Identification of Hymenoptera (wasps, bees, ants)

I am grateful to you (sincerely) for the help that you have given me all this time and constantly hinted at how "creepy" and "disgusting" my photos are.
In this case, the photos are cropped because there are even fewer insects on the original ones. In principle, I don't come here for communication, but for business: they identify me - thank you, no - I'm looking for it myself or I'm waiting for an answer.
But, judging by the last phrase "on europeisika forums, there you will not be offended by Muscovites", it is clear where such an attitude in my direction comes from. But I'm NOT a racist and I don't care if a Black man helped me or a Chinese man...
Have a nice day

I myself understand that it will not always be possible to take a picture as I would like. Moreover, I am already embarrassed to come here every time (and I want to find out...). In addition, thanks to your definitions, I note the insects that live here.
Thank you for the referral, I will definitely download it!

I myself understand that it will not always be possible to take a picture as I would like. Moreover, I am already embarrassed to come here every time (and I want to find out...). In addition, thanks to your definitions, I note the insects that live here.
Thank you for the referral, I will definitely download it!

By the way, Ruslan.
If it's not a secret, what kind of equipment do you use for shooting? After all, such a small thing is not possible to shoot in detail with any camera/lens.

Ruslan, do not pay attention to all sorts of natsikov like ENO, who also made a mess of his no less "creepy" photos of a huge size of the forum floor))
As for the definition, a good specialist in most cases will determine poochti from any photos at least to the genus
This forum is quite European, in the sense that it is physically located in Germany, so that local imperials go through the forest, but in general, there are other sites, register on Facebook, there are groups of very different directions for determining and documenting nature, as well as databases with catalogs of images are created, there are specialists in the most interesting topics. different groups of animals and plants and so on

It's no secret that I have a Canon PowerShot SX150 IS digital camera. I know that there are much better devices, but I took it (first of all) for my pocket and for shooting / photographing birds in our area. And then I decided on insects... I've been shooting birds for 4 years, and insects for 2.
What about those photos?.. in the original, they look like this (at the bottom), so I had to crop them.
If you remove the photo from the video, you will get this (grasshopper at the bottom; by the way, is this Chrysochraon dispar?) I apologize for not being in the right place, among the Hymenoptera.
If anything, here is the link to the video https://ok.ru/video/292350003939

This post was edited by Ruslan Mazurik - 09.07.2017 23: 54

Pictures:

IMG_6288.JPG — (282.94к)


IMG_6289.JPG — (272.59к)


MVI_6628_21_21_39_.JPG — (103.6к)

Unfortunately, sometimes you have to read such a negative in your address. Different people come across... For example, if I keep lists of animals (for myself), I don't care where they live: Europe, America, or Antarctica... Also, I don't care who I communicate with (this is written above).
If it goes on like this, I'll probably register there. As for the definition, I agree with you, because I am of the same opinion: "a good specialist in most cases will determine poochti from any photos." If not, then you get "creepy photos, poor quality" and so on... I know I'm not an expert myself, but it's too much to repeat every time.
Thanks for the support.

This post was edited by Ruslan Mazurik - 09.07.2017 23: 56

As for the definition, I agree with you, because I am of the same opinion: "a good specialist in most cases will determine poochti from any photos." If not, then you get "creepy photos, poor quality" and so on...

As for ants, the genus can almost always be determined even by blurry photos. In this case, the genus Lasius. And to determine the appearance, you often need to see the location of distant hairs on the body or the bend of the handle of the tendril at a certain angle. If this is not visible, no matter how good a specialist determines it, they will not be able to accurately confirm the species affiliation. And if the definition concerns, for example, the genus Myrmica, then even the best experts with a global reputation often do not undertake to determine the species even from very good photos (even from photos with the quality as on the site). https://www.antweb.org/). In this particular case, for example, I would like to see if there are any stray hairs on the handle of the tendril. But I don't see this from these photos. And I can't go any further than the Lasius family. Something like that.

Not necessarily the handle of the tendril, the lower legs are just as revealing. And there, in the first photo, still something shiny sticks out, if it's not just broken pixels.

Not necessarily the handle of the tendril, the lower legs are just as revealing. And there, in the first photo, still something shiny sticks out, if it's not just broken pixels.

And you're willing to sign up for a species definition based on the fact that there seems to be something shiny sticking out?

