Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Eristalis rupium?=>E.pseudorupium
|
|
| Vladimir Davydov |
Posted on 19-10-2009 18:58
|
 Member Location: Posts: 324 Joined: 01.08.07 |
Help ID please Russia,St.-Peterburg,Olgino 15 august 2009 Edited by Vladimir Davydov on 20-10-2009 14:34 Vladimir |
|
|
|
| Vladimir Davydov |
Posted on 19-10-2009 19:01
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 324 Joined: 01.08.07 |
another shot
Vladimir |
|
|
|
| Gerard Pennards |
Posted on 20-10-2009 11:02
|
 Member Location: Posts: 1914 Joined: 07.06.04 |
No, because rupium has tergites 3 and 4 completely shiny, whereas this one has a dull hind border on those tergites. So that would make it something like picea or pseudorupium, but that's difficult from a picture. Greetings Greetings, Gerard Pennards |
|
|
|
| Menno Reemer |
Posted on 20-10-2009 14:21
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 343 Joined: 10.06.04 |
The photo was taken in August, so that would indicate that it's likely to be E. pseudoruopium, as E. picea is a spring species... Besides, I recall having found a new character for distinguishing females of these two species: in one of the species the shining lateral parts on tergite 2 (which largely overlap with the yellow markings) are connected medially, while in the other species the shining parts are separated by a dull black median part. I can't remember which one was which though, and I don't have my collection here right now to check it. But in this specimen the shining parts on tergite 2 seem to be connected! Edited by Menno Reemer on 20-10-2009 14:21 |
|
|
|
| Andre |
Posted on 21-10-2009 16:59
|
 Member Location: Posts: 2111 Joined: 18.07.04 |
The shining lateral parts on tergite 2 appear connected in picea.  PS: apparently the correct name for pseudorupium is now obscura... Edited by Andre on 21-10-2009 17:00 |
 |
|
| Jump to Forum: |
but don't see the image in the post.