Insecta.pro Community

Pages: 1 ...563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571... 627

02.09.2011 21:33, Vorona: comment on What about entomological atlases?

Check out plantago's library. I did. But it's in German.

02.09.2011 20:37, Peter Khramov: comment on Adequate data structure for the description of a species in the Lepidoptera catalog

Proctos, thanks for the list. The number of features is impressive. Still, there is so much data to dig up...

02.09.2011 18:42, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #8282

Not so lately the system of shot dates was reconstructed, so now we can see just "1977" year, with no details...

02.09.2011 15:30, PVOzerski: comment on What is chirping in the St. Petersburg park?

Cicadetta montana is known from the vicinity of St. Petersburg, but only locally - on the Duderhof heights. This year, their exuviae were collected there by colleagues in early summer. Where it came from there is another question. Either it is a relic of the Holocene optimum, or an introduced one (under Catherine II, trees from the Carpathians were planted there). But it is very far from Okhta to ...

02.09.2011 11:22, barko: comment on Dear colleagues from Ukraine, We need your help!

Could someone from Kiev bring a few boxes of butterflies from Moscow to Kiev and give them to my Kiev friend?

01.09.2011 22:18, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10422

Moved to "uncertain". Hopefully, that's it: no such photos at the website.

01.09.2011 22:18, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10408

Thanks, goes to M. ferrago.

01.09.2011 22:17, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10407

Ok, moved to L. sticticalis.

01.09.2011 22:16, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10406

Moved to L. anella.

01.09.2011 22:16, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10404

Thanks, moved.

01.09.2011 22:16, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10403

To go.

31.08.2011 20:19, Bianor: comment on Butterflies in fat

Got here on the occasion of a male ornithoptera Rothschild with steamed wings. It sticks out in the sump-and it is not comme il faut to expose it and it is a pity to throw it away. Can I restore the color somehow?

31.08.2011 19:45, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #10459

This species is identified correctly.

31.08.2011 19:44, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10374

Bzzzzzzz.

31.08.2011 19:43, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10376

Dark and scary.

31.08.2011 19:37, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10418

The nearby shot is http://lepidoptera.pro/gallery/10010/.

31.08.2011 19:33, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10443

As well as http://lepidoptera.pro/gallery/10012/.

30.08.2011 22:20, botanque: comment on Strange animals

Lepidurus, I assume L. batesoni. And where was he caught? Just this type for the south of Western Siberia is given. Although probably Triops granarius from Transbaikalia is more suitable.This post was edited by botanque - 30.08.2011 23: 05

30.08.2011 15:58, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #10304

The underside of #10303 shot.

30.08.2011 1:44, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10186

Ok, moved.

30.08.2011 0:28, Vlad Proklov: comment on photo #10333

This species is identified correctly.

30.08.2011 0:27, Vlad Proklov: comment on photo #10332

This species is identified correctly.

29.08.2011 22:51, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10331

It's not the tail who is the main.

29.08.2011 20:52, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #6690

Ok, will be male then.

29.08.2011 20:51, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10219

Moved.

29.08.2011 2:24, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #6366

Ok, if sure, goes to "identified successfully".

28.08.2011 22:15, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #2046

Moved to T. comae (as well as http://lepidoptera.pro/gallery/2045/).

28.08.2011 22:13, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #6692

Ok then, corrected this and nearby ones.

28.08.2011 22:11, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10279

Meh, right. Corrected.

28.08.2011 20:26, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #6691

Female.

28.08.2011 20:24, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #6688

Male.

28.08.2011 20:24, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3541

Male.

28.08.2011 20:16, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #10296

Male.

28.08.2011 20:16, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #10297

Female.

28.08.2011 19:39, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #9938

To go.

28.08.2011 19:39, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #9936

Moved.

28.08.2011 19:39, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #9937

To go.

28.08.2011 19:39, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #9940

Moved to laterana, uncertain.

28.08.2011 17:26, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10299

Yep, corrected.

28.08.2011 17:26, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10300

Corrected.

28.08.2011 13:24, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10205

Shot moved to A. aescularia.

27.08.2011 17:06, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #10149

This species is identified correctly.

27.08.2011 17:06, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #10147

This species is identified correctly.

27.08.2011 14:30, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #10159

Moved to argus. As for retouching, there should be some limits. For instance, paphia shots are definitely too "art" and not real. Such intense colors as you can see on this shot are rather usual and even default for some digital cameras. Even though for this very photo author did it manually. As for "art" sections and the idea in general, let's look at this on the other hand. I think, we lack ...

27.08.2011 14:22, Peter Khramov: comment on photo #9022

Moved from undetermined to uncertain.

27.08.2011 14:21, Peter Khramov: comment on Ceramica pisi

People, please be careful when adding views. If the database is already synonymous, then you need to bind the new kind to him, and not to add new species to the database separately. Accordingly, this type I have renamed, deleted and new.