What are the chances of seeing an Antiblemma abstrusa in Podocarpus National Park?
With luck
About 10% of wildlife watchers report an Antiblemma abstrusa sighting in Podocarpus National Park on a given day, based on 6 verified sightings from GBIF citizen-science data from 2019 to 2026. It is the 42nd most-seen of the 61 insects we can rate there. Over three days the chance rises to about 40%, and over a week to about 70%, if each day is a fresh chance.
When is the best time to see an Antiblemma abstrusa in Podocarpus National Park?
January
In that month about 40% of wildlife watchers report an Antiblemma abstrusa in Podocarpus National Park on a given day, against under 5% in February–July and September–November, the lowest months.
What time of day is best to see an Antiblemma abstrusa?
Between 7 and 10 pm
Across all the parks we cover, that three-hour window holds the most Antiblemma abstrusa 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.
Is Podocarpus National Park the best place to see an Antiblemma abstrusa?
Yes
Of the 2 parks where we can rate Antiblemma abstrusa sightings, Podocarpus National Park has the highest daily chance: about 10%. Next come Tapantí-Macizo de la Muerte National Park (Costa Rica, about 10%).
Which relatives of the Antiblemma abstrusa live in Podocarpus National Park?
Same family: Erebidae
The closest relatives of the Antiblemma abstrusa that you can see in Podocarpus National Park (family Erebidae, Underwing, Tiger, Tussock, and Allied Moths) are Calonotos aequimaculatus (about 10%), Black Witch (about 10%) and Tipulodes rubriceps (about 10%), with each one's daily chance of a sighting.
Where does the Antiblemma abstrusa sighting chance come from?
GBIF citizen-science records
It is estimated from how often the Antiblemma abstrusa is recorded against all the insects logged in Podocarpus National Park (6 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.