Public coordinates shown as a random point within 10KM of the true coordinates. True coordinates are only visible to you and the curators of projects to which you add the observation.
private
Coordinates completely hidden from public maps, true coordinates only visible to you and the curators of projects to which you add the observation.
open
Everyone can see the coordinates unless the taxon is threatened.
This is certainly from Platyptilia or one of the closely related genera. The form of the labial palpi and the fact that the moth does not show two large scale-teeth projecting from each wing pair probably rule out Acanthodactyla. Anstenoptilia marmorodactyla looks close, but the forewing pattern is not quite right. Platyptilia williamsii looks by far the best fit among the Moth Photographers Group photos, although my impression is that the relative widths of the two forewing lobes don't look quite right for most Platyptilia species (I'd expect a broader second lobe) and the image of a live moth on the Moth Photographers Group page has a much plainer second forewing lobe. Otherwise, could this actually be a Paraplatyptilia species? Paraplatyptilia auriga looks a plausible fit but is excluded as an eastern species. There are many North American species in this genus (see http://www.plumemoth.com/) and few are illustrated by the Moth Photographers Group (http://mothphotographersgroup.msstate.edu/species.php?hodges=6109) or by BOLD (http://www.boldsystems.org/index.php/Taxbrowser_Taxonpage?taxid=6693).
Thank you Donald for your detailed explanation. I saw he moth was on the window of my apartment in the morning and I didn't have time to take a better picture. By the the time I came back in the evening it was gone.
The data quality assessment is a summary of an observation's accuracy. All
observations start as "casual" grade, and achieve
"research" grade when
the iNat community agrees with the observer's ID, where an "agreeing"
identification is one that matches exactly or is of a child taxon of the
observer's ID. For example, if Scott says it's a mammal and Ken-ichi
says it's Homo sapiens, then Ken-ichi agrees with Scott.
the observation has a date
the observation is georeferenced (i.e. has lat/lon coordinates)
the observation has a photo
Observations will revert to "casual" grade if the above conditions aren't met or
the community agrees the location doesn't looks accurate (e.g. monkeys in the middle of the ocean, hippos in office buildings, etc.)
the community agrees the organism isn't wild/naturalized (e.g. captive or cultivated by humans or intelligent space aliens)
Comments & Identifications
This is certainly from Platyptilia or one of the closely related genera. The form of the labial palpi and the fact that the moth does not show two large scale-teeth projecting from each wing pair probably rule out Acanthodactyla. Anstenoptilia marmorodactyla looks close, but the forewing pattern is not quite right. Platyptilia williamsii looks by far the best fit among the Moth Photographers Group photos, although my impression is that the relative widths of the two forewing lobes don't look quite right for most Platyptilia species (I'd expect a broader second lobe) and the image of a live moth on the Moth Photographers Group page has a much plainer second forewing lobe. Otherwise, could this actually be a Paraplatyptilia species? Paraplatyptilia auriga looks a plausible fit but is excluded as an eastern species. There are many North American species in this genus (see http://www.plumemoth.com/) and few are illustrated by the Moth Photographers Group (http://mothphotographersgroup.msstate.edu/species.php?hodges=6109) or by BOLD (http://www.boldsystems.org/index.php/Taxbrowser_Taxonpage?taxid=6693).
Thank you Donald for your detailed explanation. I saw he moth was on the window of my apartment in the morning and I didn't have time to take a better picture. By the the time I came back in the evening it was gone.
Could you please confirm the ID so the observation will get the "Research Grade"?
Add a Comment
Add an Identification