Identification of Hymenoptera (wasps, bees, ants)

Community and Forum → Insects identification → Identification of Hymenoptera (wasps, bees, ants)

Pages: 1 ...177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185... 277

09.12.2015 16:41, TimK

Thank you very much! Can Formica rufa have both red and dark legs?

About Formica pratensis is now clear. And I was thinking: why do Formica rufa live near my dacha for so many years in a small mole-type earthen pile, and do not want to build a large anthill in any way? I even specially brought them some of the old abandoned Formica rufa anthill and poured it on top. But they took the sticks away somewhere, and again there was bare ground. Although the grass does not grow in this place-they destroy it! Now it is clear that this is not Formica rufa, and I will not have the desired large anthill!

Rufus and Polyctene, whom I saw, always had darker legs than their chests. Usually brown with reddish-brownish tan markings in the joints. In various versions. Sometimes-the color variant was brown with orangish tan markings. I have never seen any pure red legs in these species.
Formica pratensis nests are usually not bare ground, but rather a flat pancake of clumps of earth and small twigs. And, in the middle, there is usually an underground cone of larger twigs. That is, it is not just a mink in the ground, but a structure of branches and earth, although it is flat on the surface. Perhaps this is also a dome, only turned down with its top and lowered into the ground. Unlike Rufus and Polyctenes, Pratensis get along better next to human habitation.

This post was edited by TimK-09.12.2015 16: 47

Likes: 1

12.12.2015 23:14, IchMan

Here are others, also from South Korea
1.
picture: Polistes2.jpg

In last year's article (Tan et al. 2014), a bunch of subspecies of Polistes rothneyi, including koreanus, were brought together as synonyms.

In the old Carpenter checklist (Carpenter, 1996), P. (M.) jokahamae Radoszkowski, 1887 is listed as a synonym of P. japonicus Saussure, 1858, whereas in the newer one, which is found in the web: http://iunh2.sci.ibaraki.ac.jp/wasp/polistes/Polistes.htm these are both valid views.
Some leapfrog Gyrostoma-Megapolistes with subgenera

4. Is this Auterhynchium flavomarginatum ?
picture: Auterhynchium_flavomarginatum.jpg

picture: Auterhynchium_flavomarginatum1.jpg

picture: Auterhynchium_flavomarginatum2.jpg

5. Is this Orancistrocerus drewseni ?
picture: Orancistrocerus_drewseni.jpg

By the way, Alexander, in the Korean article on hornets (Choi et al. 2011) Vespa binghami for Korea is not given, it was found there later, quite recently? Or is this an extrapolation?
And what I caught in Korea, like Vespa velutina, which was first noted there only in 2003. These were more common than the others, and they would soon reach Primorye.
picture: Vespa.jpg

Likes: 1

14.12.2015 11:25, AVA

Here are others, also from South Korea

Photo 1 female Parapolybia indica (de Saussure, 1854).

As for the” subspecies " of social wasps (and indeed subspecies in general for the most part), this question requires awareness of the need for some kind of gap in the range of the species. If there is no such gap, then the described "subspecies" most often represent color variations associated with habitat conditions. To be honest, I am skeptical about most of these names, and I consider the synonymization of the names of the “subspecies” of Polistes rothneyi Cameron, 1900 to be justified.

I once wrote that nomenclature is somewhat akin to jurisprudence – in both cases, every letter and word is important. In this case, these are the authors of identical names (homonyms) and the names themselves.

So, the name Polistes jokahamae Radoszkowski, 1887 is the senior (!) synonym of the name Polistes jadwigae Dalla Torre, 1904, which is just a substitute for the name Polistes japonicus Cameron, 1900, which, in turn, is the primary homonym of Polistes japonicus de Saussure, 1858. Thus, Polistes jokahamae Radoszkowski, 1887 (subgenus Gyrostoma) and Polistes japonicus de Saussure, 1858 (subgenus Polistella) are different species.

