Photo #27947: Lepidoptera sp.

22.09.2014 15:58, Irina Nikulina

And in my opinion, is not it. The author himself has defined and put in Psyche casta (et al. Photo), but asks to check for compliance with the mindRebelia herrichiella, and this is likely. Or others. View from Rebelia ... So, I think, will not have to endure

22.09.2014 15:35, Vasiliy Feoktistov

It is very likely that it was she: http://britishlepidoptera.weebly.com/012-psyche-casta.html
But the psyche most accurately determined by my Case consists: http://lepidoptera.ru/gallery/29982 (100%) or genitals. My opinion: you can move, but inaccurate.

22.09.2014 13:35, Irina Nikulina

There are 2 photos of the butterflies, we have already dealt with this. Second http://lepidoptera.ru/gallery/26121. We ought to leave one (the primary was just that). Here the formPsyche castamove, of course, if it is so. Photo right is available.

02.06.2014 12:42, Vasiliy Feoktistov Corrected data.

13.03.2014 23:43, Peter Khramov

In general, the grit, it says not grown together, but he asked to remove foty from the site, and must remove that look.

13.03.2014 13:01, Vasiliy Feoktistov

P.S. This, I pulled it from admin to light just to lay there :)

13.03.2014 12:32, Vasiliy Feoktistov Corrected data.

Tentatively identified → Not identified.

13.03.2014 12:03, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Well I stuffed: just thought that would be translated quickly. And that could not be on the forum just write someone a photo? We must and we understand the Serbian name it :)

13.03.2014 11:47, Peter Khramov

ZY Basil, what for you and stuffed in a box with a copy of the English version of his commentary of the Russian text and posted the whole thing? It is now to Vaughn as elegant looks http://lepidoptera.pro/gallery/27947.

13.03.2014 11:46, Peter Khramov

The author says that the admin forum post it under his own name since there were certain difficulties, not to ship under his. Concerning the second foty, a link to which I laid out, it is not his and is not written anywhere that it, so there is the case of all the rules. As for the first, it is necessary to write to ask confirmation, but it did not grit in English. Hmm.

13.03.2014 11:38, Peter Khramov

It happens when the picture is the same.

13.03.2014 4:03, Vasiliy Feoktistov

The main "trick" that have been laid out on said butterfly resources under a different authorship snapshot same position of the legs and antennae :) Really it happens in nature?

13.03.2014 1:45, Alexandr Zhakov

Cool.

13.03.2014 1:31, Peter Khramov

Yeah. But it's ... http://www.naturefg.com/pages/c-animals/rebelia.htm

13.03.2014 0:56, Alexandr Zhakov

http://www.lepiforum.de/1_forum.pl?page=1;md=read;id=78754
but there is still a caterpillar-shaped case, I think the explanation is satisfactory. :) This is not plagiarism.

12.03.2014 21:47, Peter Khramov

Zoran posted today, waiting for clarification.

12.03.2014 0:36, Irina Nikulina

The same photo (but without turning and processing background) I met online nahuby.sk http://www.nahuby.sk/obrazok_detail.php?obrazok_id=383349
(author of the image Boženka Hricová). There's this butterfly is defined as Rebelia herrichiella. I would like to clarify the situation ..

12.03.2014 0:04, Vasiliy Feoktistov

P.S. The genus name (if known only genus) propose to write in the "Additional information / remarks. For example, the instance output from the pupa or Determination was carried out on a photo or any other additional information" In this case, the writing will be seen not only Moderators, but all users of the site.

11.03.2014 23:54, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Zoran, charging indeterminate species is not necessary to write only one generic name in the name field of the form. It is written in the field of the form Rebela Sp. : this should not be, and this field should be left blank. Due to the non-compliance of the problems with the moderation of the photo.