Header

Norway Maple Dot Etainia sericopeza

Until recently this species was placed in the genus Ectoedemia and still appears on various websites as Ectoedemia sericopeza. It was first recorded in 2013 but there have been quite a few records since. Adults are tricky to separate from Maple Seed Dot Etainia louisella and should be confirmed by checking the genitalia. Formerly given the vernacular name Norway-maple Pigmy.


I was a little surprised to find this species at home as I'm not aware of any Norway Maple growing nearby - though I'm not an expert botanist and presumably there must be at least one near enough. My first was a male. The genitalia of male sericopeza and louisella are similar but differences I think I can see by comparing images in the Moth Dissection website and the Svenska Fjarilar website include a more pointed uncus in sericopeza and, I think, longer arms on what I think is the juxta (though I'm not sure if I've identified this bit of anatomy correctly?).

Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza
male Norway Maple Dot Etainia sericopeza showing genitalia (main capsule and aedeagus separately), North Elmham (Norfolk, UK), 19th September 2018


My next one was a female. The main difference in female genitalia appears to be the length of the ventral medial process to the sclerite joining the anal papillae - longer in sericopeza. It looks like there may also be a difference in the detail within this process, containing a triangular structure in sericopeza and only a more ciruclar structure in louisella. In addition the Svenska Fjarilar website shows arrows pointing at the anal papillae and the pair of sclerotised pads at the top of the ductus bursae. I'm not clear what the differences are in the shape of the anal papillae - presumably something to do with the shape of the swelling but I can't make out anything that is consistently shown in images elsewhere. The pads are shown as being rounded a the top in sericopeza but again I can't see this clearly enough in images elsewhere to be convinced it's a useful feature.

Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza
female Norway Maple Dot Etainia sericopeza showing genitalia, North Elmham (Norfolk, UK), 31st July 2020


This one was caught by Laura King and the first photo below is hers. When she sent me the photo I thought it was going to be louisella. Comparing images of the two species it looks like the white bar across the forewings at about one third is usually broader on louisella than on sericopeza and in this respect Laura's seemed to resemble lousiella more. There are also supposed to be differences in the colour of the vertex and the collar according to the commments in the Suffolk Moths website, but these don't appear to be consistent across all images of the two species. And that is presumbaly why the species is grade 4, i.e. requiring dissection to confirm.

Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza Etainia sericopeza
female Norway Maple Dot Etainia sericopeza showing forwing and genitalia, Lower Hellsedon (Norfolk, UK), 18th August 2023 (trapped by Laura King, and photo of live insect is by Laura)