campus area. The Spot 
was occupied by wetland and crop fields. The rice crop 
fields were occupied with seasonal rice (Oryza sativa) 
plants i.e., Aus, Aman and Boro in the three stages i.e., 
nursery, transplanting and ripening. In this area, rice was 
extensively cultivated throughout the year.
Insects were collected once in a month from each 
sampling location mainly in the morning for one hour. 
Sweeping process in each collection accomplished the 
collection of  samples. Insect sweeping net was used for 
this purpose. Hand-picking collection was also followed 
for the small insects occupied in the leaf, grass as well as 
in the soil. 
The captured insects were chloroformed, killed, sorted, 
stretched, mounted, labeled, and preserved following 
general entomological procedures (Borror et al. 1989). A 
total of  5257 insect specimens were collected during the 
study period.
The insects were identified with the help of  taxonomic 
keys and characters. Firstly, specimens were identified up 
to family level. Then each specimen was examined up to 
genus and species level by comparison with previously 
identified specimens preserved at the Department of  
Zoology, University of  Chittagong. The collected insect 
specimens were classified up to family following Borror 
et al. (1989), Richards and Davies (1977), and then up to 
generic level. Identification was made following Bingham 
(1908) and Talbot (1975) for lepidopterans, Kirby (1914) 
for orthopterans and hymenopterans, Maulik (1919) for 
coleopterans, Fraser (1936) for odonates, Van Emden 

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
3

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

(1965) for dipterans, Richards and Davies (1977) for 
butterflies, dragonflies, damselflies and beetles and 
Burton (1974). Help from internet sources was also taken 
for identification.

Figure 2: The workflow 

Figure 1: Map of  the Study Area showing the Study Spots

Shannon-Weiner Species Diversity Indices and 
Community Dominance were calculated to know the 
abundance and diversity status of  the insect fauna of  the 
CU campus area.

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
4

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The present study deals with the faunistic study of  
the insect community in CU campus. The study of  
the abundance and diversity of  insects helps to gather 
information on the statistics of  entomofauna. Sánchez-
Bayo, F. and Wyckhuys, K. A. G. (2019) studied the 
entomofauna and found that over 40% of  insect species 
were threatened with extinction. Their findings showed 
that habitat loss by conversion to intensive agriculture 
was the main driver of  the decline, while agrochemical 
pollutants, invasive species and climate change were the 
additional causes.

A total of  5257 insect specimens were collected during 
the study period. The collected specimens were primarily 
sorted into 6 orders. Then they were identified into several 
different families within these orders. The orders are- 
Odonata, Orthoptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera 
and Hymenoptera. 3 families under order Odonata, 
2 families under order Orthoptera, 4 families under 
order Coleoptera, 5 families under order Lepidoptera, 5 
families under order Diptera and 3 families under order 
Hymenoptera were identified. For each order, families, 
genus and species a diagnosis is given. The collection 
included 73 species which are listed below:

Table 1: List of  the insects collected during the study period
    Order         Family Scientific name             Common name
Odonata Libellulidae Orthetrum sabina (Drury, 1770) Green Marsh Hawk

Orthetrum pruinosum (Burmeister, 1839) Crimson-tailed Marsh Hawk
Neurothemis tullia (Drury, 1773) Pied Paddy Skimmer
Neurothemis fulvia (Drury, 1773) Fulvous Forest Skimmer
Rhyothemis variegata (Linnaeus, 1763) Common Picturewing
Rhodothemis rufa (Rambur, 1842) Rufous Marsh Glider
Brachydiplax chalybea (Brauer, 1868) Rufous-Backed Marsh Hawk
Crocothemis servilia (Drury, 1770) Scarlet Skimmer
Brachythemis contaminata (Fabricius, 1793) Ditch Jewel

Coenagrionidae Ceriagrion coromandelianum (Farbicius, 1798) Coromandel Marsh Dart
Mortonagrion aborense (Laidlaw, 1914) N/A
Agriocnemis lacteola (Selys, 1877) Milky Dartlet

Platycnemididae Onychargia atrocyana (Selys, 1865) Black Marsh Dart
Copera marginipes (Rambur, 1842) Yellow Bush Dart
Copera vittata (Selys, 1863) Blue bush Dart

Orthoptera Acrididae Dissosteira carolina (Linnaeus, 1758) Road-duster
Oxya velox (Fabricius, 1787) Paddy Field Grasshopper
Oxya chinensis (Thunberg, 1825) Short Horned Grasshopper
Oxya hyla hyla (Serville, 1831) Rice Grasshopper
Paratettix sp. (Bolivar, 1887) Creek Pygmy Grasshopper
Atractomorpha sp. (Saussure, 1862) Vegetable Grasshopper

