---

Hello,

is Limnia unguicornis correct here? The fly is from last week from a wet forest near Neuss (germany). Length was about 6mm.

Thanks,
Michael

---

Limnia is correct, and then the uniformly brown vitta on scutum suggests the rarer Limnia paludicola.

---

Hello Stephane,

thank you for your answer. Now that you say it I see the difference to L. unguicornis too. Is idenfication certain enough for the gallery, which still lacks L. paludicola?

Michael

---

Well, I have never met L. paludicola myself, but females with brown band are keyed out as L. paludicola in all litterature. If I find a species like this, it is the name I would give to it ! After, I don't know if it makes certain the identification...

---

It is my personal opinion, so far I'm not ready to give proof of it.
I don't think that palludicola is a valid species.

---

Hello Stephane, Nikita,

if we accept L. paludicola, then I guess, if all literature leads to this species, we can assume, the identification is correct. Even genetic or genital examinations are not 100% certain.

Whether to accept the species or not I let Paul decide.

Michael

---

Paul's, Stephane's and mine opinions are the same:
so far as nobody publish anything palludicola is a valid species.
I only wrote that at my unofficial opinion palludicola smells as species make up out of whole cloth (as well as several other Sciomyzidae, Euthycera sticticaria, for example).
As for palludicola: 1. The difference in genitalia are very doubtful my test, the matter of piont of view. 2. The colour of midstrip in female? Why not a variation? 3. The marriage of palludicola males and females. Nobody collected and examined any copulation pairs of palludicola, as far as I know. What is the reason to regard such males and females as conspecific? I can't see any...