Imma ancistrota
species of moth
Imma ancistrota is a moth in the family Immidae. It was described by Edward Meyrick in 1912. It is found on New Guinea.
The wingspan is about 18 mm. The forewings are dark lilac fuscous, with ochreous-yellow markings, a spot at the base and a moderate somewhat oblique fascia near beyond this, confluent with it in the middle. There is an irregular transverse streak before the middle, dilated on the costa, broken inwards on the fold, the lower portion sinuate outwards. There is a dot in the disc beyond the middle and a narrow irregular fascia beyond this, interrupted in the middle, not reaching the dorsum. There is a subtriangular spot on the costa towards the apex and a fine line on the submedian fold posteriorly. An ochreous-whitish line runs from just before the lower extremity of the costal spot to the tornus, twice dentate outwards, the lower dentation confluent with an ochreous-yellow spot on the termen above the tornus and there is a fine ochreous-whitish terminal line. The hindwings are prismatic hyaline, with the veins dark fuscous and a dark fuscous band around the costa and upper half of the termen, broadest at apex, continued narrowly and irregularly around the lower part of the termen and tornus.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Imma ancistrota” as species of moth. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of moth. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
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 29, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q30589781. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1912.
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.
- 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 “Imma ancistrota”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Imma ancistrota primary sources, Imma ancistrota archive and Imma 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 “Imma ancistrota”?
- 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 “Imma ancistrota” 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.