I think that this, which came to my MV light last night, is probably Ypsolopha vitella, rather than a dull sequella, but the date seems rather late for the former.
Hello Phil, I think you are almost certainly correct with Ypsolopha vittella rather than a worn sequella but I'd be more comfortable with what would be a nice record if you got it checked. We have getting on for 400 records of sequella in Bucks (many of them from October) but only nine of vittella. Seven of those nine had their genitalia checked and three were seen on dates in September so the timing isn't out of the question. The records are from quite widely spaced sites across the county too, the nearest to you being Hillesden.
Hello Phil,
ReplyDeleteI think you are almost certainly correct with Ypsolopha vittella rather than a worn sequella but I'd be more comfortable with what would be a nice record if you got it checked. We have getting on for 400 records of sequella in Bucks (many of them from October) but only nine of vittella. Seven of those nine had their genitalia checked and three were seen on dates in September so the timing isn't out of the question. The records are from quite widely spaced sites across the county too, the nearest to you being Hillesden.
Thanks Dave,
ReplyDeleteI'll get it checked.