Genus Scarabaeus

As far as I understand, this year you have an extensive program planned, in particular, the planned collection of Ph. excavatus in the Crimea, isn't it? On Tarkhankut, you are very likely to collect the S. typhon series. So much for the groundwork. But in order to understand this, run it through the determinant-and you will learn and gain experience yourself.
Sincerely,...

Another species from this extensive genus:
Scarabaeus (s. str.) pius (Illiger, 1803)
Astrakhan region, 70 km. From Astrakhan, P. Dosang district, to the light; 20-21. V. 2006
tnx Papis for the material


Top-level parameters

2. Scarabaeus (s. str.) babori Balthasar, 1934
Kyrgyzstan, Bishkek region, near the Manas railway station, 30.07.2000 (copy - "disabled Stakhanovite", 2 middle teeth on the platelet were broken off, apparently, during life)
It is distributed throughout Central Asia, in Southern Kazakhstan, and in the north it reaches the Caspian lowland, the Aral Sea, and the Ili River. Mass species, years from March to October, from late March to mid-April-active during the day, and then switches to a nocturnal lifestyle, flying to the light. It occurs in all types of landscapes.

Judging by the genitals, it's still S. typhon:


And here are the genitals of two specimens of S. typhon.
The first one is the Astrakhan region, 70 km away. From Astrakhan, P. Dosang district, to the light; 20-21.V. 2006:

Second - Israel, Golan Heights, March 2007:

Scarbaeus sacer L.
Abkhazia, locality of Ldzaa (Lidzava) sandy beach, 19.09.2009

This post was edited by bugslov - 04.10.2009 22: 20

Pictures:

101_0258.JPG — (347.38к)


101_0259.JPG — (323.53к)

Scarbaeus (s.str.) sacer Linnaeus 1758
Abkhazia, okr. P. Ldzaa (Lidzava) sandy beach, 19.09.2009; A. Matveev (aka beetleslov, thanks to him for the material) leg.



Top parameters

I'm sitting here, learning from scratch...
I have material from Dosang, from 19-20 to 30-31 mm, 50 pieces, females and males, polymorphism is noticeable.

In the last photo, sacer's genitals and appearance are indistinguishable from typhon.
Maybe this is typhon?

In addition, here they give a synonym, from which it follows that sacer, theoretically, should have the same characteristics as pius, including genitals. Theoretically, of course.

http://zipcodezoo.com/Animals/S/Scarabaeus_pius/
sacer is a synonym for pius

http://zipcodezoo.com/Animals/S/Scarabaeus_sacer/
The synonyms for sacer are -

Ateuchus impius Fabricius • Ateuchus retusus Brulle • Scarabaeus confluidens Fleischer • Scarabaeus crenatus Degeer • Scarabaeus degeeri Macleay • Scarabaeus dufresneri Macleay • Scarabaeus edentulus Mulsant • Scarabaeus europaeus Motschulsky • Scarabaeus inermis Mulsant • Scarabaeus peregrinus Kolbe • Scarabaeus platychilus Fischer Von Waldheim • Scarabaeus rufipes Seabra • Scarabaeus spencei Macleay

In other words, they are also synonymous with pius.

and by typhon

http://zipcodezoo.com/Animals/S/Scarabaeus_typhon/
affinis and minor synonyms for typhon

now, look at the Green Determinant... there are only 3 species(out of 5-6 European ones) represented - pius, sacer and affinis, probably as the most, the most. Dosang was already a mecca at that time, meaning mass species were probably being studied.

On the site above, pius and sacer are synonymous, but in Green they are different, but typhon does not exist...

In short, the confusion is still the same...
I'll look at my genitals tomorrow.

This post was edited by Seneka-08.08.2012 02: 38

It can't be true, Nikolai.

http://www.biolib.cz/en/taxon/id772245/
it is written that they are different.

So I say that it is written differently in different places and there is no guarantee of the correctness of the definition. Even on the zin site, I suspect, there is an ambiguous definition, i.e. there is no reference to a typical instance (what was compared with it?), there is no reference to the determinant table (by what criteria was this instance determined?) or, at least, a list of features for this instance. There may be a lot of material in the collection, but not much on the site.

I found two links to photos with names, one supposedly incorrect (http://www.zin.ru/Animalia/Coleoptera/rus/scasacbo.htm; photo, in the first post taken from here), according to the author of another photo (http://www.zin.ru/Animalia/Coleoptera/eng/scatypkm.htm).

By the way, the photo is very high-quality and it clearly shows that this specimen has obvious bumps between the eyes, high and keeled, and it is defined as typhon. Maybe, maybe, but remember that according to other authors, typhon is a synonym for affinis, and the Green Determinant for affinis indicates the following signs: "Forehead without bumps or with barely outlined, sometimes keeled bumps."

On the other hand, this expression in "Green" itself is meaningless, because firstly, it contains two opposite signs(i.e., everything is possible), and secondly, when defining an instance, it is incorrect to talk about the frequency of the sign in relation to this instance. "sometimes" or" often " are statistical categories that apply to large samples, over large territories, or over many years of data, rather than actual categories that apply to a single individual that the entomologist is currently working with. It is incorrect to make a determination based on probabilistic assumptions, based on the fact that one species is more common in a certain area than another, or one species is generally larger in size than another, when the dimensions overlap greatly. Unfortunately, almost all qualifiers are like this through and through.

I got distracted... back to pius

Or here, for example, pius, according to the link you provided http://www.biolib.cz/en/taxonimage/id128935/, does not visually differ from typhon, especially since someone, the user Jiří Mička, identified this pius by the female(female in the photo), while a more or less satisfactory definition is made by males. And it is easy to make a mistake, because first, the definition is partly based on the fuzzy color difference of the bristles (black, red, in other descriptions brown,dark brown), which can be perceived differently in different lighting and contrast. Redheads can look like black ones (for example, it took me a while to pick up the light so that I could see the redness). Secondly, the forehead of this pius seems to be with bumps (there is no sharpness), but should be in dense merging points and without bumps.

In my collections, at least, most of them are exactly like this pius. There are a few others, but within the limits of polymorphism. For example, the frontal protrusions vary from almost zero to sharp, while other signs indicate the identity of the species.

This post was edited by Seneka - 08.08.2012 14: 57

Or here, for example, pius, according to the link you provided http://www.biolib.cz/en/taxonimage/id128935/, does not visually differ from typhon, especially since someone, the user Jiří Mička, identified this pius by the female(female in the photo), while a more or less satisfactory definition is made by males. And it is easy to make a mistake, because first, the definition is partly based on the fuzzy color difference of the bristles (black, red, in other descriptions brown,dark brown), which can be perceived differently in different lighting and contrast. Redheads can look like black ones (for example, it took me a while to pick up the light so that I could see the redness). Secondly, the forehead of this pius seems to be with bumps (there is no sharpness), but should be in dense merging points and without bumps.

In my collections, at least, most of them are exactly like this pius. There are a few others, but within the limits of polymorphism. For example, the frontal protrusions vary from almost zero to sharp, while other signs indicate the identity of the species.

Pay attention to the basal border of the prsp. - in pius, it is strongly smoothed. the typhon is generally larger and shinier. Shamanism, of course, but it seems to work ) In Dosang 2: just pius and typhon, they meet together during the day. At night, only typhon came across.

And there is a table on Zina: http://www.zin.ru/animalia/coleoptera/rus/kab_2006.htm

This post was edited by Fornax13-08.08.2012 13: 29