Post 89 no 1.
It is Orthaga exvinacea.
http://www.nbair.res.in/insectpests/...-exvinacea.php
Orthaga eaudrusalis.
http://www.jpmoth.org/Pyralidae/Epip...uadrusalis.jpg
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4140/4...0c548dfd_b.jpg
Both are mango pest.
Printable View
Post 89 no 1.
It is Orthaga exvinacea.
http://www.nbair.res.in/insectpests/...-exvinacea.php
Orthaga eaudrusalis.
http://www.jpmoth.org/Pyralidae/Epip...uadrusalis.jpg
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4140/4...0c548dfd_b.jpg
Both are mango pest.
I see the likeness, but I do not think it had these hindwings...
Which one are you refering to? Baradesa or Orthaga.Quote:
Originally Posted by guldsmed
Both have the HWs hidden.
Post 89 no 5.
Glyphodes stolalis. Widespread from Africa to Asia to Australia.
Malaya.
http://www.meloidae.com/data/0045/5-000-000-010-230.jpg
Taiwan
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bettam...7605916993307/
Australia.
http://lepidoptera.butterflyhouse.co.../stolalis.html
TL Seow : Cheers.
Post 89 no 6.
Glyphodes bicolor is right.
In G bicolor the HW white patch extend narrowly on the inner margin down to the tornus.
Africa
http://www.africanmoths.com/images/c...lor1%20upp.JPG
Thailand.
http://www.jpmoth.org/~dmoth/Digital...%20bicolor.htm
In G actornalis it does not or less so.
http://www.geocities.ws/pyralidaetw/R60-288.html
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5441/1...a6cfb48587.jpg
I was referring to 84/2 that I do not think had black and yellow hindwings, I remember handling it (it was dead as some ant or an other predator had bitten its head off), and I think I would have noticed such underwings. Difficult to know for sure though :-)
[QUOTE=guldsmed;129675]
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1561/...141231f0_o.jpgThaton2015_08_28_17_40_DxO by Jan Fischer Rasmussen, on Flickr
You are right it can not be Baradesa because 1. the abdominal end's yellow & black would be visible.
2. The FW is darker & the costal area almost black in Baradesa.
As I said in the earlier post I couldn't match the colour.
It is Ramesa bovoculosugens see the 2nd of the three variants in the reference article,
1 The colour & shading match correctly.
2. The FW marginal spots & shape matched correctly.
3. The FW apex has a pale whitish oblique band.
4. The series of black spots that goes round the discal spot are less sharp or clear in the ref image but can be seen on the right wing.
TL Seow : Cheers.
Post 89/3.
You are right it is Galleria mellonella. montypic in the genus. introduced world wide.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...701408170).jpg
http://bugguide.net/images/raw/LKW/K...SKNK5QV08Q.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...516157729).jpg
Yes - there it was (Ramesa bovoculosugens) - wonder why I overlooked that :embrass:
Edit: Hmm looking again, I think maybe Ramesa siamica is even closer? Or maybe not, it seems to have some white marks not in my specimen...
Quote:
Originally Posted by guldsmed
Even with a proper reference these Notodontids can be quite a headache.
My laptop is getting old. With usual 110% zoom I couldn't scroll properly .
Only by setting to 50% do I get some speed but the image becomes too small, until I zoom up on the image I want.
However, I believe Ramesa bovoculosugens is correct.
The other three R. siamica, lacrimisaddica & bhutanica are more closely related & similar as stated in the text.
All three have the lower 1/3 of the FW paler, from outer margin (termen) to the base.
The marginal & submarginal spots are enlarged often joining to form short bars.
In contrast, R, bovoculosugens have the FW evenly grey on the FW & marginals & submarginals not broaden.
TL Seow: Cheers.
PS R. siamica.
http://www.jpmoth.org/~dmoth/Digital...%20siamica.htm