Suspected (Parastichtis suspectus) ?

[davidtomlinson]

Suspected (Parastichtis suspectus) ?

Is this a Suspected (Parastichtis suspectus) ? Seems pretty clear to me, but it is cited as "local" in Waring & Townsend, so I thought I'd check with you experts out there. Trapped 04/08/2011.

David

[SteveMcBill]

Hi Dave,

Yes, that is indeed a Suspected (Parastichtis suspecta).

On the rECOrd database there are currently 152 records for this species (not all Cheshire) and another 24 records (for Cheshire) on the NBN Gateway. See the distribution map below - gold dots are data in the rECOrd database and red dots are from the NBN).

See over at: http://ukmoths.org.uk/show.php?bf=2268

Hope that helps.

Cheers.

Steve

[PaulMartinHill]

I suspect that when we get all the moth records from the Moth Group entered and validated, the number will increase - I've had several Suspected at Marbury this year.

Paul

[davidtomlinson]

Steve, Paul,

Thank you.

David

[SteveH]

Just to add that we've only missed trapping Suspected (Parastichtis suspectus) once (in 1998) since it first turned up in our garden in 1995, with a total of 28 individuals recorded.

Why is there such a difference in data between the RECORD and NBN Gateway perspectives ? Would have thought that in this day and age there would have at least been some form of interface between the two...

Steve

[PaulMartinHill]

At the current time we/Cheshire are without a County Macro-moth Recorder. Most of the moth data (currently looked after by Steve Hind) is held on MapMate by the County Moth Group, and has yet to be transferred to rECOrd. This will be a long process as it is known that several people submitted records via RODIS and also direct to Shane when he was County Macro-Recorder.

Cheshire Moth Group data, up to a couple of years ago, also went to BC. Rather than uploading all of the rECOrd data to the NBN and risk loads of duplicates, the whole database needs looking at and duplicates identified and removed. None of the moth data submitted via RODIS in the last few years has been validated. This latter issue is currently under discussion and hopefully will soon be resolved - in the meantime until we find a new County Macro-moth Recorder, the situation may remain as it is

Paul

[SteveH]

Sounds like any new County Macro=Moth Recorder will need a lot of spare time on his/her hands then; the task looks to be enormous.....

Steve

[PaulMartinHill]

The role may be split into sub-roles so that one person deals with one aspect. Any volunteers?

Paul