• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Flying prawn or moth? (1 Viewer)

SleepyLizard

Well-known member
I'm not even sure if this is a moth. In fact, in the second photo it looks more like a flying prawn. Head to tail - 14 mm. Any ideas please???
 

Attachments

  • beastie-1.jpg
    beastie-1.jpg
    85.2 KB · Views: 164
  • beastie-2.jpg
    beastie-2.jpg
    38 KB · Views: 171
Hi Alan,

It looks like a Caddis Fly to me. They quite often turn up in moth traps and I remember being confused by them too. Curious creatures!
 
Fifebirder said:
Hi Alan,

It looks like a Caddis Fly to me. They quite often turn up in moth traps and I remember being confused by them too. Curious creatures!


I agree, it's certainly a Caddis fly. Not a speciality of mine and, given the 189 known British Species with minimal variation , I'll leave this to someone who knows (or wants to) sort it out for you.
 
Aha! - A Caddis Fly! I should have known that as I've seen enough pics of them. However it's the first I've photographed myself. This one spent the night on my bedroom ceiling. Thanks again for your help everyone.
 
SleepyLizard said:
I'm not even sure if this is a moth. In fact, in the second photo it looks more like a flying prawn. Head to tail - 14 mm. Any ideas please???

Hi Alan,
As others have already said, it is a Caddis fly. Identification down to species level is a very specialised occupation and I only know personally, one man in England who is expert at this and he is the National Recorder.

Identification of Caddis relies on many factors and points of examination, it cannot be done from a photograph unfortunately. It may be possible for an expert to get it down to a certain 'Genera' but not to species level.

Things to be looked at include positioning of hairs on the wings, spurs on various legs and genitalia. It is almost impossible to do on a living insect.

Personally I'd rather try identifying melanic Pug Moths than take on Caddis.

Sorry I can't help further.

Harry
 
harry eales said:
Hi Alan,
As others have already said, it is a Caddis fly. Identification down to species level is a very specialised occupation and I only know personally, one man in England who is expert at this and he is the National Recorder.


Harry

I know one person who's a wizz at lacewings and correspond with someone who is an expert on hoverflies (both of which I'm useless at) and some guy has just written a book about the ladybirds of Surrey (there's also one on the grasshoppers and bush-crickets). It's fascinating how people get drawn to different groups of animals. Almost every photo I've posted, whether of beetles, leaches or dead mammals has been IDed, at least to genus!
Personally I tend to lose interest once a microscope or a dissection kit is needed!
 
Surreybirder said:
I know one person who's a wizz at lacewings and correspond with someone who is an expert on hoverflies (both of which I'm useless at) and some guy has just written a book about the ladybirds of Surrey (there's also one on the grasshoppers and bush-crickets). It's fascinating how people get drawn to different groups of animals. Almost every photo I've posted, whether of beetles, leaches or dead mammals has been IDed, at least to genus!
Personally I tend to lose interest once a microscope or a dissection kit is needed!

Oh the lack of dedication in todays Naturalists, lol. There's an excellent book by Colin Plant on British Lacewings and great one on British Hoverflies by Falk. It will cost you less than £50 for the pair. Both worth having for ID's and interesting reading to boot.

Forget the dedication bit Ken, I had forgotten your dedicated to letting us have a try at ID'ing your captures. lol.

Harry. (Sorry mate, I'm in one of those 'take the micky' moods today)
 
Warning! This thread is more than 20 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top