The background is green with just different lighting intensity or exposure on the two images. Check my other images - most on this same green plate with translucent mesh covering.

BOLD has the genus wrong. Staudingeria is no longer a valid name. It was synonymized with Ancylosis in Leraut (2008).

Steve,

I noted the generic squabble in my original comments. Also seem to recall a difference in those two forms in the data from BOLD that put them on different taxonomic limbs. That was some time ago and might have changed. Again, I care less about which genera a specimen might eventually end up being. I send moths to the biodiversity group for archiving and study and the DNA data exists as a permanent record for the future. Along this regard, has anyone who specializes in moth genitals compared the DNA sequence results from the same comparisons? It might indicate if the test data would show or indicate this difference as some percent? Or put another way, has there been closely matching sequence data between specimens that have what are considered morphological different enough in the genitalia to define a species? Can the two means be utilized together perhaps as a check?

There is no system for checking BOLD identifications against genitalia. Sometimes we get luck and contributors add genitalia slides but that is typically not the case. When available, I do use this to cross check IDs. I am very much a novice with genitalia but I often know enough to know when to ask for expert guidance. Some experts have permission to edit contributor submitted identifications and will exercise those permissions to varying degrees. Experts don't like to change IDs of other experts and often don't have the time to ask. Not sure if this addressed your question. If not, shoot me an email.

I added the photo. Glad I asked. Thanks!

ibid - this is a moth right?

*