Internet identification of Russian wasps

This should be understood as an error (misidentification) in the" Green " identifier. In fact, what is listed there under the name P. gallicus is really P. dominula, and what P. chinensis is P. gallicus.

And how to distinguish Polistes riparius from nimpha in Siberia? I don't understand...

This is my little secret. Until I finish my little book.

I tried to solve this little secret myself. I don't know how correct it was. The result is here:
http://www.antvid.org/Vespa/Opred/Polistes%2001.html

I don't understand why you need all this...
But if you really need to, then look for it, and you will find it!
By the way, your male "P. nimpha" belongs to a different species.

I do my best for people...
I haven't dealt with the males yet. But at first glance, it looks like I really made a mistake with the male. The male appears to be a dominula.
Within a week, I will make a determinant for males. Then I'll figure it out more precisely.

Well, well... I've already spent several years and haven't figured it all out, and you "within a week". The flag is in your hands.

You can understand the basics in a week, and then spend your whole life understanding the details.
Thanks for the tip with the male. I fixed everything. If you don't see any changes, click the "update" button in the browser.

P.S.
And where are several other types of polystis that live on the territory of Russia?
For example, P. diakonovi, P. atrimandibularis, P. sulcifer, P. associ or P. bishoffi?

I didn't set out to show ALL types of operating systems, just the most common ones. Plavilshchikov's determinant was also far from all types, but it was also produced. And in vol. 3 of Animal Life, which I read enthusiastically as a child, not all species are listed. So what? Is all this unnecessary? My site is for amateurs. Not for professionals. This is written on the site itself. The site's goal is to help amateurs. Interest beginners. Not everyone who is interested in the wasp will be familiar with the scientific literature for years.

P.S.
And where are several other types of polystis that live on the territory of Russia?
For example, P. diakonovi, P. atrimandibularis, P. sulcifer, P. associ or P. bishoffi?

I didn't set out to show ALL types of operating systems, just the most common ones. Plavilshchikov's determinant was also far from all types, but it was also produced. And in vol. 3 of Animal Life, which I read enthusiastically as a child, not all species are listed. So what? Is all this unnecessary? My site is for amateurs. Not for professionals. This is written on the site itself. The site's goal is to help amateurs. Interest beginners. Not everyone who is interested in the wasp will be able to understand the scientific literature for years.

Dear TimK. I want to support you and your interesting work. It may only be worth adding a couple of important distinguishing features to the description for each Vespid species. Then the frequently asked questions on the separation forum, for example, P. nimpha and P. dominula, will disappear. Yes, and AVA will be less loaded.

And how to distinguish Polistes riparius from nimpha in Siberia? I don't understand...

According to Dubatolov, 2009: Polistes riparius - hind legs with black or brown spots, platypus below with a long protrusion. P. nimpha-hind legs yellow, platypus below with a short protrusion.

This post was edited by ASSIB - 02/28/2013 00: 12

Just the fact that this site is dedicated to wasps, and not to all sorts of beans and beetles, does honor to the author
Basically, it's fine. But we must adhere to the principle that not all species should be included, but those that are included should be correctly identified and correctly described, and data on synonymy and distribution should be provided.
That's when this site will be really useful, and if beginners are interested in emails from the very beginning will receive false information, then this will only do one harm.
In any case, the idea of the author is much more sympathetic to me than those guys who here throw out mountains of photos from the dacha or from a walk and ask for olpredelit just to sign the file

In general, of course, I support AVA. After all, the site is a public phenomenon, students will start to take deliberately false information for their essays from there, and then it's off.
And the fact that, for example, Saussure is more correct to write de Saussure, and Lepelletier is more correct than Lepelletier de Saint Fargeau, not all "professionals"know.
And some guys even seriously think that parentheses for authors are needed for beauty

Just the fact that this site is dedicated to wasps, and not to all sorts of beans and beetles, does honor to the author

I do my best for people...

I think you should sign the authorship of the photos, otherwise it makes you feel a little queasy when you see familiar photos somewhere... especially since you've known these people for years. In principle, no one is against such a resource, which is very necessary. They will help you with both the material and definitions... you just need to do everything in a human way.

