E-mail: Password: Create an Account Recover password

About Authors Contacts Get involved Русская версия

show

Limnocarabus

Community and Forum → Insects images → Limnocarabus

Dinusik, 13.03.2007 8:20

Carabus (Limnocarabus) maacki Morawitz, 1862
Distribution: Northeastern Mongolia, Northeastern China, Korean Peninsula, Japan. Russia: Zabaikalie, Amur region, Primorsky Krai.
It lives in swampy meadows. In the Amur region, it inhabits the southern regions.

Pictures:
picture: Carabus_maacki.JPG
Carabus_maacki.JPG — (73.75к)

Comments

Pages: 1 2

01.04.2007 21:52, rpanin

Carabus (Limnocarabus) clathratus Linnaeus 1761
Body length (female) 32 mm. Hygrophil. Rare and narrow-localised (in Western Ukraine)
Lviv region, Kamenka-Bugskaya district, near Kora, November 2005

This post was edited by rpanin - 03.04.2007 14: 57

Pictures:
картинка: Carabus__Limnocarabus__clathratus_Linnaeus_1761.jpg
Carabus__Limnocarabus__clathratus_Linnaeus_1761.jpg — (141.37 k)

Likes: 7

02.04.2007 10:15, Nilson

Pay attention to the rare ability of L. clathratus to fly for carabuses! Perhaps this explains the findings of beetles in arid regions near water bodies (I have two specimens from the Russian Federation-Kazakh border).
Likes: 1

02.04.2007 11:34, rpanin

Pay attention to the rare ability of L. clathratus to fly for carabuses! Perhaps this explains the findings of beetles in arid regions near water bodies (I have two specimens from the Russian Federation-Kazakh border).


That's what I wanted to ask: What really can C. clathratus fly? After all, it has full-fledged wings .However, not all individuals.

02.04.2007 11:58, Archypus

C. (L.) clathratus is a trans-palearctic species with an amphiboreal distribution, reaching the taiga zone in the north, but is more common in the steppe zone. In the Moscow region, it is very local, mainly attached to the Oka Valley, but in the corresponding biotopes the population can be high. Spring activity, in the southern districts flies to the light.
It forms a number of subspecies. Don't know how to consider maacki in this regard?

Perhaps the percentage of winged individuals increases when the population density reaches a maximum, or perhaps this percentage always keeps at a certain level
Likes: 2

02.04.2007 12:31, Dinusik

Different authors consider maaki differently. Some people separate it into a separate type, while others consider it a subspecies. It seems to me that they are still too different for subspecies.
By the way, at the expense of wings, this year I specifically looked at Maaki's degree of development. In males, there were individuals both full-winged and with varying degrees of their reduction. The females were all wingless. I wonder if the Clathratus shows the same pattern.

This post was edited by Dinusik-02.04.2007 12: 32

02.04.2007 13:09, Nilson

Well, yes, a very interesting topic. I don't have enough material, but from a conversation with the people, it turns out that, indeed, not all individuals have fully developed wings.

10.04.2007 11:51, Cerambyx

Carabus clathratus foveolatoseriatus. 1 - male, 2 and 3-female.
Collected in bulk along the banks of the steppe lake.
Orenburg region, Svetlinsky district, Svetly settlement, Obalykol Lake.

Pictures:
picture: 1._C._clathratus_foveolatoseriatus_male.jpg
1._C._clathratus_foveolatoseriatus_male.jpg — (134.99к)

picture: 2._C._clathratus_foveolatoseriatus______.jpg
2._C._clathratus_foveolatoseriatus______.jpg — (128.73к)

picture: 3._C._clathratus_foveolatoseriatus________2_.jpg
3._C._clathratus_foveolatoseriatus________2_.jpg — (112.57к)

Likes: 8

11.04.2007 14:19, rpanin

Question: How does clathratus foveolatoseriatus differ from the nominative species?
Or a geographical definition ?

