

- Generally Common / Widespread

ID pointers: Easily confused with Copper Underwing A. pyramidea. There is great conjecture on the correct methods of identification.
One of the most consistent features seems to be careful examination of the under hindwing. The underside of the hindwing’s discal area is a suffused orange-copper with little or no contrast with the discal and terminal areas. Other features that can aid identification are:-
1. The cross-line just before the middle of the forewing has four projections along it with the two nearest trailing edge protruding further out and being more pointed.
2. This feature has been completely rejected as a means to ID – interest purposes only – The upward point labial palps at the front of the head are dark with a pale tip – unreliable if worn.
3. The upper-parts are duller in comparison to pyramidea. There is a less contrasting post median line and a pale creamy cross-band.
4. The Copper markings on the under hindwing run the full length of the inner wing and the black and white markings on the abdomen are duller and less intense than pyramidea.
5. There is some difference in the flight period – early Coppers tend to be.
6. If ID cannot be determined – then examination of the genitalia is required, as they show clear differences or record as aggregated (agg).
Distribution: A resident that is fairly common and widely distributed in Derbyshire. Since 1970 this species has steadily increased in numbers and is now regarded as a fairly common woodland moth.ID difficulties arise with Copper Underwing – Amphipyra pyramidea.
Forewing: 21-26mm

IMAGES BELOW:





