Taxonomy of Chorthippus Fieber, 1852

Please help me with the definition. Tatarstan Nizhnekamsk district. July 2015

Ch. brunneus/mollis

Ch. brunneus/mollis

By the way, Vlad, here's another question that comes up: what about the possibility of Ch. porphyropterus in this case? I didn't see this view (or didn't know it ) neither live, nor in the photo, and I do not undertake to judge the shape of the costal field in it.

By the way, Vlad, here's another question that comes up: what about the possibility of Ch. porphyropterus in this case? I didn't see this view (or didn't know it ) neither live nor in the photo and I do not undertake to judge the shape of the costal field in it.

Benediktov writes that it can be confused with biguttulus. I.e. all references to biguttulus from our south most likely refer to porphyropterus.
Well, the wings are there, respectively, with a more swollen costal field.

At Pskov mollis'ov (determined by the song) the costal field is almost like that of biguttulus. And near Chisinau, I remember, mollis was almost like brunneus in this respect. The question is: how reliable is this feature at all? About the definition of females (at least for some reason) I am silent at all. In the summer, when I calculate the proportion of green/brown individuals in different species, I avoid this group.

Well, yes, you can tell for sure only with a song and a copy in your hands.
But it is unlikely that there will be porphyropterus in Tatarstan.
And biguttulus in the middle lane is still with "humped" wings (and I don't really know mollis) - so I wrote brunneus/mollis.

By the way, the Tatar individual in habit is one in one British brunneus (and there are no other species of this group here).

The Brits are lucky enough to be able to work with ecology, genetics, and other topics without worrying about what kind of band you're dealing with.

And I came across a relatively recent article by Sychev about the group - although, as I understand it, porphyropterus is hidden in it under other names: http://tele-conf.ru/zhiznedeyatelnost-rast...otrazhenie.html (the encoding must be set by force).

The Brits are lucky enough to be able to work with ecology, genetics, and other topics without worrying about what kind of band you're dealing with.

And I came across a relatively recent article by Sychev about the group - although, as I understand it, porphyropterus is hidden in it under other names:

The first impression - some kind of partisanship...

In general, Sychev had a whole series of publications on the group, however, quite a long time ago. As far as he is right, as far as not - this should be understood, in theory, based on acoustics. And it is easy to come to" partisanship " when you work in a provincial (by the way, not necessarily in a provincial) university and you simply do not have the strength or time to fight for a place in prestigious publications. To be honest, I'm talking more about myself than about Sychev - and I only know him in absentia, thanks to the late Voznesensky.

It turns out that Sychev also died-this year: http://burdygovaim.osschool.edusite.ru/p15aa1.html

This post was edited by PVOzerski - 12/11/2015 18: 47