Gallery Links
Users Online
· Guests Online: 41

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 5,060
· Newest Member: Amee
Forum Threads
Theme Switcher
Switch to:
Last Seen Users
· socrates< 5 mins
· John Carr00:13:54
· Axel Steiner00:26:49
· Volkmar01:01:56
· eklans01:18:25
· Andrzej02:13:43
· Amee02:18:00
· weia02:34:01
· Jan Maca02:46:33
· ivo05:02:39
Latest Photo Additions
View Thread
Diptera.info :: Identification queries :: Diptera (adults)
 Print Thread
Rhagio strigosus?
Juergen Peters
#1 Print Post
Posted on 31-07-2006 21:54
User Avatar

Member

Location: northwest Germany
Posts: 14250
Joined: 11.09.04

Hello!

These Rhagionids numerously inhabited a tree trunk in our garden today (Germany). Is this Rhagio strigosus? Thanks in advance!


www.foto-upload.de/diptera/060731/Rhagio_cf_strigosus_M1.jpg
www.foto-upload.de/diptera/060731/Rhagio_cf_strigosus_M2.jpg
Best regards,
Jürgen

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Juergen Peters
Borgholzhausen, Germany
WWW: http://insektenfo...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
http://insektenfotos.de/forum
Tony Irwin
#2 Print Post
Posted on 01-08-2006 21:45
User Avatar

Member

Location: Norwich, England
Posts: 7306
Joined: 19.11.04

Could be, but it is difficult to separate male strigosus from scolopaceus. Also there is another species, latipennis that occurs in Germany. In this species the wings are rather broader than the others, and this may be what you have photographed. It is difficult to tell from the angle of the shot. Sad I only have scolopaceus in my collection, so perhaps someone with all the species can compare and give you a better answer! Smile
Tony
----------
Tony Irwin
 
Juergen Peters
#3 Print Post
Posted on 01-08-2006 23:13
User Avatar

Member

Location: northwest Germany
Posts: 14250
Joined: 11.09.04

Hello Tony,

thanks for your reply!

Tony Irwin wrote:
Could be, but it is difficult to separate male strigosus from scolopaceus.


My first thought was indeed R. scolopaceus, but isn't that a spring species? They were numerous here, but have disappeared some weeks ago. Additionally the current flies are considerably smaller than R. scolopaceus.

Also there is another species, latipennis that occurs in Germany. In this species the wings are rather broader than the others, and this may be what you have photographed. It is difficult to tell from the angle of the shot.


Of course the wings seem relatively broad to me. I have added another photo more from above.
Juergen Peters attached the following image:


[63.22Kb]
Edited by Juergen Peters on 01-08-2006 23:15
Best regards,
Jürgen

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Juergen Peters
Borgholzhausen, Germany
WWW: http://insektenfo...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
http://insektenfotos.de/forum
Paul Beuk
#4 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2006 07:15
User Avatar

Super Administrator

Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19403
Joined: 11.05.04

From my key I understand that both R. strigosus and R. latipennis should have yellowish sides of the thorax, of about the same colour as the femora. In addition, R. latipennis has wings that are only 2.5 times as long as wide. Here it appears to be about 3. So in my opinion, I think it is R. scolopaceus.
Apparently the species is getting scarcer in July and August, but there is even a Danish record from early September. Speculation: It has been hot and dry for quite some time. I have noticed some species that appeared to postpone their emergence until the surroundings became more humid. Maybe the case with your Rhagio's, too?
Paul

- - - -

Paul Beuk on https://diptera.info
 
diptera.info
Tony Irwin
#5 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2006 09:06
User Avatar

Member

Location: Norwich, England
Posts: 7306
Joined: 19.11.04

The more dorsal view shows that the wings are not so broad, so I agree with Paul that latipennis is unlikely. However, I understand that the thoracic colour of the male strigosus can be grey sometimes, so I'm not certain that this is scolopaceus. There is a difference in the antennal shape, with scolopaceus having a pointed ventral projection, but I cannot tell from the photos exactly what shape they are. If you can get a detailed close-up lateral shot of the head, we may be able to be sure!
Don't worry too much about flight times or size - as Paul says, scolopaceus can fly much later than some books suggest, and small individuals do occur - depending on conditions during development.
Tony
----------
Tony Irwin
 
Paul Beuk
#6 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2006 09:43
User Avatar

Super Administrator

Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19403
Joined: 11.05.04

My main reason for concern that it may NOT be R. scolopaceus would be the rather darkish impression I get from the specimens. Still, I have not seen that the overall colour of R. strigosus should be darker and that does not fit with the yellowish lateral part of the thorax either...
Paul

- - - -

Paul Beuk on https://diptera.info
 
diptera.info
Juergen Peters
#7 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2006 14:58
User Avatar

Member

Location: northwest Germany
Posts: 14250
Joined: 11.09.04

Hello Paul and Tony,

many thanks for your explanations!

