Pages: 1 ...354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362... 497
Yes, Alexander, you understood correctly: so. :) Everything is fit to be her Tanaorhinus viridiluteata (base below). Drag.
Funny blooper found the Japanese, with respect to this type: "Range: Borneo Endemic, frequent in upper montane ": http://www.jpmoth.org/~dmoth/Digital_Moths_of_Asia/90_NOCTUOIDEA/02_EREBIDAE/02_ARCTIINAE/03_Arctiinae/03_Areas/Areas%20galactina/Areas%20galactina.htm Oh, I do not say that this is endemic of Borneo :)
Irina, thank you for what drew my attention to an absolute blunder. Judging from the underside of the rear wings, it really Tanaorhinus viridiluteata. Differences clearly shows the underside of the Japanese on their website: Tanaorhinus ...
Of course, why I wrote the comments regarding these two kinds :) They do "like two drops of water 'and geography is very helpful in this case to put the point: there is China, but here Peninsular Malaysia, Sumatra and Borneo :) I, just from Peninsular Malaysia is now full of material. Label true 100% (caught my good friend).
Not to be confused with a similar appearance, the Chinese view:Tanaorhinus reciprocata:) Forms very significantly different in geography, which can be seen here: http://www.nic.funet.fi/index/Tree_of_life/insecta/lepidoptera/ditrysia/geometroidea/geometridae/geometrinae/tanaorhinus/ Notice a significant gap areas. Soglasngo the reduced reference is no longer synonymous. It should be on site ...
It is possible that the proposed Dmitry option has the right to be. Given the variability of the species and the fact that it forms several subspecies: http://www.butterfliesofamerica.com/L/t/Chamaelimnas_briola_a.htm, I agree with Dmitry and advocate for the transfer to theChamaelimnas briola:)
Sinev catalog in a format djvu put here: https://yadi.sk/d/XqyHuBAccX7Wd Program - viewer for this format can be downloaded here: http://windjview.sourceforge.net/ru/ Fifth volume to the insects DV I, unfortunately not (
Irina, thank you. I confess: there, I just did not look, but worth it. Just a few distinct thence pictures ... Tomorrow I will be with a human Internet and will observe is given necessarily arguments. I think, and then put an end :)
Or are synonyms, or different kinds? Mysterious butterfly for me, as well as the author of the first description .... Maybe you can somehow clarify the situation?
Defective, simply. The day before yesterday it looked, though there was no time to write. Now his exotic Pts. a lot of. And it must be generally determined and put on the site :)
This has not yet dared to put into precise: a lot of unknown to them. Alternatively MoreBorbacha altipardaria???
Pingasa lariariastill be on my? Later, several kinds of Pingasa loaded (will be in neoprene. Set). There is possibility to define?
I, exactly the same, "fly" 3 copies. and all look the same: http://www.jpmoth.org/~dmoth/74_Geometridae/72.7_Geometrinae/2169Pingasa/2172Pingasa_ruginaria/Pingasa_ruginaria.htm In general, a lot of moths Malay received this time: hope posmosch :)
It must be combined with Pingasa ruginaria (Guenée, 1857): http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/59272 It is a subspecies of it, rather than a separate species.
It is necessary to add the following subtypes: Pingasa ruginaria andamanica Prout, 1916 Pingasa ruginaria communicans (Walker, 1860) Pingasa ruginaria commutata (Walker, 1860) Pingasa ruginaria interrupta Warren, 1901 Pingasa ruginaria pacifica Inoue, 1964 And of synonyms remove Pingasa ruginaria andamanica Prout, 1916 and Pingasa ruginaria pacifica Inoue, 1964 . Subspecies in ...
Well, here it is, too, in all guises: http://en.butterflycorner.net/Papilio-thoas-King-Swallowtail.466.0.html As they say: "Without the bottle does not understand" :)
I determined at this link: http://www.jpmoth.org/~dmoth/Digital_Moths_of_Asia/85_GEOMETROIDEA/04_GEOMETRIDAE/02_Ennominae/012_Fascellina/Fascellina%20albicordis/Fascellina%20albicordis.htm In general, the gap with the picture type in Google a huge ...
Well, that's another photo definitively clarified that with minos I was wrong a year ago. Now you can carry it in a group photo to viciae :)
It is not just "give", and it is necessary to understand :) What I see in this specific image, wrote the following: a modified strongly enough: Z. viciae? But maybeZygaena lonicerae(too atypical), but not minos (on that photo, I probably was wrong a year ago). Two options: Z. viciae or Z. lonicerae: it is necessary to reason someone else :)