Identification of Hymenoptera (wasps, bees, ants)

Tell me, please, the type of bumblebee?
Belarus, Minsk region, Minsk district, Machulishchi bus stop, lug, bodyak. 23.07.2017.



Images are not attached in the usual way.

And how are they attached?

Here we go again - twenty-five! This female was identified to me as Vespula vulgaris, also here on Molbiol! I ran all my oss through Molbiol, with the exception of Megascolia maculata and Scolia hirta, which are unmistakable! And hornets, of course-Vespa crabro is unmistakable!
So I don't have much luck with Vespula vulgaris females! Two of them were so defined to me, and they never got it!

I don't remember any such blunders.
In any case, you can decide for yourself:
- The inner edge of the mandible at the base in front of the basal tooth is clearly curved; the platypus is usually with three black spots, less often without lower ones or with an elongated upper one; light spots on the temples and cheeks, as a rule, merge into a band; light stripes on the sides of the pronotum are triangularly expanded from below - Vespula germanica
- The inner edge of the mandible at the base in front of the basal tooth is straight; the platypus is usually with a wide longitudinal black stripe, expanded below, less often the lower part in the form of lateral spots; light spots on the temples and cheeks, as a rule, are separated by a dark stripe or spot; light stripes on the sides of the pronotum are not expanded below - Vespula vulgaris
By the way ,the" typical " pattern of the platypus and abdomen is typical only for female founders, while among working individuals it varies greatly, and it is not very convenient to rely on it.

Can we identify the sawfly?" I think it's Eriocampa ovata, but I'm afraid to put my finger in the sky. Novgorod region, end of June.



This post was edited by Yevgeniyk-05.03.2018 13: 53

And then there's the sawfly, which I suspect is Tenthredo vespa. Novgorod region, July.
Can you tell me who it really is?





This post was edited by Yevgeniyk-05.03.2018 14: 20

That's for sure! I noticed that Bombus terrestris is very common in the city and in suburban areas, but not very common in the forest. Bombus lucorum, on the contrary, is common in the forest zone and rare in the urban one. And black-haired females are usually found in urban areas, I did not see them in the forest - that is, they are characteristic of terrestris, and not of lucorum. Almost always, they are large in size and can be found as early as July - that is, they are hardly founder females. In addition, female founders are usually smaller than these black-haired ones. Therefore, it seems very logical to assume that males can be descended from them. Unless, of course, the female founder suppresses their eggs with her pheromones.
As for Bombus cryptarum, I also repeatedly found information that this is a separate independent type. From the external signs, it differs from terrestris and lucorum by a strong black pubescence of the head, and it also seems that the yellow band on the abdomen is on the second or even on the third tergite, and not on the first, as in terrestris and lucorum.

When it seems necessary to be baptized.
The yellow sash of all the listed comrades is on the second tergite.
I looked at my bumblebees (Moscow region):
April-mid-May (a couple of pieces in the second half of May) female founders of bumblebees;
mid-May - June mainly the first half (two pieces on July 4 and 17) - female cuckoos;
July (the bulk from the third decade, there are 13, 23 and 29 pieces each June)- until the second decade of September, males;
with workers somehow sparsely I have, mainly the end of July-the first two decades of August.
Specifically, I catch only spring females (there are no workers yet at this time, and June cuckoos differ well in size from ordinary bumblebee workers) and males. Most of the workers, and probably half of the males, come here to catch bees, wasps, and beetles on all sorts of massively blooming vegetation.
I read specifically about bumblebees, though in German with which I am not friends at all, as far as I understand for European bumblebees. The female leaves the nest to search for food, only before the first brood leaves, and then does not leave it until death. When laying eggs, the female secretes a special pheromone, which guarantees that only working individuals will leave the eggs: on average, the larval stage is less than 7 days against 10.5 in queens, the pupal stage is about 9.5 days against 13 days, in general 20 days against 27 in queens. By the beginning of July (when exactly, apparently depending on the species, weather conditions, nest size or, most likely, a certain combination of these factors, in my opinion, the process may occur somewhat earlier in earlier species), the female ceases to secrete this pheromone and lays only queen eggs and male eggs. This process is the beginning of the end, because the female no longer lays eggs, and after all of them die, the nest dies of starvation, if it does not die of cold first. Young queens and males are born and spend several days in the nest, then leave it forever. Whether the uterus can throw unfertilized eggs I do not know, but it is unlikely, because they are supposed to spend the whole next summer laying them in their nest, most likely there is a mechanism to prevent such indecency. For some South American tropical bumblebees, the alternation of periods of formation of monogynous (with one queen) and polygynous (with several) nests is known, depending on climatic conditions.In addition, the nests can be perennial, what is there and how exactly it happens should be searched and read. We're not in the tropics, so it's unlikely. Given the accelerated fattening of workers, it is unlikely that they will reach sizes larger than the uterus. No matter how much you try to convince us and yourself that there are special (larger than queens) summer females for the production of males, I don't believe it. At the moment, IMHO, all the krupnyak flying in July, it's either slow cuckoos (or vice versa, especially nimble), or young queens, especially otozhraty workers seem less likely to me.

