Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Calendar
Upcoming Events

Interested in a 2022 BugGuide gathering in New Mexico?

Photos of insects and people from the Spring 2021 gathering in Louisiana, April 28-May 2

National Moth Week 2020 photos of insects and people.

Photos of insects and people from the 2019 gathering in Louisiana, July 25-27

Discussion, insects and people from the 2018 gathering in Virginia, July 27-29

Photos of insects and people from the 2015 gathering in Wisconsin, July 10-12

Photos of insects and people from the 2014 gathering in Virginia, June 4-7.

Previous events


TaxonomyBrowseInfoImagesLinksBooksData
Photo#1055031
Couldn't find any moth pictures that had this triangular shape - Mocis disseverans

Couldn't find any moth pictures that had this triangular shape - Mocis disseverans
Pinellas County, Florida, USA
September 22, 2011
Can anyone help id this moth?

Moved
Moved from Mocis.

Moved
Moved from Owlet Moths.

Moved
Moved from Moths.

Moved
Moved from Mocis.

.
Hello Pabu,

I wish I had made this comment at the beginning of this discussion. I do not think that you can get a definitive species identification from a photo with such poor orientation. I think, if you will look through the photographs of the identified Mocis you will find the photographs were all taken at a square angle. When a genus is as difficult as this is, it is necessary to take all clues into consiseration. We drove to our West Texas place today (5 hours) so I did not have time earlier to study my knowledge of this genus. I have missed the primarly diagnostic elements heretofore and gone on my own "eye" reading of MPG photographs. Now that I have copied and compared all of the identification sections from the guide, I have corrected my own files.

I compared only photographs identified by either Maury Heiman or Bob Patterson. Until last year they were THE moth experts on BG. THEY STILL ARE, however, however for some reason neither of them is currently active to my knowledge. Using only their sanctioned photographs eliminated possible mistakes made by users who placed their own moths to species.

I still believe this MAY be a M. diseverans, but for a different reason. If you got to you will see a comment by Robert Lord Zimlich as to the incomplete PM line at the costa edge in M. diseverans. There is NO ID information on the species page, so I found this very helpful and found a nby Maury Heiman referring to the same diagnostic. I could follow that reasoning in all of the species ID'd by Maury Heiman and Bob Patterson.

I will not place this moth to species because I do not wish to contribute to the confusion among the species.

 
Thank you
A Hendrickson. Learning how to id and what I need in a photograph to be able to id is more important than being able to get a critter down to species level. I appreciate you sharing what you discovered from pursuing the id.

 
.
You are welcome. It has been good for me. I will definitely pay more attention to my Mocis until I get comfortable!

Moved
Moved from ID Request.

I agree with Josiah, but am not placing any of these to species except for the Texas Mocis which is pretty clearly identifiable since I was told by Maury Heiman that he thought a lot of the this genus was mixed up and needed to be reviewed.

 
OOOPS
Changed my mind. Look at Carol's Wolf's specimen [url}http://mothphotographersgroup.msstate.edu/species.php?hodges=8746[/ur.]. That double waved median spot kept nagging at me! And here on BG .

I wish Robert Lord Zimlich would weigh in. He has seen a number of these.

 
-
Although I'm starting to think this is likely disseverans, I see a number of Mocis latipes in the guide with that double waved median spot. Such as these: . Looking at BOLD, virtually all the latipes are a dull gray, and none have the double waved median spot. I wonder if this means that there just has not yet been a specimen with that double median spot, or going out on a limb, maybe latipes does not have this double median spot? Looking at BOLD's disseverans page, though, there are only one or two with the median spot, but there is a variety in the shades of color , unlike BOLD's latipes, with one particular disseverans specimen seeming to match this submission perfectly in color and pattern (including the double median spot). Based on the BOLD specimens, and the photos of disseverans in the guide, I'm going out on another limb, and wondering if some of those yellowish specimens (the common name is, after all, Yellow Mocis) in the guide from Florida with the shading below the PM line are mis-identified as latipes, and should be disseverans, particularly those with the double waved median spot.

I don't really know this, and it is basically a lot of speculation, but bottom line, I suspect this moth is likely disseverans.

 
Clarification on my comment
I'm sorry about my unclear comment above (dated 11:13pm April 13th). I was kind of thinking out loud. I thought they were interesting details, and I made some speculations, but I didn't intend that any identification or conclusion should be drawn from what I had written.

Based on what I had seen on BOLD and the like, I personally (not from a scientific standpoint) suspect that it is likely disservens, but I was certainly not giving that as an identification. I viewed it more in the nature of a guess, which I would be curious to see verified or corrected by an expert in this group.

I fully admit that I was being hasty when I initially identified it as Mocis latipes, and I am sorry for any confusion I may have caused.

 
'
Josiah,

Please send me a private e-mail. I think this is getting a bit long for notations on a submission.

Refer to my original comment, that Maury Heiman told me these pages were mixed up and needed work. I have never claimed to be an expert and am not capable of separating this variable genus.

I DO see them a LOT and have not paid a lot of attention to them - just give them a name for my personal files and go on.. Looked up the information on the caterpillars and it looks like even rearing might not accomplish much.

 
Since you moved it out of id request,
how do these other volunteers, with knowledge of moths, see it?

 
.
We try to get to Genus before moving, but I will move back to Moths per your request.

 
two spots?
My photo doesn't show two spots. On the Moth Photographers Group, I saw a list of species and locations for Florida. It included Mocis latipes, M. marcida, M. texana, M. disseverans and M. cubana.

 
,
I was referring to the two "waves" in the median area.

 
Mocis
Looking at this again, I think you are right, it is not necessarily Mocis latipes. It looks like Mocis disseverans is another possibility which I overlooked. In fact, it looks like disseverans might even be a better match than latipes. I cannot say for sure. Anyway, thanks for mentioning this, I was being careless, and did not research it throughly enough.

 
Due to your comment I searched and found the Moth
Photographers Group and found Mocis marcida as a possibility but my photo doesn't show the two distinct black spots. Do moths have differences like that between the male and female?

I didn't know this resource existed. See http://mothphotographersgroup.msstate.edu/FL2007/ABS03.shtml and 8744.

I use a hand held camera and I'm in the field so I will never get such fantastic photos like what I saw there, sigh.

Mocis latipes
My first id was wrong I believe. This looks better .

 
This does look like a good match
Will have to read more about this genus.

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.