Bold Systems list two species Pataeta carbo and P. conspicienda and Australian Faunal Directory states that these are synonyms. MOV suggests that there is DNA evidence for more species. I am wondering if there has been any advancement on this subject and is it possible to differentiate between the sexes from appearance?
Guenée described and named the species Pataeta carbo from only a single damaged specimen that had lost its palps, antennae, and abdomen, so he could not determine the sex of the holotype ! Walker also described only one specimen, naming it P. conspicienda, which he said was male, but was later found to be a female ! Ted Edwards in the 1996 Checklist put Pataeta carbo and P. conspicienda into synonomy. I can see no superficial differences between the sexes illustrated in MOV8.
As I read BOLD's BIN info, there is a difference, but not a big one.Their Pataeta specimens have been put into 2 BINS, one mostly dark and one mostly light. Obviously the individual specimens would have to be studied carefully before a conclusion could be drawn.
I think we should leave them together as separating them just on light/dark wouldn't be very accurate. The notes on the species page describe the situation.
Describe how you intend to use these images and/or audio files and your request will be sent to the author for consideration.
Your request has been successfully submitted to the author for consideration.
2,167,030 sightings of 20,573 species in 6,801 locations from 11,955 contributors
CCA 3.0 | privacy
We acknowledge the Traditional Owners of this land and acknowledge their continuing connection to their culture. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present.