Identification of beetles (Coleoptera)

№1
№2
№3
№4
№5
№6
№7
№8
№9
№10

2 - Calasoma sycophanta
4 - Meloe sp.
7 - Blaps sp.
9 - Dorcus parallelepipedus
10 - Oryctes nasicornis

12 - Aporia crataegi
13 - Xylocopa violaceus
14 - Cossus cossus
17 - Aromia moschata
18 - Vespa crabro
21 - Gryllotalpa gryllotalpa
24 - Oryctes nasicornis

25 - Inachis io
28 - Broscus cephalotes
29 - Blaps sp.
30 - Cetonia aurata
33 - Meloe sp.

22 - Ranatra sp.?

№11

It would be nice if each insect still has a place and time to specify .

1 – Something from the tribe Cleonini
3-Carabus exaratus
5-like Carabus nemoralis
6-Carabus cancellatus
8-Pentodon ? idiota
9 – Dorcus parallelepipedus
10 – Oryctes nasicornis
15 – Anisoplia ? austriaca
23 – Cybister lateralimarginalis
26 – ? Megopis scabricornis

Only beetles are defined in this topic! The last Chinese warning - I'll just delete it.

Help me determine it... Kharkiv, today, 10..12 mm, in the forest.

Pictures:

CRW_1592a.jpg — (180.76к)

OK, I understand about BUGS) sorry...

to Metallman92: 4 and 33 Meloe proscarabaeus, male and female, respectively.

Dear metallman.92!
Of course, your curiosity, the desire to find out "what is the name of the beetle", is very commendable. However, do you actually read (or at least view) any literature, if not special, then at least popular and informative (even children's)?! 50% of the beetles you put up for identification are photo models of all publications for readers aged 7-12 years from the "I want to know everything!" series, and another 40% are easily identified when you want to use the most elementary insect identifier. Don't think that I'm not a snob, but if you're serious about studying insects (even if only on an amateur level), then I don't think you should rely on the fact that uncles from a forum like ours will recognize everyone and name everyone. I'm sorry, but you have to work hard yourself. It should be inconvenient for an entomologist (even for a beginner) to put up a rhinoceros beetle, a day-old peacock's eye, a bear, a ranatra (and all of them in the "beetle detection" section!) on an entomological site for identification.

Help me determine it... Kharkiv, today, 10..12 mm, in the forest.

Pogonocherus (genus - 100%)) hispidus? But the size seems too big... For hispidulus, I think, the white sash is kosovat (for him it is more correct-transverse.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 04/27/2008 20: 33

Please help me determine the type of barbel. It was found last year in an oak forest in the vicinity of Kharkiv,
initially it was already single-whiskered ((

Pogonocherus (genus - 100%)) hispidus? But the size seems too big... For hispidulus, I think, the white sash is kosovat (for him it is more correct-transverse.

A top view might help...

Pictures:

CRW_1576.jpg — (198.35к)

A top view might help...

In general, the top looks more like Pogonocherus hispidus L., 1758.
What will usyatniki say?

A top view might help...

Still Pogonocherus hispidus Linnaeus, 1758. Compare http://www.zin.ru/animalia/coleoptera/rus/poghisdk.htm

  

Please help me determine the type of barbel. It was found last year in an oak forest in the vicinity of Kharkiv,
initially it was already single-whiskered ((

Lucky, though. A rare creature for Ukrana!

Dear metallman.92!
Of course, your curiosity, the desire to find out "what is the name of the beetle", is very commendable. However, do you actually read (or at least view) any literature, if not special, then at least popular and informative (even children's)?! 50% of the beetles you put up for identification are photo models of all publications for readers aged 7-12 years from the "I want to know everything!" series, and another 40% are easily identified when you want to use the most elementary insect identifier. Don't think that I'm not a snob, but if you're serious about studying insects (even if only on an amateur level), then I don't think you should rely on the fact that uncles from a forum like ours will recognize everyone and name everyone. I'm sorry, but you have to work hard yourself. It should be inconvenient for an entomologist (even for a beginner) to put up a rhinoceros beetle, a day-old peacock's eye, a bear, a ranatra (and all of them in the "beetle detection" section!) on an entomological site for identification.

Sorry, I'll keep that in mind. I knew the names of more than half of these beetles, but in various literature they do not agree. So I decided to check it out.

Hello, can you tell me the name of the beetle? Probably one of the usual Cicindela campestris? Moscow, Serpukhov district, sosnovy bor. The other day.
Thanks!

Hello, can you tell me the name of the beetle? Probably one of the usual Cicindela campestris? Moscow, Serpukhov district, sosnovy bor. The other day.
Thanks!

Yes, this is it - Cicindela (Cicindela) campestris, Linnaeus, 1758

Help identify the beetles! All but #1 - Mid-April 2008.1
. Cicindela germanica? 13.07.2007 arrived at the light

2,3. Both Cicindela maritima?


4. Dorcadion what kind of view?

5. A similar weevil was identified here as Otiorrhynchus caucasicus. Also him?

6. Rhagium ?inquisitor? Pine forest, but there are deciduous islands nearby.

7. A pair of weevils

8. Ground beetle about 6 mm

9. Ground beetle, 10 mm, common

10. ground beetle, 8 mm

11. Small black bodies, 9-9. 5 mm

12,13. Nutcrackers

Help identify the beetles! All but #1 - Mid-April 2008.1
. Cicindela germanica? 13.07.2007 arrived at the light

1. He is the one, Cicindela germanica
To me they also flew to the light (or resorted, I did not understand)

# 2-looks like Cicindela maritima
11-Tentyria nomas? (but omar would say better)
12-Ampedus balteatus
13-sort of like Ampedus pomonae? or Ampedus pomorum?

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 29.04.2008 09: 44

#10 darkling too, Nalassus?
#11 - Anatolica sp. What is the locale?

Nutcrackers: the first is something from Athous ssp., the second is probably Athous subfuscus.
Weevils two and one are a subfamily of Lixinae, the former most likely Pleurocleonus quadrivittatus.
Ground beetle in photo #10 (8 mm) This is the Oodes tribe. It resembles Oodes helopioides.
But I don't rule out that I made a mistake somewhere.

This post was edited by Nozer - 04/29/2008 10: 47

Racehorses that are maritima can be sahlbergi
Green ground beetle for sure Harpalus distinguendus
Ground beetle 8 mm-blackfin of the genus Nalassus Is the
size of small blackfins correct?

Ground beetle about 6 mm - Ophonus

11. Small black bodies, 9-9. 5 mm - the size is correct. Caught on a quarry slope in pine plantings on the sand, numerous were

Nutcrackers: the first is something from Athous ssp., the second is probably Athous subfuscus.

But no, if you are Sergey D's nutcrackers, then these are not Athous, they were not lying next to you. Both Ampedus, definitely! Opinion on the types expressed above.

I would refer black-heeled plants to the tribe Tentyriini (Anatolica).

Dmitrich I agree with you, I looked at the Ampedus images of the similarity more.

Everything is correct then, it is Anatolica

If everything is clear with the first ampedus - definitely balteatus, then the second one should be seriously driven according to the definition tables, most of the species of this genus cannot be determined from the photo, you need to consider the features of dotted lines and hair loss, this is not visible in the photo.

It was me.

Thank you all for the definition!
Anything on Dorcadion?"

Anything on Dorcadion?"

Dorcadion holosericeum, male.

This post was edited by Nozer - 29.04.2008 17: 58