Beetles of the Moscow and adjacent regions

If you are interested in this data, follow the catalog of Alexey Isaev and co-authors for the entire territory of the Russian Federation.Volga region - 370 species (excluding Bruchidae).

Benkovsky seems to be working on leaf-eating plants in the Moscow region right now.

If you are interested in this data, follow the catalog of Alexey Isaev and co-authors for the entire territory of the Russian Federation.Volga region - 370 species (excluding Bruchidae).

what kind of families are these? And is it possible to seepurchase this catalog?

Thanks to Fornax, if this is from the determinant (A. Y. Isaev 2007), I have this data. Interestingly, from individual areas of Cp. Much less is known of them in the Volga region. For example, okodo 200 (Isaev, 2007)

For the Leningrad region, by the way, there is a not uninteresting page-" Fauna of phytophagous beetles
of the Leningrad region " compiled by Vadim Berezin:
http://www.zin.ru/ANIMALIA/COLEOPTERA/rus/berezin2.htm
For example, I was interested in comparing the number of species in these families in the former USSR and in Russia (see the table at the end of the article).

This post was edited by amara - 21.01.2008 11: 09

Thanks to Fornax, if this is from the determinant (A. Y. Isaev 2007), I have this data. Interestingly, from individual areas of Cp. Much less is known of them in the Volga region. For example, okodo 200 is known from Chuvashia, the region geographically closest to the Moscow region (Isaev, 2007)

In general, yes, the data is about the same. I think there are more of them in Chuvashia after all. Even if Coptocephala chalybaea lives there, which is only located in the southern part of the region, there are probably many more steppe species there than is known.

what kind of families are these? And is it possible to seepurchase this catalog?

In addition to the groups included in the determinant, there are Rhysodidae, Carabidae, Staphylinidae (Staphylininae, Oxyporinae), Scarabaeidae, and Buprestidae. I'll find out who was supposed to stay. Only someone worked very hard on this book - "forgot" to print the list of literature. Someone would have found out-they would have torn off their legs.

This post was edited by Fornax13-22.01.2008 00: 56

If possible. Send it to us. Or bring it yourself. We will be glad to visit us.

I was left completely without undiscovered beetles for the winter, and over the summer I got so involved and spoiled that tinkering with the determinant adding at least one new species per day became as much a need as, probably, a puff for a smoker. And now there was a man, I don't know how to thank him, who provided me with the material. Such a person turned out to be Professor K. V. Makarov, who allowed me to pick at student fees (which I think I" cleared " almost everything). Well, this is about 100-150 of the most popular types that are very suitable for my purposes (to gain experience), and I was not going to find something interesting. However, I want to share a couple of finds in these most common beetles.
The first is Epicometis hirta.
On the label: Moscow region, Istra district, Pavlovskaya Sloboda village.
19.06. 2004, Usatova
is just one beetle among many (almost overlooked) O. funesta goldenrods. Makarov heard surprised, but looking at the beetle confirmed.
So these beetles also reached the Moscow region.
If desired, I can take a photo.

This post was edited by amara - 29.01.2008 13: 04

Another interesting find for me was Agonum (Europhilus) munsteri (ibid.). I speak for me because K. V. Makarov knew about it for a long time. He said that this species in that area of the Moscow region is not at all rare (in my opinion, he even said that it is frequent).
The subgenus Europhilus turned out to be difficult for me, with its three species I got lost as "in three pines", but Kirill Vladimirovich "corrected". Good in my opinion tablitsa Lafer G. Sh. in vol. 3 part 2 Beetles DV (much more detailed than in the "green"), but there as in the book by A. Y. Isaev, the Western species munsteri is not. There is a website for this subgenus (in German) with good photos
http://www.coleo-net.de/coleo/texte/europhilus.htm.
Since Agonum (Europhilus) munsteri was not mentioned in Fedorenko's list and Nikitsky's works, this may be a new indication for the Moscow Region.

This post was edited by amara - 30.01.2008 10: 19

Amara, tell me, are you sure about Usatova's training camp? Could there have been any confusion? Maybe the mattresses were lying next to collections from more southern places, for example?
How did you define Agonum (Europhilus) munsteri? Using the German table on the site? I have never seen this type in the region. Nikitsky seems to be the same. In what district of the region?

This post was edited by omar - 30.01.2008 10: 28

I would still treat with a certain degree of caution the "finds" of new species for the region from student mattresses. There are negligent students who" scrap "to catch and they either "gut" other people's, poorly lying fees, or someone collects for them (often in other regions). Especially if the importer is a girl. I was told a case when, under the guise of Kyrgyz beetles, a girl passed fees from Afghanistan - her boyfriend served as a lieutenant there... To say that the teachers were stunned is not enough to say!!!