I was just wondering (because I haven't put ants in the definition yet) what kind of genus / species lives in my garden. I was leaning towards Lasius niger and asked him to confirm or deny my version. And here... Here we go!
So, thank you to everyone who participated so actively in this discussion! For the quality, I know myself+, perhaps the equipment is needed stronger than mine and the insects ran back and forth: this is the result.
p.s. yesterday I was in the field and took a colony in an anthill, but there, moreover, it is not clear what kind of genus... although, they are also black.

I was leaning towards Lasius niger and asked him to confirm or deny my version. And here... Here we go!

Personally, I would not dare to accurately determine the view from such photos. A purely external appearance is similar to Lasius niger and, if we take into account that this is the most common species of this genus in this area, then most likely it is.

And I generally have an A540, that is, many times worse than yours. Nevertheless, field photos of ants are obtained as something like this:



Because, firstly, I don't even try to shoot such a small thing without a macro setting, because I realize the complete futility of such an undertaking, and secondly, I shoot moving objects in the shadow only with a flash. In those conditions, you would hardly be able to shoot something worthwhile without a flash, even with a DSLR with the best matrix. It's not a camera that takes pictures, it's a photographer who takes pictures, and almost any modern soap dish can make good shots, but only if you understand and accept all its limitations. The grain in your images is very creepy, like a terrible combination of undressed noise with high-frequency sharpness. Was there any post-processing? If this is a raw camera run, then clearly something is screwed up in the settings, since Kenanov soap dishes themselves, unlike many competitors, seem to have never suffered from such garbage. Disable all effects, forget Auto mode and ISO is greater than the minimum (usually for "Kenans" it is 80). It is better to set the contrast to -1, and in some cases, for example, when shooting landscapes and shooting with flash, as much as -2.

Any insect can be identified by a photo or a series of photos taken from different angles. The only question is the quality of these photos. In nature, and even with such moving objects as ants, it is sometimes very problematic to make such a series, but on a corpse it is quite easy. The exception is genital species, but this approach, thank God, has not yet been applied to ants. And the fact that some specialists refuse, so simply do not want to take responsibility for a mistake, even if it is unlikely, but possible. At the opposite end of the spectrum of views on this problem are bourgeois entomologists who describe species based on photos from the Internet.

With the AUTO function, you have to move a little away from the insect, because the approximation is VERY blurry =( And if the photo has more than what you need, you have to crop it. In this case, as I did with these. But, I have other examples; with ladybirds, for example (where, when pruning, it is normally visible). Staphylins are also difficult to take pictures of (I used to throw one photo here, which was not found out further than the subfamily).
Well, I'll follow your advice: disable all settings, maybe the result will be better (just going to the field). If not, then it's just me - I'll have to practice photographing ants. Too bad I don't have a macro attachment. With birds it is a little easier...
p. s. here is that video from the anthill https://ok.ru/video/292350135011

Thank you for your advice, ENO

This post was edited by Ruslan Mazurik - 10.07.2017 17: 28

I didn't have one before either. I did it in a couple of hours. From the video: some ants are running around at an abnormal speed, as if you disturbed them a lot before starting shooting. How one ended up on the lens is generally a mystery. in general, you need to be very careful with sticking the lens of the camera directly into the ant, the illumination of lenses is not good friends with acids, including formic acid. I read the story of a naturalist about how his formica gun was ruined - from acid bluing peeled off.

This post was edited by ENO-10.07.2017 20: 38

They are very impulsive: if you step near an anthill, they immediately run out. I had a case when I "knocked" on an anthill and they immediately began to get out... Even when some beetle passes near the burrow-the same thing.
I was shooting from the outside, and he probably got on the lens up his sleeve when it touched the ground. But this is already the case... So, in this case, too: they run abnormally because they felt the vibrations of their steps.

I also like it when the animal is definitely accurate (down to the species, if possible). If this is difficult (for me) I'm applying here. Sometimes, it happens that I can (if I know) resort to my own option (as in this case), based, as you said, on the appearance, prevalence and probability of living in a given area (I know what is risky). And I have a small area, due to the fact that I shoot in two locations that we have: in my garden and out in the field. Unfortunately, there is no forest nearby...
p. s. not all my photos on arthropods are identified.

Could it be a stalk sawfly (Tsepkhidae)?I will be glad of any information about what kind of insect is in the picture.

