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

Eugoa basipuncta

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 31, 2026
Entity authorityQ15636361 ↗
Source-derived summary

Eugoa basipuncta is a moth of the family Erebidae first described by George Hampson in 1891. It is found in southern India and on Java and Borneo, as well as in Taiwan, Japan, Thailand and Australia (Queensland).

The wingspan is about 20 mm.

References

Pitkin, Brian & Jenkins, Paul. "Search results Family: Arctiidae". Butterflies and Moths of the World. Natural History Museum, London.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Eugoa basipuncta” as species of insect. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Eugoa, basipuncta and species.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1891—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Eugoa, basipuncta 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 “Eugoa basipuncta”, 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 Mar 31, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q15636361. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1891.

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 “Eugoa basipuncta”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Eugoa basipuncta primary sources, Eugoa basipuncta archive and Eugoa 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 “Eugoa basipuncta”?
  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 “Eugoa basipuncta” 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.