---

I expected this to be a species I'd recently requested an ID for, however I can't seem to match it with anything. So, at the risk of wasting your time, can anyone help?

Devon, England
28/5/2009
Hedge/meadow.

Thanks

Tim

---

Looks like Macquartia, however, the apicalscutellar bristles are lacking.

So Cleonica callida (?)

How rare is that in Britain ?

Theo

---

Cleonice ... just a tad rare ... known from 2 records from southern counties by 1996 ... I think I heard of 1 more record from last year but I haven't seen the specimen yet :)

So, Tim is in the perfect county to see rarities like Cleonice so we can't discount it. :)

I have never seen Cleonice but one thing I noticed about Tim's fly is that it seems to have quite a small eye and relatively deep gena ... not sure if that is any clue.

---

Thanks both of you, sounds like a really interesting find. I take from (?) that you are not 100% certain, Theo; is there some way different photos would help? I only took 3 shots and all are from the same angle, but I'll post more if I get them.

A quick bit of research suggests a preference for woodland - and particularly poplar - the site was definitely not woodland, rather a very old hedge with a lot of mature trees, mostly oak. The nearest poplar is a planted belt about 200m away.

Chris, are records such as this (assuming it could be confirmed from a photo) any use to you, or do you always require a specimen?

This site, an organic farm almost adjacent to my house, has turned up quite a few notable insect species in the last few years, I still wonder what else is out there...

Tim

---

Sorry guys, I just noticed the tibiae are slightly reddish, so that brings Pelatachina tibialis in mind. Female Pelatachina is from picture very similar to female Cleonice, though Pelatachina is distinctly larger.
In any case, the ocellars are fine, excluding Cleonice.

So no Cleonice and most likely Pelatachina tibialis female


Theo

---

Thanks Theo, I've edited the thread title accordingly.

Tim

---

All tachinid records are gratefully received as long as there is a high-degree of confidence in the ID. For rarities, such as Cleonice (if it had been this species) then a specimen would be very good - I don't think we could have accepted the ID if there was any doubt in Theo's mind. :)

---

I agree, rarities should be confirmed by specimens unless unmistably obvious (such as male Phasia aurigera).

All my ID's are (at most) 90 - 95 % reliable, that is, is something very unusual pops up, I'm likely to miss it.
There are simply to many species of Tachinidae to be able to give a 100 % from picture, in most cases.

this one, on the other hand, is my mistake. 'Resembles Macquartia' got me into Cleonice, whereas Pelatachina more or less resembles Macquartia as well and is much more common (also in the UK ?)

Theo

---

I agree completely with the both of you, I was merely wondering about cases (probably not that many, I admit) where identification could be established with 100% certainty from a photograph. Obviously my interest is in taking photographs rather than specimens (I'd like to do both but I don't have the time). I'd be happy if I could contribute in a small way by submitting records of what I can be sure of.

Tim

---

Yes, I'd say it is fairly frequent/common in the UK :)

---

... and we'd be very happy to have them - anything from Tachina fera and Eriothrix rufomaculata right up to the Cleonice callida of this world ;)

---

Actually, diptera.info has contributed significantly to the recent knowledge on distributional pattern, so keep them coming !

More pics of the same fly make a positive ID more likely.

In 3 pics of this one I would inmediately have noticed the reddish tibiae in at least one.
So, the more, the better, even from the same fly !


Theo