And then the data about such "finds" get into articles. That's how unhealthy sensations (Strugatsky) are born.

Amara, tell me, are you sure about Usatova's training camp? Could there have been any confusion? Maybe the mattresses were lying next to collections from more southern places, for example?
How did you define Agonum (Europhilus) munsteri? Using the German table on the site? I have never seen this type in the region. Nikitsky seems to be the same. In what district of the region?

I think that there is no confusion in the collection point, the bug was also impaled in the same box with other fees of this student from the same place (and this is the only place where students make fees). She never identified this species, so she didn't know what she found (she put it on a par with O. funesta, probably thought it was the same thing). This student's other beetles were all very common species.
Agonum (Europhilus) munsteri was identified by Makarov, who is known to be a major specialist in ground beetles, and he has a whole series of this species from the Moscow region, Krasnogorsk district, 1.5 km South. Timoshkino.
For me personally, the difficulty in determining what is considered black and what is brown, where there is a weak metallic luster, and where it is not at all.
This species, by the way, is found in all the countries of Fennoscandia and Karelia.

This post was edited by amara - 30.01.2008 11: 40

Were the beetles gutted? The fact that it is located to the north may not mean that it is mandatory to have it in the Moscow region. Are there images of endophallus subgenus anywhere?

This post was edited by omar - 30.01.2008 12: 11

Were the beetles gutted? The fact that it is located to the north may not mean that it is mandatory to have it in the Moscow region. Are there images of endophallus subgenus anywhere?

I didn't gut it. I trust what Makarov said.
All I know is a photo of Aedeagus for two closely related species (including munsteri) of this subgenus on the Web page I mentioned earlier. It seems to me that the "subtle game" with the prsp form is important for this subgenus. for which Lafer gives the ratio of width to length (it's a pity that he doesn't have this type). The beetle that Makarov kindly gave me "as a control" form of prsp. like the photo on this site for this view. But I certainly still need to" get my hands on " with these beetles, the group (at least for me) is not an easy one.

This post was edited by amara - 30.01.2008 13: 40

Does Makarov have any dissected specimens in the series? And yet, since I do not know German at all, it seems to me or not that the ex. in the photo from the German website, a bluish metallic ebb along the sides of the pronotum? Is it on those beetles you saw?

This post was edited by omar - 30.01.2008 13: 49

At first , I don't know.
On the second, I have a bluish tint neither on the computer nor on the beetles that I do not see. The text says it seems about a light bronze shade (tint?) in one (munsteri) and then sometimes (manchmal), and the absence of such in gracile.

I looked at the gracile and munsteri beetles shot by Makarov, and I personally did not see a big difference either in the bronze shade or in the nature of the microsculpture (except as if just a little bit), which I pay attention to in the "green" determinant (maybe as a novice I just do not catch them). But, in the form of prsp (see on the website) and nadkr. (flat in the back third of the first, and convex, house, in the second, which, by the way, is also mentioned in the "green"), there are definitely noticeable differences for me.

This post was edited by amara - 30.01.2008 15: 08

The third beetle from the same place (Moscow region, Istra district, village of Pavlovskaya Sloboda), which I would like to mention, turned out to be a medium-sized staphylin Acylophorus wagenschieberi. Then I found a great photo of this beetle made by K. V. Makarov for the Zinovsky atlas
http://www.zin.ru/Animalia/coleoptera/rus/acywagkm.htm It
is not included in the list of staphylinids of the Moscow region (1982) compiled by A. L. Tikhomirova. As Makarov said, to catch it, you need to work hard and expel this beetle from the moss cushion of the sphagnum where it lives.

If possible. Send it to us. Or bring it yourself. We will be glad to visit us.

In general, there is still a book. I just don't know when I'll get there yet. But as soon as possible, so immediately. Write only where

I looked at the gracile and munsteri beetles shot by Makarov, and I personally did not see a big difference either in the bronze shade or in the nature of the microsculpture (except as if just a little bit), which I pay attention to in the "green" determinant (maybe as a novice I just do not catch them). But, in the form of prsp (see on the website) and nadkr. (flat in the back third of the first, and convex, house, in the second, which, by the way, is also mentioned in the "green"), there are definitely noticeable differences for me.

Thank you, I'll have to see my own. It would also be interesting to compare the biotopes: they are probably different in these species.

About their Omiamima-I do not understand anything at all, apparently, really all-Barypeithes'y. But they are very different, although the distance between the collection points is 2 kilometers.

By the way, does Acylophorus glaberrimus live here?

By the way, does anyone know what Chlaenius tibialis is, and how it differs from similar species? And does this beast live in MO?

Epicometis hirta of the Moscow region. Fresh addition, but hard to believe! Epicometis hirta is too southern to live in the Moscow region. You need to show the plate whiskers specialist!!!