This post was edited by John-ST-05.03.2018 17: 10

Surroundings of Kirovo-Chepetsk, Kirov region. 13.06.2017.
Do you recognize the ant?

Surroundings of Kirovo-Chepetsk, Kirov region. 13.06.2017.
Do you recognize the ant?

Lasius niger

It's from some other fairy tale. All three have baldrics on identical segments and the head is very black without the slightest glimpse of other colors. And they think there's another Magnus.

On the head of terrestris and lucorum, the hairs are small, so that you can see three more eyes, and on the head of cryptarum they are not a fig not visible because of the thick coat.
Magnuses, judging by their photos, are kind of square, at least the females. Can you be well-fed? And there is also Bombus sporadicus - they have small eyes located almost in a straight line, do not form a triangle on the forehead, as in terrestris and lucorum. I shot one of them. I also shot something like
terrestris or lucorum with a yellow sling on the third or fourth segment of the abdomen-maybe this is cryptarum?

 
Who and when? I don't remember any cases where Molbiol in the last few years has been so badly screwed up in the definition of os, and no one has corrected it yet.

I can say who and when, but this is unethical - anyone can make a mistake, as I said above!

 
Maculata-yes, but hirta is quite possible and confused.

This is true, but in our region, in addition to hirta and maculata, other scolias can not even be close! Although-who knows? Everything flows, everything changes!

When it seems necessary to be baptized.

And when you don't think so, it doesn't hurt either!

The yellow sash of all the listed comrades is on the second tergite.

I'm sorry - I wanted to say: everyone is on the second, and cryptarums can jump to the third and even to the fourth!

No matter how much you try to convince us and yourself that there are special (larger than queens) summer females for the production of males, I don't believe it. At the moment, IMHO, all the krupnyak flying in July, it's either slow cuckoos (or vice versa, especially nimble), or young queens, especially otozhraty workers seem less likely to me.

First of all, definitely not cuckoos. Cuckoos are quite distinguishable from normal bumblebees by their legs.
Second , I'm not trying to convince you. I once participated in a forum from the Russian Academy of Sciences a few years ago. I was mostly interested in quantum mechanics and wave physics, but I also went into biology several times. So one day I went into the topic "hymenoptera" and asked a question about the reproduction of offspring in bumblebees. And I was answered by some kind of associate professor or professor - I don't remember any more-like this, as I told you here above.

At the moment, IMHO, all the krupnyak flying in July, it's either slow cuckoos (or vice versa, especially nimble), or young queens, especially otozhraty workers seem less likely to me.

It can also be old queens that have not laid nests due to illness or something else.

It can also be old queens that have not laid nests due to illness or something else.

Then it is more likely that they are young, just appeared female founders, since at the end of July or in August they are sometimes seen a lot, and before that time they were not visible.
By the way, I remembered one forest clearing, which I often visit at different times of the year, but it was in early-mid-August that very large individuals appeared on it, either Bombus hortorum or Bombus ruderatus, but most likely both, because the width of the black sling on the back at the base of the wings the difference between the yellow areas in front and back of the dorsum was very different in different individuals. They flew a lot on meadow cornflowers, and among them there was a large percentage of very large ones. In April and May, I have never seen such large ones. This may have been the last brood of the workers, who for some reason turned out to be even larger than the female founders. There were simply too many of them flying to be considered non-working.
About the forum in my post above, I made a little mistake in the name - it was a dXdY forum, which is not from the Russian Academy of Sciences, but just some members of the Russian Academy of Sciences are present on it. It was recommended to me at one time as a very authoritative forum in the field of technical sciences, and it turned out to have many branches of other sciences, including entomological topics.

