Insecta.pro Community

Pages: 1 ...18 19 20 21 22 23

23.02.2011 0:42, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #6379

Not argiolus since it's Primorye region. Can't surely name the species. :)

23.02.2011 0:42, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #6378

Not argiolus since it's Primorye region. Can't surely name the species. :)

23.02.2011 0:32, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #6383

IMHO, Japonica lutea.

23.02.2011 0:32, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #6384

This species is identified correctly.

23.02.2011 0:25, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on Antigius butleri

What such kalёfris-shmalёfris? :) _Antigius_ Butleri!

23.02.2011 0:21, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #6366

Imho, that's the very Argynnis ruslana, male. Definitely not paphia (it has different androconiae, etc.)

18.02.2011 2:49, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #5883

M. jurtina.

17.02.2011 20:14, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #5879

This species is identified correctly.

17.02.2011 20:14, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #5880

This species is identified correctly.

15.02.2011 0:21, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #5794

Sure. I did it many times. :) Actually, I didn't mean aurelia, but wondered why britomartis, that's all.

14.02.2011 22:07, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #5795

Look comments to #5794 photo.

14.02.2011 22:04, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #5794

Fine! If so, doubts are irrelevant. :)

14.02.2011 0:29, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #5795

Why the very this species?

14.02.2011 0:29, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #5794

Why not aurelia?

14.02.2011 0:27, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #18341

IMHO, argus.

12.02.2011 23:37, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #3686

Should be moved to eximia.

12.02.2011 0:16, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #2340

This is spini.

10.02.2011 23:39, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #4640

Not clearly seen, so it has "uncertain" status...

10.02.2011 23:38, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #1543

There we can see antennas from outside are slightly colored red. Anyway, Vlad saw more (shooting or even catching), if identified it like this. ;)

10.02.2011 23:37, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #1543

There we can see antennas from outside are slightly colored red. Anyway, Vlad saw more (shooting or even catching), if identified it like this. ;)

10.02.2011 23:35, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #2077

Just for the record: what should be considered that is butterfly's antennas from outside (even though usually it's hardly seen just the smallest part at the end of an antenna). Lineola has dark ones, sylvestris does red. And the sawyere is colored more or less similarly, males have red or something like, females do dark. Also, males can be easily identified by stigmas.

10.02.2011 21:08, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #3686

Satyrium eximia.

10.02.2011 21:06, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #2077

Dmitry, consensus needed. How can it be sylvestris? ;) Stigma is thin, interrupted, antennas are dark from outside...

09.02.2011 15:09, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on Pieris rapae

And then the top picture - NADI, it is necessary to remove, the eye immediately brosat.

09.02.2011 15:08, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on Thymelicus lineola

It should be even upper picture, the amplitude of its swing in from this page to remove Silvestris ... :)

09.02.2011 15:04, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #2077

Back!!! ;) This is lineola! Solid!

09.02.2011 0:11, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #2588

This one is palaemon, say. Appearance and shot location.

09.02.2011 0:04, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #2166

If these are from Caucasus (as far as I can remember, the author is local), should be melotis ponticus then.

09.02.2011 0:00, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #1106

Approve sylvestris not lineola. ;))) Hey, moderators!

08.02.2011 23:17, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #3457

No, not to sylvanus. ;) Stigma is clearly seen as well as antennae. Look through few more pictures and compare. Sylvestris.

08.02.2011 22:37, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #3457

This one is Th. sylvestris!

08.02.2011 22:36, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on Ochlodes venatus

Note to the form Ochlodes venata (removed from the base of 09.11.2013 14:26): Dear moderators, once again urge you not to be confused with O. venatus O. sylvanus. O. venatus lives in the Far East. Accordingly, it is necessary to transfer pictures to O. sylvanus.

08.02.2011 0:09, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #4277

Then let's change its identifying status at least. Maybe, that's really irrelevant, the more, this one is rather worn-out. Anyway, I vote for xanthomelas. ;)

07.02.2011 22:46, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #4560

Well, yes, caucasogenita turns out to be as dark as this one, admit :)

07.02.2011 22:27, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #4277

Hm... There, on the 2nd upper photo in the right row you can see similar triangles, and this is the very хanthomelas: http://kharkovbut.narod.ru/xanthomelas.html.

07.02.2011 22:27, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #4277

Hm... There, on the 2nd upper photo in the right row you can see similar triangles, and this is the very хanthomelas: http://kharkovbut.narod.ru/xanthomelas.html.

07.02.2011 22:19, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #4277

Hm... There, on the 2nd upper photo in the right row you can see similar triangles, and this is the very хanthomelas: http://kharkovbut.narod.ru/xanthomelas.html.

07.02.2011 22:13, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #4560

Diamina, hm?

07.02.2011 21:07, Eugene Karolinskiy: comment on photo #4277

This is хanthomelas, imho. Hind wings dark fringe is smoothly graduated outside.