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

Pexicopia malvella

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 revisionAug 3, 2026
Entity authorityQ18462812 ↗
Source-derived summary

Pexicopia malvella, the hollyhock seed moth, is a moth of the family Gelechiidae. It was described by Jacob Hübner in 1805. It is found in almost all of Europe.

The wingspan is 17–20 mm. Adults are on wing from early June to mid-August.

The larvae feed inside the seeds of Malva species, Althaea officinalis and Alcea rosea. The species overwinters in a cocoon constructed within the seed.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Pexicopia malvella” as species of insect. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

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—1805—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Pexicopia, malvella and species can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of insect. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

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 Aug 3, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q18462812. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1805.

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 “Pexicopia malvella”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Pexicopia malvella primary sources, Pexicopia malvella archive and Pexicopia 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 “Pexicopia malvella”?
  2. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Pexicopia malvella” 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.