Chrysoclista flavicaput — The Life Data

Animalia/Arthropoda/Insecta/Lepidoptera/Elachistidae/Chrysoclista

At a glance

Occurrence records17

Data sources6

Biological traits2

DNA specimens0

eDNA detections13

Sources6 archives

Databases and archives Chrysoclista flavicaput's data was compiled from.

WikipediaWikimedia Foundation4 languages↗

BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗

GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility17 records↗

ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI13 eDNA detections↗

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

Traits & measurements1 literature sources2 traits

Occurrence & distributionGBIF17 records

Environmental DNA1 datasets · 4 countries13 detections

01Narrative

Spuleria is a genus of moths of the family Elachistidae. It contains only one species Spuleria flavicaput, which is found in most of Europe and Anatolia.

No narrative description available for this taxon yet.

02Traits & measurements

SourcesPantheon

Diet & foraging2

Feeding guild (adult)nectivore

Feeding guild (larval)herbivore

05DNA & barcoding13 eDNA hits

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 Chrysoclista flavicaput has left across the world's sequence archives.

At a glance

eDNA detections13

Countries4

08Occurrence & distribution

Record type17 records

Wild obs. + sensor16

Museum / vouchered1

Range

Area of Occupancy AOO40 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 accuracy94% within 1 km

≤100 m 5≤1 km 10≤10 km 1

16 georeferenced

Open the mapobservation + sensor16

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 accuracy

no georeferenced coordinates · 1 records without

Open the institutions mapphysical evidence1

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

Institution	Specimens
Durban Natural Science Museumlocation not on record	1

1 institutions · 1 of 1 vouchered records shown

09Environmental DNA13 detections

Where the DNA of Chrysoclista flavicaput 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 found13

Studies independent surveys1

Countries4

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

Where its DNA was found

0 of 13 detections have coordinates

Open the map4 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.

Modelled climatemodelled

−15°Ctemperature across detection sites+40°C

Temperature median12.0 °C 8.90–15.8

Seasonal swing summer↔winter19.2 °C

Max temp (day)16.1 °C 13.4–20.2

Min temp (night)7.20 °C 3.30–10.3

Precipitation78.4 mm/mo 62.5–123

Air humidity58.9 % 57.4–61.2

Moisture balance-17.4 mm/mo -54.6–13.4

Vapour deficit576 Pa 470–768

Wind speed2.80 m/s 2.20–3.90

Cloud cover38.1 % 33.7–41.6

CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 10 detection points · median with p10–p90 · reflects where sampling happened, not only the true niche

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.