Talk:Pyrrharctia isabella

could ne1 tell us for a fact, that this is or isnt poisionous?

i would like to know if they r poisionous i found 1 in our field and i would like to know about it.....

-It is in fact poisonous to an extent and can deliver a nasty stinging similar to a bee sting. If someone could find a source to back up this info it'd be greatly appreciated.

You can find data on the "poisonous" issue of woolly bear from this http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ffeiGEC_H5gC&oi=fnd&pg=PA83&dq=woolly+bear+caterpillars+poisonous&ots=dy8l5SKw6Z&sig=S1rx4FWBYwTSp3nUr9cFq6nuGCk#v=onepage&q&f=false (Chemical defenses in woolly bears) link (found through Scholar Google search). The caterpillars have the ability to sequester chemical compounds (allochemicals) from the plants they eat which make them non-palatable to birds. The ability to cause skin irritation is not defined as poisonous.--Mirrordor 07:54, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm wondering what they eat

I'm wondering what they eat, how to take care of them. If you find one and want to study it..... Other sites have said certain wooly bear species eat very specific plant types. It says just grass and weeds here. Any more specific care instructions?

see http://insects.ummz.lsa.umich.edu/MES/notes/entnote19.html as an example.

color variation

I've seen them yellow/black/yellow instead of black/yellow/black. Are these a different species or just some kind of genetic mutation?

71.17.223.125 (talk) 03:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All about Pyrrharctina Isabella tiger moth!

This is Shawn Fleetwood speacking the Pyrrharctia Isabella is a rare moth that is found in North America in the U.S.A states of Virginia,North Carilina,South Carilina,Marland,California and Tenezee.This moth is a very rare!This is the way males call females they flap there wings really loud and if any female heres it thell come to the call.There called a wully bear caterpiller.By the beginning of the winter they spin there cacons.Moths spin cacons and butterflys spin crysallisaes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.205.13.247 (talk) 23:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Woolly Bear" in the UK

In the UK 'woolley bear' colloquially refers to a different creature, I think. You occasionally find them around the house, about 2-4mm long, they look like some sort of insect larva. Sort of tiny, elongated tribbles.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Woolly_bear.jpg http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/gallery/showimage.php?i=27417&c=2 http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/facilities/palaeo-conservation-unit/shared/pictures/preventative/woolly_bear.html http://www.arrestapestgidding.co.uk/pest_control/carpet_beetles.html

Pyrrharctia Isabella

I almost vacuumed up this 'wooly bear' a little while back in our downstairs playroom. My mother in law had given the kids a poster of Butterfly's and Moths so we checked it out and decided to try to keep it. We put it in a bug keeper and fed it H20 and dandelions - according to the poster - and it eventually made a cocoon. It just came out last night and we have a beautiful Isabella Tiger Moth now! When should we release it and do we feed it sugar water? 69.205.20.87 (talk) 13:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Length of Cocoon till adult emergence.

October 2nd, 2010

My daughter recently caught two Pyrrharctia isabella catepillars and has had them in a bug cage for about a week. As of this morning we woke to find that both caterpillars have encased themselves in cocoons. Does anyone know how long it will be until they emerge from their cocoons?

Also, is it normal for them to be making cocoons now with winter so close by? Location of catepillars in question is in lower British Columbia, CANADA.

Thanks :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Serenityfirefly1 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correction needed

"they are mostly spotted all black than they are as seen below". The sentence does not make sense!Mirrordor 07:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrordor (talk • contribs)

Confused with Gynaephora groenlandica?

I don't think this is the species that matures over 14 (or 7) years. See http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Gynaephora_groenlandica. I think someone has been overzealous to include information from the Frozen planes series. Can any one else confirm this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.32.201 (talk) 05:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I have not seen the TV series cited, but other articles suggest the artic wooly-bear species is Gynaephora groenlandica, not Pyrrarctia isabella. Cephal-odd (talk) 00:48, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Info about the town of Sedro-Wooley seems likely incorrect, should be checked.

The Sedro-Wooley page cites a railroad developer, Philip A. Woolley as a prominent early citizen, a more likely source for the name. Needs research. 67.253.183.203 (talk) 02:46, 17 October 2014 (UTC)KTM[reply]

Range? Just the Arctic?!

This article needs an update. This insect's range appears to be much broader than just the "arctic." I added "needs citation" and here's a link for someone with more time than me to research the range. http://www.butterfliesandmoths.org/species/Pyrrharctia-isabella — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1003:B107:899B:B960:CA0:F39:1C70 (talk) 15:48, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing articles in the Lepidoptera WikiProject for a behavioral ecology class at WashU

This article includes some very interesting information about a very cool species, but I think adding a few sections about its biology and ecology would be valuable and put it more in compliance with the Lepidoptera WikiProject guidelines. These could include mating behavior and rituals, defense mechanisms and other interspecies interactions, all of which would provide better context for the moth within its ecosystem. More in-depth information about the life cycle of the moth to go along with the great images already in place would also improve the article. Thanks!

Hanna peterman 00:54, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Hanna peterman[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pyrrharctia isabella. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303234807/http://nwwoolybearsociety.9f.com/ to http://nwwoolybearsociety.9f.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:57, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

US southern Colloquialism "Wooly Booger"

Wooly booger is a common nickname through much of the southern US. Jonoaf (talk) 04:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We would need a reference that supports that to add it. - Ahunt (talk) 12:30, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter cannot be used as a ref

Some random post by some random person on Twitter cannot be used as a source for Wikipedia. Please see WP:RS, WP:SPS and especially Wikipedia:RSPTWITTER which says Twitter is a social network. As a self-published source, it is considered generally unreliable and should be avoided unless the author is a subject-matter expert or the tweet is used for an uncontroversial self-description. In most cases, Twitter accounts should only be cited if the user's identity is confirmed in some way. Tweets that are not covered by reliable sources are likely to constitute undue weight. Twitter should never be used for third-party claims related to living persons. Unless an actual reliable source is provided this claim will be removed. - Ahunt (talk) 11:51, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Ahunt (talk) 00:20, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]