No interactions present.
Yes, as David says many think it unsafe to ID without GD.
I'm of the view that they can sometimes be ID'd, but not really from a photo.
I would lean slightly towards Rustic on this one.
I'd share Douglas's view, with these moths in the hand I will usually ID without retaining for dissection. But from a photo I'd not be confident.
I would lean slighly towards Uncertain on this one.
RHoman is right that there is another confusion, and that we should be careful from photos. To my eye Vine's Rustic has a much greyer appearance than Uncertain/Rustic, so I will stick with my slight leaning on this one, but his ID is probably the safest one to agree with.
Yes, I had considered Vine's however had decided it wasn't right for this moth.
However, I agree with the caution on these 3 species.
I don't know why I submitted this one but it has resulted in discussion. My notes show I recorded Rustic on that day, and it was probably the one I photographed, being a neat clean specimen unlike many of them. It was the photo rather than the insect that made me think of Common Quaker. Vine's are usually more distinctive with a slight shine to them. I normally record the darker ones as Rustic and paler as Uncertain but am never that sure. At least they are all common.
I've not heard that dark=rustic paler=uncertain distinction before. The external character I usually use is the presence (uncertain) or absence (rustic) of a dark curved cross bar between the two kidney marks.
Lat/Lng: 51.41258, -2.503
OS grid ref: ST651682
MV moth trap