Gryllidae Gryllus pennsylvanicus (Burmeister, 1838) Field Cricket
Coleoptera Chrysomelidae Aulacophora frontalis (Baly, 1888) Pumpkin Beetle

Aulacophora indica (Gmelin, 1790) Orange Pumpkin Beetle
Aspidomorpha sanctaecrucis (Fabricius, 1792) Golden Tortoise Beetle
Aspidomorpha miliaris (Fabricius, 1775) Green Tortoise Beetle

Coccinellidae Menochilus sexmaculatus (Fabricius, 1781) Lady Bird Beetle
Carabidae Harpalus distinguendus (Duftschmid, 1812) Ground Beetle
Tenebrionidae Eleodes hispilabris (Say,1824) Darkling Beetle

Lepidoptera Papilionidae Papilio helenus (Linnaeus, 1758) Red Helen
Papilio polytes (Cramer, 1775) Common Mormon
Papilio demoleus (Linnaeus, 1758) Lemon Butterfly
Papilio clytia (Linnaeus, 1758) Common Mime
Graphium agamemnon (Linnaeus, 1758) Green-Spotted triangle

Pieridae Leptosia nina (Fabricius, 1781) Psyche
Eurema hecabe (Linnaeus, 1758) Common Grass Yellow

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
5

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

Catopsilia pomona (Fabricius, 1775) Lemon Emigrant
Pieris canidia (Evans,1912) Indian Cabbage White
Delias hyparete (Wallace, 1867) Painted Jezebel
Cepora nerissa (Fabricius, 1775) Common Gull
Appias libythea (Swinhoe,1890) Striped Albatross

Nymphalidae Athyma inara (Westwood, 1850) Himalayan Colour Sergeant
Junonia lemonias (Linnaeus, 1758) Lemon Pansy
Junonia almana (Linnaeus, 1758) Peacock Pansy
Junonia atlites (Linnaeus, 1763) Grey Pansy
Junonia hierta (Fabricius, 1798) Yellow Pansy
Junonia iphita (Cramer, 1779) Chocolate Pansy
Ypthima baldus (Fabricius, 1775) Common Five-ring
Lebadea martha (Fabricius, 1787) Knight
Mycalesis perseus (Fabricius, 1798) Common Bushbrown
Polyura athamas (Drury, 1770) Common Nawab
Hypolimnas bolina jacintha (Drury, 1773) Orienta Great Eggfly
Neptis hylas (Moore, 1872) Common Sailor
Phalanta phalantha (Drury, 1770) Common Leopard
Hypolimnas bolina bolina (Linnaeus, 1758) Sunda Great Eggfly
Parantica melaneus (Cramer, 1775) Chocolate Tiger
Euploea core (Cramer, 1780) Common Crow
Elymnias sp. (Hubner, 1818) Palmfly

Lycaenidae Neozephyrus quercus (Linnaeus, 1758) Purple Hairstreak
Castalius rosimon (Fabricius, 1775) Common Pierrot
Spindasis sp. (Tytler, 1915) Rufous Silverine

Hesperiidae Notocrypta paralysos (Fruhstorfer, 1911) Banded Demon
Baoris farri (Moore, 1878) Paintbrush Swift
Telicota bambusae (Moore, 1878) Dark Palm Dart

Diptera Sarcophagidae Saracophaga sp. (Meigen, 1826) True Fly
Muscidae Musca domestica (Linnaeus, 1758) House Fly
Drosophillidae Drosophila melanogaster (Meigen, 1830) Common Fruit Fly
Tabanidae Tabanus sp. (Linnaeus, 1758) Horse Fly
Calliphoridae Calliphora vicina (Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830) Blue Bottle Blowfly

Hymenoptera Sphecidae Sphex lobatus (Fabricius, 1775) Digger Wasp
Sceliphron violaceum (Fabricius, 1775) Fassorial Wasp

Apidae Xylocopa latipes (Drury, 1773) Tropical Carpenter Bee
Vespidae Polistes sp. (Latreille, 1802) Paper Nest Wasp

During the collection period, a total of  5257 insects were 
collected (Table-2). January and April were the most 
dominant months. In January and April, 478 (9.10%) and 
465 (8.85%) insects were collected where Lepidoptera, 
Odonata and Orthoptera insects were mostly available. 
In February, March, July, November and December, 452 
(8.60%), 454 (8.64%), 418 (7.95%), 430 (8.18%) and 416 
(7.91%) the abundance was medium. In the month of  
August 404 (7.68%), September 412 (7.84%) and October 
407 (7.74%) the abundance of  the insects was lower. 