Tony Irwin wrote:
There is a difference in the antennal shape, with scolopaceus having a pointed ventral projection, but I cannot tell from the photos exactly what shape they are. If you can get a detailed close-up lateral shot of the head, we may be able to be sure!


Unfortunately I have no real lateral shot, the pics below are the best I have taken. I would try to get better photos, but today it is raining all the time :-(.
Juergen Peters attached the following image:


[89.88Kb]
Edited by Juergen Peters on 02-08-2006 14:59
Best regards,
Jürgen

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Juergen Peters
Borgholzhausen, Germany
WWW: http://insektenfo...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
http://insektenfotos.de/forum
Zeegers
#8 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2006 21:03
Member

Location: Soest, NL
Posts: 19143
Joined: 21.07.04

I have to agree with Tony.

A much more crucial and better feature than the colouration of pleurae is the length of the third antennal segment. The third antennal segment is definitely short on the picture, unless it is very misleading, that is, shorter than the second. This rules out Rh. scolopaceus.
Moreover, as pointed out by Paul, July is clearly not in favour of scolopaceus.

In latipennis, in males the eyes should be separated, which I don't see on the picture. So in my opinion Juergen was right from the beginning: strigosus.

Theo Zeegers
 
Juergen Peters
#9 Print Post
Posted on 03-08-2006 22:41
User Avatar

Member

Location: northwest Germany
Posts: 14250
Joined: 11.09.04

Hello, Theo!

Moreover, as pointed out by Paul, July is clearly not in favour of scolopaceus.
In latipennis, in males the eyes should be separated, which I don't see on the picture. So in my opinion Juergen was right from the beginning: strigosus.


Thanks a lot!
Best regards,
Jürgen

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Juergen Peters
Borgholzhausen, Germany
WWW: http://insektenfo...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
http://insektenfotos.de/forum
Juergen Peters
#10 Print Post
Posted on 17-09-2006 23:46
User Avatar

Member

Location: northwest Germany
Posts: 14250
Joined: 11.09.04

Hello!

Zeegers wrote:
Moreover, as pointed out by Paul, July is clearly not in favour of scolopaceus.


By the way: those flies are still around here in our garden now in mid September (pic from yesterday).
Juergen Peters attached the following image:


[53.14Kb]
Best regards,
Jürgen

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Juergen Peters
Borgholzhausen, Germany
WWW: http://insektenfo...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
http://insektenfotos.de/forum
Jump to Forum:
Similar Threads
Thread Forum Replies Last Post
Rhagionidae, ID please => Rhagio tringarius (male) Diptera (adults) 4 13-08-2025 10:13
Rhagio (female) - north-western France Diptera (adults) 5 19-07-2025 14:00
Rhagio sp. ? Diptera (adults) 3 16-12-2024 08:53
Rhagio (Rhagionidae) ID Diptera (adults) 4 13-11-2024 13:19
Rhagio from pyrenees.. Diptera (adults) 1 03-08-2024 21:11
Date and time
17 September 2025 17:21
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Temporary email?
Due to fact this site has functionality making use of your email address, any registration using a temporary email address will be rejected.

Paul
Donate
Please, help to make
Diptera.info
possible and enable
further improvements!
Latest Articles
Syrph the Net
Those who want to have access to the Syrph the Net database need to sign the
License Agreement -
Click to Download


Public files of Syrph the Net can be downloaded HERE

Last updated: 25.08.2011
Shoutbox
You must login to post a message.

08.09.25 16:17
Anyone has this article'A REVISION OF SPECIES OF THE GENUS CADREMA WALKER (DIPTERA, CHLOROPIDAE) FROM ISLANDS IN THE INDIAN OCEAN'? Smile

24.08.25 16:55
Thanks for your proposal, but for me this option is ineligible.

15.08.25 10:15
For those specialists not active on Facebook, I just ask to consider to join our group on FB. Please, be aware that it is not necessary at all to be active on FB outside the diptera group. Actually, n

15.08.25 10:13
We received requests to get permission to ask for ID in our Facebook group, https://www.facebo
ok.com/groups/1798
95332035235/ Until now we pointed to diptera.info, but since Paul's passing we not

23.06.25 18:10
If you have some spare money, there is a copy (together with keys to pupae and larvae) for sale by Hermann L. Strack, Loguivy Plougras, France

23.06.25 11:18
Appreciate it, Tony Irwin! I got the hint to use the key next to Langton and Pinder key for females of Chironomidae. So no specific queries, except the keys... I will keep this on my list and hope th

19.06.25 15:33
I have the hard copy book, if you have any specific queries, but I'm not scanning the 500+ pages!

02.06.25 18:26
Anyone has "Chironomidae of the Holarctic region. Keys and diagnoses. Part 3. Adult Males Entomologica Scandinavica Supplement 34"? smolwaarneming@gma
il.com

28.05.25 20:57
I have Russian Coenosia. nikita6510@ya.ru

28.05.25 12:25
Is someone able to share with me "A key to the Russian species of the genus Coenosia"?

Render time: 1.35 seconds | 240,875,684 unique visits