In relation to Gyrostoma, there is also no special leapfrog.
The name Gyrostoma Kirby, 1828 was published as a substitute name for the generic name Cyclostoma Kirby, 1826, which turned out to be the primary homonym of the name Cyclostoma Lamarck, 1799, described in gastropods. And the fact that the latter name later turned out to be a junior synonym for the generic name Epitonium Röding, 1798, does not formally change anything (the word, that is, the name, remains). The name Megapolistes van der Vecht, 1968, published as a subgenus in the genus Polistes, is a junior synonym for Gyrostoma Kirby, 1828.

Photo 2 shows a male Polistes (Polistes) chinensis Fabricius, 1793, common in East Asia.

Photo 3 shows a female Polistes (Polistella) diakonovi Kostylev, 1940. And this is interesting, since until now this species was known only from Primorsky Krai.

Photos 4-5 – no comments. The solitary Vespids are not my diocese, since there is a Carcharoth in the world.

As for Vespa binghami in Korea, this is certainly not an extrapolation. I'm not a fan of fantasy. Posted here:
Jeong-Kyu Kim, Il-Kwon Kim. 2011(March). Discovery of Vespa binghami (Vespidae: Hymenoptera) in Korea. Korean Journal of Systematic Zoology, vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 105-107.
Try using the link from the command line (it opens without any problems):
http://www.koreascience.or.kr/search/artic..._2011_v27n1_105

Finally, about Vespa velutina (this is it). Now this South Asian species, which originally appeared in the south of France (thanks to the US Navy), has already settled in Spain, Portugal, Italy and, it seems, even in Bulgaria. Everywhere safely crushes honeybees, and noticeably more active than the native Vespa crabro. The climate is good, but there are no enemies here. Whether it will be able to take root in Primorye is a question. I am not sure that it will be safe to survive the usual winter -20° C here, and the pressure of Vespa mandarinia is also no joke.

Likes: 1

Likes: 2

14.12.2015 15:18, IchMan

Photo 1 female Parapolybia indica (de Saussure, 1854).

As for the” subspecies " of social wasps (and indeed subspecies in general for the most part), this question requires awareness of the need for some kind of gap in the range of the species. If there is no such gap, then the described "subspecies" most often represent color variations associated with habitat conditions.

Photos 4-5 – no comments. The solitary Vespids are not my diocese, since there is a Carcharoth in the world.

Finally, about Vespa velutina (this is it). Now this South Asian species, which originally appeared in the south of France (thanks to the US Navy), has already settled in Spain, Portugal, Italy and, it seems, even in Bulgaria. Everywhere safely crushes honeybees, and noticeably more active than the native Vespa crabro. The climate is good, but there are no enemies here. Whether it will be able to take root in Primorye is a question. I am not sure that it will be safe to survive the usual winter -20° C here, and the pressure of Vespa mandarinia is also no joke.

As for subspecies and further - I fully agree, why and who needs this division?

Photos 4-5-let's wait for Sasha with his verdict

And as for Vespa velutina-let's see, in winter it can be frosty in Korea. In the meantime it's heading north

15.12.2015 12:04, IchMan

Surroundings of Kirovo-Chepetsk, Kirov region. September 2. On Boletus edulis.
Any version

It's not much that you can see in the photo, but something tells me that this is a braconid. And if you take into account that it sits on a white mushroom, it is probably a parasite of dipteran larvae, which are developing in this mushroom. It can be assumed that the image shows a representative of Alysiinae from the tribe Alysiini - a wide head and a long ovipositor also contribute to this... Among the ichneumonids trofically related to this group, with such a long ovipositor, there are only a few species, but this is definitely not them. Somehow you

can fantasize about this topic for a long time, and accordingly there will be more versions than enough

Likes: 2

Likes: 1

Likes: 2

Likes: 1

Likes: 2

Likes: 3

Likes: 1

25.12.2015 0:23, TimK

Well, why immediately turned? This is a normal convex dome. although much more gentle than in different forest forms. And it falls inside, first becoming concave (and later, as restoration work progresses, it becomes flat) during fires, which occur regularly in the steppe area, and attacks by predators. I have repeatedly observed this process in dynamics.