From 12 months observation (Table-3) the highest 
abundance of  insects was found in Spot 1, medium 
abundance of  insects was found at Spot 2 and Spot 4 and 
lowest abundance of  insects was found in Spot 3.
From this study it is seen that the maximum numbers 
of  insects were collected in the months of  January (478), 
April (465) and May (462) when the temperature and 
weather condition was suitable and minimum number 
were collected in the months of  August (404), October 
(407) and September (412) due to monsoon season.

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
6

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

Table 2: Number of  insects collected per order and month wise % composition of  the collected insect orders during 
the study period. 
Order

Ja
n

20
18

Fe
b

20
18

Mar
2018

Apr
2018

May
2018

Jun
2018

 Jul
2018

Aug
2018

Sep
2018

Oct
2018

Nov
2018

Dec
2018

Total

   
  %

(m
on

th
)

Odonata  123  117  118  117  121  120  124  119  123  122  121  128

1453

  27.64
O

rt
ho

pt
er

a   56   43   35   44   45   46   39   36   39   42   45   35 505    9.61

C
ol

eo
pt

er
a   27   21   17   20   20   13   16   17   18   17   20   17 223    4.24

Le
pi

do
pt

er
a  244  244  251  244  244  251  207  202  203  193  205  200

26
88

  5
1.

13

Diptera   16   13   15   23   17   17   12   14   16   14   25   20  
202

   3.84

H
ym

en
op

te
ra   12   14   18   17   15   12   20   16   13   19   14   16 186    3.54

Total  478  452  454  465  462  459  418  404  412  407  430  416
% (Order) 9.10 8.60 8.64 8.85 8.79 8.73 7.95 7.68 7.84 7.74 8.18 7.91

Table-3 shows the order wise distribution of  the collected 
insects in the four study Spots during the study period. 
Butterflies (Lepidoptera) were the most abundant group 
in Spot 4 (834), Spot 1 (762), Spot 2 (655) and Spot 3 (437).  
The lowest insect abundance order was Hymenoptera 
which was found very few in number in different study 
Spots, such as 62 from Spot 4, 45 from Spot 2, 43 from 
Spot 3 and 36 from Spot 1 respectively. 
Amongst the orders, a total of  2688 lepidopterans, 
1453 odonates, 505 orthopteran, 223 coleopterans, 202 
dipterans, 186 hymenopterans were collected during the 
study period. Of  the total collected insects, maximum 

numbers of  insects were collected from Spot-1 and 
minimum numbers from Spot-3. Spot-1 had more insect 
species than were found at other sites. These differences 
could be the result of  habitat and microhabitat differences 
among the sites. This Spot consisted of  several flower 
gardens, grassland and was also rich in small to big sized 
plants which were the natural breeding ground and food 
source of  butterflies, bees, wasps and beetles which may 
explain the highest total number of  species captured at 
this site. From the study, it was seen that lepidopteran, 
odonate, orthopteran and coleopteran species were 
most abundant in Spot-1. Thus, the large number of  

Table 3: Showing number of  insects collected per order from the four Spots and % composition of  the collected 
insects during the study period.  
Order       Spot 1       Spot 2       Spot 3       Spot 4        Total     %(Spot)
Odonata         431         313         322         387         1453        27.64
Orthoptera         163          89          98         155          505         9.61
Coleoptera         134           0          49          40          223         4.24
Lepidoptera         762         655         437         834         2688        51.13
Diptera          72          39          41          50          202         3.84
Hymenoptera          36          45          43          62          186         3.54
Total        1598        1141         990        1528         5257
% (Order)        30.40       21.70       18.83        29.07

