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

TaxonomyBrowseInfoImagesLinksBooksData
Photo#248248
Unknown moth - Ypsolopha angelicella

Unknown moth - Ypsolopha angelicella
In open desert scrub, NW of I-15 and Main St, Hesperia, San Bernadino County, California, USA
May 5, 2008
Size: Head to Wing Tip ~18mm
Hundreds of these moths were swarming at dusk in an area of open desert scrub in the southwest Mojave Desert. They were densely congregating on and around the yellow-flowering shrubs of Acamptopappus sphaerocephalus (shown here) and Tetradymia axillaris var. longispina, both members of the Asteraceae.

Images of this individual: tag all
Unknown moth - Ypsolopha angelicella Unknown moth - Ypsolopha angelicella Unknown moth - Ypsolopha angelicella Unknown moth - Ypsolopha angelicella

Moved
Moved from Ypsolopha maculatella.

See my comments here.

Moved to Ypsolopha maculatella
Moved from Ypsolophidae.

Two experts have determined that this is the most likely species. Also, the left moth in your image here really does match one of the pinned images at MPG fairly well. I think we know that none of these difficult calls are can be made with certainty and the Guide would be much less useful, at least for moths, if we restricted it to only what is certain. Hope that makes sense.

 
Thanks for the move, Steve
You're right, the goldish wing-markings do agree well with Jerry Powell's image here. Also, I looked up the discussion on pg 107 in Powell & Opler(1) and there was more therein to further support Ypsolopha maculatella: e.g. that they're sometimes found in abundance at composite flowers growing near Ephedra shrubs, which was the case in my photos. Also, that it's quite variable...perhaps comprising more than one species (compare the largely unmarked specimen in this 2nd Powell image to the previous one). Perhaps this might partially explain Jerry's "tentative" qualifier.

I am puzzled by something else though! Both BugGuide and the text on pg 107 of Powell & Opler(1) use the name Y. maculatella. On the other hand: Bob, the CalPhotos images, and the figures in Plate 11.9 and 11.10 of Powell & Opler use the name, Y. maculatana. Are these synonyms? (Or maybe one's just an inadvertently perturbation of the other?)

PS: I certainly recognize that Jerry Powell is the probably the foremost expert on CA moths (and beyond) and I wouldn't have hesitated to move the images if I clearly understood he felt it appropriate to do so. It was my wish to respect his judgment that prompted me to be cautious and try to clarify things in my earlier interchange w/ Bob. I think what happened there was mainly a misunderstanding of intent.

But just to be clear, in the absence of such misunderstanding, I believe that with "difficult calls", the wiser (and official?) policy is to take the more cautious approach (i.e. placing the posts at a more certain higher rank rather than an uncertain lower rank). Of course, we'd all like to have everything classified down to species (or lower). But if we allowed that desire to drive us to systematic recklessness, BugGuide would become inaccurate, and thus less, rather than more, useful. It is definitely useful for people to mention speculative ID info in their BugGuide remarks and comments...as those drive discussion and further research and progress to resolving questions, and they'll also generally be detected by the search engine by anyone trying to track down possibilities for an ID. But to ensure and enhance the accuracy (and thus genuine utility) of BugGuide or any similar such site, I think most of us would agree on the need for a fairly strong level of confidence before things are moved to species. I believe it's important to emphasize this.

PPS: I'd also like to emphasize one more thing. I believe we're all here on BugGuide for the same basic reasons: to further our understanding and share knowledge of a subject we find fascinating. I applaud and appreciate all the dedicated and passionate efforts we all make towards that goal...in particular, the efforts of Bob, Jerry, and you! :-) Thanks again.

 
Ypsolopha maculatella is the Correct Name
(no rsvp, thanks)

Probably 2386 - Ypsolopha maculatana
....the ID should be considered tentative, according to Jerry Powell to whom I sent the photograph.

 
Thanks Bob!
I find moths very difficult, and didn't know where to begin here...so your assistance is much appreciated! Following up on your lead of Ypsolopha, I found Powell & Hogue mention on pg. 193 of "California Insects"(1) that, when at rest, the wing-tips of Ypsolopha (cervella) bend upward "like the outline of a canoe". That's a nice, simple, character which is very apparent in the moth(s) in these photos. Other online images of Ypsolopha also look like a good match (at least to my relatively untrained eye). I'm tempted to move my photos to the guide page for genus Ypsolopha (under the presumption that Jerry's ID is "tentative" regarding species rather than genus). Think that's a good idea? Or should I wait for further comments/clarification? It may be worth noting that the California Moth Specimen Database shows records for Ypsolopha maculatella in locales with habitat much like that where these photos were taken.

By the way, I was delighted to learn (on the Moth Photographers web site) that Jerry Powell and Paul Opler have a major work "Moths of Western NA"(2) due out soon...what a welcome resource that will be!! (We have good references for butterflies in CA, but comparatively little for that other far vaster portion of Lepidoptera.)

 
I Move it to a Species Page......
..... when Powell says "it probably is...." it probably is. Many professionals will often hedge their determinations when they cannot handle the specimen or examine genitalia. There is no one as knowledgable about West Coast micros as Jerry. This may be difficult for many people to understand, but absolute identifications from photographs, especially for micros, is an unrealistic expectation. Now, if Jerry said "it is possibly....." I'd leave it at the genus or family level.

 
Sounds Good
Considering how huge (and subtle) the group is, it makes sense what you say regarding absolute ID's from photos. I'm grateful to get to family with a tentative genus/species. I'm not totally clear on where "tentative" resides in the spectrum between "possibly" and "probably" :-). So I'll move it to the family page and BugGuide editors can then make any further moves as they may see fit. Thanks again to you and Jerry Powell for sharing your knowledge and efforts.

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