Identification of beetles (Coleoptera)

Please help me figure out the agri-luses (are they defined correctly?).
All three are from the Moscow region, from here: M. O. Balashikha district, Zheleznodorozhny district.
1) Agrilus pratensis Ratzeburg, 1839? - 20.07.2000 on aspen L=8mm.
2) Agrilus viridis Linnaeus, 1758? - 23.06.2000 on aspen L=10mm.
3) Agrilus (Dentagrilus) cyanescens Ratzeburg, 1837? - 01.07.2000 on an oak tree L=6mm.

The photos were posted in reverse order .
1) - yes, Agrilus pratensis, it is painfully characteristic, you will not confuse it.
2) - the viridis group is difficult to make out even if it's not based on the photo!
3) - I agree with Fornax13: it is definitely not Agrilus cyanescens, especially on oak (A. cyanescens on honeysuckle). But something like A. angustulus-it may well be. But this is only under binoculars!

The photos were posted in reverse order .
1) - yes, Agrilus pratensis, it is painfully characteristic, you will not confuse it.
2) - the viridis group is difficult to make out even if it's not based on the photo!
3) - I agree with Fornax13: it is definitely not Agrilus cyanescens, especially on oak (A. cyanescens on honeysuckle). But something like A. angustulus-it may well be. But this is only under binoculars!

Yes, I know that they were laid out in reverse order (apparently some kind of glitch)- I edited it several times and everything turned out that way. And for two agriluses, thank you (I'll know where to dance from). In fact, I collected a lot of them in the Moscow region (these puzzles).

Size 7 mm. Unfortunately, there was no label on this copy...

then according to the photo of the female 11

ok, no big deal

For Konung:

IMG_7320 Ilybius sp. - det. Vasily Dyadichko (below is his comment)

Here are the options given to the instance owner as a hint on which versions to check first:
fenestratus is most similar in general appearance and the nature of the metallic luster, and this option is the easiest to check. If 10 mm or more, and VERY narrow lateral wings of the posterior thorax-this is it
subaeneus-also more than 10 mm, lateral wings of the posterior thorax are wide
aenescens if small, less than 10 mm, yellow antennae, check further on the key points for this species
angustior is also small, but unlikely, the gloss is different, similarly drive away by the key thesis for this species is that the antennae are NOT yellow ,at least the apical segments are darkened
picipes are genially different from the previous one,
crassus is unlikely, it still looks different. I didn't see much of him, though

This post was edited by Alexey Sazhnev - 17.11.2009 00: 12

Help with the Carpathian weevils
Caught rpanin (except 7,8)for which many thanks to him,oh yes fotkal Barry to him too hi and thank you for the marshmallows

Here's what I was wondering,but probably didn't guess most of them:
1-Otiorhynchus multipunctatus ?
2-Otiorhynchus coecus ?
3-Otiorhynchus morio ?
4-Otiorhynchus tenebricosus ?
5-Otiorhynchus rugosus ?
6-
7-Liparus laevigatus ?
8-Liparus laevigatus ?
9-Alophus ? kaufmanni
10-Mecaspis alternans

Pictures:

1.jpg — (36.74 k)


2.jpg — (30.56 k)


3.jpg — (31.83 k)


4.jpg — (37.77к)


5.jpg — (41.06 k)


6.jpg — (17.95 k)


7.jpg — (74.98 k)


8.jpg — (74.96к)


9.jpg — (72.24 k)


9_______.jpg — (64.15к)


10.jpg — (42.87к)

And more liksusy from Kharkiv and otiorinkhus from the Crimea
11-Kharkiv 30. May. 2009 on sorrel
12-Kharkiv 26. May. 2009 on sorrel
13-Kharkiv 02. June.2009 on the nettle
14-Crimea, Aypetri yayla, 07. August. 2009, under the stones

This post was edited by Liparus - 17.11.2009 00: 31

Pictures:

11.jpg — (156.56к)


12.jpg — (18.86 k)


13.jpg — (169.51к)


14.jpg — (16.02к)

Kola Peninsula, August.

Kola Peninsula, August.

Lepturobosca virens.

and no one will identify Omsk barbels and weevils?

We'll identify you, send your photos to the studio!

they are on the previous page

To Konung:IMG_7288.jpg
-Lixus iridis
IMG_7292.jpg - Eusomus ovulum
IMG_7296.jpg -Chlorophanus sellatus, apparently
IMG_7301.jpg - apart from Lepidonotaris petax, nothing comes to mind
IMG_7304.jpg -otiorinha - I won't risk
it IMG_7307.jpg -Hypera conmaculata (=adspersa) like
IMG_7309.jpg -Anthonomus (Furcipus) rectirostris

Moustaches, Alexey will call
the rest IMG_7251.jpg -Phytoecia coerulescens
IMG_7256.jpg -Menesia sulphurata
IMG_7258.jpg -Semanotus undatus

IMG_7260.jpg -Phyllobrotica quadrimaculata
IMG_7226.jpg - Cytilus sericeus
IMG_7228.jpg -I think it's the same
IMG_7279.jpg - Dascillus cervinus
IMG_7282.jpg " Serropalpus ?"barbatus
IMG_7277.jpg - Ptinus sp.

and no one will identify Omsk barbels and weevils?

IMG_7243 Stictoleptura rubra (male)
IMG_7245 Tetropium can gabrieli
IMG_7247 Phytoecia icterica
IMG_7249 Callidium chlorizans
IMG_7262 Brachyta interrogationis
IMG_7263 Tetropium I think gracilicorne
IMG_7265 Brachyta variabilis

Well, I have a question about lixus (from our only L. iridis and I know), and this one does not look like Iridis at all.
Caught: 13.06.2004, here: M. o. Sergiev Posad district, okr. der. Golkovo, in the swamp. L=10mm.