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
7

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

Figure 1: Percentage of  the total insect found in each 
four Spots

lepidopteran and odonate insects was collected from 
Spot-4 which was rich in grass areas. Orthopteran and 
hymenopteran insects were mostly collected from Spot-2 
because of  forest hilly areas. The large sized butterflies 
and other large sized insects were the inhabitants of  
forest and hilly areas and medium to small sized insects 
were the inhabitants of  plain land and flower garden. The 
most significant characters were that the abundance of  
hymenopteran species very low in all Spots and also in 
the study months. 
Lepidopteran species were the most abundant insect order 
in almost all the months except July, August, September, 
October, November and December. Hymenoptera is the 
lowest abundant insect order which was found in very 
low number except the month of  March, April, July, and 
October. Except Hymenoptera, insects of  all orders were 
found more or less in almost all the months. James (2011) 
while studying the diversity and abundance of  insect 
fauna in Rajshahi University Campus illustrated that the 
highest number of  insects was found in November 2008 
followed by February 2009 and the lowest population of  
insects was found in January 2009. 
Table – 4 showed the community dominance value 
with the dominant species found in each month in the 
studying spots.The community dominance value was 
8.8% in the Spot-1 in October, which was recorded as 
the highest value of  the year. Dissosteira Carolina and 
Ceriagrion coromandelianum were found in October. The 
second dominant species Ceriagrion coromandelianum was 
used to calculate the community dominance value in the 
month October. In July, the most dominating insects 
were Crocothemis servilia and Aulacophora indica in the 
Spot-1 and the community dominance value was 5.83%, 
which was the lowest value in the Spot-1. The lowest 
value of  community dominance indicated the diversity 
of  species in the respective month. In Spot-1, the most 
dominating species were Oxya hyla hyla, Crocothemis servilia 
and Brachythemis contaminate. The second most dominating 
species was the Copera spp. 
In Spot-2, Leptosia nina and Papilio clytia were found in the 
month of  August and the dominance value was 10.11%. 
The community dominance was low i.e., 8.41% in 
November. The most dominating insects were Hypolimnas 
bolina jacinth and Junonia iphita So, the most diversified 

month was November in Spot-2. In Spot-2, the most 
dominating species were Athyma inara, Pieris canidia and 
Junonia atlites. The second most dominating species were 
Junonia spp. and Papilio spp.
In Spot-3, Oxya hyla hyla and Brachydiplax chalybea were 
found in the month of  August and the dominance value 
was 12.79%. The community dominance was low i.e., 
8.05% in January. The most dominating insect were Copera 
marginipes and Orthetrum pruinosum. So, the most diversified 
month was January in Spot-3. In Spot-3, the most 
dominating species was Mortonagrion aborense. The second 
most dominating species were Copera marginipes, Rhyothemis 
variegate, Copera vittata and Brachythemis contaminate.
In Spot-4, Oxya velox and Mortonagrion aborense were found 
in the month of  January and the dominance value was 
8.61%. The community dominance was low i.e., 7.53% 
in June. The most dominating insects were Catopsilia 
Pomona and Junonia almana. So, the most diversified month 
was January in Spot-4. In Spot-4, the most dominating 
species was Ceriagrion coromandelianum. The second 
most dominating species were Brachydiplax chalybea and 
Orthetrum sabina.
Species richness varied from month to month. But 
throughout the year the species richness was highest 
in the Spot 3 and lowest in the Spot-2 (Table-5). The 
highest species richness value was 2.66 found in Spot 
3 in November and lowest value was 1.97 which was 
also found in November in Spot 2. The average highest 
species richness value was observed in the months of  
September and October (2.38 ± 0.14) and lowest value 
in January (2.31±0.13) and April (2.31 ± 0.11) during the 
study period. Species richness value (average) fluctuated 
between 2.32 (±0.13) to 2.37 (±0.15) in the rest of  the 
months (According to Table-5). 
Species diversity (H′) values in the twelve months 
study period in the four study areas was also given in 
Table-5. The species diversity value was lowest in Spot 
2 throughout the year. The species diversity value was 
highest in the Spot 1 in the month of  January, February, 
March, June, July, September, November and December 
and in the Spot 3 in the rest of  the months. The highest 
species diversity was 1.45 in January which was found in 
Spot 1 and in August which was found in Spot 3. On 
the other hand, the lowest species diversity was 1.01 in 
March. The average highest species diversity value was 
observed in the month of  October (1.31 ± 0.09) and the 
lowest value in the month of  June (1.20 ± 0.05) during 
the entire study period. Species diversity value (average) 
fluctuated between 1.21 (±0.08) to 1.29 (±0.13) in the rest 
of  the months (According to Table-5).
Species evenness values varied from month to month 
during the entire study period in the four study areas. The 
highest species evenness value was found in Spot 1 in 
the months of  January, February, March, June, September 
and December. The value was highest in July in spot 1 and 
4 and in November in spot 1 and 3. The value was highest 
in the remaining months in spot 3. The lowest species 
evenness value was in spot 4 in the months of  February 

