Diptera.info :: Identification queries :: Diptera (adults)
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
Anthomyiidae > Botanophila fugax female
|
|
Stephen R |
Posted on 29-10-2010 00:40
|
![]() Member Location: Clitheroe Lancashire UK Posts: 2396 Joined: 12.06.09 |
5+mm, Clitheroe UK, 4 July 2010. Hi Joke, hope the cold is better ![]() Stephen R attached the following image: ![]() [98.64Kb] Edited by Stephen R on 04-11-2010 16:32 |
|
|
javanerkelens |
Posted on 29-10-2010 19:17
|
![]() Member Location: Netherlands Posts: 2962 Joined: 18.10.07 |
My cold is still terrible ![]() Botanophila fugax seems right to me. but after looking at the key I'm not convinced. Or are you thinking at another possible Botanophila species...? Joke |
|
|
Stephen R |
Posted on 31-10-2010 23:21
|
![]() Member Location: Clitheroe Lancashire UK Posts: 2396 Joined: 12.06.09 |
Thank you. I didn't understand the bit in Michael's key about the ratio of the last two medial vein sections - it sounded as if the distal section should be shorter than the one before?![]() Stephen. |
|
|
javanerkelens |
Posted on 01-11-2010 21:20
|
![]() Member Location: Netherlands Posts: 2962 Joined: 18.10.07 |
I didn't understand the bit in Michael's key about the ratio of the last two medial vein sections - it sounded as if the distal section should be shorter than the one before? Indeed confusing. Maybe he ment that the thickness of the vein M1+2 at the end is 0.8mm....??????? And at B.laterella it is 0.55mm....????? And my cold.......gone!!!!! ![]() javanerkelens attached the following image: ![]() [98.29Kb] Edited by javanerkelens on 01-11-2010 21:21 |
|
|
Stephen R |
Posted on 01-11-2010 23:07
|
![]() Member Location: Clitheroe Lancashire UK Posts: 2396 Joined: 12.06.09 |
I think we are both in the dark about this one! I think it must be about the relative lengths of sections of M1+2 due to the different positions of the crossveins. Have you got enough different Botanophila species to be able to compare them? (Imagine a vein 0.8mm thick - more than 10% of the fly's length ![]() |
|
|
javanerkelens |
Posted on 01-11-2010 23:22
|
![]() Member Location: Netherlands Posts: 2962 Joined: 18.10.07 |
(Imagine a vein 0.8mm thick - more than 10% of the fly's length ![]() LOL...ha ha ha ha ha ha.....!!! The cold has definitive damage my brains ![]() Just forget it all... ![]() Have to reset !!! Joke |
|
|
javanerkelens |
Posted on 03-11-2010 20:39
|
![]() Member Location: Netherlands Posts: 2962 Joined: 18.10.07 |
Answer from Ackland: You will see earlier in the key that I have compared the length of the penultimate section of M1+2 to the ultimate section, giving generally a ratio of usually more than 1. The comparison of fugax with lateralla females should be (for fugax) "penultimate section of M1+2 1.25 times length of ultimate section. What I must have done is to give the ration of the penultimate section compared with the penultimate which is 0.8 (penultimate section =4 ultimate section 5). I further compounded the problem by calling the character " last section of M1+2 ratio" ! It is anyway the length of the sections of M1+2 and not the thickness. (You don't need this character to separate fugax from laterella females) Problem solved! Joke ![]() |
|
|
Stephen R |
Posted on 04-11-2010 16:25
|
![]() Member Location: Clitheroe Lancashire UK Posts: 2396 Joined: 12.06.09 |
Great, thanks! I guessed that might be what happened ![]() |
|
Jump to Forum: |