Forum home Wildlife gardening
This Forum will close on Wednesday 27 March, 2024. Please refer to the announcement on the Discussions page for further detail.

Insects of the day (2)

15859616364128

Posts

  • Papi JoPapi Jo Posts: 4,254
    [...] it's something new to me and finding out about new things makes me happy. :)
    me too ;)
  • FireFire Posts: 19,096
    Me three.
  • FireFire Posts: 19,096
    A beautiful shield bug.







  • ShepsSheps Posts: 2,236
    Papi Jo said:
    My insect of the day is a small (unidentified) butterfly. With such knowledgeable forum members as @wild edges @Sheps (and others) I'm getting lazy at identifying the little critters myself. :(




    After quick search in the old Collins 



    I'd go with Geranium Bronze 

    Website below to probably confirm 

    https://www.butterfliesoffrance.com/html/Cacyreus marshalli.htm
  • FireFire Posts: 19,096
  • wild edgeswild edges Posts: 10,497
    I've been pondering this since it's been a really mixed bag here. The woods have been full of ringlets, gatekeepers and meadow browns but I've seen very few peacocks this year and normally I see plenty of them. There's been an abundance of common blue and skippers and a fairly normal number of whites but no painted ladies or wall browns at all. I've also had two new species in the garden which I wonder maybe due to them moving up this way to escape the drought and heat elsewhere since we haven't had it as badly as other places? England always seems to have a much higher rate of loss than anywhere else in the UK.
    If you can keep your head, while those around you are losing theirs, you may not have grasped the seriousness of the situation.
  • FireFire Posts: 19,096
    I think England has a higher rate of loss of eveything: sense, courtsey, trees....
    With citizen science surveys I do always wonder about the rigour of the data produced. I hope the parse it properly. As with the bird count, surely the weather at the time of the count, the location of those counting etc would make a huge difference to what is recorded. The data would even out over decades, if looking for long term trends, but headlines like "the lowest buttefly numbers since records began" might not be helpful, esp if not adjusted for higher numbers of records from England/south east.

    Also - education levels; perhaps more and more people are getting recently interested in butterflies (like me) in the UK and, with study, could begin to tell a common blue from a holly blue, for example (I can't, off the bat). I've not looked into data parsing in bee, bird, worm counts etc, but it would be interesting to learn about the weaknesses of the systems.
  • Slow-wormSlow-worm Posts: 1,630
    I've never in my life known what these are called, but as one landed on my deckchair and sorted his wings out, I thought I'd better photograph 'im. 😊

  • Agreed @Fire you probably can't trust too much of the data provided for the big butterfly count at least. The average "non interested in nature" person can't even tell the difference between a honeybee and a wasp. They also think all bees make honey.
    Though there are butterfly surveys you can add to all year round, I think it's an irecord one I do and you have to upload a pic - then an expert responds and either accepts it as correct or incorrect ID! 
    PS the common blue has the funky underwing that the Holly one doesn't.
Sign In or Register to comment.