The BOLD specimens seem to have legs that are pale on top and dark underneath. It might be worth asking Ian McMillan about the legs in his photo on LBH.
Great mind think alike Don, I have also contacted Iam Mc and I see he has sent Don the correct image of argentella, without yellow legs. iNates is also in error with this one. I would use iNats with caution. I prefer Bold which is mostly correct, though some images are yet to be barcoded and the odd problem occurs and a few manuscript names have/had (some corrected) been used. I find using the original description, when available and not 4 lines of latin or ancient German script, then comparing it with the Bold images as the best ID method but treat everything with caution. So this is best left as Xylorycta sp. though Ian Mc informs me there is a possibility it belongs in Lichenaulas.
OK, I concur with you Peter and Don as regards your remarks. I use Bold 4 reguarly too , of course, however species coverage may be lacking and images of dead set specimens are sometimes hard to reconcile with photos from life at times. And my final resort is sometimes to refer to Glenn Cocking who has access to and can look at the vast holdings of moths in the ANIC collection here at CSIRO, Black mountain in Canberra if need be. This may mean we need to review some of our revious IDs of this and similar species on NaturMapr.
Describe how you intend to use these images and/or audio files and your request will be sent to the author for consideration.
Your request has been successfully submitted to the author for consideration.
2,155,800 sightings of 19,971 species in 6,516 locations from 11,539 contributors
CCA 3.0 | privacy
We acknowledge the Traditional Owners of this land and acknowledge their continuing connection to their culture. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present.