This post was edited by omar - 02.02.2008 20: 49

By the way, does anyone know what Chlaenius tibialis is, and how it differs from similar species? And does this beast live in MO?

At the time of Reitter, (1908) was considered a variation of nitidulus Schr. differing in the color of the dark thighs ( in nitidulus they are yellow) and from 1 to 3 of the first members of the antennae are yellow. For the MO, Fedorenko (1988) was not cited (but I do not know whether it was then considered a separate species or not).

This post was edited by amara - 02.02.2008 10: 59

At the time of Reitter, (1908) was considered a variation of nitidulus Schr. differing in the color of the dark thighs ( in nitidulus they are yellow) and from 1 to 3 of the first members of the antennae are yellow. For the MO, Fedorenko (1988) was not cited (but I do not know whether it was then considered a separate species or not).

In the Yaroslavl region there is. And in Moscow, too-confirmed by information on the forum http://molbiol.ru/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t152745.html
Thank you Archypus!

In the Yaroslavl region there is. And in Moscow, too-confirmed by information on the forum http://molbiol.ru/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t152745.html
Thank you Archypus!

Thank you, my suspicions were justified. We now also have

I asked Viktor Borisovich Semyonov, a specialist who studies staphylins in the Moscow region. I said no, there is only Acylophorus wagenschieberi.

Strange, it should be in theory... Only he needs other biotopes.

Dear colleagues, no one needs staphylinides of MO?
I take all the staphylinids that fall into the soil traps, in case someone needs them. So they lie there, waiting for the owner.

Oxythyrea funesta also came to us from the south not so long ago.

I have a corpse of Oxytherea funesta found in the fall of 2000, in the Kurovsky district ~88 km east of Moscow. Pseudostyphlus pilumus - also became a common species on chamomile ?medicinal, and until the 90s it was considered a good find.

This post was edited by Cosmos - 12.02.2008 13: 30

I can say that nitens is reliably found only in one point, and then rarely, and violaceus has not been caught for so long that no one believes in it anymore.

Heh-heh, didn't you see my series of nitens at K. Makarov's? ))) And do not ask, colleagues, about the exchange, I have only one left. By the way, the next year there was a plant succession, and they were no longer found there, although there were external attempts to prune the point))) In the same place, in the Kurovsky district, as well as Petushkov (Vladimirskaya O.) and arcensis-arvensis was caught, if anyone was interested. I'm not really into beetles... I can't tell violaceus from marginalis anymore((

This post was edited by Cosmos - 12.02.2008 12: 59

Barypeithes (Exomias) pellucidus (Boheman, 1834) ... It was given only for Pri-and Transcarpathia. I learned, however, that it is found all over Fennoscandia.

I have this vidok from 4 points(Moscow, Pushchino), more and do not need to collect. It is very common in deciduous forest parks right on the paths on fallen leaves. There is also 1 copy of B. mollicomus, defined by V. Grachev (peace be upon him!), and several copies.they didn't even try to identify themselves.
If anyone decides to take up elephant breeding in the Moscow Region, God forbid you forget to communicate with V. Savitsky (Biofac, Moscow State University), and I advise you to invite my collection, where there should be about 250 species from the Moscow region.

This post was edited by Cosmos - 12.02.2008 13: 54

and I advise you to invite my collection, where there should be about 250 species from the Moscow Region.

Do you think the figure of 400 species for MO (including Apions but excluding Bark Beetles) sounds plausible? So much, it seems, Nikitsky assumed, and so much is found in Finland and Karelia.

Right here http://claude.schott.free.fr/Carabidae/Ago...Agonum_PL_2.jpg photos of agonums have finally appeared, and thoreyi and fuliginosum are mixed up. Let's hope this is temporary.

Do you think the figure of 400 species for MO (including Apions but excluding Bark Beetles) sounds plausible? So much, it seems, Nikitsky assumed, and so much is found in Finland and Karelia.

It seems to me that there are still more elephants in MO. And although I am now frantically redefining my inevitable mistakes in green according to Isaev, it is obvious that there are no baridins and magdalisses in the north. I think the situation will repeat itself with Ceutorhynchinae

Heh-heh, didn't you see my series of nitens at K. Makarov's? ))) And do not ask, colleagues, about the exchange, I have only one left. By the way, the next year there was a plant succession, and they were no longer found there, although there were external attempts to prune the point))) In the same place, in the Kurovsky district, as well as Petushkov (Vladimirskaya O.) and arcensis-arvensis was caught, if anyone was interested. I'm not really into beetles... I can't tell violaceus from marginalis anymore((

Don't understand you, Kosmos, nitensy from the Moscow region or from the Vladimir region?

Badister collaris was also discovered by me in MO, and I put together a series last spring (as it just turned out).