Tiger moths (Arctiinae)
Announcements
9 hrs ago
The team are working hard on a number of important improvements to the historic data import tool, to allow you to more easily bring across your historic records into NatureMapr.Thanks to support from ...
Continue reading
NatureMapr welcomes Edgar McNamara
Platform wide attribute changes
New Feature: Moderator Quick Responses!
New priority species lists in the ACT
Discussion
WendyEM
wrote:
24 Apr 2025
ok, it is N. secundiana going by the isolated (black above & below) small size white spot of the hindwing visable on several shots above. However, as Don said, on ALA N. secundiana is is listed as a synonym for N. baulus see
https://bie.ala.org.au/species/https://biodiversity.org.au/afd/taxa/e78784a4-71a6-4749-b23a-53fd838ac9a6#names
https://bie.ala.org.au/species/https://biodiversity.org.au/afd/taxa/e78784a4-71a6-4749-b23a-53fd838ac9a6#names
Nyctemera secundiana
WendyEM
wrote:
24 Apr 2025
Yes, but where is the type specimen ? There is no indication that is a drawing of the type specimen of A. paradelpha. That British Museum specimen may be misidentified. The book the image came from is dated 1900. If I am reading this correctly Turner named A. paradelpha in 1905.
Amata paradelpha
donhe
wrote:
24 Apr 2025
I thought N. baulus differed from N. secundiana by having a much larger white patch on the hindwing which shows on the underside , but is not evident in these photos
Nyctemera secundiana
donhe
wrote:
24 Apr 2025
The image of A. paradelpha on LBH is a drawing by Hampson of a British Museum specimen. I think specimens that do not look like that are possibly misidentified.
Amata paradelpha
Top contributors
- kasiaaus 201
- jb2602 179
- Hejor1 156
- PJH123 141
- AlisonMilton 132
- WendyEM 122
- SteveBorkowskis 97
- ConBoekel 89
- trevorpreston 82
- MatthewFrawley 81
Top moderators
- ibaird 1.2K
- donhe 1.1K
- GlennCocking 174
- DianneClarke 155
- WendyEM 51
- MichaelMulvaney 45
- DiBickers 17
- JulieMorgan 15
- kasiaaus 12
- MichaelBedingfield 12
