CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Lorita scarificata

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 revisionMar 15, 2026
Entity authorityQ10596907 ↗
Source-derived summary

Lorita scarificata, the chrysanthemum flower borer, is a moth of the family Tortricidae. It is native to North America (where it has been recorded from Florida and California) and is an introduced species in Hawaii.

The wingspan is 10–12 mm.

The larvae have been recorded feeding on Chrysanthemum blossoms, Cuscuta californica and green bell pepper.

Etymology

A synonym of Lorita scarificata, Lorita abornana, was named for composer, performer and pianist Lora Aborn.

Editorial summary

“Lorita scarificata” enters the record as species of insect. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Lorita, scarificata and species can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current 72-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Lorita, scarificata and species.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Lorita scarificata” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Lorita, scarificata and species provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 15, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q10596907. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. 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 “Lorita scarificata”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Lorita scarificata primary sources, Lorita scarificata archive and Lorita 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 “Lorita scarificata”?
  2. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
  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 “Lorita scarificata” 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.