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
8

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

Table 4: Monthly % Community Dominance (DC) of  entomofauna of  four ecologically different areas in CU 
Campus collected from January 2018 to December 2018.
Spot-1
Month Most dominating species  DC (%)
Jan Oxya hyla hyla, Rhodothemis rufa 7.33
Feb Agriocnemis lacteola, Onychargia atrocyana 6.43
Mar Copera marginipes, Rhyothemis variegata 6.57
Apr Brachythemis contaminate, Ceriagrion coromandelianum 6.43
May Oxya velox, Brachydiplax chalybea 6.43
Jun Crocothemis servilia, Copera vittata 6.57
Jul Crocothemis servilia, Aulacophora indica 5.83
Aug Copera marginipes, Agriocnemis lacteola 7.44
Sep Brachythemis contaminate, Menochilus sexmaculatus 7.03
Oct Dissosteira Carolina, Ceriagrion coromandelianum 8.8
Nov Onychargia atrocyana, Oxya hyla hyla 6.77
Dec Orthetrum Sabina, Menochilus sexmaculatus 7.09
Spot-2
Month Most dominating species DC (%)
Jan Athyma inara, Junonia atlites 10
Feb Pieris canidia, Junonia lemonias 9.47
Mar Pieris canidia, Cepora nerissa 9.47
Apr Catopsilia Pomona, Graphium agamemnon 9.89
May Junonia almanac, Mycalesis perseus 9.38
Jun Athyma inara, Hypolimnas bolina jacintha 9.38
Jul Junonia almanac, Junonia atlites 9.18
Aug Leptosia nina, Papilio clytia 10.11
Sep Catopsilia Pomona, Papilio helenus 9.57
Oct Graphium Agamemnon, Papilio demoleus 10
Nov Hypolimnas bolina jacintha, Junonia iphita 8.41
Dec Leptosia nina, Parantica melaneus 9
Spot-3
Month Most dominating species DC (%)
Jan Copera marginipes, Orthetrum pruinosum 8.05
Feb Rhyothemis variegate, Crocothemis servilia 8.64
Mar Brachythemis contaminate, Mortonagrion aborense 8.43
Apr Tabanus sp., Oxya velox 10.11
May Rhodothemis rufa, Ceriagrion coromandelianum 8.14
Jun Neurothemis fulvia, Copera marginipes 8.75
Jul Ceriagrion coromandelianum, Copera marginipes 10.47
Aug Oxya hyla hyla, Brachydiplax chalybea 12.79
Sep Copera vittata, Mortonagrion aborense 11.54
Oct Onychargia atrocyana Oxya velox 11.69
Nov Rhyothemis variegate, Mortonagrion aborense 11.84
Dec Brachythemis contaminate, Copera vittata 11.11
Spot-4
Month Most dominating species DC (%)
Jan Oxya velox, Mortonagrion aborense 8.61
Feb Onychargia atrocyana, Ceriagrion coromandelianum 8.09

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
9

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

Mar Rhyothemis variegate, Rhodothemis rufa 7.91
Apr Ceriagrion coromandelianum, Copera vittata 7.59
May Brachydiplax chalybea, Crocothemis servilia 7.86
Jun Catopsilia Pomona, Junonia almana 7.53
Jul Eurema hecabe, Paratettix sp. 7.89
Aug Papilio clytia, Ceriagrion coromandelianum 8.33
Sep Oxya velox, Brachydiplax chalybea 8.04
Oct Papilio demoleus, Brachythemis contaminata 7.83
Nov Orthetrum Sabina, Copera marginipes 7.89
Dec Graphium Agamemnon, Orthetrum sabina 8.33

and May while it is lowest in spot 3 in December. The 
value was lowest in both spot 3 and 4 in June and spot 2 
and 4 in May. The lowest value was found in spot 2 for 
the rest of  the month. The highest value was 0.56 and the 
lowest value was 0.43, found in spot 2 in March.
The average highest species evenness value was observed 
in October (0.52 ± 0.02) and the lowest value in the 
month of  March (0.48 ± 0.03) during the entire study 
period. Species evenness value (average) fluctuated 
between 0.49 (±0.03) to 0.51 (±0.04) in the rest of-the 
months (According to Table-5). 
From Figure-2, it has been seen that Spot 3 had more 
species richness (2.61 ± 0.01) with low insect abundance 
(990) whereas spot 2 was less species rich (2.03 ± 0.008) 
with moderate Insect abundance (1141). Spot 1 was most 
diversified (1.36 ± 0.02) with high insect abundance 
(1598, 30.40%). On the contrary, spot 2 showed low 

