Aethecerinus latecinctus — The Life Data

Animalia/Arthropoda/Insecta/Coleoptera/Cerambycidae/Aethecerinus

At a glance

Occurrence records66

Data sources7

Biological traits0

DNA specimens1

eDNA detections1

Sources7 archives

Databases and archives Aethecerinus latecinctus's data was compiled from.

WikipediaWikimedia Foundation5 languages↗

BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗

GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility66 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 & distributionGBIF66 records

Environmental DNA1 datasets · 0 countries1 detections

DNA & barcodingBOLD1 specimens

01Narrative

Aethecerinus latecinctus is a species of beetle in the family Cerambycidae.Bezark, Larry G. A Photographic Catalog of the Cerambycidae of the World . Retrieved on 22 June 2012. It was described by George Henry Horn in 1880.

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 Aethecerinus latecinctus has left across the world's sequence archives.

At a glance

DNA specimens1

BINs1

Marker genes1

eDNA detections1

Countries1

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 type66 records

Wild obs. + sensor51

Museum / vouchered15

Range

Area of Occupancy AOO216 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 accuracy89% within 1 km

≤100 m 27≤1 km 5≤10 km 2>10 km 2

36 georeferenced · 15 without coordinates

Open the mapobservation + sensor51

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 2≤10 km 3>10 km 1

6 georeferenced · 9 without coordinates

Open the institutions mapphysical evidence15

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 institutions5 of 8 geolocated

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

Institution	Specimens
Washington, US	4
US	3
San Diego, US	2
Albuquerque, US	2
University of Central Floridalocation not on record	1
Santa Barbara Museum of Natural Historylocation not on record	1
WIlocation not on record	1
Wuzhou, CN	1

8 institutions · 15 of 15 vouchered records shown

09Environmental DNA1 detections

Where the DNA of Aethecerinus latecinctus 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.