Insecta.pro Community

Pages: 1

22.05.2014 20:59, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #5564

IMHO, it is not Orgyia antiqua, andOrgyia recens

26.04.2014 22:28, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #28803

Reserves # 28814. Also very troubling year shooting :)

08.01.2014 3:12, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #18695

Please correct pupa to larva.

04.01.2014 0:54, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #26097

This is not Hoplodrina superstes, but again Anarta trifolii

04.01.2014 0:49, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #26113

Vague doubts bother me. Doesn't look like Spodoptera exigua...

30.12.2013 21:24, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #25998

This is not Hypsopygia costalis. Bug, apparently!

28.12.2013 0:20, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #25915

This is not at all Acronicta rumicis, I see Anarta trifolii instead.

23.12.2013 22:48, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #5336

In my unprofessional opinion, this specimen looks more likely to be a nominative ssp. rather than autolycus. I checked there: http://en.butterflycorner.net/Papilio-ulysses-Mountain-Blue.schwalbenschwanz100.0.html.

23.12.2013 22:30, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Amphigonia hepatizans

Please remove the comma from the gender name!

10.12.2013 23:44, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #25556

Maybe worth adding that it's home-raised, not naturally? Not to scare folks ;)

09.12.2013 0:23, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #25513

Castalius rosimon (Fabricius, 1775) ?

22.11.2013 2:09, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #8279

Well, I was thinking like this: what similar species is a closest to Kharkov? If they don't migrate, then should interrogate the author, if he happened to visit the South Caucasus or Middle Asia when was a child ;)

22.11.2013 2:00, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #15909

Isn't there is some ID mistake? Looks so unsimilar to #18796.

14.11.2013 23:27, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Yponomeuta rorrella

There is a double: Yponomeuta rorrellus (Hübner, 1796), http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/33509

14.11.2013 1:08, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Danaus chrysippus

I want to clarify about the spread. 1. In Ukraine, this species is found, as far as I know, only two (2) times in the Crimea. Obvious zalet. Whether it is necessary in this case to indicate that the species is distributed in the Ukraine? I think not. Well, or at least put a star. 2.In the "old description": Is Russia has a "Trans-Caspian region to the Aral Sea"? Perhaps originally it was about ...

12.11.2013 2:51, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #19621

I see that the larva is crawling to pupate, still too early to name it "pupa"... IMHO... yet

12.11.2013 2:09, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #8279

Why Chilades galba couldn't really fly from the Caucasus to Kharkov?

11.11.2013 23:14, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #17802

Still maybe female? The head is red...

11.11.2013 23:09, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #20601

Very cautious version: Cigaritis lohita male?

11.11.2013 1:50, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #20601

There's something wrong with this pic. Look closely at #22455 pic of the same author. Evidently it's the same specimen, on the same leaf. Whilst the date differs.

10.11.2013 1:53, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #13466

I'm for this is Niphanda fusca (Bremer & Grey, 1853).

10.11.2013 1:28, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Melanthia mandshuricata

The first description is written Melanippe Mandshuricata (http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/126369#page/98/mode/1up). But that does not mean anything :)

10.11.2013 0:42, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Ochlodes venatus

Yes, O. venatus only in the Far East, Europe - sylvanus. By Reference not buggy, just before, as I understand it, and sylvanus venatus considered synonymous, respectively, in the books in Europe could venatus drives.

09.11.2013 13:39, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #24618

I won't anymore (c). Would delete the pic, sadly am not able already.

07.11.2013 23:36, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Ochlodes venatus

@Ornithoptera titanoides Sumiyoshi, 1989, Phalaena pavonia Linnaeus, 1758, minor Linnaeus, 1758@ удалены из синонимов

07.11.2013 23:27, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Zygaena osterodensis

@Ornithoptera titanoides Sumiyoshi, 1989, Phalaena pavonia Linnaeus, 1758@ удалены из синонимов

03.11.2013 1:31, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #8810

IMHO, of course, this butterfly is not like Eudonia lacustrata, but rather on Scoparia basistrigalis. Watched here: http://lepiforum.de/lepiwiki.pl?Eudonia_Lacustrata

01.11.2013 21:06, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #24141

Author, comment, please, where is the caterpillar? I do not see it :)

01.11.2013 20:56, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #19587

Maybe not an egg, but still a caterpillar?

01.11.2013 20:54, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #9841

Can move in precise? What other options besides argiades?

31.10.2013 19:52, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Phengaris alcon

I've now look carefully at the site has a subgenus of the genus Maculinea Phengaris, and there is a separate genus Maculinea. With the same species. IMHO there is better not to hurry, but first understand what is happening.

28.10.2013 21:56, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #14581

It may still be moved to N. antiopa?

28.10.2013 21:25, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #18981

Something does not look like it on the imago :)

28.10.2013 20:37, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Phengaris alcon

And this kind of duplicated: Maculinea alcon, http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/51159

28.10.2013 20:30, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Lycaena violacea

Note to the species Lycaena violaceus (removed from the base of 04.11.2013 18:45): And if it is not synonymous with Lycaena violacea (http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/23144)?

28.10.2013 19:55, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Cupido minimus

I do not know where to write, I will write here. Look at what the picture is shown as the title for the subgenus Cupido (http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/2601). Well this is all some kind of nightie!

28.10.2013 17:57, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #20285

And why is inaccurate? IMHO this is a 100% Celastrina argiolus. And in Ukrane there is nothing else like it.

28.10.2013 17:52, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #5880

Gluck: view somehow still in inaccurate.

28.10.2013 17:51, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on photo #4493

Gluck: view somehow still in inaccurate.

28.10.2013 1:09, Dmitry Borisyuk: comment on Papilio machaon

To be absolutely precise, we should probably write Papilio machaon Linnaeus, 1758 (ie, without brackets), since it is in the genus Papilio and he was described by Linnaeus.