species diversity (1.09 ± 0.01) with comparatively low 
insect abundance (1141, 21.70%). Though the present 
study showed that the collected specimens were poorly 
distributed in all spots, the highest species evenness was 
found in the Spot 1 (0.53 ± 0.006) with highest insect 
abundance (1598, 30.40%). Species evenness was low in the 
Spot 2 (0.47 ± 0.006) with low abundance (1141, 2170%). 
The environmental factor (both biotic and abiotic) like 
temperature, rainfall, humidity, vegetations and food 
sources directly affect the diversity and distribution of  
insect populations, which was also supported by Morais et 
al. (1999), Kittleson (2004), Bispo and Olivera (2007) and 
Goldsmith (2007). The influence of  humidity on density 
and diversity in the environment is likely to be an indirect 
effect operating via effects on availability. The differences 
could be the result of  habitat and microhabitat differences 
among the sites. 

Table 5: Average (±SE) Monthly fluctuation in Species richness (SR), Species diversity (H′), and Species evenness 
(E/J′) of  the collected insects in four study Spots.
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Average

Sp
ec

ie
s r

ic
hn

es
s (

SR
) Spot 1 2.30 2.33 2.34 2.33 2.33 2.34 2.40 2.40 2.37 2.38 2.35 2.38 2.35±0.009

Spot 2 2.05 2.02 2.02 2.04 2.02 2.02 2.01 2.05 2.06 2.05 1.97 2.00 2.03±0.008
Spot 3 2.58 2.61 2.60 2.56 2.58 2.63 2.58 2.58 2.64 2.65 2.66 2.62 2.61±0.01
Spot 4 2.29 2.34 2.33 2.31 2.32 2.31 2.43 2.46 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.46 2.38±0.02

Av
er

ag
e

2.
31

±
0.

13
2.

33
±

0.
14

2.
32

±
0.

14

2.
31

±
0.

11
2.

32
±

0.
13

2.
33

±
0.

14
2.

36
±

0.
14

2.
37

±
0.

15
2.

38
±

0.
14

2.
38

±
0.

14

2.
35

±
0.

17

2.
37

±
0.

15

Sp
ec

ie
s

di
ve

rs
ity

 (H
′)

Spot 1 1.45 1.37 1.35 1.34 1.38 1.29 1.32 1.28 1.36 1.36 1.44 1.38 1.36±0.02
Spot 2 1.05 1.07 1.01 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.10 1.08 1.11 1.14 1.06 1.17 1.09±0.01
Spot 3 1.30 1.30 1.27 1.42 1.42 1.18 1.25 1.45 1.29 1.43 1.44 1.22 1.33±0.03
Spot 4 1.22 1.17 1.19 1.30 1.23 1.19 1.30 1.22 1.28 1.31 1.22 1.23 1.24±0.01

Av
er

ag
e

1.
26

±
0.

09
1.

23
±

0.
07

1.
21

±
0.

08

1.
28

±
0.

11
1.

28
±

0.
11

1.
20

±
0.

05
1.

25
±

0.
07

1.
26

±
0.

10
1.

26
±

0.
05

1.
31

±
0.

09

1.
29

±
0.

13

1.
25

±
0.

06

Sp
ec

ie
s e

ve
nn

es
s (

E
/J

′) Spot 1 0.56 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.53 0.50 0.51 0.50 0.52 0.53 0.56 0.53 0.53±0.006
Spot 2 0.45 0.46 0.43 0.45 0.47 0.49 0.47 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.46 0.50 0.47±0.006
Spot 3 0.50 0.50 0.49 0.54 0.55 0.46 0.48 0.56 0.50 0.55 0.56 0.47 0.51±0.01
Spot 4 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.50 0.47 0.46 0.51 0.47 0.49 0.51 0.47 0.48 0.48±0.006

Av
er

ag
e

0.
50

±
0.

03
0.

49
±

0.
03

0.
48

±
0.

03

0.
50

±
0.

03
0.

51
±

0.
03

0.
48

±
0.

01
0.

50
±

0.
01

0.
50

±
0.

04
0.

50
±

0.
02

0.
52

±
0.

02

0.
51

±
0.

04

0.
50

±
0.

02

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
10

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

The climate condition of  the campus is characterized by 
moderately high temperature, with plenty of  sunshine in 
summer, moderate to excessive humidity, heavy rainfall 
in rainy season and charming cool dry weather in winter. 
During the study period temperature varied from 19o C 
in January to 28o C in May to September and 27o C in 
October to 20o C in December and mean annual rainfall 

was 225 mm. Ecologically the campus is a tropical green 
forest area but the ecology has been suffering badly due 
to various biotic and abiotic factors and manmade causes.  
Data of  average monthly temperature, rainfall, humidity 
and wind speed for the entire study period were collected 
from the practical field study. The data is given below: 
In the present study, it was seen that some species were 

Figure 2: Spot-wise Species richness (SR), Species diversity (H), and Species evenness (J) of  the collected insects.

