Identification of beetles (Coleoptera)

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

Pages: 1 ...769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777... 854

Likes: 1

12.09.2018 17:34, Barnaba

[quote=I. solod, 11.09.2018 15: 35] Taman, South Coast, 13-15. 07. 2015
talking about the reds. When I collected and laid it, I believed that it was such an Ophonus (like cordatus - rupicola). The material is not currently available, I look at the archive photo of the mattress here, and I think that this is not ofonus, it's a painfully strange prsp. The quality of the photo, of course, no, because this is a fragment of an archive photo, but there is no other. Who could it be? Could it be Oedesis? Or what other ditomina? The size, judging by the acinopus on top, is about 8-9mm.

yet they are more similar to Oedesis caucasicus

and Eucarterus sparsutus (Rtt.) has a completely different appearance

Igor, thank you, but I wouldn't say that E. sparsutus has a completely different appearance, judging by K.'s photo.Makarova s carabidae.org and from the Italian forum (but there is a provisional definition), my last one (managed to pull it out):
user posted image

The PRSP of the first two is flattened to varying degrees due to scanning.

And here is the Oedesis from E. V. Komarov from the Volgograd region, defined by B. M. Kataev, below yours and from maik:
user posted image

It can be seen that mine and K. Makarova differ in appearance from O. caucasicus (least of all from your specimen), at least in the following ways:
1) the prsp is closer to square, whereas in O. c. it is clearly transverse;
2) the prsp edge is clearly expressed up to the posterior angle - it narrows or almost disappears posteriorly from the middle;
3) the maximum width of the elytra is in their apical third, and not basal to the middle of the length;
4) the punctuation of the bottom of the elytra furrows is not obvious - in O. c. Oedesis the grooves of the elytra are clearly and densely dotted;
5) on the contrary, the interstices are roughly dotted, sometimes eroded by the confluence of irregularly located large pits, rather convex, while the punctuation of the interstices in O. S. is shallow and less pronounced, the interstices are flattened and not eroded, although your specimen is different;
6) in a similar way Apparently, the structure of the surface of the PRSP is different, although it is not really visible in mine;
7) at first glance, the rear corners of the prsp are different, in O. c. they form an almost right angle and are curved, and in E. s. they are rather obtuse, with the rear edges sloping forward, but I'm not sure here.

I don't know how significant this is, nor do I know the genus-level features that distinguish Eucarterus from Oedesis (I think it was previously considered internally). From the Oedesis revision from Wrase 1999, I only had the key by type, and then, perhaps, incomplete, which IMHO is not very clear. I would appreciate an indication of the source where such signs are given, or a whole work by D.Wrase:
Wrase, D. W. (1999): Revision of the Genus Oedesis Motschulsky
(Coleoptera, Carabidae, Harpalini). Pp. 393-416.
In: Zamotajlov & Sciaky (eds.): Advances in Carabidology. Papers Dedicated to the Memory of Prof. Dr. Oleg L. Kryzhanovskij. Krasnodar: MUISO Publishers, 473 pp

It also seems that the variability of Oedesis, Eucarterus, and Graniger (another candidate, by the way, but it is more flattened and the posterior corners of the prsp are rounded there) is poorly studied, probably due to the few and scattered finds. And it should be considerable, because the ranges of a number of species are huge. Of course, you need normal photos. I have collected at least 6 copies at this point, and it is possible that there are more in other collections, but I will have to wait 2-3 months until I am reunited with the material (moving).

This post was edited by Barnaba - 12.09.2018 18: 21

Likes: 2

Likes: 1

14.09.2018 10:54, Barnaba

2.4 and 4.4 - Euheptaulacus sus, male and female. For carinatus, the dotted line on the prsp is too rare. They must be very damp, so they look dark.
3-I would also say Chilothorax melanostictus-the choice, in general, is small

I'll stand by my opinion. It's not just the color, although the edges of the PRSP are not lightened at all. The dotted line is poorly visible, and this is a subjective sign. But:
1) the two extreme (lateral) flat grooves of the elitr are much wider than the protruding spaces and noticeably wider than the other grooves;
2) the posterolateral corners of the prsp are widely rounded (they do not have a protrusion, are not eroded, are not beveled). These are the characteristic features of E. carinatus as opposed to E. sus.

14.09.2018 16:27, KorvinBF08

I don't know. I've been thinking about your next "spare parts" for a long time and haven't come up with one yet. It is necessary to dig in groups with lateral antennal grooves.

The head on the 1st photo really resembles Rhyncolus or something close from the Cossoninae, I'm not familiar with this group.

Thank you, Ilya, I don't even know how to thank you. I've been waiting for even such a message for a long time. A message from the category "I don't know" is also important for me, because some objects from the bird's diet are not always determined.
If they are defined before the species or genus - fine, just fine.
If they are defined up to a family, squad, or even class, well, there's nothing you can do about it.
I'm just going to leave these elephants as if they were made out of paper. Entiminae.

I have already strained our local Belarusian specialists with these elephants. So far, everything is in a quandary. It happens.
If they are ever determined closer, or I pick up something similar, or (which is generally good) come across in the collection fees, then I will definitely let you know.

In general, who knows who, and elephants in general dofiga in the diet of birds, I just do not lay out everything.

14.09.2018 16:47, Mantispid

Thank you, Ilya, I don't even know how to thank you. I've been waiting for even such a message for a long time. A message from the category "I don't know" is also important for me, because some objects from the bird's diet are not always determined.
If they are defined before the species or genus - fine, just fine.
If they are defined up to a family, squad, or even class, well, there's nothing you can do about it.
I'm just going to leave these elephants as if they were made out of paper. Entiminae.

I have already strained our local Belarusian specialists with these elephants. So far, everything is in a quandary. It happens.
If they are ever determined closer, or I pick up something similar, or (which is generally good) come across in the collection fees, then I will definitely let you know.

In general, who knows who, and elephants in general dofiga in the diet of birds, I just do not lay out everything.

I just ran through my collection again. I looked at a row of similar elephants. If there is a possibility - a better shot of the lower head, so that it is all in focus-I could help. It would be nice to take a picture strictly from above and strictly from the side - this would greatly simplify the definition.

14.09.2018 16:58, KorvinBF08

I don't know. I've been thinking about your next "spare parts" for a long time and haven't come up with one yet. It is necessary to dig in groups with lateral antennal grooves.

The head on the 1st photo really resembles Rhyncolus or something close from the Cossoninae, I'm not familiar with this group.

And on the first elephant from under the tree. Cossoninae is only suitable for Rhyncolus. Dryophthorus corticalis and Cossonus are just not like Phloeophagus lignarius. Hexarthrum exiguum and Stereocorynes truncorum are somewhat more similar, but they still have a more elongated head tube, a slightly different eye arrangement and a different eye shape.
And more according to the Catalog of Coleoptera of Belarus (Alexandrovich O. R., Lopatin I. K., Pisanenko A.D., Tsinkevich V. A., Snitko SM., 1996) from this subfamily. and there is no one.