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

Acrobasis comptoniella

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 17, 2025
Entity authorityQ4675180 ↗
Source-derived summary

Acrobasis comptoniella, the sweetfern leaf casebearer or sweet-fern moth, is a species of snout moth in the subfamily Phycitinae. It was described by George Duryea Hulst in 1890 and is known from eastern Canada and the United States.

The wingspan is about 22 mm (0.87 in). There is one generation per year.

The larvae feed on Comptonia peregrina.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Acrobasis comptoniella” is species of insect. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Acrobasis, comptoniella 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—1890—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Acrobasis, comptoniella 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 Mar 17, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q4675180. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1890.

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