Diptera.info :: Miscellaneous :: General queries
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Chorisops´ doubt
|
|
| paqui |
Posted on 29-12-2009 00:06
|
|
Member Location: Valencia (spain) Posts: 816 Joined: 02.09.05 |
Hello, I´m looking at this genera now and a few doubts come to me, - I copy the list fron Fauna Europaea: Chorisops caroli Troiano 1995 Chorisops masoni Troiano & Toscano 1995 Chorisops nagatomii Rozkosny 1979 Chorisops tibialis (Meigen 1820) Chorisops tunisiae (Becker 1915) In Spain there are two recorded: C. tibialis and C. tunisiae, but I haven´t found any description of C. tunisiae: - In "Lindner" there´s only C. tibialis, and C. tunisiae appears as a synonym (outdated, I suppose). - "The manual of Palaearctic Diptera" separates Allognosta from Beris, Actina and Chorisops because Allognosta has no spinelike processes (scutellum) but the other 3 genera have 48!!, I´ve never seen all those spines, where are they? I link to a photo from the gallery: http://www.dipter...to_id=3275 perhaps not visible with this angle (?) - "Faune de France" has only C. tibialis and doesn´t tell a number of spines Looking for more Chorisops pictures I´ve seen this one, from Portugal: http://commons.wi...2008-1.jpg The Portugese records (until 2002) were C. nagatomi and C. tunisiae , - "British soldier flies... " covers C. tibialis and C. nagatomi (orange abdomen) so perhaps the one from this picture is C. tunisiae ? This book says Chorisops has 4 spines (or 6 in aberrant specimens), so perhaps "spinelike processes" are smaller or thinner than normal spines (?) Any help with any of these questions is welcome (where/how are the spines and/or any reference (article) with description of C. tunisiae). Thank you all very much for your atention And happy new year  |
|
|
|
| blowave |
Posted on 29-12-2009 02:15
|
 Member Location: LINCOLN, UK Posts: 3151 Joined: 27.06.07 |
Hello paqui, I was interested to find these spines myself as I took pics of both male and female C. tibialis this year. I can see some faint, pale spines on the thorax of the male and it appears the female has some too but they don't show very well at some angles. I was going to post my pics, but I searched the site and found some which show the spines well. I guess these are the 48 you have read about. http://diptera.in...post_42064 Janet |
 |
|
| Paul Beuk |
Posted on 29-12-2009 09:58
|
 Super Administrator Location: Netherlands Posts: 19225 Joined: 11.05.04 |
I guess 48 should read as 4-8...
Paul - - - - Paul Beuk on https://diptera.info |
|
|
|
| paqui |
Posted on 29-12-2009 20:19
|
|
Member Location: Valencia (spain) Posts: 816 Joined: 02.09.05 |
Thank you very much |
|
|
|
| Jump to Forum: |
but don't see the image in the post.