Diptera.info :: Identification queries :: Diptera (adults)
 Drosophilidae (1), August 30, 2007
|
|
| Dmitry Gavryushin |
Posted on 30-08-2007 22:32
|
 Member Location: Moscow region, Russia Posts: 3338 Joined: 17.10.05 |
Naro-Fominsk, Moscow region, Russia. Caught on decorticated wood of Betula at the point where the tree was broken. Size less than 2 mm.
Dmitry Gavryushin attached the following image:  [129.87Kb] |
|
|
|
| jorgemotalmeida |
Posted on 30-08-2007 22:41
|
 Member Location: Viseu - PORTUGAL Posts: 9296 Joined: 05.06.06 |
Wonderful photos as always! Is it Rhododendron sp. leaf, Dima?  Drosophila sp. for the fly? |
 |
|
| Dmitry Gavryushin |
Posted on 30-08-2007 22:58
|
|
Member Location: Moscow region, Russia Posts: 3338 Joined: 17.10.05 |
No, it's Ground-elder (Aegopodium podagraria), my favourite this year . Since anterior reclinate or are approx. as thick as proclinate or and located in front of the latter, I think it's Chymomyza and not Drosophila. P.S. nigrimana (distincta) or fuscimana? Is it possible to tell w/o examining genitalia? Edited by Dmitry Gavryushin on 30-08-2007 23:10 |
|
|
|
| jorgemotalmeida |
Posted on 30-08-2007 23:11
|
|
Member Location: Viseu - PORTUGAL Posts: 9296 Joined: 05.06.06 |
 thanks.
Edited by jorgemotalmeida on 30-08-2007 23:13 |
|
|
|
| Dmitry Gavryushin |
Posted on 18-09-2007 07:50
|
|
Member Location: Moscow region, Russia Posts: 3338 Joined: 17.10.05 |
I'm not sure about this specimen (didin't keep it), but on September 11 there was a lot of very similar flies ob fresh stumps of Betula, both males and females. Andrey Ozerov kindly checked male genitalia and in Stackelberg's key it fitted well Ch. nigrimana (Meigen, 1826). Now it's Ch. distincta (Egger, 1862), am I right?
Dmitry Gavryushin attached the following image:  [83.96Kb] |
|
|
|
| Paul Beuk |
Posted on 18-09-2007 10:22
|
 Super Administrator Location: Netherlands Posts: 19403 Joined: 11.05.04 |
Two species would fall under the first couplet of Stackelberg's key: C. fuscimana and C. distincta. C. nigrimana is given as questionable synonym of C. fuscimana in the Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica handbook. The genitalia illustrated by Stackelberg mostly resemble those of C. fuscimana and not those of C. distincta. Comparing the image with specimens of C. fuscimana and C. distincta I collected last month (I was lucky, I also collected C. caudatula and C. amoena, so four species within three weeks  ) I would also go for C. fuscimana: The mesonomtum is paler than in C. distincta (that appears to have a darkened scutellum) and the the ventral setae on the fore femore are less regularly placed than in the latter species.
Paul - - - - Paul Beuk on https://diptera.info |
|
|
|
| Dmitry Gavryushin |
Posted on 18-09-2007 11:03
|
|
Member Location: Moscow region, Russia Posts: 3338 Joined: 17.10.05 |
Thanks a lot Paul, Stackelberg simply gives the picture from Duda (fig. 18 on p. 45), and there's a handwritten note 'fuscimana' against nigrimana in my copy (quite probably by Mr. Okada), so I think I could upload it to the Gallery as Ch. distincta. |
|
|
|
| Paul Beuk |
Posted on 18-09-2007 11:08
|
|
Super Administrator Location: Netherlands Posts: 19403 Joined: 11.05.04 |
I hope you mean as fuscimana. See both Okada's note and my remarks in favour of that species above...
Paul - - - - Paul Beuk on https://diptera.info |
|
|
|
| Dmitry Gavryushin |
Posted on 18-09-2007 11:35
|
|
Member Location: Moscow region, Russia Posts: 3338 Joined: 17.10.05 |
Well of course you're right Paul, fuscimana, sorry for the mistake  . |
|
|
|
| Tony Irwin |
Posted on 18-09-2007 19:53
|
 Member Location: Norwich, England Posts: 7306 Joined: 19.11.04 |
I'm glad I didn't offer my shots of fuscimana for the gallery (see http://www.dipter...post_38859). They can't compare to the maestro's pictures!
Tony ---------- Tony Irwin |
|
|
|
| Dmitry Gavryushin |
Posted on 20-09-2007 08:21
|
|
Member Location: Moscow region, Russia Posts: 3338 Joined: 17.10.05 |
I blush . Now hope to put a name on Campichaeta images. |
|
|
|
| Jump to Forum: |