Amblycorypha uhleri — The Life Data

Animalia/Arthropoda/Insecta/Orthoptera/Tettigoniidae/Amblycorypha

At a glance

Occurrence records61

Data sources7

Biological traits0

DNA specimens4

eDNA detections3

Sources7 archives

Databases and archives Amblycorypha uhleri's data was compiled from.

WikipediaWikimedia Foundation2 languages↗

BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗

GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility61 records↗

ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI3 eDNA detections↗

BOLD SystemsCentre for Biodiversity Genomics4 specimens↗

Catalogue of LifeCOLtaxonomy↗

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 & distributionGBIF61 records

Environmental DNA1 datasets · 0 countries3 detections

DNA & barcodingBOLD4 specimens

01Narrative

Amblycorypha uhleri, known generally as the Uhler's virtuoso katydid or Uhler's katydid, is a species of phaneropterine katydid in the family Tettigoniidae. It is found in North America.

No narrative description available for this taxon yet.

02Traits & measurements

No structured trait data for this taxon yet.

05DNA & barcoding4 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 Amblycorypha uhleri has left across the world's sequence archives.

At a glance

DNA specimens4

BINs2

Marker genes1

eDNA detections3

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 type61 records

Wild obs. + sensor3

Museum / vouchered58

Range

Area of Occupancy AOO152 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 accuracy

no georeferenced coordinates · 3 records without

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 accuracy38% within 1 km

≤100 m 1≤1 km 8≤10 km 9>10 km 6

24 georeferenced · 34 without coordinates

Open the institutions mapphysical evidence58

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 institutions6 of 9 geolocated

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

Institution	Specimens
College Station, US	12
Champaign, US	12
CUlocation not on record	9
Provo, US	9
Wuzhou, CN	7
University of Alabamalocation not on record	4
Cleveland Museum of Natural History, OH (CLEV)location not on record	2
	2
Montgomery, US	1

9 institutions · 58 of 58 vouchered records shown

09Environmental DNA3 detections

Where the DNA of Amblycorypha uhleri 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 found3

Studies independent surveys1

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

Where its DNA was found

0 of 3 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.