Identification of Hymenoptera (wasps, bees, ants)

AVA, you put me in an awkward position: I promised not to offtopit in that topic, but I will have to, because I need to answer.

Thanks for the reply. I just confirmed once again my opinion that we just speak different languages.
I could talk for a long time about the pros/cons of matrices of different sizes and approaches to estimating the light intensity, but I won't. As promised, I removed all my off-topic posts from this subforum.
By the way, I compared the lid not in the form of macro objects, but with a chestnut tree, to show that the " pro” was fucked up.

Some even wrap up two sets, or even all three. Only the aperture value will drop, but this is not critical for a dead object. Another thing is that this supposedly macro lens for a tidy sum, with a resolution that the bourgeois usually hesitate to specify. Alternative: macro attachment. The best alternative: a real macro lens with a normal zoom, and not this portrait camera with the word "macro", which is incomprehensibly wormed into the name. By the way, this option can be implemented for quite a penny at the expense of Soviet optics.

The conversation may not be serious, but I have a soap dish with a magnifying glass, the head of this ant would have turned out much better (I'll catch it - I'll demonstrate it). That's really enough for me, but what Radik gets for Tuev's cloud of bucks wouldn't be enough. If it wasn't still twisting around the edges - in general, as Pan Gierofis puts it, there would be a "competitor to watering cans". So, as we can see, the super-sophisticated equipment itself does not guarantee anything. But something completely offtop has already gone.

Uvzhaemyy ENO.
Well, just a bourgeois, but for tuevu a bunch of bucks.
The camera is like this, because I work as a photojournalist. I asked a friend for the lens (he takes photos for photostocks). I became interested in insects not long ago, and even then I used to collect them.
But thank you for the tips and hints (cheap USB microscope)

I overreacted with bourgeois, sorry. Somehow I didn't think that the presence of a professional camera can be really due to the profession, in the modern world in 90% of cases it is due to the majority. But a bunch of bucks is really cool, there can be no objections here. But since you are a professional photographer, then you can't afford such a quality of photos, so improve yourself. In this case, the Chinese microscope is strictly contraindicated for you.

This post was edited by ENO - 05/23/2016 16: 26

Please help with the definition of bumblebee from this topic:
http://molbiol.ru/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t85067.html

ps: there are more photos if you need

Hello, can I tell you what kind of bee I photographed? Taken today, in Klin (Moscow region).

Hello, can I tell you what kind of bee I photographed? Taken today, in Klin (Moscow region).

Apis mellifera-Honey Bee

Thanks!
Now at least I'll know what an ordinary honey bee looks like

Can someone identify the obstacle.
M. O., Poplar
Parasitized on the caterpillar Mythimna sp.
11. 05. 2016


16.05.2016

26.05.2016

Can someone identify the obstacle.
M. O., Poplar
Parasitized on the caterpillar Mythimna sp.

Some kind of braconid

Hello! 26/05/2016, Saratov. On yastrebinka, in the sinuses of a growing gall, exhausterom. 3506-small black, parasite? 3508, 3509-gall-forming agent, aulacidae hieracium? 3512 - eurytomidae? (parasite or gall-forming agent)? Thanks!

Pictures:

IMG_3506.JPG — (265.47к)


IMG_3507.JPG — (263.61к)


IMG_3509.JPG — (264.92к)


IMG_3508.JPG — (269.93к)


IMG_3512.JPG — (256.09к)

Kirovo-Chepetsk, Kirov region.
Hatched a hairy one, I would like to know the type.

02.08.2015.


05.08.2015.


05.05.2016.

Most likely T. sylvaticum

Is it known on what the larva developed?

This post was edited by Rhabdophis - 05/28/2016 09: 48

Most likely T. sylvaticum

Is it known on what the larva developed?

Thanks!
I can't remember now. And although I photographed it on an aspen leaf, it is not a fact that it was eating it... Three days after the discovery, she pupated, so it's possible that she didn't feed on me anymore.

Is this Germanic? Hefty very, 21 mm. Kiev, 28.04.

Pictures:

Vespula.jpg — (405.99к)

She's a darling. Hefty, because the uterus is wormy.

Maybe I already asked you once, but still: what kind of single wasp. at least the gender can be determined? taken on 31.07.2013. Crimea.

