Diptera.info

Posted by blowave on 19-08-2007 21:59

Hi.

It looks like a Tachinid fly to me but I can't find it, any clues? :|

Lincoln UK.

19th July 2007.

Thanks for looking!

Posted by ChrisR on 19-08-2007 22:14

No - muscid or callaphorid, I think :)

The reasons being: no really stout bristles, just hairs; the head shape - big(ish) eyes with a sloping face; and I don't see a bend in vein M... but that might just be the light. But really, it just doesn't look like a tachinid :)

Edited by ChrisR on 19-08-2007 22:18

Posted by blowave on 19-08-2007 22:28

Thanks Chris, I looked in the Calliphoridae and found a Pollenia sp. which looks similar.

Does anyone agree with this? :)

Posted by ChrisR on 19-08-2007 23:46

I thought so too at first, but Pollenia should have a little golden hair on the thorax and I can't see any one yours. I'm not sure what it is but it is probably something common - I am just sure it isn't a tachinid! :D

Posted by blowave on 19-08-2007 23:58

Waddya say to this one, Stomoxys calcitrans, Muscidae? Looks similar.

http://www.univ-u...rides.html

I have Pollenia rudis too! And maybe some more...:D

Posted by blowave on 20-08-2007 00:10

Or a Musca sp., both on the link, there are horses across the road.

http://cal.vet.up...s/lab9.htm

Posted by blowave on 20-08-2007 00:27

Thanks Nikita, there is a picture of Muscina prolapsa in the Gallery which looks very similar, but a little darker. Could it be that? :p

Posted by Susan R Walter on 20-08-2007 13:34

#10

The just visible brownish tip to the scutellum indicates Muscina, and if you look really really carefully you can see that the M vein is gently bending. I would say it is M levida as there doesn't seem to be any brown/orange on the legs or antennae. If it had been Stomxys you would have been able to see the rigid proboscis in these photos. Muscina are very attracted to horses too (or at least, their by-products ;) )

Posted by blowave on 20-08-2007 14:58

#11

Thanks for your input Susan, the two species M. prolapsa and M. levida look very similar, is there any defining feature that could separate them? They both look darker than my fly, it was as in the pic, or could this be an age thing?

I found another pic of M. levida where the female looks paler, but mine looks like a male judging by the widespread eyes of the female. :|

http://popgen.uni...evida.html

Posted by Susan R Walter on 20-08-2007 18:39

#12

The difference in colour could be age, light conditions, angle of view - flies with those shifting tessellated patterns of pruinosity often look different depending on all of these factors.

The difference between M prolapsa and M levida is basically if it has any orange or brown at all on it, except the scutellum tip, it is not levida. .

Yours is male, as you worked out. The flies on the link you provided are not Muscina at all. I think they are something like Haematobosca.

Posted by ChrisR on 20-08-2007 19:09

#13

It's just not going to be possible to get a good, solid ID from a slightly fuzzy photo taken at distance. This is why entomologists take specimens, not photos if they want a really good ID ;)

Posted by blowave on 20-08-2007 19:33

#14

Thanks Susan and Chris, I will be happy to call it a Muscina sp.

Gosh, the link seems to be an authoritave site, if they can't get it right where does that leave the rest of us who are none the wiser? I am learning in this jungle! B)

Chris, somehow I don't think I will be going as far as taking specimens! But I am going to upgrade to a DSLR camera, my Sony DSCV1 is good but not up to this type of photography and I hate not being able to get good pics! :@

Janet