Paracrama dulcissima
In 3 days ~20% in a week ~30%
Paracrama dulcissima is a moth of the family Nolidae first described by Francis Walker in 1864. It is found in Indo-Australian tropics of India, Sri Lanka and the Bismarck Islands. Wikipedia →
| # | Park | Country | Daily sighting probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kaeng Krachan National Park | 🇹🇭 Thailand |
More parks will be added in future updates.
With luck
About 10% of wildlife watchers report a Paracrama dulcissima sighting in Kaeng Krachan National Park on a given day, based on 5 verified sightings from GBIF citizen-science data from 2019 to 2026. It is the 249th most-seen of the 296 insects we can rate there. Over three days the chance rises to about 20%, and over a week to about 30%, if each day is a fresh chance.
February–April, July and December
In those months about 10% of wildlife watchers report a Paracrama dulcissima in Kaeng Krachan National Park on a given day, against under 5% in January, May–June and August–November, the lowest months.
Between 6 and 9 pm
Across all the parks we cover, that three-hour window holds the most Paracrama dulcissima sightings with a recorded time, and about 8 in 10 of them come between 6 pm and 6 am: it is mostly seen at night.
Only Kaeng Krachan National Park, in our data
Kaeng Krachan National Park is the only park on Wallace's Line with enough records to rate Paracrama dulcissima sightings: about 10% of wildlife watchers there report one on a given day.
Same family: Nolidae
The closest relatives of the Paracrama dulcissima that you can see in Kaeng Krachan National Park (family Nolidae, Tufted Moths) are Labanda fasciata (about 10%), Urbona leucophaea (about 10%) and Maceda mansueta (about 10%), with each one's daily chance of a sighting.
GBIF citizen-science records
It is estimated from how often the Paracrama dulcissima is recorded against all the insects logged in Kaeng Krachan National Park (5 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.