I also read about bumblebees here and was finally convinced: John-ST, you also read the wrong fairy tale about the cryptarium. Cryptarum - is not close to the territory, but rather to the lucorum, as I said before. And the front band of it, on the contrary, is wide and bright. Unlike Lucorum, I have not yet been able to enter it, which is probably not just for everyone. I remember reading something about the ends of this band and the mandibles, but I can't find the article right now. But here from the oba territory (luxor and cryptarum) differs more clearly: a wider and lighter front band, more powerful and longer pubescence. In general, the same as lucorum. A dark (with a missing or weak front stripe) terrestris is probably just terrestris. Sometimes a banana is just a banana (C).

Here-here sit terrestris on the left and cryptarum on the right (the second was determined by Timofey Levchenko):



This post was edited by ENO-07.03.2018 04: 32

Is it possible to determine from such a photo what kind of bumblebee?

Tell me, please, the type of bumblebee?
Belarus, Minsk region, Minsk district, Machulishchi bus stop, lug, bodyak. 23.07.2017.

Probably there you and the working vulgaris identified as the uterus.

No, it was here. Here is the link if Google was banned:
http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...82#entry1659882

This post was edited by KM2200 - 07.03.2018 11: 54

help with the definition of Abkhazia 17.08.2017 roc Pitsunda
1. L-25 mm span 38 mm

2. L-20mm span 38mm

3. L-20mm span 38mm

Is it possible to determine from such a photo what kind of bumblebee?

Undetectable, Bombus sp.

I also read about bumblebees here and was finally convinced: John-ST, you also read the wrong fairy tale about the cryptarium. Cryptarum - is not close to the territory, but rather to the lucorum, as I said before. And the front band of it, on the contrary, is wide and bright. Unlike Lucorum, I have not yet been able to enter it, which is probably not just for everyone. I remember reading something about the ends of this band and the mandibles, but I can't find the article right now. But here from the oba territory (luxor and cryptarum) differs more clearly: a wider and lighter front band, more powerful and longer pubescence. In general, the same as lucorum. A dark (with a missing or weak front stripe) terrestris is probably just terrestris. Sometimes a banana is just a banana (C).

Here-here sit terrestris on the left and cryptarum on the right (the second was determined by Timofey Levchenko):

and how to determine this photo at all?
yes, cryptarum is closer to lucorum..But I already "broke my eyes" when all my lucorums turned out to be cryptarums. There are also differences in the punctuation of the first tergite. How could Timofey have seen all this?

Can we identify the sawfly?" I think it's Eriocampa ovata, but I'm afraid to put my finger in the sky. Novgorod region, end of June.

Eriocampa ovata

This is a very controversial statement. Future founders of many bumblebee species fly out starting from the first or second decade of July and in an amount commensurate with the number of workers. And they still feed on the flowers. And by mid-August, most of them lie in winter shelters.

Here are the big bumblebees I mentioned in mid-August. Probably of different types. I assume Bombus hortorum or Bombus ruderatus. Or maybe there are bohemicus cuckoos among them?

...not won, but lost. etc., on molbiol, this could not have happened. Probably there you and the working vulgaris identified as the uterus. Now I'll take a look, what kind of forum is this.

Both the worker as a uterus, and the German as a vulgaris were defined here. I didn't post any photos there at all. Especially since it was 6-7 years ago - I didn't even take pictures then! I later started taking pictures of insects.

Bumblebees (at least not ours) don't have eyes that "can't be seen", otherwise they wouldn't have seen them themselves. All eyes are visible, if you look well.

But this one will be able to see a lot? (Bombus pratorum)




Or like this one? (Male Bombus lucorum)

And how can a good rearing turn into squariness?

Very simple. The width is almost equal to the length. But maybe this is a special case, not everyone is like this?

This is also from another fairy tale.

Here ENO says that such bumblebees do not have yellow hairs on the third tergite of the abdomen instead of the second!

I would also like to know what sciences he is either a candidate or a doctor, if technical or physical and mathematical, it will be a laugh.

No, biological ones. He even drew me all the insides of a female bumblebee, where her eggs are stored and where the sperm bag is located. Then he explained to me in detail how and how bumblebees and bees raise their body temperature. I almost drew a diagram!

help with the definition of Abkhazia 17.08.2017 roc Pitsunda

1. Sphex either funerarius or flavipennis.
2. Not here at all-ktyr!
3. Vespa crabro.

There are mostly, if not exclusively, males, and I don't know how to identify them at all.

Wow - there were such big males! I was confused by their size, since males are usually smaller than female founders

Is there anything to say about these? I assume all Bombus subterraneus, but I'm not sure. Or bombus jonellus?

1. July.





2. August





3. May, the founding female

I can say that we don't have such people, so I have no idea who it is. Although there is a timid assumption about the second one, it is B. semenoviellus (this is how Timofey Levchenko identified very similar bumblebees from Nizhny Novgorod).

