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

Dysphania (moth)

genus of insects

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 revisionMay 10, 2026
Entity authorityQ5319547 ↗
Source-derived summary

Dysphania is a genus of colourful moths in the family Geometridae and typical of the tribe Dysphaniini; they are sometimes called 'false tiger moths' and are found in northeast Australia, Melanesia, and south, east and southeast Asia.

Description

Most Dysphania are day flying, but there are also nocturnal species. With a typical wingspan of 50–85 millimetres (2.0–3.3 in), they are relatively large compared to many other members of this family.

Editorial summary

“Dysphania (moth)” enters the record as genus of insects. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Dysphania, moth and genus can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current 70-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 Dysphania, moth and genus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Dysphania (moth)” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Dysphania, moth and genus 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 May 10, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5319547. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

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.

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 “Dysphania (moth)”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Dysphania (moth) primary sources, Dysphania (moth) archive and Dysphania 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 “Dysphania (moth)”?
  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 “Dysphania (moth)” 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.