Insecta.pro Community

Pages: 1 ...489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497

14.01.2011 4:28, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3139

First photo of this species will be indexed by yandex.ru. Wow!

14.01.2011 4:12, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3139

Thanks, that's in memory of one man (inherited some collection after his death).

14.01.2011 4:09, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3578

No exact label, alas. At least, species is identified. Cool.

13.01.2011 15:17, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3000

Imho, not alexis also, as well as the previous one (nearly no spots on its underside).

13.01.2011 10:44, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3279

Glaucopsyche alexis Poda, 1761 (couple).

13.01.2011 10:43, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3433

Glaucopsyche alexis Poda, 1761 (female).

13.01.2011 8:05, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3934

Truly Stichophthalma louisa, Wood-Mason, 1877. There Dmitry Podjogin is right.

12.01.2011 23:09, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3980

This species is identified correctly.

12.01.2011 22:58, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on Calliteara pudibunda

Butterfly is famous for its magnificent caterpillar in whose honor is soё second name "red-". Imago compared with caterpillar sulfur and quite homely.

12.01.2011 22:30, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2577

This species is identified correctly.

12.01.2011 22:29, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3069

This species is identified correctly.

12.01.2011 22:29, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3012

This species is identified correctly.

12.01.2011 22:19, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3930

Male.

12.01.2011 22:17, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #1676

This species is identified correctly.

12.01.2011 22:16, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4056

Female.

12.01.2011 22:16, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4056

This species is identified correctly.

12.01.2011 19:43, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4017

Sure, move that (didn't know about its synonyms).

12.01.2011 19:34, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4158

There is some mistake about identifying of this species, I know the right name of it. No jokes, this is really Calliteara pudibunda. Let's move?

12.01.2011 19:05, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4158

Wonder if it can be Calliteara pudibunda?

12.01.2011 18:15, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4017

http://sungaya.narod.ru/hete/zyg/zyg_min.htm.

12.01.2011 18:14, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4017

Also minos, imho.

12.01.2011 18:13, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4018

No hope.

12.01.2011 18:12, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4019

Whether can it be Z. minos?

12.01.2011 18:09, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4020

Hard with such angle shot: Z. minos? osterodensis? No more than a guess work. For sure, genus Zygaena. Can see even subspecies here! But no go.

11.01.2011 0:04, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3255

Viktor, I see the same. Maybe, some technical bug.

09.01.2011 20:51, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3983

Lycaena virgaureae, male, Linnaeus, 1758.

09.01.2011 20:43, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4032

Triodia sylvina Linnaeus, 1761.

09.01.2011 20:42, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #4031

Triodia sylvina Linnaeus, 1761 (hopely, not wrong).

08.01.2011 18:13, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3435

This species is identified correctly. Let's get these classified too.

08.01.2011 18:12, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3432

This species is identified correctly.

08.01.2011 18:12, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3444

This species is identified correctly.

08.01.2011 18:11, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2966

This species is identified correctly.

08.01.2011 18:11, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2965

This species is identified correctly. Up

08.01.2011 17:06, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3909

Approve: that is truly polytes, but let's at least database Jordani. I just fouled up a little bit.

07.01.2011 23:45, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3632

Think, this case should be cleaned, so as even me often mash up these two species, chrysitis and stenochrysis. And tutti should be deleted.

07.01.2011 22:14, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3708

There is some mistake about identifying of this species, I know the right name of it. Diachrysia stenochrysis, Warren, 1913.

07.01.2011 22:14, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3441

There is some mistake about identifying of this species, I know the right name of it. Changed: Diachrysia stenochrysis, Warren, 1913.

07.01.2011 22:13, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2519

There is some mistake about identifying of this species, I know the right name of it. Diachrysia stenochrysis, Warren, 1913.

07.01.2011 22:12, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2087

There is some mistake about identifying of this species, I know the right name of it. Diachrysia stenochrysis, Warren, 1913.

05.01.2011 10:45, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2923

Vlad, this information is assured on a forum. I offered it there as S. ocellata (caught nearby), but guys re-identified it successfully.

30.12.2010 13:49, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3891

Viktoria, this one is definitely not P.blumei. Once I uploaded blumei there, so that one was pure blumei (compare at least the leg spurs): http://lepidoptera.pro/species/papilio-blumei/.

19.12.2010 17:50, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3444

As far as I can remember, Vanessa atalanta, Linnaeus, 1758.

19.12.2010 17:48, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3432

Lamprotes c-aureum, Knoch, 1781, 100% sure.

19.12.2010 17:46, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3435

Moma alpium, Osbeck, 1778.

19.12.2010 17:43, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2966

Pronophila unifasciata, Lathy, 1906 ssp. kennethi (underside).

19.12.2010 17:42, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2965

Pronophila unifasciata, Lathy, 1906 ssp. kennethi (up). South America (no details, no any label).

28.09.2009 23:10, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #2923

There is some mistake about identifying of this species, I know the right name of it. Smerinthus planus, Walker, 1856.

04.08.2009 10:20, Vasiliy Feoktistov: comment on photo #3940

This species is identified correctly. Evgeny, you are right. This one is really Idaea emarginata, Linnaeus, 1758. I identified it wrong, my apologies. (http://ukmoths.org.uk/show.php?bf=1712) or (http://www.lepidoptera.pl/show.php?ID=553&country=PL).