---

I am going through the sarcophagidae in my collection and I am strugling with this one: 2+3 DC, no AC, with scutellar apicals (smaller than the lateral bristles, but clearly present), 1 bristle on R1, with this genitalia:

From Sosoye (chalk-pasture) in Belgium, 7/7/2002.
The closest I find in Pape is bezziana (infantilis now ?). Anybody that can confirm/refute this ? Are there any species I can expect in Belgium which are not in Pape ?

Thanks,

Joris

---

Hmm, I guess it could be vagans ... Very long juxta then for vagans relative to the picture in Pape - more like the drawing of vicina there.

---

Ah - I opened Rodendorf in Bei-Bienko and there it is: S. dissimilis (but glancing over the literature, this group seems to be in turmoil and S. chaetoneura could be possible too). So I seemed to have answered my own post, though confirmation is still wellcome ... Joris

---

Very hard to say for sure ... I dabble in the UK sarcophagids but I don't have enough experience of the foreign ones to be able to comment :) Pape's keys should be fairly clear though - if that's what it comes out as then you are probably correct :)

---

Well - problem is Pape's key for Fennoscandia doesn't contain dissimilis (unless I missed it) and I only found figure of the genitalia of dissimilis when I looked in Bei-Bienko (Keys to diptera of European part of Russia). I notice there is a lot of new literature published in Zootaxa on Heteronychia (redescriptions etc.). I'll try to get these via my local university (unless somebody has them readily available ?) Joris

---

As far as I know Sarcophaga dissimilis is not known from Fennoscandia which would explain why the key of Pape doesn't include this species. The species is included in the key of Povolny & Verves (1997) [Spixiana Supplement 24. The Felsh-Flies of Central Europe].

---

Thanks for the reference - I notice it's even on the web (http://www.archive.org/details/spixiana2426199799zool). I was clearly trusting too much that at least the Danish fauna would be similar enough to the Belgian ... Joris

---

I think this is S. chaetoneura but I would need to study the specimen to give a definite id.

Apparently you are trying seriously to id it yourself. In that case you will need several publications in order to get the correct information. Blackith et al 2004 seems to have some errors, considered by Whitmore, Richet et al 2011 gives a better view. Nevertheless there are some peculairities in this species-complex to be resolved in my personal opinion.

Liekele

---

Thanks I will try to get some of the recent literature. I seem to have several similar exx. Joris