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

Eupithecia edna

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 revisionFeb 12, 2025
Entity authorityQ13540084 ↗
Source-derived summary

Eupithecia edna is a moth in the family Geometridae first described by George Duryea Hulst in 1896. It is found in the southwestern United States, including Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico.

The wingspan is about 17–22 mm. Adults have been recorded on wing from May to September.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Eupithecia edna” as species of insect. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Eupithecia, edna 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—1896—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Eupithecia, edna 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 “Eupithecia edna”, the useful work is to connect “species of insect” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Feb 12, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q13540084. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1896.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. 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 “Eupithecia edna”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Eupithecia edna primary sources, Eupithecia edna archive and Eupithecia 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 “Eupithecia edna”?
  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 “Eupithecia edna” 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.