Hi, Steve (and Chuck). Yesterday I posted another individual in this species group. Your thoughts would be welcome!

Hey John, I'm out of town so no access to the Pelochrista book until late September.

Thanks for the heads-up

Michael Sabourin agrees that the above is reasonable for rosaocellana and I added it to MPG after taking some liberties with adjustments to levels (hope I got it right). I asked about your photo #2288626, and he commented directly to the submission that is looked like salaciana but atypical. I will do nothing more with it for now.

I reviewed the Pelochrista MONA but learned little more than what Chuck mentioned. I guess I could add that salaciana is "intermediate is size (mean FLW = 7.4 vs. 6.9 [palabundana] and 8.7 mm [rosaocellana]." I would be surprised if there were not overlap and aberrations.

Thanks, Steve. I saw Michael's comment at my image and will keep on the lookout for specimens like it.

In the recent Wright & Gilligan monograph (MONA 9.5, 2017)[cite:1636722,60], three very similar species are described as probable geographic replacements and may constitute one taxon. The form occurring in the Great Plains from Montana and Nebraska south to northern Texas is P. rosaocelana, and the present moth seems a good match to the plates in that MONA fascicle. P. salaciana was originally described from southeast and south coastal Texas (Colorado and Nueces counties).

I have moved the image at MPG and I added a page for rosaocellana at BugGuide. Not sure if you want it moved at BG or if you want to wait to see if others respond to our email conversation.