Didymoctenia exsuperata
In 3 days ~10% in a week ~20%
Didymoctenia is a monotypic genus of moths in the family Geometridae and subfamily Ennominae which was described by Warren in 1901. Its only species, Didymoctenia exsuperata, the thick-lined bark moth, was first described by Francis Walker in 1860. It is found in Australia. Wikipedia →
| # | Park | Country | Daily sighting probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blue Mountains National Park | 🇦🇺 Australia | |
| 2 | Great Otway National Park | 🇦🇺 Australia | |
| 3 | Springbrook National Park | 🇦🇺 Australia |
Rare
Under 5% of wildlife watchers report a Didymoctenia exsuperata sighting in Melbourne on a given day, based on 30 verified sightings from GBIF citizen-science data. It is the 323rd most-seen of the 875 insects we can rate there. Over three days the chance rises to about 10%, and over a week to about 20%, if each day is a fresh chance.
Any time of year
In every month with enough records, under 5% of wildlife watchers report a Didymoctenia exsuperata in Melbourne on a given day, so our monthly data shows no clear season.
Between 8 and 11 pm
Across all the parks we cover, that three-hour window holds the most Didymoctenia exsuperata sightings with a recorded time, and about half of them come between 6 pm and 6 am: it is seen both by day and at night.
Yes
Of the 3 cities where we can rate Didymoctenia exsuperata sightings, Melbourne has the highest daily chance: under 5%. Next come Brisbane (Australia, under 5%) and Sydney (Australia, under 5%).
Same family: Geometridae
The closest relatives of the Didymoctenia exsuperata that you can see in Melbourne (family Geometridae, Geometer Moths) are Apple Looper (about 20%), Plantain Moth (about 20%) and Red-Lined Looper (about 10%), with each one's daily chance of a sighting.
GBIF citizen-science records
It is estimated from how often the Didymoctenia exsuperata is recorded against all the insects logged in Melbourne (30 verified sightings), calibrated against known sighting rates. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10% because citizen-science data supports honest approximations, not decimals, and months with records from fewer than five people show "—". How it works.
