• 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.

A few moths from Vienna (1 Viewer)

Wandered Scot said:
If someone could be kind enough and tell me how to copy and paste a shortened version of web sites not including the whole search process, I could put what I have found here for everyone to take a look. I will try again now but not holding my breath on this one.http://images.google.at/imgres?imgu...&prev=/images?q=Archips+rosana&hl=de&lr=&sa=N
Click to expand...

Jim,

I am now a little confused. Take a look at Archips rosana on the Finish site - it looks quite different! There is another species in the genus that looks quite similar (to the Finish photograph) Archips crataegana - from the name I would think it more likely but according to Ford it has almost the same host range and dates. It is not on that excellent INRA site.

I have just stumbled across an interesting site on Eurasian Tortricidae. Take a look, it has almost 200 species with photographs and pictures of adults and larvae and an interactive key.

From Google to get rid of the search string there is a button at the top right labelled something like "Remove frame" which leave you in the original site, then you can grab the URL from the address bar.
Andrew.
 
Hello Andrew,

Thanks for looking further, that dutch site does highlight the size problem which has bothered me since looking in on the collection where it was noticable that the average size of male A.podana was greater than A.rosana, and that some of the larva must have been greater than the one I had at 19mm for male alone.

Out of interest, do you by chance have a carcass there or did you release it?

The Swedish site you quote(don't let them know you called it Finnish!!) shows two males ('hane'). Was this to compare with what we caught on our last trapping?

Clepsis consimilana crops up again, the only problem I have with that is that none of the photos I have looked at have the strong line marking which runs across the central back of the one that hatched, whereas both A.rosana, and A.podana appear to have this trait.

Another point that bothers me is that there are no females of A.rosana or A.podana in our collection, whereas there are about 8 A.podana, and I think it was 5 A.rosana males. It begs the question was there also alot of uncertainty over final identity here of female, because I cannot believe they never had them in hand (this is taking into consideration the ratio of female/male encountered in rest of collection).

There are very good id pointers in the Dutch site of the similar larvae, which I can use next year. The photos I have this year do not highlight these points enough to now support a conclusive conclusion on my part. It bugs me to leave something unconcluded when there was so much in hand, but this one(unless you have it still) will remain to me uncertain, and one to be worked at again knowing what we need to be looking for next time. I think we should both go down to the orchard next spring and collect everything we can, and maybe with luck, and a bit of work, hit it right next time. It is my mistake we are dealing with here not your's(or anyone elses for that matter) in Id efforts, I once again wish to thank yourself and everyone else for that effort,and there has been alot of effort here which has narrowed the field down.

Cheers

Jim
 
A lot of my C. consimiliana (they breed like mad in my garden) are almost unmarked. I thought it might have been a bit early for this species when you recorded your's though.
 
Hi Brian

The problem again then comes back to main colour of larvae

http://ip30.eti.uva.nl/bis/tortricidae.php?selected=beschrijving&menuentry=soorten&id=153

In neither stage was it violet green or violet brown, and according to this site the larva feed on dead leaves, a point also noted in UK Moths. Mine was feeding positively on living matter.

The latter conclusions of yourself, Harri, and Angus are definitely in the right area, and the further info Andrew has dug up would also support that. I think we have ended up with one of those difficult ones to finish off.

I will attach the other stage of larva I found it in now. Thanks though for your comments, they are appreciated.

Jim
 

Attachments

  • JPG 25.04.05 02 Connell J., Wien, Prunus.jpg
    JPG 25.04.05 02 Connell J., Wien, Prunus.jpg
    51.1 KB · Views: 131
Last edited:
Don't anybody dare state the obvious in the picture!! 'Er jim is that a half eaten dead leaf on the right?' :scribe:

Well it still isn't violet green is it!!!! I think I'll go back to bed.


Jim
 
Lamboti, I think you are missing the major point of this forum. So far as I know none of the regular contributers are into trading moths or larva. We have a keen interest in the natural enviroment around us, and the catching and release of live moths is for recording purposes, rarely for collection purposes or trading as far as I am aware.

Likewise the rearing of larvae is to support or further our understanding of them be it for our personal satisfaction, for the group, or part of our professional work.

You would be better to encourage visitors to your country, so you can show them the living creatures; that way, they will still be alive for future generations to enjoy.

Jim.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with Jim. Birdforum is interested in wild birds (and animals). We are not into encouraging trade in what are often endangered species.
Ken
 
harry eales said:
It's got me a little confused as well. But in my case, it may be senility.

Harry
Click to expand...

Sorry to disappoint you all but you may not be quite as senile as you try to claim ;)

Yes there was a Post deleted - I think you can guess what it entailed.