This post was edited by ENO-08.03.2018 17: 31

Tell me about the bees please.

1. June






2. It's too late for Andrena - August 26






3. This one is even later-on September 15






4. Is the male Halictus so mustachioed? September






5. Is this Lasioglossum? It seems to be bursting someone, and bees are not predators! September





6. Is the nomad definable? May





7. Anthidium manicatum or Anthidium florentinum?

Here are the big bumblebees I mentioned in mid-August. Probably of different types. I assume Bombus hortorum or Bombus ruderatus. Or maybe there are bohemicus cuckoos among them?

Both the worker as a uterus, and the German as a vulgaris were defined here. I didn't post any photos there at all. Especially since it was 6-7 years ago - I didn't even take pictures then! I later started taking pictures of insects.

Dmitry, you are stubborn or rather stubborn.
How many days have you been trying to convince us that you are completely ignorant about bumblebees?
Your main arguments are reduced to it seems, it was seen and OBS. Even if this "grandmother" is a candidate of biological sciences or a doctor of biological sciences specializing in bumblebees:
1) the person could have made a reservation;
2) could have been sincerely mistaken;
3) You did not fully understand correctly (I encounter this every other day at work);
4) due to the time limitation, something is remembered wrong (a feature of human memory).
Bumblebees in such photos (by color) and pictures from the net are overwhelmingly not determined to the species, especially males and workers. Sometimes you can tell something about the uterus, but you need to be sure that it is the uterus. You can't even tell the difference between males and females in the photo, but you've identified all your bumblebees, and you don't know how to identify people and give illiterate advice on how to identify them.
Here you tear the shirt on your chest: yes, they told me, yes, I saw it, yes, it seems to me, but for the few days that the discussion is going on, they didn't even bother to search the net for any confirmation or refutation of your conjectures and memories.

This post was edited by John-ST-10.03.2018 13: 44

  
I will add that it is the first brood that usually does not fly out at all (these are such dwarf intra-nest bumblebees that cannot fly), the second one flies out. Although this is probably true only for a part of the species.

I read it, it's different for different species, and it may also depend on specific conditions. The first brood can remain in the nest as nannies without flying to forage, some of the brood become foragers, and the entire brood is sent to forage. About the inability to fly in these dwarf bumblebees is not mentioned anywhere. In early spring, I met dwarf bumblebees foraging on mother-and-mother, of other flowers, only dandelions were on the heating main at this time.
In general, as I understood, it seems that a lot is known about bumblebees, but more and more with reservations: "most likely for this species", there are a lot of old observations and it is not always possible to reliably establish the species in question, plus the data change depending on the climatic conditions of the colonies.

and how to determine this photo at all?
yes, cryptarum is closer to lucorum..But I already "broke my eyes" when all my lucorums turned out to be cryptarums. There are also differences in the punctuation of the first tergite. How could Timofey have seen all this?

Apparently by the shape of the sling (in particular its ends) on the chest, I found such keys in the British, but with a reservation it is applicable only for queens (standard color) and is reliable only for British bumblebees.

This post was edited by John-ST-10.03.2018 13: 51

Tell me about the bees please.

1. Lasioglossum sp., female.
2. Andrena sp., female.
3. Melitta sp., female.
4. Lasioglossum (Evylaeus) sp., male.
5. Halictus sp., male.

7. It is difficult to see, but rather a female A. florentinum.

Tell me about the bees please.

2. It's too late for Andrena - August 26

Andrena denticulata (Kirby, 1802) flies from mid-July to late August. It visits flowers of compound flowers, usually yellow in color.
Perfect fit.

Dmitry, are you stubborn or rather stubborn.
.........
Here you tear the shirt on your chest: yes, they told me, yes, I saw it, yes, it seems to me, but for the few days that the discussion is going on, they didn't even bother to search the net for any confirmation or refutation of your conjectures and memories.

John, why should I look for something in the net, if I have already asked a question here and they answered it? ENO told me everything and I agreed with him, because I trust him as a specialist. And after I agreed with him , for some reason I turned out to be "stubborn and stubborn"! I've never seen anything like this in my life. And never in my life have I "torn the shirt on my chest" - either literally or figuratively! I've never argued with anyone in ten years. So I didn't understand anything at all - what are you talking about and what are you talking about, and I don't need to understand it - there are enough other worries!

