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

Paratrea

Genus of moths

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 16, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

Paratrea is a monotypic moth genus in the family Sphingidae erected by Augustus Radcliffe Grote in 1903. Its sole species, Paratrea plebeja, commonly known as the plebeian sphinx moth, was first described by Johan Christian Fabricius in 1777. This species is found in the eastern part of the United States extending westward to Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and eastern Texas.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Paratrea” as genus of moths. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Paratrea, Genus and moths.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1903, 1777—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Paratrea, Genus and moths providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Paratrea”, the useful work is to connect “genus of moths” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

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 16, 2026. The first chronological checks are 1903 and 1777.

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