Regards,
Bill
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Try zooming in on the tips of the antennae in the original photo.Willrow wrote:unless someone has another suggestion that is
I guess you mean like this:Wurzel wrote:Smalls seem to have a curved edge to their antennae with bits sticking out the end
The body shape looks distinctly female to meTuts wrote: I think a worn Small male
I agree that those pages give the only discriminators we know. They describe the differences in the wings of males but don't say there is no difference between the females. I just live in hope of someone, perhaps with access to a large collection, spotting something but I'm sure many experts have pondered this one over the years.Sussex Kipper wrote:These age-old criteria remain the only way of confidently differentiating the species
Well said that manSussex Kipper wrote:Images of female butterflies shot from above, giving no clue as to pigmentation of the underside of the tips of the antennae, remain undiagnostic.
This is absolutely true.Sussex Kipper wrote:The differences between Small and Essex Skipper are graphically explained in the 'Similar Species' sections of the SS and ES UKB species pages - see here http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/species. ... sylvestris These age-old criteria remain the only way of confidently differentiating the species, a task best done in the field. Images of female butterflies shot from above, giving no clue as to pigmentation of the underside of the tips of the antennae, remain undiagnostic.
BWs, Neil