Acraea camaena — The Life Data

Animalia/Arthropoda/Insecta/Lepidoptera/Nymphalidae/Acraea

At a glance

Occurrence records107

Data sources7

Biological traits0

DNA specimens1

eDNA detections1

Sources7 archives

Databases and archives Acraea camaena's data was compiled from.

WikipediaWikimedia Foundation2 languages↗

BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗

GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility107 records↗

ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI1 eDNA detections↗

BOLD SystemsCentre for Biodiversity Genomics1 specimens↗

Open Tree of LifeOpenTreephylogeny backbone↗

GLoBIGlobal Biotic Interactionsbiotic interactions↗

On this page4 sections

Every layer below draws on the sources above — open one to explore it, or use ← → to move between tabs.

NarrativeWikipediaarticle

Occurrence & distributionGBIF107 records

Environmental DNA1 datasets · 0 countries1 detections

DNA & barcodingBOLD1 specimens

01Narrative

Acraea camaena, the large smoky acraea, is a butterfly in the family Nymphalidae. It is found in Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, southern Burkina Faso, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Bioko, the Republic of the Congo and Angola (the Cabinda enclave).

No narrative description available for this taxon yet.

02Traits & measurements

No structured trait data for this taxon yet.

05DNA & barcoding1 specimens

A DNA barcode is a short, standardised stretch of genes that works like a fingerprint — enough to tell one species from another. Below is the molecular trace Acraea camaena has left across the world's sequence archives.

At a glance

DNA specimens1

BINs1

Marker genes1

eDNA detections1

Marker genes sequenced

★ the standard DNA barcode for this group — the short region actually read to tell this species apart. The rest are extra genes sequenced along the way.

COI-5P

animal barcode

08Occurrence & distribution

Record type107 records

Wild obs. + sensor3

Museum / vouchered104

Range

Area of Occupancy AOO132 km²

Wildobservation + sensor

Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.

Coordinate accuracy67% within 1 km

≤1 km 2>10 km 1

3 georeferenced

Open the mapobservation + sensor3

Museum / Voucheredphysical evidence

Backed by a physical specimen — a herbarium sheet, sample or voucher held in a collection. “Vouchered” means supported by material evidence, not just an observation.

Coordinate accuracy33% within 1 km

≤1 km 1≤10 km 1>10 km 1

3 georeferenced · 101 without coordinates

Open the institutions mapphysical evidence104

Wildobservation + sensor

Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.

10Collections & institutions

Holding institutions2 of 4 geolocated

Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.

Institution	Specimens
African Butterfly Research Institutelocation not on record	100
MZLUlocation not on record	2
Cambridge, US	1
Auckland, NZ	1

4 institutions · 104 of 104 vouchered records shown

09Environmental DNA1 detections

Where the DNA of Acraea camaena was picked up in samples of water, soil or air — nobody saw the organism, only its DNA left behind. A trace is a clue that the species was near, not a confirmed sighting.

Signal

Detections DNA found1

Studies independent surveys1

Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections

Where its DNA was found

0 of 1 detections have coordinates

Open the map0 countries0

How strong is each trace?

DNA read depthRead counts were not reported for this species — the map shows presence only, not how strong each trace was.

How to read this: each dot is one detection of this species' DNA in an environmental sample. The confidence meter weighs how many independent studies and places back up the signal — one detection in one study is a hint; many across several studies is solid. Records dated before 2008 (when eDNA methods began) are treated as likely mislabeled and left off the map.