Pictures:

PB172005.jpg — (66.27к)

Well, I have a question about lixus (from our only L. iridis and I know), and this one does not look like Iridis at all.
Caught: 13.06.2004, here: M. o. Sergiev Posad district, okr. der. Golkovo, in the swamp. L=10mm.

L. bardanae is common on horse sorrel

L. bardanae is common on horse sorrel

Thanks! I don't remember what I was sitting on, but it's full of horse sorrel.

To Konung:IMG_7304.jpg
-Otiorhynchus is SIMILAR to Otiorhynchus tristis (Scopoli, 1763)

Well, I'd like to deal with Malashka. I think this is:
Anthocomus (Celidus) coccineus Schaller, 1783?
Caught: 30.08.2000, here: M. O. Balashikha district of okr. der. Poltevo, old linden park "V let"

Pictures:

Anthocomus.jpg — (50.85к)

Good afternoon!

With Byturus sp. can you help me out before the view? MO, end of May, on dandelion.

IMG_7243 Stictoleptura rubra (male)
IMG_7245 Tetropium can gabrieli
IMG_7247 Phytoecia icterica
IMG_7249 Callidium chlorizans
IMG_7262 Brachyta interrogationis
IMG_7263 Tetropium I think gracilicorne
IMG_7265 Brachyta variabilis

like all called, I will express my opinion:

For IMG_7249 Callidium chlorizans-thank you!
IMG_7245 can't it be castaneum (Linnaeus, 1758)?
IMG_7251 perhaps such a Phytoecia (Opsilia) coerulescens (Scopoli, 1763 - poorly visible
IMG_7254 Phytoecia (s. str.) cylindrica (Linnaeus, 1758)

Many thanks to all those who defined it!
Borka, Liparus - name or use your real surnames and initials to enter them in the definition. labels. You can write to your personal account.

Good afternoon!
With Byturus sp. can you help me out before the view? MO, end of May, on dandelion.

Byturus ochraceus

Tell me please. Whether all three hornbills are Platycerus caraboides (just the difference is very noticeable). Under No. 3 is clearly his female.
All beetles are collected at different times on the birch tree here:
M. O. Lyuberetsky district of okr. der. Torbeevo.

This post was edited by vasiliy-feoktistov - 19.11.2009 18: 34

Pictures:

PB192016.jpg — (57.75к)

in my opinion, there is a suspicion of Platycerus caprea (De Geer, 1774), especially the first one-you can take a closer look at the mandibles and pronotums

in my opinion, there is a suspicion of Platycerus caprea (De Geer, 1774), especially the first one-you can take a closer look at the mandibles and pronotum

I'll try it now.

Here they are (for the first two).

Pictures:

PB192017.jpg — (47.29к)


PB192018.jpg — (46.31к)

Tell me please. Whether all three hornbills are Platycerus caraboides (just the difference is very noticeable). Under No. 3 is clearly his female.
All beetles are collected at different times on the birch tree here:
M. O. Lyuberetsky district of okr. der. Torbeevo.

The rightmost female is exactly Platycerus caraboides (bronze and red - legged). In the center, by the way, is also a female.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 19.11.2009 20: 05

The rightmost female is exactly Platycerus caraboides (bronze and red - legged). In the center, by the way, is also a female.

Thanks! And for the first two (dark blue), nothing happens? Yes, they are much larger than No. 3.

And for the first two (dark blue), nothing happens? Yes, they are much larger than No. 3.

This question, especially when you look at the photo, and you don't hold a beetle in your hands, is not an easy one. In my opinion, the far left (male) and "girl" in the center is Platycerus caprea. However, compare it yourself.
http://www.zin.ru/animalia/coleoptera/rus/platyce2.htm

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 19.11.2009 20: 32

Thank you, the first two are really Platycerus caprea (I have most of it in my collection for some reason). Special thanks for the link, otherwise P. caraboides is only mentioned everywhere, and the difference between these two species is obvious.

Obvious, but not so obvious . By the way, Platycerus caprea also dominates in the Yaroslavl region, while P. caraboides is more rare.

Viktor, if you don't take a look at Malashka, she's just a little bit taller (I posted it the day before yesterday). Thank you in advance.

Alas, in malashki I am a little better than a pig in oranges . For some reason, I'm not interested in this group. I don't even collect them.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 19.11.2009 21: 00

Alas, in malashki I am a little better than a pig in oranges .

Similarly (and so do I). Yes, and I myself have only two types of them and come across.

This post was edited by vasiliy-feoktistov - 19.11.2009 21: 03

I was a little late, but everything became clear-I subscribe to Platycerus caprea ))

Well, I'd like to deal with Malashka. I think this is:
Anthocomus (Celidus) coccineus Schaller, 1783?
Caught: 30.08.2000, here: M. O. Balashikha district of okr. der. Poltevo, old linden park "V let"

It is definitely Anthocomus (Celidus) coccineus (Schaller, 1783) (= A. rufus), and there should be nothing like it in the MA.

p. s. in vain you are not interested in malashki, the group is very curious and peculiar, although they are mostly in the south.

It is definitely Anthocomus (Celidus) coccineus (Schaller, 1783) (= A. rufus), and there should be nothing like it in the MA.

p. s. in vain you are not interested in malashki, the group is very curious and peculiar, although they are mostly in the south.

Thanks! I'm not interested because I think I've already collected all of them (two species: this one and Malachius bipustulatus Linnaeus, 1758).