Insecta.pro Community
Pages: 1 2
This species is identified correctly.
This species is identified correctly.
Phymatopus hecta.
For me, it is Phymatopus hecta.
I think this is Scoparia basistrigalis.
Both photos above are Donacaula mucronella!
This is Pyrausta aurata.
This is Evergestis limbata.
This is Sitochroa verticalis.
This is Agriphila straminella.
This is Agriphila straminella.
This is Agriphila straminella.
This is Agriphila straminella.
Anyhow, it's not culmella. I think it is Crambus uliginosellus.
This is ocularis?
This is ocularis.
I think this is festucae.
This is tripartita.
This is tripartita.
The thumbnail of Orthosia incerta is one of a Geometridae!?
This is impossible. Orthosia gracilis, as all Orthosia, is a species of the spring.
Azochis trichotarsalis
Spilomela perspicata
Syngamilyta apicolor
Dichogama prognealis
Tachyphyle albisparsa
Oospila ciliaria
Oospila rufilimes extensata
Incarcha aporalis
Probably Incarcha aporalis
Incarcha aporalis
Incarcha aporalis
Drasteria saisani
This species is identified correctly.
In my opinion, it looks more like a Cupido species. I think it is alcetas but I don't know if it flies in the Primorye region.
Phiaris palustrana
Epiblema sticticana
Adscita is for sure, but further on, genitalia examination is needed.
Paracolax tristalis.
I think it is prodigellus.
Probably Eupithecia subfuscata.
Scopula subpunctaria.
Phiaris umbrosana.
Cnephasia sp.
Idaea rufaria.
Apparently there is still a discussion about the distribution of bicruris and capsincola. If we follow the Fauna Europaea, then the photos of the species of Serbia should be capsincola and not bicruris.
The lower picture is not of Hadena perplexa.
The thumbnail of the Brithys genus is certainly not Brithys!
If there was no dissection of the genitalia, then it is impossible to make a difference between secalis and secalella.
The thumbnail of the Gortyna genus is of Cervyna cervago and not of Gortyna flavago.
Next page