I think you should sign the authorship of the photos, otherwise it makes you feel a little queasy when you see familiar photos somewhere... especially since you've known these people for years. In principle, no one is against such a resource, which is very necessary. They will help you with both the material and definitions... you just need to do everything in a human way.

In the wasp part of the site, I signed the site where the photo was taken from under each photo. If the source specified the author, then I also specified the author in addition to the link to the site. On the ant part, the situation is slightly different. There, on the first page, the authors are listed and their gratitude is expressed. In the aspen part, most of the photos will be replaced over the summer with my own or photos of my friends. They have already started sending them to me, for which I am very grateful. So far, the wasp part of the site is just a skeleton, which I will fill with material.
I am grateful to AVA for the comments, because, as one of the great ones said, only after learning about the shortcomings can they be corrected. That's what I'll do.
Thank you all for your comments. Thank you.

For AVA. Regarding:
"Inaccurate data on the number of genera living in Russia are given, for example (the first thing that caught your eye):
- Polistes of at least 11 species"
and the following:
" Finally, I would greatly appreciate links to publications describing:
- nesting sites of " our "polistes" in tree hollows and in the ground"
- polygynous families in Polistes gallicus
-feeding of imago Vespidae with pollen of flowering plants and fruit pulp".

Taken this from here:

http://vespabellicosus2008.narod.ru/pdf7.pdf

TimK, Eumenes coarctatus and E. pedunculatus were accurately misidentified from single wasp species. Both are E. coronatus, in extreme cases E. papillarius. I didn't delve into the rest of the views - there aren't enough angles to see the signs.
According to the key, in addition to the above, I recommend reading one topic - http://forum.plantarium.ru/viewtopic.php?id=27536
Although something there images are not displayed, maybe only I have...
If I can find the time, I can send you my photos, which are reliable.

This post was edited by Carcharot - 02/28/2013 15: 17

for AVA
, Blame, about this:
"Inaccurate data on the number of genera living in Russia are given, for example (the first thing that caught your eye):
- Polistes no less than 11 species
- Trypoxylon no less than 25 species"
Number of species taken from the ANNOTATED CATALOGUE of INSECTS
OF THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST"
Section on Vespidae comp. by N. V. Kurzenko.
It contains data for Russia and the Far East.

TimK, Eumenes coarctatus and E. pedunculatus were accurately misidentified from single wasp species. Both are E. coronatus, in extreme cases E. papillarius. I didn't delve into the rest of the views - there aren't enough angles to see the signs.
According to the key, in addition to the above, I recommend reading one topic - http://forum.plantarium.ru/viewtopic.php?id=27536
Although something there images are not displayed, maybe only I have...
If I can find the time, I can send you my photos, which are reliable.

Thank you very much. I'll fix the keys over the weekend. If you send me photos , I will say thank you on the first page of my site and sign each of your photos as you say.

Thank you very much. I'll fix the keys over the weekend. If you send me photos , I will say thank you on the first page of my site and sign each of your photos as you say.

As soon as I find the time, I'll do it.

You can understand the basics in a week, and then spend your whole life understanding the details.
Thanks for the tip with the male. I fixed everything. If you don't see any changes, click the "update" button in the browser.

The family Chrysididae, if I am not mistaken, used to belong to its own superfamily Chrysidoidea, the same superfamily now includes Bethylidae, Dryinidae, Embolemidae, and ants, according to modern data, just belong to the real wasp superfamily. Vespoidea, well, sphecids with crabronids belong to bee superfamies. Apoidae.

It's very nice to see your own old article, which has enough flaws.
But there is no mention of wasps feeding on pollen and the pulp of fruits and berries. And also about polygynous families of P. gallicus.
In the case of nesting in hollows and underground cavities, it was NOT our species that was meant, but polysts in general (such cases are noted, although rare).

To be precise, pollen can enter the digestive system of social wasps, apparently, along with nectar (http://www.umsl.edu / ~huntj/Number%2046. pdf), and they consume the fruit pulp by sucking the juice out of it. Thus, they do not eat the actual pulp, as well as pollen.
There was an article in the Bulletin of Zoology (the author was named Larionov), where it was pointed out that wasps collect pollen and nectar from nettle and tansy flowers! It would be funny if it wasn't so sad (the flowers of these plants do not secrete nectar, and the pollen of folding wasps is not interested, unless it is Mazarin).
By the way, I apologize for the offtopic, but I found such a cool book on Mazarin on the net yesterday, just super - http://www.sanbi.org/sites/default/files/d...styseries18.pdf.

