---

Hello, could you help me to identify the animal?

Found on 14. July 2016, Stuttgart, Germany.

There are these common ("officially recorded" Eristalis species in this area you can select from

Eristalis alpinus (Panzer, 1798)
Eristalis arbustorum (Linnaeus, 1758)
Eristalis cryptarum (Fabricius, 1794)
Eristalis horticola (De Geer, 1776)
Eristalis interruptus (Poda, 1761)
Eristalis intricarius (Linnaeus, 1758)
Eristalis jugorum Egger, 1858
Eristalis pertinax (Scopoli, 1763)
Eristalis piceus (Fallén, 1817)
Eristalis rupium Fabricius, 1805
Eristalis similis (Fallén, 1817)
Eristalis tenax (Linnaeus, 1758)

---

Eristalis interrupta.

---

Can E. jugorum be excluded for sure? The dark wing markings may be really faint. Compare discussion in http://www.dipter...;pid=50661...

---

The pterostigma is very small and squared, the wing marking seem really absent (and the abdomen is very typical of this species), but a profile view could reassure everyone...

---

Thanks for identification and discussion! I see there is some uncertainty and you are focussed now on two species. There is no profile view available, sorry. Here are some more wing details that might be helpful.

---

Stephane, I think that the pterostigma spot is too short for a E. similis

this is Markus' fly

---

While this is how a E. similis should look like (taken from hoverfly gallery)

Pterostigma is really longer. From the first picture was near impossible to check it fully (and I was sure too about similis), but zooming it there's no dubt.

---

I never mentionned E. similis, but thanks anyway.

---

Well, with "Eristalis cf. interrupta" you are on the safe side...

---

Sorry! I was checking Eristalis interrupta compared to jugorum, but reading species descriptions I made some laps and I assumed you were talking about similis.

Anyways, zooming, it appeared that dark clouding in the wing, and doesn't sound very likely for a interrupta...of course, the clouding isn't very dense.