a small butterfly with some extraordinary features.

[Wim van Egmond]

This is a small butterfly of the genus Adela. I am not sure about the species.

No, I did not draw those antennae myself

Wim

[Ken Ramos]

Wow! I bet he gets good reception. Never seen a butterfly like that before Wim, thanks for the look see, great job by the way.

[Beetleman]

Very nice shot Wim (I also love all your microscope pictures as well). Sometimes I wonder why nature designs odd features in some animals & plants. They must serve some purpose for survival in its species, maybe it helps in finding a mate like a large nose or ears.

[rjlittlefield]

Outrageous antennae, well captured!

A fine point about the identification: this is a fairy moth (Lepidoptera:Adelidae) -- not really a butterfly, though it flies during the daytime.

Probably a male; the females have shorter antennae. (See bugguide article.)

--Rik

[crocoite]

A fine point about the identification: this is a fairy moth (Lepidoptera:Adelidae) -- not really a butterfly, though it flies during the daytime.
--Rik

I was always taught that butterflies fold their wings up and moths fold theirs flat, so if true, that would support the moth id.

Regards
Steve

[Wim van Egmond]

Thanks!

It could indeed be to attract mates. It is probably a bit like a peacock. There is a theory that says that when a male has such features and can still avoid being eaten by predators it is a prove of strength, so good genes! Does that make sense?

It should indeed be moth. Thanks for the I.D! In my language we use the words 'vlinder' and 'nachtvlinder' translated: 'butterfly' and 'night butterfly' We also use 'Mot' but that is a bit improper. This explains my error:)

Wim

[Sven Bernert]

No, I did not draw those antennae myself

ROFL!

Well captured Wim!

Best,
Sven

[Ken Ramos]

Crocoite replied:

butterflies fold their wings up and moths fold theirs flat

I never noticed that before. Goes to show just how much I pay attention to what is going on around me when it comes to butterflies and moths.

[rjlittlefield]

In my language we use the words 'vlinder' and 'nachtvlinder' translated: 'butterfly' and 'night butterfly' We also use 'Mot' but that is a bit improper. This explains my error:)

Wim,

On the Nederlands Wikipedia, I see "dagvlinder" also, which Babel Fish Dutch-to-English translates as "day butterfly".

I have often wished, in English, for a short word to mean any Lepidopteran -- either butterfly or moth.

Does "vlinder" play that role in Dutch, or is "dagvlinder" just a more emphatic way of saying "the ones that fly in the daytime"?

--Rik

[rjlittlefield]

I was always taught that butterflies fold their wings up and moths fold theirs flat

This is a good rule of thumb. There are exceptions, and the skippers often hold the front wings up and the back wings flat at the same time.

The naming is funny -- both strange and amusing. Compared to the rest of the Lepidoptera, the butterflies are really a small and specialized group. We all speak of "butterflies and moths" as if it makes sense. But in terms of diversity, to say "butterflies and moths" is really a lot like saying "sparrows and all other birds"!

We just give the butterflies special attention because they're showy and fly around when and where we can see them.

Not that that's a bad reason...

--Rik

[Wim van Egmond]

Hello Rik,

Yes, Vlinder is a word only used for Lepidopterans. It would be a good word. Better than butterflies because what do they have to do with butter?

Wim