Pictures:

IMG_9238.JPG — (132.05к)

Can someone identify the obstacle.
M. O., Poplar
Parasitized on the caterpillar Mythimna sp.

This is Meteus (Braconidae, Euphorinae). On this genus of butterflies, 5 types of meteorites were noted. Euforin specialist-Julia Stigenberg (Stockholm).

Maybe I already asked you once, but still: what kind of single wasp. at least the gender can be determined? taken on 31.07.2013. Crimea.

And what is only the genus?
This is Gorytes kohlii Handlirsch, 1888 [Crabronidae, Bembicinae].

... the uterus is wormy.

Ugh, your bee jargon is depressing...
It is not customary to call female founders of Vespidae so. Usually" queens "are called, or, less often, "queens", if in direct translation...

So this is a tracing paper from English, and in Russian there was always a "uterus". Well, "wormy" - yes, not an entomological term, but short and capacious, but in a scientific way how will it be? Ovulating? In general, almost all the terminology came to vespidologists from beekeepers: honeycomb, cell, brood.

So this is a tracing paper from English, and in Russian there was always a "uterus". Well, "wormy" - yes, not an entomological term, but short and capacious, but in a scientific way how will it be? Ovulating? In general, almost all the terminology came to vespidologists from beekeepers: honeycomb, cell, brood.

Well, if you really want to emphasize her ability to lay eggs, then in a scientific way a fertile female is the founder or "queen" (tracing paper is "korroleva"). But this is a pleonasm, if not a tautology, almost like "butter oil".

What does fertility have to do with it? I don't mean the potential ability of laying eggs (which, by the way, workers also have), but the already implemented one. Just when the uterus begins, I apologize for the expression, to worm, its abdomen increases significantly. that would be seen on the example of KM2200. IMHO" queens "and" queens " are still better left for children's fiction. The term "womb" reflects much more precisely the function of the representative of this caste in the family.

What does fertility have to do with it? I don't mean the potential ability of laying eggs (which, by the way, workers also have), but the already implemented one. Just when the uterus begins, I apologize for the expression, to worm, its abdomen increases significantly. that would be seen on the example of KM2200. IMHO" queens "and" queens " are still better left for children's fiction. The term "womb" reflects much more precisely the function of the representative of this caste in the family.

But, according to my observations, even in autumn, young females of Saxon, Germanic, vulgaris and even hornets that are still unfertilized have the same abdomen. And not at the expense of eggs, but at the expense of the accumulated fat body. In addition, eggs in females do not develop all at once, but in turn, without having a special effect on the size of the abdomen.
Further, our yellow-faced brothers from the island empire once conducted a series of studies on the ability of vespin workers to lay eggs, opening up almost the entire population of nests (these were thousands of workers, but you can't do that for the sake of science). And they could not find a single (!) working individual with sufficiently developed ovarioles. Now, if there were no female in the nest, then this would be possible, but also not for sure.
Now about the terminology. The uterus is a reproductive organ in females of some groups of mainly vertebrates, the main function of which is to ensure the intrauterine development of fetuses. Vespids does not have this, so the term does not reflect the essence of the matter. This is just an archaism of beekeepers. And the epithet "wormy" does not reflect anything at all. It would be nice if the female laid mobile larvae, but here only eggs.
By the way, I myself prefer the term "founder female".

Well, I don't know, polistov definitely has a longer abdomen than chevrv... more egg-laying females than non-egg-laying ones. At Germanicus, it seems to be the same (although my observations here are more modest). In any case, they spend the winter with a rather short belly, not at all like in the KM2200 picture (see my photos in the topic about nests). Although there is also a tracheal air filling effect, and this indicator, unlike the volume of the ovaries and adipose body, is very labile, so the question is complicated.

