CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Balacra caeruleifascia

species of insect

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 20, 2026
Entity authorityQ13433942 ↗
Source-derived summary

Balacra caeruleifascia is a moth of the family Erebidae. It was described by Francis Walker in 1856. It is found in Angola, Cameroon, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and

Togo.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Balacra caeruleifascia” as species of insect. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Balacra, caeruleifascia and species.

Editorial reviewUseful for establishing the present vocabulary of the subject while preserving a route back to the evidence on which that vocabulary rests. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1856—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Balacra, caeruleifascia and species providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Balacra caeruleifascia”, the useful work is to connect “species of insect” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 20, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q13433942. The first chronological checks are 1856.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Balacra caeruleifascia”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Balacra caeruleifascia primary sources, Balacra caeruleifascia archive and Balacra research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Balacra caeruleifascia”?
  2. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Balacra caeruleifascia” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.