Photo #36505: Telipna sanguinea

18.12.2014 10:36, Peter Khramov

Excess poudalyal. As for geography, I think, everything is understood.

17.12.2014 23:53, Alexandr Zhakov

According to African :)))

17.12.2014 23:52, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Specialist-was I?))) I do in cabbage rolls do not understand anything)))

17.12.2014 23:49, Irina Nikulina

Where is the smiley face "embarrassment" :)))? "Fighter" is pleased that the expert confirmed the result nekorotkih searches - so no wonder!

17.12.2014 23:47, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Irina, as usual, well done. A geography cut off after 1969 described species.

17.12.2014 23:45, Alexandr Zhakov Corrected data.

Not identified → Telipna sanguinea / Confidently identified / Irina Nikulina.

17.12.2014 23:38, Dmitriy Pozhogin

After insistence Irina and Andrei work to give the only correct definition Telipna sanguinea sanguinea (Plötz, 1880)

17.12.2014 16:36, Irina Nikulina

Yes, Dmitri, thank you, I, too, yesterday to get to the bottom of this review, even wanted to give a link here, but then esteemed for new species (after 1969) and realized that nothing is clear, descriptions of some not .. and did not.

17.12.2014 15:07, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Here you can still see it, but without a sense of geography little atbutterflies.com/downloads/lycaenidae_pentilina.doc

16.12.2014 23:27, Irina Nikulina

http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/2313694#page/11/mode/1up sheets with illustrations copied, flip, increased everyone can understand) + especially marked in the text.

16.12.2014 23:18, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Irina! The sources do not. Even descriptions, especially 2005 available. A reference to the audit can lose?

16.12.2014 23:13, Irina Nikulina

Yes, Dmitri, I agree that the review part, I only contributed one well-matched version of widespread species from the set described. You decide where to put, and put there. Where to see the newly described species not know was looking for. If there is a source - tell me, please.

16.12.2014 22:42, Dmitriy Pozhogin

An audit in 1969? After that, a bunch of species described.

16.12.2014 22:38, Irina Nikulina

The revision is given a detailed description of 26 species and subspecies of 8 illustrations. They differ in the number of good, size, arrangement of white spots on the VC and NC, configuration and size of the dark zones and the boundaries between the red and black zones (crimp number of projections).On set - picture VC - picture NC - Size - Select only one option (of a drawing in line 2, but the second type has a wingspan of 56-60mm) This maleTelipna sanguineaview is widespread mainly in Nigeria, Cameroon Congo, Uganda. I must say that the existing online photo top and underside sanguinea - photo of the female, it differs from the male.Just different and subspecies T. s. bistrigata, which also has a photo

16.12.2014 17:49, Irina Nikulina

Yes, I had in mind a more specific indication of the country. Africa is big)) And I totally agree about the importance of labels. That's just not clear - we sort of do not let nikak- either orally or in any prescribed rules - statement on the website bezetiketochnyh copies.(only wishes write)), but it will not identify? But then why would there be these photos - as an element of decor? :) Either the rules - a taboo on bezetiketochnye, or - to determine, if possible, adding gallery) of this butterfly is quite determinable tables and descriptions, given that the size specified, the underside and the top there.

16.12.2014 16:16, Dmitriy Pozhogin

No etiketki- not figs and wonder.

16.12.2014 15:39, Irina Nikulina

Just kind of Telipna. There is a detailed overview «A revision of the genus Telipna Aurivillius» (by Thomas Herbert Elliot Jackson), which describes all kinds of (30) (but in English). Cursorily looked - at least 10 species with a similar pattern. You can probably exclude some, knowing wingspan, and then look in more detail. Please try again later. With geography in any way? The review is given to the types of details.

16.12.2014 8:18, Dmitriy Pozhogin Corrected data.

Euphaedra ruspina / Tentatively identified / Andrey Kravtsov → Not identified.

16.12.2014 8:18, Dmitriy Pozhogin

Can copper-butterfly genus Telipna?

15.12.2014 21:15, Alex Dumchus

C is a fright ruspina ??? Rather, it is one of Acraea!

15.12.2014 19:16, Andrey Kravtsov

Wingspan 40 mm, very similar to Euphaedra ruspina, but the shape of the rear wings and the number of white dots sovpadaet.Kto not something in the subject?