Regarding photos:
"In your photo gallery, the operating systems are incorrectly identified:
Dolichovespula norwegica
Dolichovespula saxonica
Dolichovespula adulterina
Polistes gallicus"

Under the photos, it says where I took them. I considered these sources reliable. So it is in the text. I chose from different jobs. The phrase about fruit pulp referred to hornets, but I didn't immediately find the source. It doesn't matter. I tried not to invent anything myself. In ants, the oral apparatus is designed so that they can only consume liquid food. Is it probably the same for the OS?
If someone can help with reliable photos , I will be happy. The address on the first page of my site. I will correct all these errors. In your spare time from your main job. I'm currently editing the determinant.

No, these traits "don't work" - the variability is high in both species.

The same signs are indicated in the Identification of insects of the Far East. About the trim-for females, about black spots - for males. I think that even if in rare cases these signs do not work , they can be indicated. Overwhelmingly, it will work.

Invalid data is specified there. N. Kurzenko-not God, can not embrace the vast. Moreover, he is not a specialist in burrowing and social folding-winged wasps. Its diocese is Eumeninae. And even then, it was a long time ago.

Which one of us is God? If we ask different famous people, we will get different opinions. Someone thinks so, someone else. And no one can claim to be God and speak the ultimate truth. Who in general has RELIABLE information about the boundaries of the distribution of certain types of OS in Russia? I have an article by Dubatolov with maps. But there, for example, Polistes biglumis is not mentioned, although it should be in theory... And there is no data for the European part of Russia.

Fixed the caller ID. Edited theses and antitheses. Added samtsov. If you can't see it , you'll need to update the page 01.htm in the browser. I hope it's getting better.
Of course, it's better to work with the material. Especially with a live one. But that's still a couple of months away. If we wait , we'll do it. In the meantime, I will correct other comments...

Unfortunately, it didn't.
Moreover, some species of viesto males depict females.

I will find photos of males of the desired species - there will be males. But if I use the arrow to show a black spot on the lower leg of the hind leg, then it doesn't matter whether the leg is female or male, as long as the spots are the same. And now - more specifically, what are your comments if it doesn't get any better?

Can I determine the view from this photo?

Pictures:

Eumenes1.jpeg — (134.13к)

Can I determine the view from this photo?

where was it taken???

where was it taken???

In the suburbs, I think. This isn't my picture. If you need to know for sure, I can ask the author. But it's not fast.

Can I determine the view from this photo?

Hmm... There is a yellow stripe at the base of the clypeus and a tuft of hair in the same place... But other important signs are not visible. You see, you can only tell from such photos if you know the local fauna thoroughly. If it was filmed in the Crimea, I would have identified it, but in the Moscow region, the same species that we have in the south have a different color, and we need to look at more stable signs that are not visible here. Most likely it is E. coarctatus or E. pedunculatus.

Hmm... There is a yellow stripe at the base of the clypeus and a tuft of hair in the same place... But other important signs are not visible. You see, you can only tell from such photos if you know the local fauna thoroughly. If it was filmed in the Crimea, I would have identified it, but in the Moscow region, the same species that we have in the south have a different color, and we need to look at more stable signs that are not visible here. Most likely it is E. coarctatus or E. pedunculatus.

Thank you very much! Since it is impossible to determine exactly , I will not post it. Let's wait for summer. I hope to take a lot of photos from all sides. Then, I hope, it will be possible to determine.

Better yet, catch it after you've taken it off. Then there will be no questions.

Better yet, catch it after you've taken it off. Then there will be no questions.

And even better, if you love these insects, catch, identify and put your collection. And only then shoot.

And even better, if you love these insects, catch, identify and put your collection. And only then shoot.

No. I love taking pictures. And I really don't like dusty collections of twisted corpses. I keep ants alive at home in formicariums. I feed, watch, and take pictures. With wasps, this will not work.... I will just shoot and post photos on my website.

