Posted by Manuel Lopez on 15-06-2012 17:30
#1
Leucophora sp. male. Is it possible to go further ?
Granada (31/03/2012)
Thanks
Edited by Manuel Lopez on 19-06-2012 15:05
Posted by Stephen R on 16-06-2012 07:42
#2
A full-res crop of the antenna might narrow it down, but we'd probably also need the other side of the hind femur.
Posted by Stephen R on 19-06-2012 09:50
#5
These images seem to show the arista bare, and no ventral seta on t2. I can't see hairs on the notopleuron, which takes us to
L. sericea or
L. sponsa.
This is a good example of the uncertainty of identifying flies from photos. As you can see, each stage of the argument depends on assuming that because we can't see something in the photos it isn't there on the fly; a microscope might tell a different story ;)
We could go a stage further along the slippery path and say that because the genal setae appear to be uniserial this must be
L. sericea. But there also seems to be a pair of crossed interfrontal setae, which
sericea 'generally' lacks.
Looking again at the second image, perhaps there are a couple of hairs between the notopleural bristles. In that case it would become
L. personata. You can see how easy it is to be wrong :D
Edited by Stephen R on 19-06-2012 09:59
Posted by Manuel Lopez on 19-06-2012 15:05
#6
Really difficult, I see, Stephen. So, Leucophora sp. remain as its name. Thanks for the detailed explanation, so much.