The reason I left the replies to it in was that Jim's (Wandered Scot) reply was so good (even though I changed it slightly) that I felt it could be used again, should a similar need arise.

So - back on Topic! (What was the Topic?)

Cheers,

Andy.
 
Brian

Would you be kind enough to post up a couple of your females that you mentioned for comparison purposes? Since that leaf is there as evidence of my ignorance, better I take a bit more heed and look at what you have been saying all along.

Thanks in anticipation

Jim

:-C
 
Clepsis consimiliana

A series of C. consimiliana shots. I hope that is what you were after.
 

Attachments

  • clepsis_consimilana_10jun05_420_20.jpg
    clepsis_consimilana_10jun05_420_20.jpg
    94.2 KB · Views: 163
  • clepsis_consimilana_18jun05_420_20.jpg
    clepsis_consimilana_18jun05_420_20.jpg
    39 KB · Views: 77
  • clepsis_consimilana_19jun05_420_20.jpg
    clepsis_consimilana_19jun05_420_20.jpg
    35.5 KB · Views: 42
  • clepsis_consimilana_25jun04_420.jpg
    clepsis_consimilana_25jun04_420.jpg
    28.9 KB · Views: 72
I did wonder if I had left it a bit ambigious 'a couple of your females', but no, sadly enough for some perhaps, this is what I was wanting to browse!!

Ta muchly Brian

Jim

Edit; Andrew (and any one else for that matter)your opinion please. I can now see from Brian's photos why Clepsis consimilana has been strongly considered, but the lines I have been looking at are know highlighted in the attached, and these I (very personally feel) are not the border edge lines of the pattern going over the back of C.consimilana but lines standing alone as in A. podanus or A. rosana. This is where I am getting stuck on and having a problem getting away from or past. Can anyone help un stick me from this view point!!! Pleeeeeaaaaaase!
 

Attachments

  • JPEG submited painted Rosana.jpg
    JPEG submited painted Rosana.jpg
    30 KB · Views: 69
Last edited:
Phew! I nearly posted the others ;)

The diagnostic feature of adult consimiliana appears to be the two dark blotches on the trailing edge of the forewing forming the two dark marks down the middle at rest. Your is heavily worn where the first would be but there appears to be one where the second should be. I don't think this is conclusive in the case of your moth by any means as the chequering looks more intense than usual.
 
Right! Given the when it was flying are you sure it isn't Cacoecimorpha pronubana (Carnation Tortrix). Did you get to see the hindwings?

Otherwise I don't know. It seems rather early for either podana or rosana. Have you considered betulana or crataegana? - not species I know at all.
 
Hello Brian

I personally didn't look at hindwings, I took some basic mug shots, gave it to Andrew, never suspecting that there would be a problem identifying it, and absolutely no disrepect meant to anyone when I say that. Me and my innocence. Next time, hindwings Okay!

BTW the description of A.rosana larva says too that a marking underneath is distinctive. Next year I am going to devise a system of belly shots for these little wascals, involving a shallow perspex specimen tub, cotten wool or tissue to gently hold them in place, and upturn them for the shot. It would have been conclusive.

I do see from photos why you are mentioning C.pronubana for this one. Does this mean we can conclude Clepsis consimilana is no longer in your runner list?

Archips crataegana link attached.
http://ip30.eti.uva.nl/bis/tortricidae.php?selected=beschrijving&menuentry=soorten&id=123

This falls down at larva as it should have a black anal plate.

I can only find a photo of male on the Swedish site for A.betulana, maybe Harri, could clear that one up for us if the female is in as a runner or not. In theory it has not been recorded in Vienna, and listed only in Steyermark which is a bit distant from here. However bearing in mind I have had adult and caterpillar of another specie here in Vienna, when the same list says the same thing too, it can't be disregarded.

Thanks again Brian

Jim
 
Wandered Scot said:
I do see from photos why you are mentioning C.pronubana for this one. Does this mean we can conclude Clepsis consimilana is no longer in your runner list?
Click to expand...

Now I didn't say that! I really don't know and I don't think I can help any further for the time being. I may find larvae of consimilana in the future as I am sure they breed profusely in the garden.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 19 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.

Similar threads

Nerine
Moth Catches in 2007
2 3
Replies
49
Views
8K
Surreybirder
Surreybirder
Oenanthe
Moth records from my garden in 2007
Replies
0
Views
2K
Oenanthe
Oenanthe
Pete Haynes
500 up
2
Replies
21
Views
5K
Surreybirder
Surreybirder
S
Moths Fortnight Commencing 5.5.2003
Replies
0
Views
2K
simondix
S
Surreybirder
Garden moth list 2004
2 3
Replies
43
Views
9K
Angus T
A

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top