Acronicta cinerea?

[Oriolus]

Obserwacja: Droga w lesie nieco na północ od Uppsali, Szwecja 31.08.2024
Czy to gąsienica Acronicta cinerea?
Mam jeszcze taki problem, że według szwedzkiej bazy danych Artportalen jest tylko jeden gatunek to znaczy Acronicya cinerea, a Acronicta euphorbiae to tylko synonim. Według lepidoptera.eu to dwa osobne gatunki, a w Szwecji występuje tylko Acronicta euphorbiae. Czy ktoś wie jak to jest naprawdę?
Pozdrawiam Adam

[Aneta]

Z tego co wiem, status A. cinerea jest niejasny, jest o tym na Lepiforum tu:
https://forum.lepiforum.org/post/77464
i tu:
https://forum.lepiforum.org/post/808718
po niemiecku, dlatego wklejam najważniejsze przetłumaczone Googlem. Z pierwszego linku:

I personally have no experience with the taxon cinerea and can therefore only refer to the literature.

Phalaena cinerea was described in 1766 by Hufnagel from the Berlin area, but in the 19th century it was initially called Acronicta abscondita Treitschke, 1835. It was not until the 20th century that Hufnagel's work and his names were gradually recognized. So much for nomenclature.

Cinerea is widespread in northern Germany, Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic(?), the Baltic States and southern Finland, Belarus and the Ukraine, and in western Russia as far as Uralsk and Guberli; its further distribution to the east is unclear.

Ever since Acronicta abscondita was described, there has been debate as to whether it is really a separate species or just an ecological variant (sandy soil or pine heath form) of Acronicta euphorbiae. The butterflies are on average smaller and have less contrast than Acronicta euphorbiae, while the caterpillars also live on spurge, but look a little different. I am not aware of any genital morphological differences (I have not looked into this either). It is now disputed whether the differences mentioned indicate species status or are simply due to the range of variation of the overall very variable Acronicta euphorbiae (think of the dark, high-contrast alpine forms (pepli) or the (caterpillar) form esulae, which was originally described as a separate species). This is another case in which morphology reaches its limits and molecular genetic studies will hopefully provide more clarity in the future.

Whether the species is listed or not in some national faunas depends on whether the authors recognize its species status or not; in addition, as an imago it is not always clearly distinguishable from euphorbiae; in this respect, unconfirmed reports from Siberia (Irkutsk) and Komi (Uchta) must be taken with a grain of salt.

As far as I know, cinerea will be treated as a separate species in volume 11/12 of "Noctuidae europaeae", at least according to the provisional species list prepared by Michael Fibiger.

Here in the identification guide, the taxon cinerea could be listed under euphorbiae (with the note that some authors list it as a species) or included as a separate species (with the note that the species status is disputed and it may belong to euphorbiae).

i z drugiego:

The animals in the Lüneburg Heath in Lower Saxony live on heather in northern German sandy heaths, which is the classic habitat and distribution area of ​​Acronicta cinerea (Hufnagel, 1766). However, due to their structurally rich pattern, the butterflies remind me more of Acronicta euphorbiae ([Denis & Schiffermüller], 1775) than of the small, monotonous grey "Acronicta cinerea" that I know from Brandenburg. So what do the butterflies from the Lüneburg Heath belong to?

I think this is another indication that both taxa should be one and the same species. Both taxa also cluster wildly together in the barcode (see here:[www.boldsystems.org/index.php/Public_Ba ... LD:AAC6993]).

Ja osobiście oznaczyłabym tę gąsienicę jako A. euphorbiae.