Yeah, science

AVA, honestly tell me, have you seen/observed the uterus () worm-eating gkrmaniki/vulgaris during the season? I dare to make the assumption that either you did not observe, and express speculative arguments, or you observed but did not see.
So, the uterus of the worm (tm) does not just have a larger abdomen, but many times larger! in comparison with the fetal uterus of spring, for example, May/June(also wormy, but not much yet). This is a fact, and the reasons for this are obvious, and it is strange for such seasoned vepidologists not to know them )) However, the reasons are the same as for the queen bee, here science has tried, there are differences in the weight and size of the abdomen of an actively wormy and recently wormy or infertile uterus anywhere

But pooolistov all much worse, compared to the difference between the uterus germanica and pooolistov, the latter that in early spring that in the "active" period as for me the same size, and also not surprising, "worms" it probably in the active periodraz in two days, and then, at best )))
Compare hundreds of pooolistov and nest Germanic where there are several tiers and continuous waves of hatching and resp.. dozens of free cells every day, or even up to hundreds

Vo!
Oska, as I understand it, Eumenes, but alas, the photo is not the one for the determinant to determine the type, after all, it's too far to take a picture from 60cm. You need to catch them lightly in a good way, and take a picture with a "harness".
A very large bee, and very agile, andrena probably, a two-point ant, and a lasius?

Pictures:

P5295294.jpg — (485.76к)


P5295206.jpg — (408.47к)


P5295443.jpg — (523.68к)


P5305646.jpg — (560.94к)

Vo!
Very big bee, and very agile, andrena probably,

Melecta armata

don't tell me the beast.
pos. Providence. The Chukchi Peninsula.
May 31, 2016

Pictures:

Bombus.jpg — (61.74к)

A bumblebee of some sort. You probably don't have many of them, so it's probably identifiable from the photo, but I'm definitely not familiar with this view, which is not surprising.

It's not my photo. In Chukotka, according to ONDV, there are 9 species of bumblebees, but none of them looks like

And what is only the genus?
This is Gorytes kohlii Handlirsch, 1888 [Crabronidae, Bembicinae].

Thank you. Something I can't even find a photo on the web like this? Did I download it first? smile.gif

Thank you. Something I can't even find a photo on the web like this? Did I download it first? smile.gif

Normal business. The network is mostly banal, but this one is not quite...
To be honest, I didn't search for it, but it may appear somewhere in the genus Pseudoplisus (this is a junior synonym for Gorytes).

This Gorytes kohlii is notable for nesting in flower pots! My late grandmother was very familiar with this wasp - every year dozens of these wasps were hatched on her balcony (in the summer the windows were open)and then again dug their nests in pots with Usambar violets, asparagus and other plants, bringing there various small cicadas they had obtained. And once a specimen of this species was brought to our university from another part of the southern coast of the Crimea with a request to identify " impudent wasps who dug up all the flower pots on the balcony." So this is probably a pattern, from two cases of nesting in different localities-both in pots.

This Gorytes kohlii is notable for nesting in flower pots! My late grandmother was very familiar with this wasp - every year dozens of these wasps were hatched on her balcony (in the summer the windows were open)and then again dug their nests in pots with Usambar violets, asparagus and other plants, bringing there various small cicadas they had obtained. And once a specimen of this species was brought to our university from another part of the southern coast of the Crimea with a request to identify " impudent wasps who dug up all the flower pots on the balcony." So this is probably a pattern, from two cases of nesting in different localities-both in pots.

Very interesting. I also shot this one indoors.

The plum was attacked by aphids and there is now a whole variety of different insects. But the most interesting thing is the riders. I couldn't catch a few species, but here's what I have. Sudaksky district 2.06. 2, 3 and 5 are quite numerous.

Pictures:

01.jpg — (294.81 k)


02.jpg — (298.91к)


03.jpg — (281.34к)


04.jpg — (281.76к)


05.jpg — (298.92к)


06.jpg — (303.96к)

Bryansk region, Stary Vyshkov, 2.06.2016, in mass

Pictures:

___.________________2.06.16___________..jpg — (422.07к)

Bryansk region, Stary Vyshkov, 2.06.2016, in mass

Monosapyga clavicornis (Linnaeus, 1758)

Ectemnius ? Crimea, 4.06

Pictures:

___.jpg — (912.56к)

Dear forumchane, look, please, these animals. The bumblebee is so powerful, it seemed that it is larger than an earthen one. Sevastopol, May 2016. Maybe someone will identify the pollen-eaters as well?

Pictures:

IMG_0160.JPG — (394.37к)


IMG_1229.JPG — (322.83к)

on the first Xylocopa, pollen eaters - some Podonta