Talk:Houdinia
Appearance
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of an in situ or specimen photo of both the moth and the caterpiller be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Difficult to improve an article like this, ideas?
[edit]All I could think of. Content stuff only. I really doubt we can find more relevant sources than those already in the article, so this would basically need to be trawled out of the already present references. Some info will not be found. NZ researchers, you know what to do... (haha): Leo Breman (talk) 10:54, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
- better/longer description, sizes are somewhat inaccurate, see Hoare et al.
- physiology
- similar species it can be confused with
- number eggs, how many egg masses per female, sizes involved, laying behaviour
- how many instars?
- 'Star'-like pattern mining tunnels
- depth/location larvae in plant per instar
- exit/entry points larvae
- population load per plant? Percentage plants infested?
- map
- pic
- NZ conservation rating template (confusing system, can't figure out where "At Risk, Relict" goes)
- importance succession in maintenance habitat (add ref/see de Lange et al. 1999)
- importance fire (see above)
- more habitat: rainfall? acidic soil?
- behaviour/lifecycle: mating, courtship, do adults feed?, other
- predators, protections against
- more info parasitoids
- diseases
- other species interactions, co-occurrences, competition
- Conservation - abundance,
- parks it can be seen in
- pop. trend
- challenges
- verify localities= In 1999 de Lange mentions more areas the plant grows in than 3?
- problems classification higher taxonomic ranks (see Epimarptidae)