Insecta.pro Community

Pages: 1 ...21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29... 51

30.09.2014 16:11, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33740

This species is identified correctly.

30.09.2014 8:48, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #31543

at Diachrysia stenochrysis jumper is not always available. at Diachrysia chrysitis jumper rarely happens. They are easily distinguished by color. stenochrysis- golden yellow, chrysitis - golden-green.

29.09.2014 0:35, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33684

Cechenena lineosa (Walker, 1856)

29.09.2014 0:31, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33803

Hulodes caranea female

29.09.2014 0:27, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33807

Achaea serva

28.09.2014 19:22, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33675

Mimeusemia postica

26.09.2014 13:30, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33676

I've happened to collect this species, will check its name on Monday. This is noctuid.

26.09.2014 13:27, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #25623

No, it's ok with wings, this is female, just spent much time in an envelope which resulted in such abdomen flattened sides.

26.09.2014 13:24, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #25623

Here's what Pittaway says (no chance for us to see underside as I see): A variable species in forewing upperside ground colour and pattern intensity, with some specimens approaching Cechetra scotti and others Cechetra subangustata. Distinguishable from the former by the less intense green band along the costa and from the latter by the orange (not green) tone of the undersides of the wings. ...

26.09.2014 13:19, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #25623

The wing shape is absolutely abnormal. Cechetra subangustata seems not to be described in China, not a problem with hawkmoths though.

26.09.2014 11:29, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33350

Sumatra ssp. is called enganius. No difference between this and ones from Java or Kalimantan. How it's possible to tell region by pic??? Your expert confused something. helenus fairly has different hindwing bands and never does yellow wedge on forewings. Not helenus it is. This is Papilio hipponous.

26.09.2014 11:11, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #25623

Isn't that Cechenena subangustata, by chance?

26.09.2014 11:05, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #14611

This species is identified correctly.

19.09.2014 13:33, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #7310

Alexandr! Don't mess warm with soft. Dark/light are just colour forms. Ssp. is more about location, geographical item. P. p. stabilis Rothschild & Jordan, 1906 is a spp. spread from Costa Rica to Panama, P. p. asterius Stoll, 1782 — US to Nicaragua. Nominative is described from Cuba.

18.09.2014 1:03, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33350

If not hipponous but turns out pitmani, please ask for male as well. Nothing of pitmani at all!!! Will prepare that and check.

18.09.2014 0:46, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33350

Irina offered 3 for ID. Alexandr even not surely chose one, the right. I just supported his guess.

18.09.2014 0:44, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33350

Is it possible to ask for this specimen's body, to science? Couldn't find anywhere female genitalia of this species.

18.09.2014 0:31, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33350

If to be precise to the end, butterfly houses get 99% Asian leps from the Philippines, so this should be hipponous. But if the original stuff (pupae) were from Thailand, this is Papilio pitmani Elwes & de Niceville,[1887]. Matters where the pupae are from. Cool anyway even if this one is Papilio hipponous.

18.09.2014 0:24, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33350

Kindergarten indeed. Does it really matter who identified? Then it was Alexandr Dumchus.

17.09.2014 23:18, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33350

hipponous female tentatively identified

17.09.2014 20:34, Dmitriy Pozhogin: comment on photo #33350

hipponous female. Underside needed for 100% sure.