Photo #25021: Trogus lapidator

30.04.2017 13:59, Peter Khramov

Done.

29.04.2017 21:25, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Peter, this photo is still in the additional gallery despite the fact that it was moved from Papilio machaon back in July last year. It illustrates the species, but it is not displayed on the right of the page and attributes to "Additional gallery" :
Finally attribute this photo to the Main Gallery. There are simply no other photos of Trogus lapidator on the website.

26.08.2016 18:09, Vasiliy Feoktistov

UP
Peter, the issue has been in place for more than a month.
Pull the photo out into the light of day from the additional gallery at last. On the species page, on the right, there are no photos right now (

14.07.2016 0:20, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Go to the view page and look to the right block: there is no photo.
Also under the button "Edit photo data" it says "Additional gallery"
And in general, when selecting an additional gallery, the photo was there when I wrote the message.
Check it out.

13.07.2016 22:58, Peter Khramov

Vasily, why do you think that the photo is in an additional gallery? As far as I can see, it is in quite a basic one.
Brackets are placed, done.

11.07.2016 15:02, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Peter, I think it's time to put an end to this photo discussion.
There are really a lot of P. machaon here, but the Trogus lapidator is currently the only photo it the gallery :)
And the pupa of the host at the photo is to the purpose too, I think.
Summary: it is necessary to return this photo back to the main gallery from the additional one)))
P.S. And it is necessary to enclose the name of the author of the description in brackets in the name of the species: http://www.biolib.cz/en/taxon/id69002/

11.07.2016 14:55, Vasiliy Feoktistov Corrected data.

Papilio machaon / Pupa / Vasiliy Feoktistov → Trogus lapidator / Imago / Andrei Humala.

16.11.2013 16:34, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Great idea, not valid for me though: I don't examine males in this projection, just get along with only visual diagnosis.
Whatsoever, could be real thing, but only for collected specimens as you can't collect genitalia from alive butterfly :)

16.11.2013 15:03, Igor Sakhno

To add aforesaid, if someone added genitalia pics of species with similar exterior (don't consider machaon), would be great. Just an addition to ideas.

16.11.2013 13:32, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Well, as for P. machaon, I can take plenty shots in Meschera next summer. Even two generations :) It's flooded here with it, eye pain...
To this pic, no similar here and hardly to be. So I added it. Any documentation matters.

16.11.2013 12:48, Peter Khramov

Some species on the website are indeed overillustrated, for one, the same P. machaon. In this case such pics with ichneumon may really annoy. Neverthereless, I'd like to say again that this overillustration state is temporary and has to do with yet undone maps. As they get done, there will be A) a subsection with additional images for every species where all secondary pics would be moved, for one, those which illustrate spots where the species is mapped) and B) there will be additional sorting of photos to remove those not illustrating anything new, even spots on the map. Then there should no inconvenience with overillustration thing. Till then you're free to upload such ichneumon photos, only they should be together in one pic, not individual pics of parasites.

16.11.2013 9:04, Yuri Semejkin

"Entomology is the scientific study of insects which examines the thing in its full." nothing to add, well said. What we're all to aspire to.
Descriptions should be definitely added with such info, no matter that there are no references yet as to this very species of parasite. Personal observation is of more weight as it's authentic and proved (with an image).

16.11.2013 7:40, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Yury, thanks. Golden words. The very notion "entomology" includes not only fancy pics of "amazing wings": it's the scientific study of insects which examines the thing in its full. I can add the description only through the field "Additional info of the larval stage", if folks don't mind. Anyway, it's just my personal observation, I never read anywhere of the infestation of this species by this very parasite. However it's not a single case in my observations: an adult, visibly healthy P. machaon larva collected in nature, raised to the pupa stage which looks also fine and healthy and eventually it's emersed with Trogus lapidator instead of an imago. Common thing, may I assume.

16.11.2013 2:01, Yuri Semejkin

Please let's not limit ourselves with plain cycle from egg-laying to imago. This is a biological website, so let's show the biology in full (which can be shown by pics). Lepidoptera parasites are to know too, this info might be useful for experts anyway.
Just don't upload individual sawflies or ichneumons as it's still to be proved that it's very them who invade larvae and then pupae. Let's consider such cases like Vasily's here, photos that present both, parasite and its victim. There will be hardly lots of such pics, and no need in many. Enough 1—2 per 1 species. Besides, species descriptions can be added with a list of parasite(s).

15.11.2013 23:34, Vasiliy Feoktistov

Besides, this parasite is very specific, specialized on Papilio alexanor which here substituted with P. machaon, it seems :)
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CF%E0%F0%F3%F1%ED%E8%EA_%C0%EB%E5%EA%F1%E0%ED%EE%F0 (read the section "Endoparasitism"). That's why I put this pic and the guilty is defined. Any info about butterfly matters, doesn't?

15.11.2013 23:21, Alexandr Zhakov

I see no problem, many websites include parasites and the latter are shown in the pages of their "victims" they ate :)

15.11.2013 22:49, Shamil Murtazin

Agree. Very interesting.
Still again we're playing the same song about the website mission. Namely, lepidoptera.
Here this photo shows another insect, or their interconnection. Please don't get me wrong, it we leave it here, then we should draw the borderline, nominal at least; we should also think of where to put this pic which can be hardly moved to lepidoptera as it illustrates parasite. Here only exuviae left (thanks for the new term learnt). Thus this image couldn't anyway be shown in some page of lepidoptera species. Question then, where it actually can be shown? As it should be done eventually somewhere.
Probably would be good to consider some additional fields for some data of the kind, no matter, texts, photos or even video )
But... this feature may further evolves separate parasite taxonomy, gallery and other relative things... =)
Such an easy solution may gradually entail all these. Sorry for such wide mindstream ;)