Insecta.pro Community
Pages: 1 ...11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19... 33
This species is identified correctly.
If an author is correct, then what prevents drag in precisely defined?
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
It is not Gandaritis pyraliata. It -Eulithis mellinata
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
Alexander, in this photo the same butterfly, as here: http://lepidoptera.ru/gallery/22493.
We must still fulfill a formality and drag in exact.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
It is not Pyrausta despicata. It -Psammotis pulveralis
It is not Pyrausta despicata. It -Psammotis pulveralis
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
Well, what do you suggest? It would be another, better photo - it could be removed without further ado. But there is another picture, and therefore, "the rich, and so happy" :)
BanalHelicoverpa armigera
This photo for this species only, so no choice.
Specifically for this butterfly - wait for the verdict of experts.
Not sylvanus it is, not sylvanus. I already said before that I happened to collect many of sylvanus, they are quite different in my neck of the woods.
Question to all: if there any info about sylvanus ssp. in Far East? Nominative or anything else.
Next page