---

Hi everyone
Last time, I thought I was posting an Anthomyidae, and it's was Fannia sp.
Let's see whether this time I am wrong about this small fly being Fannia sp, perhaps F. canicularis ?
Approx 6 mm. H?ron (4217 Belgium) March 5th 2008
Thanks for your comments
Philippe

---

Fannia canicularis male.

---

Thanks for the confirmation Jorge
Philippe

---

Maybe I'm tired tonight, but I have some doubts on Fannia canicularis, and even on the family...

---

Stephane, I regarded this post several times and I havn't come to any conclusion too...
My best reply is to repeat you:

Nikita

---

Thanks Nikita.
I explain why I have some doubts : hind tibia with 2 strong ad and pd (not true dorsal) ; if they were true dorsal, they were anyway unusually too high placed for Fannia ; acrostichals too strong and not enough numerous ; abdomen not enough flattened ; A1 seems very long on pict 2...
Actually I suspect Anthomyiidae. A fooling one though...

---

I think it is an anthomyiid, but I can't see the chaetotaxy to be able to place it

---

Oh, confirmation has just come !

---

I got totally fooled with this one!!!

---

Stephane, I did not see your last post. Your diagnosis is absolutely right. The problem with Anthomyiidae is that defining external characters are rather difficult to see in photos. Here are some of them: anal vein is always covered in resting position, and therefore does not show up in photos; fine hairs under tip of scutellum (nearly always present in anthos, but absent in a few species in scattered genera); hind metatarsus nearly always with a basal ventral setula (again not visible in photos); 3 post dorsocentral setae (Egle ciliata has 4!), those muscids with 3 post dc generally look like muscids).
A photo of the underside of the male abdomen showing sternite V would make identification, at least to genera, muuch easier!