Posted by Danny Wolff on 22-08-2010 22:01
#4
Hi Reinoud,
Leptogaster wrote:
I can't see an extension of sternite 8 that is why i excluded T. atricapillus. The more hooked shape and the fact that the background is clearly visible through the upper clasper- (epandrium), so it is thin and made me wonder.
...
I got several collected males of M. atricapillus and even in a dried state it is hard to look through + they all have the extension on sternite 8.
I can't see any extension on sternitze 8, too, and you are right, if it is T. atricapillus, there would be. But in this view angle I'm not sure that the extension would be to see even it is there.
I can't see the "tooth" on the epandrium, which has to be there if it is Rhadiurgus. The arista is not quite Rhadiurgus-like and the upper surface of the face knob seems to be completely dusted and not partly shining as it would be expected to in Rhadiurgus.
All in all, the picture is too bad for an ID and I think it is time waste to try any further ID. One thing is clear, it's no Neoitamus cyanurus as you have mentioned first.
Greetings, Danny