Diptera.info :: Identification queries :: Diptera (adults)
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Chamaemyia sp., Chamaemyiidae
|
|
| JariF |
Posted on 16-01-2010 11:27
|
 Member Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 2072 Joined: 20.01.06 |
These are very numerous. Hopeless Chamaemyiidae yes ? July 11. 2008 Loviisa, Finland. Jari JariF attached the following image:  [120.62Kb] Edited by JariF on 16-01-2010 13:15 |
|
|
|
| Paul Beuk |
Posted on 16-01-2010 11:42
|
 Super Administrator Location: Netherlands Posts: 19229 Joined: 11.05.04 |
Chamaemyia
Paul - - - - Paul Beuk on https://diptera.info |
 |
|
| JariF |
Posted on 16-01-2010 12:07
|
|
Member Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 2072 Joined: 20.01.06 |
Thank's Paul for confirmation. Jari |
|
|
|
| viktor j nilsson |
Posted on 16-01-2010 12:21
|
|
Member Location: Gothenburg, Sweden Posts: 203 Joined: 25.02.08 |
Are the palpi black? Chamaemyiids are risky, especially females. But using Bei-Bienko, the combination 1)palpi black; 2)tibiae and tarsi yellow and 3) yellow spot near base of arista on 3rd segment of antenna, quickly keys out C. emiliae, which is an eastern species that is listed in the finnish draft catalogue. Might be correct? Maybe Steve Gaimari has something to say about this? |
|
|
|
| JariF |
Posted on 16-01-2010 13:15
|
|
Member Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 2072 Joined: 20.01.06 |
Well I can try but I believe it's just waste of time with these  Thank's anyway.Jari |
|
|
|
| viktor j nilsson |
Posted on 16-01-2010 19:28
|
|
Member Location: Gothenburg, Sweden Posts: 203 Joined: 25.02.08 |
No males? |
|
|
|
| Paul Beuk |
Posted on 16-01-2010 20:09
|
|
Super Administrator Location: Netherlands Posts: 19229 Joined: 11.05.04 |
Using the old Bei-Bienko key is dodgy to say the least to identify Chamaemyia...
Paul - - - - Paul Beuk on https://diptera.info |
|
|
|
| viktor j nilsson |
Posted on 16-01-2010 20:39
|
|
Member Location: Gothenburg, Sweden Posts: 203 Joined: 25.02.08 |
...indeed. It is almost a crime.  ...but yet not worse than using it to identify Leucopsis females! If we get a male with genitalia I´ll pick up good ol´Tanasijtjuk 1986, but the russian keys are still too difficult for me (even with Igor´s excellent russian-english dictionary för entomologsist) to understand it to identify females, if it even is possible. EDIT: 1986, not 1987 Edited by viktor j nilsson on 18-01-2010 17:51 |
|
|
|
| Steve Gaimari |
Posted on 18-01-2010 17:12
|
 Member Location: Sacramento, California, USA Posts: 169 Joined: 08.10.04 |
viktor j nilsson wrote: Are the palpi black? Chamaemyiids are risky, especially females. But using Bei-Bienko, the combination 1)palpi black; 2)tibiae and tarsi yellow and 3) yellow spot near base of arista on 3rd segment of antenna, quickly keys out C. emiliae, which is an eastern species that is listed in the finnish draft catalogue. Might be correct? Maybe Steve Gaimari has something to say about this? Females of Chamaemyia (and Leucopis) are notoriously difficult. Especially when using Bei-Bienko! But really, even with Tanasijtshuk's 1986 work, most females are impossible. The male genitalia are the thing! Only the very obvious species are possible from photographs, in any case. |
|
|
|
| Kahis |
Posted on 18-01-2010 19:28
|
 Member Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 1999 Joined: 02.09.04 |
With all the species being variable and more or less close to each other, Chamaemyia females are all but impossible. This one if definitely not C. emiliae. If I had to guess, I would say either C. sylvatica or the species formerly called C. juncorum (it's apparently nameless not  ), but your guess is as good as mine.
Edited by Kahis on 18-01-2010 19:31 Kahis |
|
|
|
| Jump to Forum: |
but don't see the image in the post.