Thread subject: Diptera.info :: Drosophila ID (obscura-group)

Posted by Carnifex on 16-07-2019 19:34
#1

I am not reaching a satisfying ID here. Sex comb bristle numbers are #14 and #11, hb-index seems to be slightly larger than 0.5 and wing border did not look infuscated when looking through the bino, but in the resulting photo it does. Don't know if to trust that feature (usually I see the darkened costal region clearly darker in subobscura). Did not have enough time to look at the genitalia, but is it safe to call it D. subobscura?

static.inaturalist.org/photos/45124888/large.jpeg
static.inaturalist.org/photos/45124924/large.jpeg
static.inaturalist.org/photos/45124900/large.jpg
static.inaturalist.org/photos/45156639/large.jpg

Posted by Paul Beuk on 16-07-2019 20:41
#2

Looks okay. Add a picture of the palpus and I can confirm with more certainty.

Posted by Carnifex on 18-07-2019 10:06
#3

Helpful?

static.inaturalist.org/photos/45311112/large.jpg
static.inaturalist.org/photos/45311114/large.jpg

Posted by Paul Beuk on 18-07-2019 12:30
#4

Carnifex wrote:
Helpful?
Yes and no. There is a short ventral setae on the palpi in addition to the strong apical one which should not be there in subobscura. A similar species which has that seta and that has similar combs is D. aplina. However, the base of the abdomen and pleura are entirely dark as in subobscura. I am inclined towards subobscura since that addition seta on the palpi appears to be smaller than in alpina but in all honesty it should be a genitalia job...

Posted by Carnifex on 18-07-2019 13:08
#5

Hm, the number of sex comb setae would favor D. alpina, and while the pleura are dark, the basal tergites are yellowish.
I am working on a delivery for you, so I will just include that specimen.

static.inaturalist.org/photos/45311108/large.jpeg