Hypatima discissa
species of insect
Hypatima discissa is a moth in the family Gelechiidae. It was described by Edward Meyrick in 1916. It is found in Australia, where it has been recorded from Queensland.
The wingspan is 16–17 mm. The forewings are ochreous whitish irrorated (sprinkled) with brown and with a minute black strigula beneath the costa at the base. There are brown median and subdorsal spots near the base, and one on the costa at one-fourth, as well as a larger brown spot in the disc at one-third, edged above by a black mark, and connected with the dorsum at one-third by a brown streak. There is a narrow semi-oval blackish spot on the middle of the costa, surrounded with brown suffusion, and confluent beneath with an irregular transverse brown blotch from the dorsum beyond the middle. There is a black line, which is slightly interrupted several times, running from the apex of this blotch to the termen beneath the apex, as well as a short black dash at five-sixths of the costa. A patch of brown suffusion occupies most of the apical third of the wing. The hindwings are grey, with the veins suffused with darker and with the cell subhyaline (almost glass like) and clothed with hairs.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Hypatima discissa” is species of insect. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Hypatima, discissa and species, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “species of insect” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 10, 2022. The linked authority identifier is Q13309539. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1916.
A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. 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.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Hypatima discissa”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Hypatima discissa primary sources, Hypatima discissa archive and Hypatima research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Hypatima discissa”?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Hypatima discissa” 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.