And I really don't like dusty collections of twisted corpses.

They need to be straightened. And so that they don't get dusty - keep them in lockable boxes.

They need to be straightened. And so that they don't get dusty - keep them in lockable boxes.

I know. But look at a photo of a live wasp in nature and a photo of a wasp from the collection. And feel the difference.

I know. But look at a photo of a live wasp in nature and a photo of a wasp from the collection. And feel the difference.

This is indeed a problem. Over time, dust will stick to them, because the box has to be opened often, and there is always enough dust in the air. To take photos, you need to think of something. Either photograph them immediately, or clean them with a brush with alcohol.

I know. But look at a photo of a live wasp in nature and a photo of a wasp from the collection. And feel the difference.

Just keep in mind that the exact name of the vast majority of these photographed live oss you will never know. If you are satisfied with the caption under the photo like "cool bee" or "road wasp", then no question.
You probably want to know the exact name of the photographed wasp. And here one option is to take photos and catch

No. I love taking pictures. And I really don't like dusty collections of twisted corpses.

For example, I also like to take more photos. But if you are making a site that claims to be scientific, then you need to collect it. After all, you have no idea what you are shooting and from what angle you need to shoot, what exactly you need to shoot so that it can be reliably determined. And whether the device will even take the sign by which it will be determined. Or maybe it's even a genital species. A photo taken without any idea of the similarity of species is just a picture. If you are planning to put a scientific site on its feet, then you should either shoot it in such a way that it is clearly visible, or confirm it with fees. Otherwise, this is just a child's idea, and there will be no trust in the site. Already, in the course of previous discussions, not one photo from the site "changed its appearance"... and what will happen next with this attitude?

Do you know how a professional differs from an amateur?
A professional is always in doubt. Therefore, it processes hundreds or thousands of instances in order to estimate the range of intraspecific variability. And the amateur is almost always sure that he is right. He takes one picture (!), declares it a standard and draws conclusions from this.
So you are either inattentive, or just don't want to listen to what you are being told. Check out URL #4300 again.
And in general, the color of vespids is not the most reliable sign, since it depends on many factors - read, for example, articles by L. Yu.Rusina. It provides very interesting information.

The dilettante doesn't do exactly what you described. It takes determinants and uses them to draw conclusions about how one species differs from another. And then under these conclusions selects images. If you make your most correct determinant and other experts agree with it, then I, as an amateur, will make my own determinant based on yours. And I will select images so that they show exactly the signs that you will write about. And since you haven't written YOUR BOOK yet, I'll use whatever qualifiers are available. Articles Rusina, by the way, read. And about the coloring, too. Some of them, of course. Very interesting. Although it does not fit in with what is written over the hill about this. In this case, I believe Lydia Yurievna more.

For example, I also like to take more photos. But if you are making a site that claims to be scientific, then you need to collect it. After all, you have no idea what you are shooting and from what angle you need to shoot, what exactly you need to shoot so that it can be reliably determined. And whether the device will even take the sign by which it will be determined. Or maybe it's even a genital species. A photo taken without any idea of the similarity of species is just a picture. If you are planning to put a scientific site on its feet, then you should either shoot it in such a way that it is clearly visible, or confirm it with fees. Otherwise, this is just a child's idea, and there will be no trust in the site. Already, in the course of previous discussions, not one photo from the site "changed its appearance"... and what will happen next with this attitude?

I don't know what to photograph yet. But I'll know by the summer. At least in Vespins. Not all at once. I didn't know much about ants either, but I'd learned a lot in 3 years. And I already define them quite well. At a good amateur level. In three or five years, I will also learn to understand wasps at a good amateur level. Yes, and I hope the experts will help.
I can't afford a scientific website. Check out the Bolton ant website! This is a scientific website. Why don't we have anything like that for ants or wasps? Although experts say there are. Thank you if they even write a book. A normal determinant, for example. I am an amateur and make a website for amateurs. My site will be at a good AMATEUR level. In three years, I will bring it to this level. With or without your help. So far, this is just a skeleton. Base. Workbook. Gradually, I will gain the necessary experience and skills, and the site will change accordingly. I do all this for the soul. I have such a whim. But I don't like collecting dry corpses. I won't do it.