andyk's picture

Pretty moth

Observed: 25th July 2012 By: andyk
London Natural History Society
andyk is knowledgeable about Invertebratesandyk’s earned reputation in Invertebratesandyk’s earned reputation in Invertebratesandyk’s earned reputation in Invertebratesandyk’s earned reputation in Invertebratesandyk’s earned reputation in Invertebrates
ANK_3704
Description:

Came to light in an old orchard.

Identifications
Species interactions

No interactions present.

Comments

ophrys's picture

Masculine

Looks like it should be masculine...formosanus. iSpot is not recognising it in the feminine!

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

andyk's picture

You are quite right.

The NBN Gateway has it correctly as formosanus, although the Field Guide has it as formosana!

Andy Keay

ophrys's picture

Change

Whichever is right, it would be worth adding a new ID, so that it gets added to the other sightings (and I'm pretty sure there are some, as I added one, I think!).

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

andyk's picture

Done!

Done!

Andy Keay

DavidNotton's picture

Andy you were right!

According to the official rules genus names ending in -odes are generally masculine, EXCEPT when treated otherwise when originally established (See http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted-sites/iczn/code/ part 30.1.4.4) and in this case Obratsov treated Lozotaeniodes as feminine when he established it, giving the type species as L. cupressana (note feminine ending), so Lozotaeniodes formosana is quite correct. The original description of Lozotaeniodes is found here: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/89708#page/219/mode/1up.

Unfortunately there are many mistakes in published sources for Lepidoptera gender agreements.

DavidNotton's picture

And

it is a very nice moth

ophrys's picture

iSpot

This has been thrashed out before, but I still think we should go with what iSpot uses, as then photos of the same species are kept together.

Agreed...it's a cracking little moth!

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

DavidNotton's picture

But the iSpot name is wrong

Surely using the incorrect name now means that when iSpot updates its name list, there will be more observations that will not link correctly in future...

I don't want to discourage anyone from using the correct name.

ophrys's picture

Fair enough

Yes, that makes sense. Blame Martin Harvey, he suggested using the names iSpot currently uses! ;)

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

andyk's picture

Perhaps

Perhaps the management would like to make a decision.......?

Andy Keay

DavidNotton's picture

Don't blame Martin Harvey

The current look up list was compiled using the best available data at the time and I'm sure Martin is working hard to get an update so it's not a matter of blaming anyone.

Also I think it would be hard for Martin to categorically advise people not to use the officially correct ICZN names.

The problem of linking records will hopefully go away in future if iSpot adopts a more sophisticated way of handling names like the NBN which recognises junior synonyms and common misspellings and links then automatically to the correct name.

ophrys's picture

Blaming people

You're in danger of taking me too seriously!

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/