Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Tephrochlamys
|
|
| andrewsi |
Posted on 17-02-2021 21:38
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 214 Joined: 15.08.09 |
This heleomyzid comes out at Tephrochlamys, but I can't fit it with rufiventris (no ad seta on mid femora...4 rows of acrostichals), flavipes or tarsalis (plain wings). I don't know laeta, but this has wings 4mm, which seems over the size of that species? Particularly obvious angled hairs on the genital segment. East Yorkshire, UK today
Edited by andrewsi on 17-02-2021 23:10 |
|
|
|
| andrewsi |
Posted on 17-02-2021 21:39
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 214 Joined: 15.08.09 |
Thorax |
|
|
|
| andrewsi |
Posted on 17-02-2021 21:39
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 214 Joined: 15.08.09 |
Dorsum... the photo does not show it, but there are definitely just 4 regular rows of acrostichals...no other hairs at all.
Edited by andrewsi on 17-02-2021 23:12 |
|
|
|
| andrewsi |
Posted on 17-02-2021 21:40
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 214 Joined: 15.08.09 |
Abdomen |
|
|
|
| Ectemnius |
Posted on 18-02-2021 00:12
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 845 Joined: 22.11.11 |
Hi andrewsi, Your description and photo's agree with Tephrochlamys laeta (Meigen, 1830) material I have collected in the Netherlands. Also the quite small anterior dorsocentral. However, Andrzej Woznica might have something further to say about the exact definition of this taxon. The size difference within T. rufiventris is also considerable, so that should not necessarily mean that this can't be T. laeta. Kind regards, Ectemnius |
|
|
|
| andrewsi |
Posted on 18-02-2021 08:37
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 214 Joined: 15.08.09 |
[quote]Ectemnius wrote: Hi andrewsi, Your description and photo's agree with Tephrochlamys laeta (Meigen, 1830) material I have collected in the Netherlands. Thanks for that. There is very little to be found about laeta on the web, so hard to find what its general habitus actually is. Ian |
|
|
|
| andrewsi |
Posted on 18-02-2021 10:34
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 214 Joined: 15.08.09 |
I see that Collin 1943 mentions Tephrochlamys rufiventris var canescens, keying it as 'Thorax lighter grey, but 3rd antennal joint blacker.' He then says 'there appears to be a difference, in this variety, from the typical form in the greater number of bristles on the tergal shell of the hypopygium. Small specimens may have only four rows of acrostichal microchetae.' That would seem to fit with this one...so is it just variety within rufiventris maybe? |
|
|
|
| empeejay |
Posted on 18-02-2021 11:54
|
|
Member Location: Posts: 234 Joined: 15.05.06 |
I wonder if it may be that Tephrochlamys rufiventris var canescens is synonymous with T. laeta.
Edited by empeejay on 18-02-2021 11:55 |
|
|
|
| Jump to Forum: |
but don't see the image in the post.
