My 2007 Moth catches (1 Viewer)

[Reader]

Agreed.

Thanks for the last two replies Brian. I thought the last one in the previous post was too far gone but I don't put anything past you guys anymore. Between you I have seen some amazing ID's.

I will check out the Grapholita sp plus those few remaining Ermine's later tonight.

John

 

[Reader]

3. Grapholita sp.?

I have another photo of this one if it will help Brian.

John

 

[Reader]

A few nights ago, whilst I was in the garage, I noticed a moth fly though my open kitchen door. It looked a bit different so I rushed in to see if I could pot it but I couldn't find it. Well I found it this afternoon, unfortunately it was dead.

What do you think it is. My best guess is Sycamore.

John

 

[Nerine]

What do you think it is. My best guess is Sycamore.

John

Hi John, yes it looks like Sycamore but I'm not very confident in ID-ing moths from photos. I caught a Sycamore recently which Harri confirmed. I'll post my pic and hope that helps you.


Nerine

 

[Reader]

Hi Nerine

Thanks for trying to answer the query.

I have some excellent photos of Sycamore myself but as this moth is dead it has gone into a pose that I haven't seen a Sycamore in before. On top of that the markings aren't too clear and that is why I am not 100% sure it is a Sycamore.

I think it is but I just want one of the experts to confirm it or if not to tell me what it is.

John

Hi John, yes it looks like Sycamore but I'm not very confident in ID-ing moths from photos. I caught a Sycamore recently which Harri confirmed. I'll post my pic and hope that helps you.


Nerine

 

[Reader]

I ran a trap last night but didn't catch as many moths as usual. About 50 moths I think but some of them are giving me real trouble. I have managed to ID 26 Species so far but following are a few I am left with. the first two I think I know but after that I am having problems.

1. Red Twinned-spot Carpet
2. Poss Common Rustic
3. I thought was a poss Common Rustic but the markings seem to look different.
4. Has me beat
5. Also has me beat.

John

 

[Brian Stone]

#4 is Cloaked Minor Mesoligia furuncula

 

[Reader]

#4 is Cloaked Minor Mesoligia furuncula

Thanks Brian

I have better photos of the 1st one and I have put it down as Red Twinned-spot Carpet. The others I need help with, as I do the following.

1. ??? is this a Cloaked Minor as well?
2 & 3. ??? is this Eucosma cana
4 & 5. ???

John

 

[Brian Stone]

1 looks like another Cloaked Minor.
2/3 is Blastobasis laticolella = lignea
4/5 Unsure.

 

[Reader]

1 looks like another Cloaked Minor.
2/3 is Blastobasis laticolella = lignea
4/5 Unsure.

Thanks again Brian.

What about the 2nd, 3rd & 5th in post 287 and the dead moth. Any ideas Brian.

BTW where are all the others, on holiday?:-O

John

 

[Surreybirder]

Hi, John, No I'm not on holiday but I didn't feel I could add much. Your last one is so worn that I was even wondering whether it was not even a moth - did you rub it between your fingers?
I hadn't cottoned on to the fact that the cloaked minors were minor-sized. I'd be happy with red-twin spot carpet.
And the common rustic aggs.
I don't have any confidence with pugs!
Ken

 

[Reader]

Hi, John, No I'm not on holiday but I didn't feel I could add much. Your last one is so worn that I was even wondering whether it was not even a moth - did you rub it between your fingers?
I hadn't cottoned on to the fact that the cloaked minors were minor-sized. I'd be happy with red-twin spot carpet.
And the common rustic aggs.
I don't have any confidence with pugs!
Ken

Thanks Ken

I hadn't realised that last one was badly worn. I just thought it looked like that. It was so small I doubt if it would have stood any heavy breathing by me, never mind rubbing its wings.:-O :-O

What about No. 287 plus the dead moth. was I right with Sycamore for that one or was it something else.

John

 

[Brian Stone]

Can't add much else. The Common Rustics and Red Twin-spot look Ok to me too and the worn moth could be a Cochylis sp.

 

[Reader]

One landed on the window last night. Could it be another Blastobasis lignea.

John

 

[Brian Stone]

Sorry. Got my new names muddled earlier. These are all adustella which is the new lignea. Lacticolella is the new name for decolorella.

 

[Reader]

Sorry. Got my new names muddled earlier. These are all adustella which is the new lignea. Lacticolella is the new name for decolorella.

Sorry Brian but you have just totally confused me. I know you know what you mean but someone who isn't into moths such as yourself (like me for instance) wouldn't have a clue what you mean.

I have done a search in UK Moths for adustella and it threw up nothing, which has confused me even more.

In the end what are the full names of the last one and the one prior to that (which I had called Blastobasis lignea)

John

 

[Brian Stone]

Blastobasis species names

0873 = B. adustella, which was B. lignea
0874 = B. lacticolella, which was B. decolorella

UK Moths uses the old names. Hants Moths for example uses the new names. We should use the new names but be aware you will have to search on the old names to get many hits on the internet as most images will still be labelled with the old names.

 

[Reader]

ok Brian. So if I understand it right both of them are Blastobasis lignea under the old name but Blastobasis adustella under the new name. Is that right.

Why did they find it necessary to change them in the firs place?

BTW I will be placing these on my web site. What names should I put them under?

John

 

[Surreybirder]

Why did they find it necessary to change them in the firs place?



John

That's what taxonomists do for a living... look at the messing about with the scientific names of birds.

 

[Reader]

I have a photo of a moth from July 2006 that was ID'd as Blastobasis lignea . Under the new name by the look of it it should be renamed Blastobasis adustella The problem is looking at the hants site this moth looks more like Blastobasis lacticolella.

What do you think?

John