Nemapogon cloacella, the cork moth, is a species of tineoid moth. It belongs to the fungus moth family (Tineidae), and therein to the subfamily Nemapogoninae. Its junior synonym N. infimella was established by G.H. Heydenreich in the 1851 volume of his Lepidopterorum Europaeorum Catalogus Methodicus, but many sources still attribute it to G.A.W. Herrich-Schäffer, who supposedly narrowly beat Heidenreich in (re)describing the species. But as it seems, Herrich-Schäffer was merely one of the first to use the name proposed by Heydenreich, as the volume of his Systematische Bearbeitung der Schmetterlinge von Europa where he discussed the cork moth was not published until 1853 or 1854. That all nonwithstanding, the species had been already validly described by A.H. Haworth in the 1828 volume of Lepidoptera Britannica.FE (2009), Robinson [2010]
No narrative description available for this taxon yet.
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 Nemapogon cloacella has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens115
BINs3
Marker genes1
eDNA detections257
Countries15
The DNA barcodethe species' typical barcode, built from every sequenced specimen
COI-5P658 bp consensus108 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. 97% of positions are identical in every specimen.
Where individuals differ — all 21 variable positions, in barcode order
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)1.8%
Haplotypes25
BINs3
Most divergent pair9.3%
Europe
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.
★ 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 type9 713 records
Wild obs. + sensor8 203
Museum / vouchered1 463
Other47
Origin
Native6
Range
Area of Occupancy AOO13 080 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 accuracy77% within 1 km
≤100 m 4 149≤1 km 1 952≤10 km 1 811>10 km 5
7 917 georeferenced · 286 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor8 203
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 accuracy87% within 1 km
≤100 m 735≤1 km 383≤10 km 161>10 km 1
1 280 georeferenced · 183 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence1 463
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 institutions13 of 37 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
DanishLepidopterologicalSocietylocation not on record
192
NHMOlocation not on record
191
SLU Artdatabankenlocation not on record
109
Tartu, EE
91
Kuopio, FI
53
Provincia di Livornolocation not on record
42
Nijmegen, NL
35
Stockholm, SE
31
Tilburg, NL
25
Museum of Zoology at the University of Bergen, Invertebrate Collectionlocation not on record
24
Zoological Museum of the University of Chittagong, Bangladeshlocation not on record
23
Rovaniemi, FI
19
ZMAAlocation not on record
18
Salzburg, AT
13
RMZlocation not on record
11
Philadelphia, US
9
Tallinn, EE
9
ZSMlocation not on record
8
Zürich, CH
8
European Distributed Institute of Taxonomy (EDIT)location not on record
7
Metsähallituslocation not on record
6
Natural History Museum Rotterdamlocation not on record
6
NTNU-VMlocation not on record
4
Uniwersytet Łódzkilocation not on record
4
neflocation not on record
4
Washington, US
4
South Kensington, GB
4
DABUHlocation not on record
4
Durban Natural Science Museumlocation not on record
3
ASUlocation not on record
3
New Haven, US
2
Bavarian State Collection of Zoologylocation not on record
2
Natural History Museum, Londonlocation not on record
2
Research Collection of Hartmut Wegnerlocation not on record
1
University of Guelph, Centre for Biodiversity Genomicslocation not on record
1
Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeumlocation not on record
1
Centre for Biodiversity Genomicslocation not on record
1
37 institutions · 970 of 1 463 vouchered records shown · 493 without an institution code
09Environmental DNA257 detections
Where the DNA of Nemapogon cloacella 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 found257
Studies independent surveys4
Countries15
Verifiable raw sequence linked140
Signal confidence: moderateweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
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 median14.2 °C 11.5–17.0
Seasonal swing summer↔winter19.6 °C
Max temp (day)18.2 °C 14.6–21.2
Min temp (night)10.2 °C 6.70–13.0
Precipitation77.8 mm/mo 53.7–159
Air humidity59.6 % 57.0–62.8
Moisture balance-36.3 mm/mo -60.2–60.5
Vapour deficit672 Pa 510–788
Wind speed2.80 m/s 1.90–4.10
Cloud cover43.3 % 34.6–54.4
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 254 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.
WikipediaWikimedia Foundation4 languages↗
BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗
GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility9 713 records↗
ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI257 eDNA detections↗
BOLD SystemsCentre for Biodiversity Genomics115 specimens↗
Open Tree of LifeOpenTreephylogeny backbone↗
GLoBIGlobal Biotic Interactionsbiotic interactions↗