[ncsc-moths] Re: 21 species for Dec- need help with unidentified
- From: Doug Allen <dougk4ly@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ncsc-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 10:00:01 -0500
Ken,
Interesting on the Vetch Looper. And I checked out 2281 and agree.
Thank you. I'll be sending the Dec batch for inclusion in the SC Moth
database at the end of the month.
Still looking for that 21st species!
I've enjoyed looking at your unidentified Gelechioidea and have comments
and a couple of my pictures that relate to one of your unidentified
species, but I'll defer that for another email. Out high today is supposed
to be 60 and low tonight about 48 so I'll put out the black lights.
I just sent John Snyder the following batch of October moth species. I'm
pretty confident with all, but maybe 1 or 2. I'm working on a 3rd October
batch. Here's the OCT#2-
https://picasaweb.google.com/114446304105523815248/OCTOBER2?authkey=Gv1sRgCKjdmYTlmryTQw
#
I guess we get pretty much the same moths where you are and here. I'm
close to extensive woods/forest, an organic farm, and fields. It seems
that most of the posters on the ncsc-moths are in Tennessee! I'll
eventually try and get on the Facebook webpage, but I have too many irons
in the fire right now.
When I was young, I learned my eastern birds and bird songs fairly
quickly. Now I'm pretty deaf and don't hear many of the bird songs and am
a slow learner with moths!
Doug Allen Windmill Hill, SC
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM, kjchilds <kjchilds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Doug,
>
> There's a dark form of Vetch Looper that shows here early and late in the
> season that doesn't seem to be very well documented. When I first started
> mothing, it fooled me too. It's usually the most common form I see until
> mid March when lighter ones start showing up. Then in late September I'll
> start seeing them again.
>
> The main reason I don't think your moth is 1422 Homaledra sabalella is the
> placement of the spots in relation to the centerline. On Homaledra
> sabalella, the top spot is closer to the center than the lower spot. It's
> reversed on your moth. I can't say for sure what it is but 2281 Dichomeris
> ligulella, Palmerworm Moth looks like a possibility and is a common moth.
> Maybe someone else will be better able to help with this one.
>
> Not being able to ID the members of Gelechioidea you see is a common
> enough problem. Most of us that have been doing this for awhile have
> folders full of unidentified Gelechioids. Many species aren't pictured on
> MPG and new species are being described all the time. I still have more to
> add but here's my album of unidentifieds.
>
>
> https://picasaweb.google.com/107941137732251962394/UnidentifiedGelechioidea?authuser=0&feat=directlink
>
> Ken Childs
> Henderson, TN
> Chester County
>
> http://tinyurl.com/FinishFlagFarmsMoths
> http://www.finishflagfarms.com
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Doug Allen <dougk4ly@xxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* ncsc-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:21 AM
> *Subject:* [ncsc-moths] Re: 21 species for Dec- need help with
> unidentified
>
> Thanks Ken,
> The Vetch Looper was a real learning experience. I glanced at it
> several times in MPG and BG trying to find some close relative with that
> gray color, but none of the pictures were even close. Of course, now when
> I look at the specific field marks, they're all there.
>
> Have you looked at the one labeled 1422. There is only one Palmetto tree
> within a mile of here! I couldn't find anything else that resembled my
> picture.
>
> The Wedgling mistake was a dumb one. It's a mirror image of the picture
> correctly identified above it. Wedgling has been the most common moth seen
> this month. I was trying too hard for that 21st species of the month to
> pass Richmond County's 20 species for the month of December. The games
> people play! I do have a couple of unsatisfactory pictures of a 21st and
> 22nd species that I'll investigate.
>
> Doug Allen Windmill Hill, 8 miles south of the NC border and 12 miles
> from the SC mountains
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM, kjchilds <kjchilds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