I've seen the first B. hypnorum workers thrown out of a balcony during repairs. They were even smaller than the first foragers and could not really fly up, they only crawled. And it was neither at the end of April, nor at the beginning of May, long before the appearance of workers of this species on the flowers. It seems that two other background bumblebee species-B. terrestris and B. lapidarius - should also have a non-flying brood, since the delay between laying nests and the appearance of the first workers on the flowers is very long (two months). Those species whose uterus appear late (for example, B. zonatus) probably do not have this. And that someone's workers on the mother-and-stepmother fed, which we have blooms in April, this is not even close, even the uterus of many of our species do not have time to catch it.

"As far as is known, the age of workers is not important in the distribution of work among them, except for the fact that after hatching, all workers perform work inside the nest, and then some of them become foragers. For example, in the first brood of working B. lapidarius individuals, foragers appear 2-3 days after hatching (Sladen, 1912) . In B. pascuorum, the largest individuals start foraging 5-6 days later, and the smallest ones only 13-15 days after hatching (Brian, 1952; Pouvreau, 1989).
...
Distribution of work among workers occurs even in very small colonies containing only 3-4 workers, of which one or two individuals never leave the nest, while others forage (Free, 1955a).
Radchenko V. G., Pesenko Yu. A. Biologiya pchelei (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) [Biology of bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea)].
Maybe at first the individuals are unable to fly, or maybe the reason was in the mastdayness of the nest. In addition, I noticed that if the bumblebee "did not intend to fly somewhere", then it will move on foot, frighten by lifting its legs and falling on its back, buzz, but persistently leave on its own six feet, despite the fact that there is an irritating factor and a real possibility of flying away.

No, I saw what I saw, and I described it exactly as it was. What you described is clearly from another opera. Under what conditions Radchenko and Pesenko conducted their observations, I do not know, but to be fair, they do not say anything about the hypnorum. Yes, I also remembered that I had read about non-flying bumblebees from Khalifman, and although the book was more popular than scientific, the author personally conducted observations on numerous nests of different bumblebee species and would hardly lie. Perhaps it happens in different ways.

No, I saw what I saw, and I described it exactly as it was. What you described is clearly from another opera. Under what conditions Radchenko and Pesenko conducted their observations, I do not know, but to be fair, they do not say anything about the hypnorum. Yes, I also remembered that I had read about non-flying bumblebees from Khalifman, and although the book was more popular than scientific, the author personally conducted observations on numerous nests of different bumblebee species and would hardly lie. Perhaps it happens in different ways.

I corrected myself above about the departure of the first brood from the nest, which is different in different species, but the inability to fly in these dwarf bumblebees is not mentioned anywhere.

I've seen the first B. hypnorum workers thrown out of a balcony during repairs. They were even smaller than the first foragers and could not really fly up, they only crawled.

Where should they fly and for what, if their life is most likely connected with intra-nest work, the nest is lying around broken, they will fly to establish a new nest, for food?

Khalifman writes that the first brood usually remains in the nest, but if necessary, the largest worker can go foraging. The book is popular science and it is not known what kind of species we are talking about, it is not even clear about the observation of a particular species or several (with subsequent interpretation for other species). But he also doesn't talk about the inability of the first brood to fly.

It is not known whether your bumblebees could not take off or did not "want to". Wings, as I understand it, they were quite developed, the pectoral muscles should also be developed a priori, because with the help of their contraction, bumblebees regulate the temperature of their own body and inside the nest.

In addition, the nest could have been treated with some kind of chemical treatment before being thrown out, as a result, bumblebees, even if they "wanted to", could not take off.

Your observations do not indicate anything about the inability to fly of the first dwarf brood of B. hypnorum, much less whether the workers of the first brood fly out to forage or not.

This post was edited by John-ST-12.03.2018 22: 15

But I've never seen bumblebees that don't want to fly under the threat of being taken by two fingers.

I think they wouldn't have crawled very fast then, which they didn't. Yes, and only such a selected bumblebee lived with me for several days while feeding honey. I didn't want to fly.

The only thing is, maybe they didn't know how to fly temporarily, so they didn't have time to get stronger yet. I don't know how many days after they come out of their cocoons, they acquire the ability to fly, but I don't think they do in the first twenty-four hours. But this hypothesis seems to me no better or worse than a fundamental inability to fly. They had wings, of course, and wing muscles, obviously, too, but it's not a fact that they were in a sufficiently developed state. I repeat that these bumblebees were very small, much smaller than the smallest foragers on the flowers.

You can make a lot of different assumptions: fly-not-fly, but in this case the nest is destroyed and it is impossible to talk about the typical situation.