In most cases, it "fails" not from fires, which are less common in our forest regions than in yours, and not from predators, but from the earthworks of the creators themselves, since they "so conceived" them. But for example, the rufus and polyctene domes standing next to each other do not fall through and do not become flat (as long as the workers in them are alive). In the same living conditions! And after the winter and predators are restored in a dome-shaped form. And only in protensis as there was a pancake (sometimes slightly convex) and it remains a pancake. With an inner cone of branches and earth. Because that's what the builders intended, not the fires.
Your main problem, Ilya, in my opinion, is that when you study the water in a glass, you draw conclusions about the ocean in the distance without ever seeing it. But the ocean is much more diverse than a glass of water, although it consists of the same water. Keep this diversity in mind and don't draw global conclusions from particular observations on a small patch of land.

Likes: 1

25.12.2015 2:39, ИНО

My main problem is the Ukrainian army, which has been firing heavy artillery at my city for the past year and a half in a row. And yours is extremely narrow and conservative views. And it would also be somewhat excusable if you were to base your conservatism on the opinions of recognized authorities (which, of course, is also wrong), but instead you focus on the constructors of your own consciousness. Tell me, which authors claim that pratensis specifically build a dome that is concave inwards, or, for example, that ants exchange information exclusively using odors? I don't know any of them personally, except you, of course.

Regarding the "small patch of land": we have a pratensis ant on any such patch every 10-20 meters, which, believe me, I had a sufficient sample size. Comparison with polyctenes is out of the question, they use completely different design solutions and the ratio of building materials. Naturally, the construction of the dome mainly from pine needles allows you to make it much higher and stronger than if it were made of mostly earth, like pratensis. But pratensis with their specifics in the choice of stations is a large height without any special need. But this is not a reason to assign negative values to this height.

In addition to fires and predators, it is obvious that there may be other factors contributing to the collapse of the dome in your area, such as weather (for example, a thick layer of snow) or edaphic (loose soil). But the very fact of frequent collapses does not at all indicate that "this is how it is intended." Here is what practical meaning can such a concave construction have in your opinion? Collect water? In your region, it is more likely to be diverted.

According to my long-term observations of a lot of nests in favorable conditions, nothing is turned down in the ants, and the ant always rises above the ground, and it is flat only at the earliest stages of construction. If nothing interferes with it, the dome remains convex for many years. Much less cool than polyctena, lugubris, Aquilonia, Rufa (and who else builds castles there) but convex:

picture: _______669.jpg

But after a grass fire, which we have through human fault occur in steppe biotopes every spring, the dome always falls, sometimes deep, so that the top is below ground level, sometimes not so much, so that the anthill in shape becomes like a volcano with a crater:

picture: ______044.jpg

Nevertheless, the ants quickly restore it (the same nest after 2 months):

picture: ______299.jpg

The most important quality of a competent researcher is flexibility of opinion and the ability to admit your mistakes, I hope you, Alexander, have it.

PS In Google images for the query "Formica pratensis" there were many photos of convex anthills and none of concave ones. Even in the photo of the nest posted on your website, the dome is quite convex. I was also surprised to find that you consider the parasitic foundation of families by females of this species to be extremely rare, and the usual one is reproduction by layering, that is, exactly the same as I did. But for some reason, the correspondence fiercely disputed this. So do you like to argue for the sake of the argument itself?

This post was edited by ENO-12/25/2015 03: 14

25.12.2015 10:40, Hierophis

Google images for the search for "Formica pratensis" found many photos of convex anthills, but none of concave ones.

Mdya.. here it is all the "professionalism" of this "competent researcher", I looked at Google images using the scientific poke method, and here is the result, and one photo is from Wikipedia

http://myrmecology.narod.ru/Formica_pratensis.jpg

http://www.antwiki.org/wiki/images/thumb/f...a-pratensis.JPG

But I somehow did not notice clearly convex cones of pratensis there, almost all such nests issued on request for pratensis turned out to be anthills of other species.
And how does the public now feel about the statements of such a researcher-always check? )))
Yes, and in the descriptions of this species they write that the anthill is in most cases with a flat top, they do not write a lie?

So the "main problem" here is clearly of a different kind than the one indicated by the "researcher"

Pages: 1 ...177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185... 277