Identification of beetles (Coleoptera)

Community and Forum → Insects identification → Identification of beetles (Coleoptera)

Pages: 1 ...302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310... 854

24.11.2010 21:53, косинус

Hello there!!
As for Athous niger, I agree with you that a difference of 1 mm is stupid. Well, lead here all veils from practice in the definition. If, for example, a person has recently become engaged in entomology, then he does not know how to determine what literature exists for determining this species, etc. And he puts here on the Forum beetle 11mm (he has them all 11 mm) he determine that this is some kind of species . And all he thinks is that this view is only 11mm. And suddenly he meets a similar beetle but chuchut different already 12 mm. We know that this type can have dimensions of 10-14mm.And he, not having literature and not knowing about its existence, is lost. When I started studying entomology, I generally defined everything according to Jacobson

.
How do you measure the size of beetles?? I'm like a botanical caliper. Convenient and error-free. And in the photo, the large A sanguineus and the small one remained unknown, the punctuation of the pronotum, the structure of the antennae and the pubescence of the body with A sanguineus are the same. Although it is almost 2 times smaller.I want to take it to the Department of Zoology to help with the definition.

24.11.2010 22:03, алекс 2611

Hello there!!
As for Athous niger, I agree with you that a difference of 1 mm is stupid. Well, lead here all veils from practice in the definition. If, for example, a person has recently become engaged in entomology, then he does not know how to determine what literature exists for determining this species, etc. And he puts here on the Forum beetle 11mm (he has them all 11 mm) he determine that this is some kind of species . And all he thinks is that this view is only 11mm. And suddenly he meets a similar beetle but chuchut different already 12 mm. We know that this type can have dimensions of 10-14mm.And he, not having literature and not knowing about its existence, is lost. When I started studying entomology, I generally defined everything according to Jacobson .
How do you measure the size of beetles?? I'm like a botanical caliper. Convenient and error-free. And in the photo, the large A sanguineus and the small one remained unknown, the punctuation of the pronotum, the structure of the antennae and the pubescence of the body with A sanguineus are the same. Although it is almost 2 times smaller.I want to take it to the Department of Zoology to help with the definition.

Maybe just pomonae? Or pomorum?

Likes: 1

26.11.2010 16:17, akulich-sibiria

Good evening, everyone. As for the nutcracker already posted earlier, this is really Selatosomus gloriosus Kishii , there were no special problems. Pronotum is flat, slightly oblong, there is an unpunctured stripe in the middle, the dots are large, frequent,more gaps. This makes the pronotum appear opaque. Characteristic structure of the posterior process of the prothorax. Which is no more than 1.5 times longer than the anterior pelvic cavity.
Picture: Selatosomus_gloriosus_Kishii_1.jpg

Picture: Selatosomus_gloriosus_Kishii_1.jpg

On the second one, I upload photos (not quite successful). The situation is not entirely clear to me. Pronotum is more convex, almost equal in length to its width. The dots are smaller and rarer. An unpunctured stripe in the middle, interrupted in the middle. The structure of the posterior process of the anterior thorax is different, it occupies almost the entire pelvic cavity of the middle thorax. Color with a purple tint. I think it's confluens Gebl. But Gurieva has two subspecies rugosus and confluens. What is correct now, are these different types or not? Cherepanov gives rugosus for Siberia
picture: Selatosomus_confluens_Gebl.jpg