Table 6: Meteorological Data
Month Average

Minimum
Temperature
(˚C)

Average
Maximum 
Temperature
(˚C)

Average 
Temperature
(˚C)

Average
Rainfall/
Precipitation
(mm)

Wet Days 
(>0.1 mm)

Relative
Humidity
(%)

Average
Wind
Speed
(mph)

Jan’18 13.7 26.4 20.0 6 2 58 1
Feb’18 16.1 28.9 22.5 15 3 58 1
Mar’18 20.4 31.6 26.0 50 5 65 2
Apr’18 23.6 32.3 27.9 120 7 71 2
May’18 25.0 32.4 28.7 233 13 77 2
Jun’18 25.3 30.8 28.0 578 22 83 2
Jul’18 25.2 30.4 27.8 707 26 85 2
Aug’18 25.2 30.5 27.8 517 25 86 2
Sep’18 25.2 31.3 28.2 270 21 84 2
Oct’18 24.0 31.2 27.6 205 8 78 1
Nov’18 19.5 29.3 24.4 52 2 71 1
Dec’18 15.1 26.8 20.9 9 1 68 1
Mean 25.8 230.17 11.25 73.67 1.58

collected regularly while others were rare. These findings 
are consistent with many community studies, which show 
that a small number of  species dominates the community, 
whilst the majority of  species are relatively rare (El-Moursy 
et al. 1999).  Five out of  six insect orders showed seasonal 
variability. The only insect order Hymenoptera did not 
show any significant seasonal variation in abundance. Four 
broad patterns were distinct in the seasonal distribution 
of  fauna. Most of  Odonata and Lepidoptera members 
were significantly higher during pre-summer (January 
to March, November, and December). Orthoptera and 
Coleoptera peaked during pre-summer and summer 
(March-May, November and December). Diptera peaked 
during the monsoon period (April to June). The number 
of  insects fluctuated in different months of  the year due 

to several reasons. Fluctuations in rainfall appeared to play 
a role in deciding the abundance of  individual and overall 
fauna, along with other variables such as litter depth, 
litter moisture, humidity, and temperature that are directly 
or indirectly related to rainfall and insect population 
densities (Wagner et al. 2003, Vineesh et al. 2007). On the 
basis of  the present observation and data collection, it 
can be said insect availability depends not only depended 
on seasonal fluctuation but also on suitable host plants. 
Hence, their presence or absence, their abundance serves 
to monitor ecological changes in habitat thus warning 
about the deterioration of  habitat.

CONCLUSION
The present study indicates that the insect diversity is 

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi


Pa
ge

 
11

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

Am. J. Life Sci. Innov. 2(2) 1-11, 2023

rich in the CU campus.  Moreover, insects play a vital 
role in the food chain and food web of  any ecosystem. 
So, the present study is providing a clear checklist for 
environmentalists to understand the present condition of  
the ecosystem of  the CU campus area. 

RECOMMENDATION
This research may help to make a further checklist of  
insect fauna of  the CU campus. Additionally, from 
the comparative analysis with the previous study it 
is distinguishable that whether the faunistic diversity 
increases or decreases as the university developed many 
infrastructures consequently the human settlement 
increases day by day. 

REFERENCES
Amin, M.R., Miah, M.S. and Rahman, H. (2018). 

Functional and group abundance of  insects on 
Eggplant. Bangladesh J. Agril. Res., 43(4), 647-653.

Balakrishnan, S., Srinivasan, M. and Mohanraj, J. (2014). 
Diversity of  some insect fauna in different coastal 
habitat of  Tamil Nadu, southeast coast of  India. 
Journal of  Asia-Pacific Biodiversity., 7(4), 408-414.

Bingham, C. T. (1908). The fauna of  British India 
Including Ceylon and Burma (Butterflies) 2. Taylor and 
Francis, London, 8.

Borror, D. J., Delong, D. M. and Tripplehorn, C. A. (1989). 
An Introduction to the Study of  Insects. Saunders 
College Publishing. New York. 588-827.

Burton, J. (1974). The Oxford Book of  Insects. Oxford 
University Press, Ely House, London. 208. 

El-Morsey, A.A., Gilbert, F., Zalat, S. and El-Hawagry, 
M.S. (1999). Foraging behavior of  anthacine flies 
(Diptera:Boombyliidae) in southern Sinai, Egypt. 
Egyptian Journal of  Biology, 1, 87-95.

