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

Pseudopharus

genus of insects

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 authorityQ7255267 ↗
Source-derived summary

Pseudopharus is a genus of moths in the family Erebidae. The genus was erected by George Hampson in 1901.

Species

Pseudopharus amata (Druce, 1900)

Pseudopharus cornelia (Druce, 1906)

Pseudopharus domingona (Druce, 1906)

Pseudopharus hades Dognin, 1909

Pseudopharus gibeauxi Toulgoët, 1990

Pseudopharus nigra (Schaus, 1904)

References

External links

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

Editorial summary

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

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—1901, 1900, 1906, 1909—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Pseudopharus, genus and insects can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

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

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 Q7255267. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1901, 1900, 1906 and 1909.

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