CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Erechthias flavistriata

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 revisionApr 29, 2026
Entity authorityQ5385385 ↗
Source-derived summary

Erechthias flavistriata, the sugarcane bud moth, is a moth of the family Tineidae. It was described by Lord Walsingham in 1907 from a specimen collected in Hawaii, but it is probably an introduced species. It is found in large parts of the Pacific Rim, including New Zealand, the Cook Islands, the Marquesas, Rapa Iti, Fiji, the New Hebrides, the Kermadec Islands, the Solomons, Java and Malaya. People have spread it widely and have travelled to many islands throughout much of the Pacific.

Taxonomy

Walsingham first described this species in 1907 and initially named it Ereunetis flavistriata. Edward Meyrick placed this species in the genus Erechthias in 1915.

Description

Walsingham first described this species as follows:

Antennae yellowish white, with two small grey spots above before the apex. Palpi are yellowish white and brush-like beneath; the terminal joint is very short. Head and Thorax yellowish white. Forewings yellowish white, indistinctly streaked with broken yellow lines along the fold, along the cell, and below the costa beyond the middle; also sparsely speckled with black scales, especially beyond the middle; a short blackish streak at the upturned apex runs to the end of the apical cilia and is joined by a slender golden brown streak along the base of the shining, white costal cilia; terminal cilia whitish cinereous, with a blackish spot in their middle below the apex.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Erechthias flavistriata” is species of insect. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Erechthias, flavistriata and species, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewUseful for establishing the present vocabulary of the subject while preserving a route back to the evidence on which that vocabulary rests. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1907, 1915—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Erechthias, flavistriata and species is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “species of insect” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 29, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5385385. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1907 and 1915.

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 “Erechthias flavistriata”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Erechthias flavistriata primary sources, Erechthias flavistriata archive and Erechthias 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 “Erechthias flavistriata”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Erechthias flavistriata” 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.