Thread subject: Diptera.info :: Eurithia anthophila ?
Posted by Nikita Vikhrev on 25-08-2006 22:34
#1
Moscow region, 25 aug, 10mm.
Please, do not tell me that I'm completely wrong, I spend 2,5 hours keying this fly!
Posted by Nikita Vikhrev on 25-08-2006 22:42
#2
one more image
Posted by ChrisR on 25-08-2006 22:43
#3
I'd be happy to say
Eurithia sp. but I'm not sure I'd commit to
anthophila. :D
Posted by Nikita Vikhrev on 25-08-2006 23:03
#4
Eurithia sp. is enought for me!
In old and very unfriendly key for European Russia systematic inside Ernestiini is completely wrong, so for fine searching genus I used Diptera of Far East. Inside genus E. anthophila - tergit V not dusted in contrast with III and IV, which I think correct for my fly.
Thank you Chris, Nikita.
Posted by ChrisR on 25-08-2006 23:47
#5
Yeah, I never liked that tergite dusting characteristic anyway - I prefer to just take males and ID them on their huge genitalia! :D
Posted by Zeegers on 26-08-2006 09:42
#6
As far as I can tell, it is not anthophila.
There is greyish dusting on tergite 5, as fas as one can see.
The vertex is very narrow for a female, since this is a female.
So Eu. connivens (which should be common near Moscow) is more likely. Still a guess.
And also the female genitalia are very distinctive.
The European Russian key by Zimin is maybe not in error, however, Zimin had a different concept of genera. This has not been followed since. However, Zimin should be honored for, as far as I know, being the first to thoroughly use both male and female genitalia in Ernestiini.
Theo Zeegers
Posted by Nikita Vikhrev on 26-08-2006 15:15
#7
Thank you Theo.
But if we regard tergit 5 as dusted it lead me to E. consorbina - 3 + 4 dc (not 3+3 as connivens), palp apicaly brown-yellowish (not all black as connivens).
Correct?
Posted by Nikita Vikhrev on 26-08-2006 15:27
#8
May be this image helps to ID species?
Posted by Zeegers on 26-08-2006 15:33
#9
Well
-1) The way I understand the picture the palpi are very black. Best seen in first pic.
-2) There is something peculiar about the post DC. In the second pic, you can see the specimen is asymmetrical: it has clearly 3+3 DC on the left side (right side in pic), however, on the other side there seem to be DC 3+4.
So, we (at least I) need to see the genitalia to improve my opinion.
Theo
Posted by Nikita Vikhrev on 26-08-2006 16:10
#10
Theo, this time first image, second image and collected fly are 3 different individuals (at least well may be).
1-st: dc difficult to say for me, but palps look brownish in apical part;
2-nd: dc asymmetrical, but side 3+3 has small hair on place of 2-nd postsutural dc.
collected - palps as I discribed, dc 3+4, but both dc of 2-nd postsutural pair is clearly more week than the rest postsutural dc.
Nikita