Praxis porphyretica
In 3 days ~20% in a week ~40%
Praxis porphyretica, the brown praxis, is a moth of the family Noctuidae. The species was first described by Achille Guenée in 1858. It is found in the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Queensland, Tasmania and Victoria. Wikipedia →
| # | Park | Country | Daily sighting probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Great Otway National Park | 🇦🇺 Australia | |
| 2 | Blue Mountains National Park | 🇦🇺 Australia |
| # | City | Country | Daily sighting probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Melbourne | 🇦🇺 Australia |
With luck
About 10% of wildlife watchers report a Brown Praxis sighting in Great Otway National Park on a given day, based on 17 verified sightings from GBIF citizen-science data from 2019 to 2026. It is the 126th most-seen of the 418 insects we can rate there. Over three days the chance rises to about 20%, and over a week to about 40%, if each day is a fresh chance.
July
In that month about 20% of wildlife watchers report a Brown Praxis in Great Otway National Park on a given day, against under 5% in February–March, May–June and November, the lowest months.
Between 9 pm and midnight
Across all the parks we cover, that three-hour window holds the most Brown Praxis sightings with a recorded time, and about 9 in 10 of them come between 6 pm and 6 am: it is mostly seen at night.
Yes
Of the 2 parks where we can rate Brown Praxis sightings, Great Otway National Park has the highest daily chance: about 10%. Next come Blue Mountains National Park (Australia, under 5%).
Same genus: Praxis
The closest relatives of the Brown Praxis that you can see in Great Otway National Park (genus Praxis) are Praxis pandesma (about 10%) and Praxis edwardsii (about 10%), with each one's daily chance of a sighting.
GBIF citizen-science records
It is estimated from how often the Brown Praxis is recorded against all the insects logged in Great Otway National Park (17 verified sightings from 2019 to 2026), 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.
