Insecta.pro Community

Pages: 1 ...486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494... 497

01.02.2011 8:49, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5042

Evgeny, try to add a comment, see "thanks for adding" or something like that, after that press "back" button in your browser and see your comment still in the field, ready to be uploaded again. I think, that's the reason of this mess.

01.02.2011 8:31, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5002

Let's leave Idalus sp. then (species is still questionable).

01.02.2011 8:21, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5042

The same is here! Using Opera browser. Maybe that's because a comment is still in field even after having been uploaded.

31.01.2011 22:20, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5002

The same is here: what if this one is Arctiidae such as #5049 and 5050? Can't find same though.

31.01.2011 22:13, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5082

Probably, but such "portraits" were already there before. Author's opinion, please?

31.01.2011 22:09, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5050

Idalus coacta (Dognin, 1902), or something like that.

31.01.2011 22:06, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5049

Eupsodosoma larissa (Druce, 1890).

31.01.2011 21:56, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5082

How can it be identified by this photo, huh?

31.01.2011 19:11, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4997

Yes, that's it for sure.

31.01.2011 17:37, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4973

Lepidoptera.pro only. Species is also questionable (only Notodontidae sure): http://www.guianensis.fr/photos_notodontidae_2.htm.

31.01.2011 16:42, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5009

Genus can be but can't find species (somewhat tough).

31.01.2011 16:00, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4997

Dmitry, I think you do right. I also tried to find in Citheronia, had no luck but success in Arctiidae.

31.01.2011 15:23, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4991

Sematuridae.

31.01.2011 15:22, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4992

Sematuridae.

31.01.2011 15:11, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4993

Arctiidae.

31.01.2011 15:08, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4973

Notodontidae.

31.01.2011 15:07, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5003

Notodontidae.

31.01.2011 15:07, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4971

Notodontidae.

31.01.2011 15:05, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4981

Arctiidae.

31.01.2011 15:04, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5007

Arctiidae.

31.01.2011 15:03, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4970

Deal on that. Now it's gonna be signed where to put what to arrange it properly. This one to Arctiidae.

31.01.2011 14:54, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5007

Suggested this also (failed to find any other).

31.01.2011 13:57, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4970

Need to look at its hind wings (what's possible, alas), but it's obviously something of mentioned.

31.01.2011 13:38, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5003

Antaea juturna, [Cramer,1777]?

31.01.2011 13:21, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4981

Hey, these tropics are a real brainstorm. Bet this one is some Arctiidae, for sure. Something like Ormetica sp. ?contraria (Walker, 1854)? Dunno.

31.01.2011 13:07, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4970

So similar to Epimolis incisa (Rothschild, 1909). Weird, I can go there even with Dr Web and Outpost.

31.01.2011 12:42, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4970

Maybe, its male: http://www.inra.fr/internet/Produits/PAPILLON/arct_guy/boite_03/texte/e_incisa.htm.

31.01.2011 12:34, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5007

Seems to be something close to http://www.inra.fr/internet/Produits/PAPILLON/arct_guy/boite_02/texte/z_traili.htm.

31.01.2011 12:31, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #5007

Zatrephes sp.

31.01.2011 11:33, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4971

Yes, that is minor, wings confused me.

31.01.2011 10:21, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4973

Notodontidae, Hemiceras sp. (emerillonarum Thiaucourt, 1987)?

31.01.2011 10:04, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4975

Evgeny, how you guessed: checking this website right now!

31.01.2011 8:58, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4971

Rosema dorsalis, Walker 1855.

31.01.2011 8:49, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4994

Imho, the same as #4995.

31.01.2011 8:34, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4995

Limacodidae: Miresa clarissa, (Stoll, 1790), female.

31.01.2011 7:38, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4998

Probably, Synchlora gerularia, Hübner, 1823.

31.01.2011 6:35, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4992

Yes, its male and female (4992), but Sematura or Nothus? http://www.guianensis.fr/photos_sematuridae.htm#top.

30.01.2011 7:52, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4988

Considering forms: http://www.learnaboutbutterflies.com/Amazon%20-%20Agraulis%20vanillae.htm.

30.01.2011 7:30, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4969

http://www.learnaboutbutterflies.com/Amazon%20-%20Adelpha%20mesentina.htm.

30.01.2011 7:17, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4991

The rest of it are also night (Heterocera)? Hard to identify. Hesperioidea and Papilionoidea are way easier to do! By the way, these two can be identified by the shot location.

29.01.2011 21:56, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4991

Was thinking, pondering....... Hard cases: lots of South American species, night, undetermined. Brainstorm, no less.

29.01.2011 13:22, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4992

Sematura lunus male, Linnaeus, 1758 (not 100% sure).

29.01.2011 13:21, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4991

Sematura lunus female, Linnaeus, 1758 (have no suggestions more).

29.01.2011 13:10, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4992

Something so close to #4991.

29.01.2011 13:08, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4991

Rather Apoprogoninae/Sematurinae/Sematura sp./ lunus Linnaeus, 1758?

29.01.2011 10:28, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4992

Uraniidae.