Photo #34912: Ericeia pertendens

09.11.2014 23:31, Peter Khramov Corrected data.

Confidently identified → Tentatively identified.

09.11.2014 19:20, Alexandr Zhakov

Basil, two kinds of issue raised Iran, not to "the beginning." Long comments, that does not add, and that does not take away from the butterfly, they help to determine the most likely, the species of the butterfly.With the unique ability to accurately determine the type, abandon it in favor of "philately" (normal collections, normally The prepared butterfly looks as aesthetically pleasing as The prepared not, as is often not the prepared forms of genital twins do not look right, if not boiled).The only instance of it, or a series, it does not matter, often just a single copy and cook. :) The given butterfly pereraspravka desirable, the rear fenders are very omitted when macerating Prepare a neat belly, genitals lessons digested.But such a deal only with very great aesthetes, easier to cook part of the body and gently placed a sealed capsule butterfly. But this is a private matter, well, requires a certain expertise. So it's all in front, if you engage seriously.:)) Remove any that do not, to reliably determine the type of the genus, there are several options, the two announced, one present arguments can take it to inaccurately determined. and there he will stay until a possible (or not possible) cooking :))))

09.11.2014 15:21, Vasiliy Feoktistov

So, what to do then? Cooking it can not be: a series, that is another matter (single copies. No one cooks, as far as I know). Moreover, this is not the suburbs.
You can remove all pictures until better times?

09.11.2014 1:00, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Alexander put to the inaccurate and that's that. It was conducted from the beginning of the two types. It was established on the basis of geography. Cooking, ruled for single copies. even in perspective.

08.11.2014 18:36, Alexandr Zhakov

I would put in inaccurate, at best, as well as to the family. Basil, you persuade yourself? or other? For others, these arguments do not work, this data 30 years ago. Clearly states reliably different in the genitals. I, frankly, a few species can cause, it is very similar to this kind. There is a butterfly, it is necessary to cook. Only then accurate.

08.11.2014 4:50, Vasiliy Feoktistov

I am quite convinced geography with mothsofborneo
I quote it here just in case:
Ericeia korintjiensis : "Geographical range. Sumatra, Java, Borneo" .
Ericeia pertendens : "Geographical range. Indo-Australian tropics to Solomons" .
From which it follows that Ericeia korintjiensis purely insular view and Ericeia pertendens is very widespread in almost the whole of Southeast Asia.
The concrete specimens.to the islands of Java, Sumatra and Borneo has nothing to do: he from mainland (Peninsular) Malaysia. Of course, I admit findings in Mainland type Ericeia korintjiensis, but, given the spread of the above can only be single / vagrants.

08.11.2014 1:07, Irina Nikulina

I asked cautiously about the kind korintjiensis - http://www.boldsystems.org/index.php/Taxbrowser_Taxonpage?taxid=224758 (of the peninsula. Malaysia has charges) Externally very similar to pertendens and reliably distinguished only genital, here in the Diagnosis of this and written http://www.mothsofborneo.com/part-15-16/hulodini/hulodini_4_7.php
Maybe not worth it in the exact place, considering it? Or do their appearance is something quite reliably distinguished? On pictures on the network is difficult to say.Or geography, at this mothsofborneo, convinced? What do you think?