11.04.2007 15:29, RippeR

I see strongly highlighted edges between spots

11.04.2007 19:29, Guest

Question: How does clathratus foveolatoseriatus differ from the nominative species?


Maybe at a price? wink.gif the more subspecies the more $ shuffle.gif
Likes: 2

11.04.2007 22:58, rpanin

Maybe at a price? wink.gif the more subspecies the more $ shuffle.gif


I also see a tendency to expand the number of subspecies ,for no apparent reason.

12.04.2007 11:46, Cerambyx

As for the financial side, in some ways, of course, you can not argue. It is usually recognized by those who benefit from it. But on the other hand, this subspecies was recognized by Kryzhanovsky-although under a different name. Moreover, the "nominative", "non-steppe" clathratus from the western part of the Orenburg region differ in appearance from the series of steppe foveolatoseriatus from the east. The differences are probably just in the nature of the pits and convex secondary spaces.
Likes: 4

12.04.2007 15:11, Bad Den

On the other hand, how much these differences can be considered sufficient to distinguish a separate subspecies . .. confused.gif
Likes: 1

12.04.2007 15:22, Guest

to Bad Den:
Yes, the differences are not really too serious. On the third hand, Makarov said that when giving the subspecies status of C. maaki (which he tends to do), all sorts of foveolatoseriatus-S are dissolved. But then again, why should all subspecies be equal? Someone closer, someone less. Although here we are already completely delving into the understanding of the subspecies as a form... It seems to me that the main thing is to understand that in some cases this is all conditional: for example, maaki is a vicariant of clathratus, so the relationship is almost like that of subspecies-the forms are geographical. You can give a number of arguments in favor of the fact that this is a species, and you can in favor of the fact that a subspecies. So who likes it better here wink.gif
Likes: 2

12.04.2007 15:24, Cerambyx

Sorry, I was the Guest (forgot to log in)

12.04.2007 15:46, RippeR

if they give you a gift or catch it, you should mark it as a subspecies, and if you buy it, then only as a type, so that you don't spend smile.giftoo much
Likes: 4

12.04.2007 15:52, rpanin

if you give or catch nashara, you should mark it as a subspecies, and if you buy it, then only as a species, so as not to spend too much smile.gif


E-e-e,that's enough! Here we need a special approach, to consider everything in a scientific way .
For a subspecies, at least one distinctive feature is needed for the entire local population.

This post was edited by rpanin - 12.04.2007 15: 53

12.04.2007 15:54, Cerambyx

According to Mayr, it is sufficient for a subspecies to have distinctive features in 70% of individuals in the population

12.04.2007 23:08, Archypus

I specifically looked at the presence of wings in two female clathratus caught "under the lantern" - the wings are fully developed! I didn't expect anything else. How, one wonders, did they end up several hundred meters away from the nearest water? But for the purity of the experiment, I decided to convince everyone. I made sure that clathratus females are winged.

13.04.2007 0:19, RippeR

but here, as the author of the genitals will draw, as he will write how many individuals he "saw" these signs, so he will deduce the subspecies.. maybe two..

13.04.2007 12:46, Cerambyx

Has anyone ever seen clathratus actually fly? Very interesting. I've seen a lot of beetles with wings, but let's say they never came to light. Wingless C. bessarabicus also comes under the lantern.

13.04.2007 13:00, omar

Has anyone ever seen clathratus actually fly? Very interesting. I've seen a lot of beetles with wings, but let's say they never came to light. The wingless C. bessarabicus also comes under the lantern.

Good theme! I don't have a good idea of flying carabuses either. confused.gif
Likes: 1

14.04.2007 14:49, Archypus

If we take into account that the clathratus biotopes are riverbanks and swamps, it would take a long time for him to stomp under the lantern in the center of Pavlograd. I didn't see any flying beetles. But why would he need wings? Having such a device and not using it is somehow too wasteful

This post was edited by Archypus - 14.04.2007 17: 10

14.04.2007 16:11, Nilson

For example, I don't often see flying cockroaches and bears, but they do fly!

14.04.2007 17:15, Bad Den

I wonder if winged individuals of C. clathratus have fused elytra or not.

14.04.2007 17:19, Dinusik

I have never met individuals with fused elytra.
Likes: 1

14.04.2007 21:29, RippeR

I personally have never seen flying bears, as well as pentodons and many others. I've never met Clathratus in person at all.. do they exist? smile.gif

15.04.2007 2:44, Dinusik

Rippet, +1!

15.04.2007 12:19, Vadim Yakubovich

And bears are proud animals, until you kick them... tongue.gif

15.04.2007 18:39, Aleksey Adamov

My wife caught the light of bears (in the mass), flew as clathratus and "pentodon". Location: RO, Rostov Nature Reserve.
Likes: 1

15.04.2007 18:46, Aleksey Adamov

The Red Data Book of the Russian Academy of Sciences lists the species Carabus clathratus stygius (Ganglbauer, 1890) for this territory. And in the western part of the region (where I catch) there is a bunch of Carabus clathratus, but I do not know the subspecies (Yu. G. Arzanov says that this is a different subspecies - not rare). How do I define them? Is there a publication on this topic?

15.04.2007 18:49, Aleksey Adamov

Here, this photo is from kr. kn. RO
picture: 6919.jpeg

15.04.2007 20:22, Archypus

The Red Data Book of the Russian Academy of Sciences lists the species Carabus clathratus stygius (Ganglbauer, 1890) for this territory. And in the western part of the region (where I catch) there is a bunch of Carabus clathratus, but I do not know the subspecies (Yu. G. Arzanov says that this is a different subspecies - not rare). How do I define them? Is there a publication on this topic?

Nominative subspecies. The general distribution can be viewed at least here: http://www.zin.ru/Animalia/Coleoptera/rus/car_rus.htm. And stygius, as you can see from the photo, has noticeably larger spots, right?

15.04.2007 20:33, Aleksey Adamov

There is no subspecies of clathratus foveolatoseriatus on ZIN's website. Why?

15.04.2007 20:51, Archypus

Apparently, our reasoning influenced the opinion of taxonomists, and they decided to abolish the subspecies smile.gif
Likes: 1

16.04.2007 1:35, Dinusik

Here, this photo is from kr. kn. RO
picture: 6919.jpeg


Are you sure this is a photo? Very similar to the drawing. Who is the author?!!

16.04.2007 8:00, omar

It's a drawing! A hundred pounds! However, maybe this is a photo of the drawing?

16.04.2007 17:31, RippeR

or even worse-drawing from a photo?! Perhaps also a person who is not engaged in entomology.. Therefore, it is not possible to judge here-a species or a subspecies..

17.04.2007 8:32, Aleksey Adamov

Yes, perhaps this is a photo of a drawing made from a photo. smile.gif

I don't know who did it. I pulled this out of the electronic version of Kn. RO.

Pages: 1 2

New comment

Note: you should have a Insecta.pro account to upload new topics and comments. Please, create an account or log in to add comments.

* Our website is multilingual. Some comments have been translated from other languages.

Random species of the website catalog

Insecta.pro: international entomological community. Terms of use and publishing policy.

Project editor in chief and administrator: Peter Khramov.

Curators: Konstantin Efetov, Vasiliy Feoktistov, Svyatoslav Knyazev, Evgeny Komarov, Stan Korb, Alexander Zhakov.

Moderators: Vasiliy Feoktistov, Evgeny Komarov, Dmitriy Pozhogin, Alexandr Zhakov.

Thanks to all authors, who publish materials on the website.

© Insects catalog Insecta.pro, 2007—2024.

Species catalog enables to sort by characteristics such as expansion, flight time, etc..

Photos of representatives Insecta.

Detailed insects classification with references list.

Few themed publications and a living blog.