Burnet moth - but which one ?

mickmassie · #1 (**permalink**) 09-06-2009, 08:26 PM

I have never tried to identify a Zygaena larva before. I have three books in front of me with Burnet Moth larvae pictures, but I can't make my mind up for sure on this one. Help please, and a pointer or two please ! I am sure it is obvious to the trained eye. The larva was on a plantain, but trefoil nearby.

M.

charlieb · #2 (**permalink**) 09-06-2009, 08:49 PM

There are 3 candidates for this one: the Six-Spot Burnet Zygaena filipendulae, Five-Spot Burnet Zygaena trifolii and Narrow-bordered Five-spot Burnet Zygaena lonicerae.

The Six-spot and Narrow-bordered Five-spot are the commonest - the Five-spot is found in the south-west and south Wales.

You can rule out Narrow-bordered as the hairs are much longer than the other two. The Five-spot tends to be paler and has black and white hairs whereas the Six-spot is quite a vivid green with mainly white hairs. The black blotches aren't particularly diagnostic - the Six-spot is quite variable.

I'd go with Six-spot for yours

mickmassie · #3 (**permalink**) 09-06-2009, 08:59 PM

Thanks charlieb,

mickmassie · #4 (**permalink**) 09-06-2009, 09:09 PM

I meant to say:
Thanks charlieb, filipendulae is the likely suspect, but I couldn't have worked that out for certain from my three books.
In Carter and Hargreaves the longer hairs are mentioned for Z lonicerae, but illustrations are cryptic.
Porter shows and talks about long hairs on Z lonicerae.
Manley shows long hairs on Z trifoli
Tricky, eh ?
M.

charlieb · #5 (**permalink**) 10-06-2009, 05:02 PM

Yup

There are some good photos of the three species at ukleps.org

The illustrations in Carter and Hargreaves are reproduced on the website whatsthiscaterpillar.co.uk and in my opinion are absolutely useless. The next best thing to having a specimen is having a series of photos, not drawings, and ukleps.org is very good for this.

mickmassie · #6 (**permalink**) 10-06-2009, 05:21 PM

I generally steer clear of leps and caterpillars, but Carter and Hargreaves is useful as the illustrations are organised by food plant. The illustrations do look like something out of a Ladybird book. Manley's new book is the best Photoguide to Leps by a street, covers a lot of species and makes the photographs in Porter look amateur. But, the photo of the Five-spot Burnet larva in Manley looks dodgy. I'll be interested if there are any other views.

UKLEPS looks good, you can trust something with a name like that - nothing warm and fluffy there.

Thanks, M.

charlieb · #7 (**permalink**) 10-06-2009, 06:19 PM

Manleys book is good but it only covers 300 of the caterpillars (there are many similar species that aren't covered which can lead to a false sense of security) - Porters book is the most comprehensive, but is not only showing its age but is also hampered by the fact that very few Leps are truly well-known, especially in the early stages (I also imagine that many of the photos are decades old). Of course this is applicable to any comprehensive book, and as Manley shows it is easier to just cover the commoner species.

The other problem is one of cost - 800 large (Manley-size) photos would cost a lot, and as the audience for such a publication is limited, the numbers probably don't add up.