P. J. Alling wrote: > Mark Roberts wrote: > >>"positive identification can only be achieved through >>dissection of the male genitalia", > > Which the skipper would thank you for, if it were aware. > (which brings up two questions, where would you get the tiny scalpel, > and would you use tweezers to manipulate it?
Moth genitalia are easy, compared to dissecting out the mouthparts of Chironimidae mosquito larvae. It's a difficult job but someone has to do it.... > > Mark Roberts wrote: > >>mike wilson wrote: >> >> >> >>>>From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> >>>>Can anyone help ID this fella? >>>>http://www.robertstech.com/temp/7d703021_Moth.jpg >>>> >>> >>>as already mentioned this is a Skipper butterfly, shown by the bend >>>just before the club of the antennae. Excellent work to get such a >>>good picture of one - these are usually as active as a caffiened-up >>>Jack Russell. But they are notoriously difficult to identify. Good luck. >>> >> >>A list lurker sent me this link: >>http://www.toledo-bend.us/enlarge.shtml?caption=Silver-Spotted+Skipper+Butterfly&pic=gallery/skippers/IMG_40911w >> >>Looks like my skipper. >> >>At least, that's what I'm going to call it. One web site I went to >>noted that "positive identification can only be achieved through >>dissection of the male genitalia", which is significantly more >>involvement than I care for simply to get a photo caption (even though >>I did have a pathologist with me when I got this shot). >> >>Oh yes: K10D and 16-50 f/2.8 >> >> >> >> > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
