Moths of North Carolina
Scientific Name:
Common Name:
Family (Alpha):
« »
View PDFErebidae Members: 15 NC Records

Idia concisa of authors not (Walker, 1860) - No Common Name


No image for this species.
Taxonomy
Superfamily: Noctuoidea Family: ErebidaeSubfamily: HerminiinaeP3 Number: 930472.00 MONA Number: 8323.10
Comments: One of eighteen species recorded in North America (Lafontaine and Schmidt, 2010), twelve of which are found in North Carolina.
Species Status: Treated as a synonym of Idia aemula by Hodges et al. (1984) and according to Lafontaine and Schimdt, the holotype for concisa is actually a typical specimen of Idia aemula. However, the species referred to as concisa by Forbes (1954) and subsequent authors appears to be distinctly different although it has yet to be described.
Identification
Field Guide Descriptions: Not in either field guideOnline Photographs: MPG, BugGuide, iNaturalist, Google, BAMONATechnical Description, Adults: Forbes (1954); Rings et al. (1992); Lafontaine and Schmidt (2010)Technical Description, Immature Stages: Wagner et al. (2011)                                                                                 
Adult Markings: Forbes (1954) describes concisa as similar to aemula but smaller and with the hindwing dirty white and strongly contrasting with the darker forewing; in aemula, the hindwing is a light fuscous and more concolorous with the forewing. The three gray bands on the hindwing are often inconspicuous in concisa whereas in aemula they are dark and outwardly edged with luteous. Lafontaine and Schmidt (2010) further note that "concisa" has a stronger bar in the median area of the forewing. This species is illustrated as Idia sp. near aemula by Rings et al. (1992).
Adult Structural Features: Like aemula and americalis (Forbes' subgenus Epizeuxis), "concisa" has relatively short palps, not reaching the vertex. The third segment is blunt and blade-like with rough hair on the upper surface (Forbes, 1954).
Adult ID Requirements: Identifiable from photos showing hindwings, abdomen, or other specialized views [e.g., frons, palps, antennae, undersides].
Immatures and Development: A larva illustrated by Wagner et al. (2011) is purplish brown with contrastingly pale lateral setae. It may not be separable from aemula, however.
Larvae ID Requirements: Identifiable only through rearing to adulthood.
Distribution in North Carolina
Distribution: Known in North Carolina from a single specimen collected in the the Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
County Map: Clicking on a county returns the records for the species in that county.
Flight Dates:
 High Mountains (HM) ≥ 4,000 ft.
 Low Mountains (LM) < 4,000 ft.
 Piedmont (Pd)
 Coastal Plain (CP)

Click on graph to enlarge
Flight Comments: Has a single flight in the Northeast (Wagner et al., 2011), but not enough information exists in North Carolina to give a clear picture.
Habitats and Life History
Habitats: Rings et al. (1992) note that most Ohio records come from wetlands. The majority of our records, however, come from Cove Forests where wetlands, if present, consist of seeps.
Larval Host Plants: Specimens in US National Museum were labeled from "blue spruce" (Forbes, 1954). Rings et al. (1992) speculated that most of the records for Idia aemula from spruce and other conifers might actually be mistakes for "concisa". McCabe (in Wagner et al., 2011) also notes dead cherry leaves as hosts.
Observation Methods: Our one confirmed specimen was collected using a 15 watt UV blacklight trap. Other members of this genus come well to both blacklights and to bait.
Wikipedia
Status in North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program Status: [W3]
Natural Heritage Program Ranks: GNR [SU]
State Protection: Has no legal protection, although permits are required to collect it on state parks and other public lands.
Comments: Although this species is largely regarded as uncommon to rare throughout its range, this may be due to confusion with Idia aemula. Not enough is known in North Carolina about its actual range, abundance, or degree of threat to determine its conservation status. To the extent it feeds on Hemlock or Fir, it may be declining due to the reduction of those species by introduced species of Adelgids.