Insecta.pro Community
Pages: 1 ...480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488... 497
This species is identified correctly.
Uncertainly: Pleuroptya ruralis, Scopoli, 1763.
We must move to the Ceramica pisi (Linnaeus 1758), and this kind of clean.
This species is identified correctly.
Yeah: http://sungaya.narod.ru/rhop/lyc/Nor_wal.htm.
To be right, in Moscow region there's Timandra comae, A. Schmidt, 1931. Looking at http://sungaya.narod.ru/hete/geo/geo11.htm. Also, Sungaya is Alexandr Boldyrev who is one of Lepidoptera.pro authors. Hope, he will make it clear.
Don't be surprised, there is nearly no urticae at all in Moscow region. Met that only once in my life :)
Spilosoma lubricipeda.
Spilosoma lubricipeda.
Both Spilosoma lubricipeda: http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtopic=195035&view=findpost&p=1015256 (urticae, there is its photo).
Even Favonius taxila (Bremer, 1861): http://szmn.sbras.ru/old/picts/butterfly/Lycaenidae/Favonius_taxila.htm. Some subspecies?
How can one even see something on this shot?? Move it to trash!
Species added: let's identify it already (doesn't suit paphia, no way).
If male, that's right, not paphia at all.
Female.
Male.
If that's one (doubtful), then female.
Female.
Female.
And this one is male :)
Yep, red form.
This is it. There are such (somewhere at the very end): http://www.leps.it/indexjs.htm? SpeciesPages/LycaenPhlaeas.htm.
Male.
Male.
Male.
Male.
Seems to be its female.
When my male gets dry enough, will add that :)
That's it: seems, there is no more similar.
To identified.
This is 100% nupta.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
Also, that's sure female.
Suggest to move it to identified: http://sungaya.narod.ru/hete/geo/enn_ero.htm. I seemed to get such yesterday too.
Note: this is male.
It lives even in America, so no doubts there, imho.
Lymantria dispar female (Linnaeus, 1758).
This is female underside (female is on #10024 shot).
Wrong: surely larger one.
We also Sinev Hydria
Means Hydria? Dig we must, alas, no time but now. On leps.it she Hydria presented.
dryas.
One vote plus to dryas.
Isn't that http://lepidoptera.pro/gallery/8921/?
As far as I know, the same, same and the same (for instance, now it's already flight period).
P. daplidice should be in Europe not in Russia. As for differences, I think it's just about genitalia. But there we can judge only by shot location.
Acronicta rumicis, Linnaeus, 1758.
Acronicta rumicis, Linnaeus, 1758.
News
- 09.04.2024: Recognition of species/taxa by file names of uploaded photos has become more convenient
- 28.03.2024: We changed timeouts for the author to edit some data for his photos on the website
- 19.03.2024: Insecta.pro and the entomological forum Integration
New photos (24.04.2024)
Fresh from the community
- 18:03, P. Khramov: A nice video from 2004 with Oleg Go...
- 13:02, P. Khramov: Bombus → Bombus sylvestris....
Popular insects
Recommended blog topics
- A. Gordon, O. Gorbunov, V. Murzin on Russian TV in 2004
- 20th International Insect Fair in Moscow (Russia, October 2023)
- The insects exhibition in Kotlas
