Moved from Eupithecia longipalpata.

This is Sample ID 2008GM-0075, the sole specimen in BIN BOLD:ACE3378. DNA barcode does place it near specimens identified as longipalpata but with a separation of over 1.5%, the evidence is inconclusive.

BOLD has recently rolled out an upgraded website. It is still a bit confusing to me, but in many cases it permits a better view of data. There might be some bugs to be worked out there, and I noticed an oddity: You appear to have two photos of this specimen, the marvelous pic of the living moth and also one of a tattered spread specimen. If the photos are of different specimens then that calls for a correction at BOLD. But, even if they are of the same moth, BOLD shows them under two different species names (7468 - Eupithecia longipalpata and 7461 - E. subvirens).

To further complicate things, your specimen appears on the tree for E. longipalpata where the entry says Eupithecia sp. It appears at the very top of the tree at a distance from other entries that suggests uncertainty as to species relationships. See BOLD tree.

The photos are also shown here under Eupithecia subvirens.

I suggest you get in touch with Jayme Sones at BOLD and ask for someone to look into all of this. Perhaps they will assign a solid species name to your specimen and correct the double placement of the photos.

Moved from Eupithecia.

98.44% DNA match at BOLD to Eupithecia longipalpata.

Appears to be a very fresh Eupithecia subvirens, but it would be best to see if others concur.

this kind of looks like Pasiphila rectangulata
see mpg pix here.