Looking at the online reference this looks like I. pectinea due to the amount of holes in the leaf. What I've been able to find on I. masculella doesn't show the same density. Is this diagnostic?
Hi Nigel, I'm not convinced that anyone really knows for sure. Incurvaria masculella certainly uses hazel (along with quite a few other plants) in continental Europe and the mines do look very similar to those of pectinea. However, like you I can't find any images showing more than a couple of masculella mines to a leaf but whether or not that means large numbers = a diagnostic difference I wouldn't like to say! So far as Bucks is concerned masculella is common (100+ adult records from across the entire county) whereas pectinea is either rare or very under-recorded (five adult records). Of the four post-millennium adult records, all are from the southern half of the county including two from Walter's Ash which isn't far from you. Something to look out for in April next year!
Hi Nigel, I'm not convinced that anyone really knows for sure. Incurvaria masculella certainly uses hazel (along with quite a few other plants) in continental Europe and the mines do look very similar to those of pectinea. However, like you I can't find any images showing more than a couple of masculella mines to a leaf but whether or not that means large numbers = a diagnostic difference I wouldn't like to say! So far as Bucks is concerned masculella is common (100+ adult records from across the entire county) whereas pectinea is either rare or very under-recorded (five adult records). Of the four post-millennium adult records, all are from the southern half of the county including two from Walter's Ash which isn't far from you. Something to look out for in April next year!
ReplyDeleteHi Dave, thanks for looking at this and the info on the Bucks records.
ReplyDeleteNigel