Musotima ochropteralis

(Guenée, 1854) · species

image placeholder — illustration coming later

Animalia/Arthropoda/Insecta/Lepidoptera/Pyralidae/Musotima

At a glance

Occurrence records189

Data sources7

Biological traits0

DNA specimens8

eDNA detections7

Sources7 archives

Databases and archives Musotima ochropteralis's data was compiled from.

WikipediaWikimedia Foundation3 languages↗

BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗

GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility189 records↗

ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI7 eDNA detections↗

BOLD SystemsCentre for Biodiversity Genomics8 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 & distributionGBIF189 records

Environmental DNA1 datasets · 1 countries7 detections

DNA & barcodingBOLD8 specimens

01Narrative

Musotima ochropteralis is a moth of the family Crambidae. It was described by Achille Guenée in 1854 and is known from all of Australia. This species has been introduced to New Zealand. Adults are brown with various markings, including a prominent white comma-shaped spot outlined in black on each forewing. The larvae feed on Adiantum aethiopicum.

No narrative description available for this taxon yet.

02Traits & measurements

No structured trait data for this taxon yet.

05DNA & barcoding8 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 Musotima ochropteralis has left across the world's sequence archives.

At a glance

DNA specimens8

BINs1

Marker genes1

eDNA detections7

Countries1

The DNA barcodethe species' typical barcode, built from every sequenced specimen

COI-5P658 bp consensus6 specimens

ACGT

▸ drag or hover over the strip to read any position — letter and how much it varies

Violet ticks below the strip = positions where individuals differ; flat = the species' unchanging signature. 100% of positions are identical in every specimen.

Where individuals differ — all 3 variable positions, in barcode order

268Amostly conserved

403Avariable

625Amostly conserved

AACTTTATATTTCATTTTTGGAATTTGAGCAGGAATAGTAGGAACATCTCTTAGTTTATTAATTCGAGCTGAATTAGGAAATCCAGGATT …

Variant network

Each circle is a barcode variant; bigger = more specimens, colour = region. Lines join the most similar variants and the tick marks count the mutations between them — a tight cluster is one “dialect”, a long line a more divergent lineage. Click a circle to list its actual specimens.

Diversity (π)0.19%

Haplotypes3

BIN1

Most divergent pair0.30%

Oceania

Closest relatives by DNA barcode

The species whose COI barcode is most similar to this one — a quick “who is this most like”. The percentage is how much the barcode differs; it approximates, but is not, the full evolutionary tree.

Musotima acriassame genus5.5%Crocidolomia suffusalissame family6.1%Pycnarmon cribratasame family6.2%Scoparia exhibitalissame family6.2%Crocidolomia luteolalissame family6.4%

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 type189 records

Wild obs. + sensor172

Museum / vouchered17

Range

Area of Occupancy AOO440 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 accuracy93% within 1 km

≤100 m 100≤1 km 26≤10 km 4>10 km 5

135 georeferenced · 37 without coordinates

Open the mapobservation + sensor172

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 accuracy100% within 1 km

≤100 m 1≤1 km 2

3 georeferenced · 14 without coordinates

Open the institutions mapphysical evidence17

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 institutions1 of 3 geolocated

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

Institution	Specimens
Auckland, NZ	2
Australian National Insect Collectionlocation not on record	2
Tasmanian Museum & Art Gallerylocation not on record	1

3 institutions · 5 of 17 vouchered records shown · 12 without an institution code

09Environmental DNA7 detections

Where the DNA of Musotima ochropteralis 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 found7

Studies independent surveys1

Countries1

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

Where its DNA was found

0 of 7 detections have coordinates

Open the map1 country0

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 median17.6 °C 14.9–24.7

Seasonal swing summer↔winter10.0 °C

Max temp (day)21.6 °C 19.3–29.1

Min temp (night)14.0 °C 9.80–21.3

Precipitation78.0 mm/mo 54.5–160

Air humidity56.9 % 55.7–60.3

Moisture balance11.6 mm/mo

Vapour deficit865 Pa 752–1,243

Wind speed2.90 m/s

Cloud cover24.6 % 17.9–34.6

CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 7 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.

←→tabs

The Life Data · species page · narrative wired to read_model image placeholder · 3D tilt requires an http server (WebGL)