Pictures:

____.jpg — (371.42к)

Could it be a stalk sawfly (Tsepkhidae)?I will be glad of any information about what kind of insect is in the picture.

What a strange reproduction of Latin!? Cephidae is pronounced cephida, (ph = f). Yes, and it is better to use the original Latin name, and not transliterate it in this way.
But this is not a stem sawfly, but an alder horntail Xiphydria camelus L. from the family Xiphydriidae

What a strange reproduction of Latin!? Tsephidae is pronounced cephida, (ph = f). Yes, and it is better to use the original Latin name, and not transliterate it in this way.
But this is not a stalk sawfly, but an alder horntail Hiphydria tsamelus L. from the family Hiphydriidae

I didn't see that the keyboard didn't switch to the Latin alphabet. Sorry. Thank you for the definition.

Is it possible to identify the species of this bee? I found it in the garden, drying it after the rain. The size is not known... (frames from the video) Don't scold me too much if someone doesn't like the photos again.
p.s. in macro mode, my device doesn't know how to take photos (it turns out to be a black photo), so I have to shoot and then withdraw the photos...

This post was edited by Ruslan Mazurik - 11.07.2017 21: 21

Pictures:

MVI_6666_21_14_30_.JPG — (102.48к)


MVI_6666_21_15_00_.JPG — (100.01к)


MVI_6666_21_15_10_.JPG — (97.17к)


MVI_6666_21_15_45_.JPG — (108.61к)


MVI_6666_21_16_01_.JPG — (99.13к)

Apis mellifera.

Thank you very much!

2-centimeter ant

Kyrgyzstan, highland

2-centimeter ant
Kyrgyzstan, mountainous area

A female camponotus of some sort.

A sawfly of some sort, apparently? Today from Karelia, in my opinion, I was sitting on a willow tree, possibly on an alder.

A sawfly of some sort, apparently? Today from Karelia, in my opinion, I was sitting on a willow tree, possibly on an alder.

This is Eriocampa ovata (Linnaeus, 1760) - one of the easily identifiable species of our sawflies.
"Nigozero?" Nothing interesting was filmed in Vodlozerye?

This post was edited by IchMan - 15.07.2017 12: 12

Tell me what kind of bees? Yesterday, Mordovia. In the mass on the body (if I do not confuse the plant)

Pictures:

DSC02090.jpg — (448.46 k)

This is Eriocampa ovata (Linnaeus, 1760) - one of the easily identifiable species of our sawflies.
"Nigozero?" Nothing interesting was filmed in Vodlozerye?

Yes, from Nigozero. There didn't seem to be anything like this in Vodlozerye, there is a small amount of material, mostly beetles.

Irkutsk region, Lake shore Baikal, VI. 2016

Have I already broken my head with this one ? Crabronidae
Any ideas?

Pictures:

Baikal_Osa_1.jpg — (313.97 k)

Irkutsk region, Lake shore Baikal, VI. 2016

Have I already broken my head with this one ? Crabronidae
Any ideas?

Ilya is a male Meria sp., sem. Tiphiidae

Tell me what kind of bees? Yesterday, Mordovia. In the mass on the body (if I do not confuse the plant)

Dasypoda sp., males.

Dear colleagues,

Please take a look at a few animals. Samara region, forest-steppe zone, 1-3 years ago, time and place are still being specified. Photo 1-June 2017.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

1. Anoplius viaticus.
2. Some kind of rider.
3. Sub-family. Eumeninae.
4.The fly from sem. Conopidae.
5. Aphids. Well, how is it even fashionable to confuse it with a perepon?

This post was edited by ENO-18.07.2017 14: 29

Hello. Can you please tell me if it is possible to define this Ectemnius before the type? The photo was taken in Rtishchevo, Saratov region.




This post was edited by Aksin2005 - 20.07.2017 21: 06

Hello. Can you please tell me if it is possible to define this Ectemnius before the type? The photo was taken in Rtishchevo, Saratov region.

Female Ectemnius cephalotes

Please help me with the definition. Tatarstan, Almetyevsky district, Yamashi village, Kichui River valley. July 17.

Please help me with the definition. Tatarstan, Almetyevsky district, Yamashi village, Kichui River valley. July 17.

2 photos resemble male Rophites sp.

Hello. Tell me, please, is this someone from Tenthredopsis? Filmed in Rtishchevo, Saratov region, in July 2017.