Diptera.info :: Identification queries :: Diptera (adults)
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Solieria? >no, possibly Bithia
|
|
| piros |
Posted on 11-12-2012 23:03
|
|
Member Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 1763 Joined: 04.01.12 |
Found in Szeged, S. Hungary, on the date 19. 07. 2011. To me, it lookslike Solieria, but with entirely black legs? (I have pictures only from this angle.) Thanks for any comment in advance! Henrik piros attached the following image:  [192.29Kb] Edited by piros on 21-01-2013 00:02 |
|
|
|
| ChrisR |
Posted on 12-12-2012 11:08
|
 Administrator Location: Reading, England Posts: 7699 Joined: 12.07.04 |
Not Solieria - Solieria are generally thinner but this also has at least 3 pairs of scutellar bristles and Solieria have 2 pairs. This is far more interesting and needed to be collected to be identified properly 
Manager of the UK Species Inventory in the Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity at the Natural History Museum, London. |
 |
|
| piros |
Posted on 12-12-2012 16:36
|
|
Member Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 1763 Joined: 04.01.12 |
Thanks again! And again, I dont have the specimen Do you have a suggestion for the genus perhaps? Edited by piros on 12-12-2012 16:38 |
|
|
|
| piros |
Posted on 12-12-2012 17:05
|
|
Member Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 1763 Joined: 04.01.12 |
Just occurred to me: couldn't this be also Bithia?? |
|
|
|
| ChrisR |
Posted on 14-12-2012 10:39
|
|
Administrator Location: Reading, England Posts: 7699 Joined: 12.07.04 |
I'm 99% sure that it isn't Bithia because it looks unusual and doesn't look like anything that I have seen before. I suspect that it is a south-east European specialist.
Manager of the UK Species Inventory in the Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity at the Natural History Museum, London. |
|
|
|
| piros |
Posted on 14-12-2012 11:39
|
|
Member Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 1763 Joined: 04.01.12 |
Thanx for your reply! It's a pity, 'cause I like the fly and the picture is not bad either |
|
|
|
| ChrisR |
Posted on 14-12-2012 11:51
|
|
Administrator Location: Reading, England Posts: 7699 Joined: 12.07.04 |
Someone else, like Theo might be able to go further - he has seen a lot more species, from a wider geographic range too
Manager of the UK Species Inventory in the Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity at the Natural History Museum, London. |
|
|
|
| piros |
Posted on 09-01-2013 22:44
|
|
Member Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 1763 Joined: 04.01.12 |
My latest attempt: Erycia? |
|
|
|
| piros |
Posted on 13-01-2013 20:50
|
|
Member Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 1763 Joined: 04.01.12 |
Can someone rule out Erycia female (something close to foribunda)? |
|
|
|
| ChrisR |
Posted on 13-01-2013 21:26
|
|
Administrator Location: Reading, England Posts: 7699 Joined: 12.07.04 |
Certainly not Erycia. If I use MoschWeb I get to Bithia (which also looks correct from the habitus) but I am not sure of this species .... it is new to me.
Manager of the UK Species Inventory in the Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity at the Natural History Museum, London. |
|
|
|
| piros |
Posted on 13-01-2013 21:37
|
|
Member Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 1763 Joined: 04.01.12 |
Thanks a lot again, Chris! Could you explain the reason to me? |
|
|
|
| ChrisR |
Posted on 13-01-2013 22:13
|
|
Administrator Location: Reading, England Posts: 7699 Joined: 12.07.04 |
For me Bithia flies have white faces with protruding mouth edge ... bare eyes ... generally quite well-dusted (but I never saw one this colour) ... but I used the MoschWeb website to work through visible features. Erycia generally have different head shapes ... different numbers and arrangement of bristles on the thorax, head & abdomen. You are right that the colour of the dusting fits furibunda but all of the structural features of tachinids (particularly the number, size & position of bristles) are very important ... and they don't fit this fly
Manager of the UK Species Inventory in the Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity at the Natural History Museum, London. |
|
|
|
| piros |
Posted on 13-01-2013 23:09
|
|
Member Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 1763 Joined: 04.01.12 |
Thank you very much indeed for your detailed explanation! I usually try to take arrangements of bristles into account, but it is quite difficult sometimes… For example, this fly seems to have a few postsutural acrostichals on one (right) side, but they are apparently missing from the other side... Well, this is probably not important, I just mention it as an example of the difficulties a poor beginner have to face  . |
|
|
|
| ChrisR |
Posted on 14-01-2013 08:50
|
|
Administrator Location: Reading, England Posts: 7699 Joined: 12.07.04 |
Yes, you do have to be careful when bristles are aberrant or have been damaged so check both sides of the body and if in doubt run both options in the keys to find the most satisfactory. In this case acr are not important - the 3 strong dc are the ones to look for plus the position and number of abdominal bristles. Also note that the humerus has the 3 strongest bristles in a line, not a triangle. The projecting mouth edge though was probably the most informative feature and the hairs on vein r1 also
Manager of the UK Species Inventory in the Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity at the Natural History Museum, London. |
|
|
|
| Jump to Forum: |