There's no 'green form' of nanina. Only delphinii has this 'green form' with a mostly green forewing, and this particular form of delphinii is generally found in the Midwest such as MO, KS, as well as OK and even Texas.

Also, size is a determining factor between the two. E. nanina is always the smaller moth.

Do you have references that say there is no green form of nanina, and that delphinii definitely occurs in Texas?

On the genus page, I used to have a link (dead now) to a mostly green Euclea nanina photo from U. of Texas, that looked virtually identical to the recent Euclea photos posted from Texas and Oklahoma.

Well, you're not going to find much published on nanina as of yet. I don't have any published works to quote you that I'm aware of.

My info comes from my personal knowledge and experience with the genus, as well as correspondence with several experts about the two species, the most recent being James Adams. James also further states, "*SIZE* is *ALWAYS* indicative. E. nanina is a smaller moth. And, even though the green spots are similar, the shape and proportions are always still diagnostic."

I'd be glad to take a look through our Euclea images and see if I can offer some opinions. I've collected specimens of both delphinii and nanina from FL, GA, AL, and TN. I'll see how the images compare to those in my drawer of Limacodidae.

is a text description of the diagnostic characteristics of delphinii and nanina, and it should be detailed/precise enough to allow us to visually distinguish the difference(s) between the species.

In the images of nanina here, the green patch near the base of the forewing resembles a closed hand, with its "index finger" pointing toward the outer margin of the wing. The basal edge of this patch is blunt or truncated, giving the patch an overall rectangular shape, with rounded corners. However, in the All-Leps image of nanina, the "index finger" on the right forewing is almost invisible, and a "detached fingertip" is all that remains on the left forewing. Also, the basal edge of the patch is more pointed, giving the patch a more triangular shape. In this photo, the "index finger" is visible on both wings, and the basal patch is somewhat trapezoidal (intermediate between rectangular and triangular) but the picture comes from the All-Leps delphinii page. I don't know whether these particular characteristics are important ones, and I don't know whether all the web photos of delphinii and nanina are correctly labelled, so the situation seems far from clear to me at the moment.

Size differences would be useful if we knew the range of measurements for each species, and had either a specimen in hand or a photo taken against a ruler that would allow accurate measurement. Otherwise, "larger" and "smaller" are relative terms, and estimating size from photos taken in the field can be risky, especially if the photos are someone else's.

I previously mentioned a link (now dead) to a mostly green E. nanina photo from U. of Texas. It looked very much like these photos of Euclea incisa from Arizona. At this point, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of all 3 species (incisa, nanina, delphinii) having individuals with mostly green forewings. And if that's the case, I wouldn't know how to distinguish between them in areas where their ranges overlap.

More detailed information is required for the sake of people who would like to ID these species on their own. Adding that info to the Guide for future reference would be a great help.

I completely understand Robin. As I mentioned earlier, there just isn’t much (if any) info published on nanina right now, which complicates things a bit. Honestly, it is quite difficult to describe the differences of the rather ambiguous markings on these two species. I seem to frustrate myself the more I try to articulate the differences. It’s almost one of those situations where I can point out the species from experience, but I can’t seem to accurately describe why in unambiguous terms.

The best I can probably do to describe them for now, is that in nanina, the green markings are proportionately larger. The basal green patch in nanina is generally perspicuously larger in proportion (of FW) when compared to the typical delphinii, and it always rises slightly above vein CuA, whereas in delphinii, the green patch generally only borders along vein CuA or less (except in the green forms). Also, as you noted, the green patch in nanina is wider basally, but more narrow in delphinii giving a more triangular appearance (although that can vary slightly in both). Also, the wing shape of nanina tends to be more blunt and “stubby” in appearance (harder to distinguish in males of the two). And in regard to size, it appears the published size range for delphinii is 19-31mm (Covell). And for nanina, I only have my specimens from my Limacodidae drawer which range from 17-19mm.

Also, as I mentioned before, there is no green form of nanina. At least none that have been collected, described, or photographed, and as such at this time, no green form of nanina exists (Though I agree with you that I wouldn’t deem it impossible). If a suspected green form of nanina does turn up, size should determine pretty quickly whether it is or not.

Now, as to that BoldSystems photo, that is an ID error. That moth is a delphinii specimen.

In regard to the moth on the former UT link, if it was a green form like that of delphinii or incisa (incisa is always green to my knowledge), I suspect that it is in fact one of those two. Given that no green forms of nanina are known, I suspect the moth was a border jumping incisa, or a green form delphinii depending on where it was collected. I contacted Ed Knudson to see if he is aware of any green form nanina showing up over there, because that would be great documentation (and the first recorded green form nanina to boot).

I wished I could be of more help with references. Unfortunately, there just isn’t much published on these two species (especially nanina). I’m offering all the info I can from my experience with them and from info gleaned from correspondence with a few experts, but I realize this info can only carry so much weight given that I am not a published expert. Hopefully, this discussion has at least helped to further the likelihood that we will get some solid info on IDing these little guys. We’re moving forward one step at a time. :)

This is one of the variations of Euclea delphinii, # 4697. The brown costa and the brown band covering and going past the tornus, as well as the brown thoracic scaling distinguish this from the Parasa.