Eresia eunice
In 3 days ~20% in a week ~40%
| # | Park | Country | Daily sighting probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Serra dos Órgãos National Park | 🇧🇷 Brazil | |
| 2 | Gandoca-Manzanillo Wildlife Refuge | 🇨🇷 Costa Rica | |
| 3 | Manu National Park | 🇵🇪 Peru | |
| 4 | Tambopata National Reserve | 🇵🇪 Peru | |
| 5 | Braulio Carrillo National Park | 🇨🇷 Costa Rica |
With luck
About 10% of wildlife watchers report a Tiger Crescent sighting in Manu National Park on a given day, based on 8 verified sightings from GBIF citizen-science data from 2019 to 2026. It is the 170th most-seen of the 366 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.
December
In that month about 30% of wildlife watchers report a Tiger Crescent in Manu National Park on a given day, against under 5% in January–February, April, June–July and September–October, the lowest months. That is one of Manu National Park's wettest months, with about 250 mm of rain against 60 mm in August.
Between 11 am and 2 pm
Across all the parks we cover, that three-hour window holds the most Tiger Crescent sightings with a recorded time, and about 9 in 10 of them come between 6 am and 6 pm: it is a daytime animal.
Among the best
Of the 5 parks where we can rate Tiger Crescent sightings, Manu National Park ranks 3rd at about 10%, level with the leaders once rounded. The best odds are in Serra dos Órgãos National Park (Brazil, about 10%) and Gandoca-Manzanillo Wildlife Refuge (Costa Rica, about 10%).
Same genus: Eresia
The closest relatives of the Tiger Crescent that you can see in Manu National Park (genus Eresia) are Nauplius Crescent (about 10%) and Clio Crescent (about 10%), with each one's daily chance of a sighting.
GBIF citizen-science records
It is estimated from how often the Tiger Crescent is recorded against all the insects logged in Manu National Park (8 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.