Gleason, H.A. (1922). On the relation between species 
and area. Ecol., 3, 156-162.

Fraser, F.C. (1936). The Fauna of  British India including 
Ceylon and Burma. Odonata., 2, Today and tomorrow’s 
printers and publishers. 461.

Hong, E., Jeon, Y. Yoon, J. Kim, J. Lee, J. Park, S. Kim, 
K. Kim, J. Kim, B. (2012). Insect Diversity of  Mt. 
Seosan. Journal of  Korean Nature, 5(3), 251-266.

Kittleson, J.M. (2004). The Role of  Discourse in 
Group Knowledge Construction: A Case Study of  
Engineering Students. Journal of  Research in Science 
Teaching, 41(3), 267–293.

Kirby, W.F. (1914). The Fauna of  British India including 
Ceylon and Burma. Orthoptera., 1, (Acrididae).Today 
and Tomorrows pinters and publishers, 276.

Lloyd, M. and Ghelard, R. J. (1964). A table for calculating 
the eaitability component of  species diversity. Journal 
of  Animal Ecology, 33, 217-225.

Maulik, S. (1919). The Fauna of  British India including 

Ceylon and Burma. Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae. Today 
and tomorrow’s printers and publishers, 439.

Nasiruddin, M. and Hoque, H. (2015). Abundance and 
Diversity of  Insect Fauna in Four Spots of  Chittagong 
University Campus. J. Biod. Cons. Biores. Manang., 1(1),

Nasiruddin, M. and Shiuli, F. A. (2017). Entomofauna 
of  four spots of  Chittagong University Campus 
and their relative abundance and diversity. J. biodivers. 
conserv. bioresour. manag., 3(1).

Park, S., Lim, H., Hong, E.J. and Jeon, Y. (2012). Survey 
on Insect Diversity of  Yeonpyeong-do Island, Korea.
Journal of  Korean Nature, 5(1), 17-26.

Pielou, E.C. (1966). The Measurement of  Diversity in 
Different Types of  Biological Collections. Journal of  
Theoretical Biology, 13, 131-144.

Rahman. M., Maleque, M.A., Uddin, M.S. and Ahmed, J. 
(2017). Abundance and diversity of  beneficial insect 

       and spider species on rice ecosystem in Sylhet region. 
J. Sylhet Agril. Univ., 4(1), 63-70.

Resh, V. H. and Carde, H. T. (2003). Lepidoptera; 
Encyclopedia of  Insects. J. A. Powell. Academic Press. 
631-664.

Richards, O.W. and Davies, R.G. (1977). Imm’s General 
Textbook of  Entomology. 2, 10th ed. Classification and 
biology Chapman and Hall, London, England. 1354.

Sánchez-Bayo, F. and Wyckhuys, K. A. G. (2019). 
Worldwide decline of  the entomofauna: A review of  
its drivers. Biological Conservation., 232, 8-27.

Siddiki, A. (2015). Insect diversity and composition 
during the wet and dry seasons in three forest types 
of  Johor, Malaysia. M.S. Thesis. Faculty of  Science, 
Technology and Human Development Universiti Tun 
Hussein Onn Malaysia.

Siregar, E.H., Atmowidi, T. and Kahono, S. (2016). 
Diversity and Abundance of  Insect Pollinators in 
Different Agricultural Lands in Jambi, Sumatera. 
Hayati Journal of  Biosciences, 23(1), 13-17.

Talbot, G. (1975). The Fauna of  British India Including 
Ceylon and Burma. Butterflies, 1, First Indian reprint 
edition. Today and tomorrow’s printers and publishers, 600.

Van Emden, F.I. (1965). The Fauna of  India and adjacent 
countries. Diptera. Vol. 7. Muscidae. Part 1. Today and 
tomorrow’s printers and publishers, 647.

Vineesh, P.J., Thomas, S.K. and Karmaly, K.A. (2007). 
Community structure and functional group 
classification of  litter ants in the montane evergreen 
and deciduous forests of  Wayanad region of  Western 
Ghats, Southern India. Oriental Insects, 41, 185-200.

Wagner, J.D., Toft, W.S. and Wise, D.H. (2003). Spatial 
stratification in litter depth by forest floor spiders.
Journal of  arachnology, 31, 28-39.

Zou, Y. (2014). Insect diversity patterns along 
environmental gradients in the temperate forests of  
Northern China. Ph.D. Thesis. University of  London.

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajlsi

