Lamiinae, Cerambycidae

Community and Forum → Insects images → Lamiinae, Cerambycidae

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Likes: 10

Likes: 1

19.09.2010 7:25, vasiliy-feoktistov

I have read that under the name "Rosenbergia straussi", the vast majority of traders, including the world's leading dealers, offer another, much more common species – Rosenbergia rufolineata (Breuning, 1948). Below are images from the site www.coleop-terra.com. It's also worth a look: http://www.biolib.cz/cz/taxon/id299651/
Left - Rosenbergia straussi (Gestro, 1876), right-Rosenbergia rufolineata (Breuning, 1948)

Yes, and here is proof of that http://www.cerambycoidea.com/specie2.asp?I...ec=32027&Tipo=S

I don't dispute it (puzzled myself): http://www.coleop-terra.com/rosenbergiaoverview.html .
In the end, straussii came to: http://www.zin.ru/Animalia/Coleoptera/rus/m_smirn8.htm
Maybe rufolineata is just a subspecies of straussii? Who knows

P.S. By the way, the French are also arguing about this: http://insecterra.forumactif.com/coleopter...neata-t4676.htm
Now I will add rufolineata in parentheses in my post.

This post was edited by vasiliy-feoktistov - 19.09.2010 07: 36

Likes: 8

Likes: 2

Likes: 1

Likes: 14

Likes: 2

05.11.2010 20:00, Cerambyx

Guys, it just so happens that I answer to myself. I really care: has anyone ever caught this bug in M. O.? What should I do with it? and how? Please explain. I'm at a loss.

Dear vasiliy-feoktistov, The fact that in the Moscow region there was a species previously unknown from here is not a phenomenon, even among barbels there will still be a lot of them (in addition to your species, at least two more species have already been added to the list of the Moscow region - Aegomorphus obscurior and Xylotrechus capricornis), and no one can say that this species "should not be here"- if there is one, then there is one. For example, this year I collected a good series of Exocentrus punctipennis on an elm tree in the Kuvandyksky district of the Orenburg region-the foothills of the Southern Urals! Although previously the species was known only to the Volga region (Samara region), and Plavilshchikov generally believed that in Russia this species is distributed only in the Caucasus! This is not surprising, because entomology is still poorly understood

Regarding my definition of an Exocentrus instance from the Moscow Region. Thanks for the Sscad images, but they just confirm my definition. At the Moscow copy. and in specimens of "punctipennis" Sscad, good diagnostic signs of the species are visible - the presence of bare dots on the elytra (around coarse standing hairs, which are certainly not visible in the images), the presence on the elytra of only one dark (bare) sling sloping to the suture in their apical part. Exocentrus lusitanus never has such bare spots on the elytra, except for the pre-apical ligation, there is a more or less clear (in the photo of lusitanus sscad-namely, "more" clear, you can see quite clearly) dark spot in front of the middle of the elytra. In general, these two species differ quite easily, as well as other European-Russian exocentrus species-stierlini and adspersus, so I don't have any doubts about the specific identity of the beetle from Vasily's photo - this is Exocentrus punctipennis.

This post was edited by Cerambyx-05.11.2010 20: 12

Likes: 5

Likes: 21

09.07.2011 1:24, Aaata

I want to present here this barbel from the Moscow region!!!
Exocentrus punctipennis Mulsant et Guillebeu, 1856
This species is not listed in Danilevsky's list of Marine areas.
Here is a quote from there (one species there is represented from the genus):
"62. Gen. Exocentrus Dejean, 1835
97. lusitanus (Linnaeus, 1767) — Lindemann, 1871: 204;
Melgunov, 1892: 42; Nikitsky et al., 1996: 158 (Prioksko-
Terrasnyj nat. reserve)."
Yes, and I myself collected this beetle for the first time in a single copy.
The beetle was caught on 18.07.2010. Here: M. O. G. Zheleznodorozhny, in the evening, at the light (at my house, on the balcony).
Many thanks to everyone who "tormented" this beetle in the definition: Alexey Sazhnev, Fornax (y) 13, Bad Den (y).
Special thanks to Cerambyx (y) for making the final verdict.

In a series of 27 copies.Exocentrus punctipennis, just collected in the Nizhny Novgorod region, expected to see differences in the length of whiskers in females and males. But, as it turned out, in all specimens, the antennae are about 20% longer than the body. It is unlikely that all beetles are of the same sex. Apparently, this feature doesn't work here. Question to the specialists of the group, please tell me how to distinguish the sex of these beetles only by external signs and whether there are any reliable extragenital signs at all?

Likes: 2

11.07.2011 1:18, John-ST

In a series of 27 copies.Exocentrus punctipennis, just collected in the Nizhny Novgorod region, expected to see differences in the length of whiskers in females and males. But, as it turned out, in all specimens, the antennae are about 20% longer than the body. It is unlikely that all beetles are of the same sex. Apparently, this feature doesn't work here. Question to the specialists of the group, please tell me how to distinguish the sex of these beetles only by external signs and whether there are any reliable extragenital signs at all?

I distinguish male and female barbels that have no differences in the structure of the legs and whiskers by the following characteristics:
1) in males, the elytra are visually narrower than in females and taper slightly along the entire length, while in females they are more parallel;
2) when viewed from below, the abdomen of females is more cylindrical, and in males it tapers along the entire length - conical;
3) when viewed from the side, the abdomen of males is slightly curved, and in females it is even;
4) in males, the hind legs are slightly curved (you should look at the hind leg from above).

On the jump (although the mustache length and differ) for example
Saperda (Anaerea) carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758)

Female
17.07.2009
Moscow region, Zheleznodorozhny, on light

Male
03.07.2010
Moscow region, Krasnoznamensk, on light

[attachmentid()=115820]

[attachmentid()=115821]

[attachmentid()=115822]

This post was edited by John-ST - 11.07.2011 02: 51

Likes: 12

25.07.2011 20:41, vasiliy-feoktistov

I want to present here this barbel from the Moscow region!!!
Exocentrus punctipennis Mulsant et Guillebeu, 1856
This species is not listed in Danilevsky's list of Marine areas.
Here is a quote from there (one species there is represented from the genus):
"62. Gen. Exocentrus Dejean, 1835
97. lusitanus (Linnaeus, 1767) — Lindemann, 1871: 204;
Melgunov, 1892: 42; Nikitsky et al., 1996: 158 (Prioksko-
Terrasnyj nat. reserve)."
Yes, and I myself collected this beetle for the first time in a single copy.
The beetle was caught on 18.07.2010. Here: M. O. G. Zheleznodorozhny, in the evening, at the light (at my house, on the balcony).
Many thanks to everyone who "tormented" this beetle in the definition: Alexey Sazhnev, Fornax (y) 13, Bad Den (y).
Special thanks to Cerambyx (y) for making the final verdict.

Well, I will now return to my post.
It looks like I got "lucky" again:
Exocentrus punctipennis Mulsant et Guillebeu, 1856
Captured (also isolated) 27.06.2011 in the same place and under the same conditions as last year.

This post was edited by vasiliy-feoktistov - 26.07.2011 09: 25

Pictures:
picture: ex.JPG