Moth Taxon Search
Dalima vulpinaria
Gender (optional)
Notes (optional)
Dalima vulpinaria (Moore, [1888])
JS: Oxydia vulpinaria. Moore, 1888. Descriptions of new Indian lepidopterous insects from the collection of the late Mr. W.S. Atkinson. P. 232. TL: Darjeeling. Female. Text at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/26805#page/250/mode/1up
FBI, Hampson, Vol. 3, Pg. 241, # 3342. WS: 56 mm.
Dalima vulpinaria MON Part 6, Fig 1465-66, Pg. 146. B&W images.
Sondhi et al 2021. Moths of Tale, Image 301.
http://v3.boldsystems.org/index.php/Taxbrowser_Taxonpage?taxid=413724
RPS: Agree with ID.
Listed as Leptostichia latitans (male): Warren, W. 1893. On new Genera and Species of Moths of the Family Geometridae from India, in the Collection of H. J. Elwes, with Notes by H. J. Elwes. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London. Text at: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/111041#page/487/mode/1up
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/150053991
JD : agree with iD. The description by Moore in OD is for the female. This a well as Hampson's descriptions do not quite match with this image. Hampson does not mention the gender, but I presume it could be the male. Images on MON and Bold Systems are good matches. Refer to the notes on page 115 in MON.
JS: Oxydia vulpinaria. Moore, 1888. Descriptions of new Indian lepidopterous insects from the collection of the late Mr. W.S. Atkinson. P. 232. TL: Darjeeling. Female. Text at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/26805#page/250/mode/1up
FBI, Hampson, Vol. 3, Pg. 241, # 3342. WS: 56 mm.
Dalima vulpinaria MON Part 6, Fig 1465-66, Pg. 146. B&W images.
Sondhi et al 2021. Moths of Tale, Image 301.
http://v3.boldsystems.org/index.php/Taxbrowser_Taxonpage?taxid=413724
RPS: Agree with ID.
Listed as Leptostichia latitans (male): Warren, W. 1893. On new Genera and Species of Moths of the Family Geometridae from India, in the Collection of H. J. Elwes, with Notes by H. J. Elwes. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London. Text at: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/111041#page/487/mode/1up
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/150053991
JD : agree with iD. The description by Moore in OD is for the female. This a well as Hampson's descriptions do not quite match with this image. Hampson does not mention the gender, but I presume it could be the male. Images on MON and Bold Systems are good matches. Refer to the notes on page 115 in MON.
Observation Reference