Lieber Besucher, herzlich willkommen bei: Insektenfotos.de-Forum.
Falls dies dein erster Besuch auf dieser Seite ist, lies bitte die Hilfe durch. Dort wird dir die Bedienung dieser Seite näher erläutert.
Darüber hinaus solltest du dich registrieren, um alle Funktionen dieser Seite nutzen zu können.
Benutze das Registrierungsformular, um dich zu registrieren oder informiere dich ausführlich über den Registrierungsvorgang.
Falls du dich bereits zu einem früheren Zeitpunkt registriert hast, kannst du dich hier anmelden.
war ja wieder klar Ich habe das Bild trotzdem bei diptera eingestellt, weil man etwas mehr Details, auch von den Beinen, sieht. Vielleicht gelingt es ja jemandem?
Therevidae can be difficult to judge by photo but not impossible. Certain people exaggerate phot identifications for purposes that are beyond my understanding. Perhaps to sell their keys? I find alot of Therevidae easy to id by photo. I have several correct identifications from this family with and without specimen examination. I am not saying that every photo is capable of identification but let's stay grounded and scientific.
The Thereva in your photo is not nobilitata: two dc, black spot on frons reaches the front occelli and the tip of the haltere appears to be entirely darkened. see my attached photos for a better idea of where to look for the above determinations.
the hind femora is sometimes important to see the av or pv bristles. Your photo is too small and does not contain a view of both av and pv positions.
However, this species should be Thereva handlirschi but a cf is necessary since your photo is a bit vague. Thereva cf handlirschi
thank you very much for your detailed explanation. I agree that many species could be successfully identified from very good pictures. I can show you an enlarged version of my pictures, maybe you will see more.
Thereva handlirschi looks correct to my eyes. I have to logoff soon but i will look at this again later to be sure that i am seeing things correctly. Thank you for posting larger images. I will be back later today...
excellent photos! Thank you for adding the photos to the thread. I agree wholly with Thereva handlirschi (weibchen) and i used my own photos for comparison in addition to keying it four times. For future reference, I also have fulva, nobilitata and rustica documented.
The photos provided by volker are sufficient for separating handlirschi from inornata. A cf is certainly necessary if a photo or photos are lacking a solid view of necessary features. Remember that i am a genitalia or dna researcher. I find it funny how certain people hesitate to id nobilitata when it is a very simple process with correct photos. I had genitalia prove my theory correctly: Spielchen spielen does exist with certain dipterists. I cannot dictate respect for my own work and i cannot logically prevent respect for someone elses work. However, i find it rather easy to id many Therevidae by photos wen the photos contain well depicted features necessary for id. Everyone can choose to believe what they wish.
I'm not surprised by the behaviour of certain dipterists anymore. Remember that i also have two first records for Germany but noone will publish my work because i'm not a Doctor of Biology approved for publication. Such is life... (ps not that anyone reading this is stupid but i just want to clarify that not being approved by the biological community means that it is easier to discredit my work. Life goes on. I do not worry about it.)
Remember that i also have two first records for Germany but noone will publish my work because i'm not a Doctor of Biology approved for publication.
can't you publish them yourself? I don't have the knowledge how to do that, but I remember that there a several spider publications by Martin Lemke, who is no Arachnologist either (he is/was a policeman).
thank you very much for the identification of Thereva handlirschi. You are right, if good and detailed pictures are available many species can be identified even from a photo with good keys. There are many so-called professionals or scientists who do not accept this and do not engage in any discussion. I personally trust people with enough experience much more than others. As far as the publications are concerned, I agree with Jürgen. Why don't you try to publish something yourself, e.g. at ResearchGate? There is a similar problem with photography. I have already sold some pictures to book publishers or magazines on request, but usually got only 20-30 euros for it. But if I could prove that I live from photography and that this is my profession, I would get a lot more money. At the same time, the pictures of many private individuals are often much better than the pictures of so-called professionals like professional photographers. The world is crazy and that will not change.
I suppose that paying someone to publish my documents is the best option. I will definitely try to publish these findings. Since i am not a Doctor of Biology, i had my first records verified by experts. For example, i have a first record for Pollenia of Calliphoridae so i wrote to the late Doctor Rognes for verification. I got to know Dr. Rognes very well over the years. He helped me master the identification of Pollenia. He even gave me some of his personal notes and unpiblished pdf files. He was a nice man and i miss him very much. He then introduced me to Dr. Szpila. Dr. Szpila also studies Calliphoridae and Polleniidae. note: some authors now separate Pollenia into their own family named Polleniidae, which translates to Blutenstaubfliegen but i named them Flittergoldfliegen for my unfinished website. Thus, Pollenia amentaria is named Schwarze Flittergoldfliege on my website.
I also want to add a photo of a correctly identified male (left / links) and female (right / rechts) of Thereva nobilitata. Volker, please look at the female in your photos and compare it with the female in my photo. See the difference? they can be separated by photo for sure.
I forgot to mention your remarks about photography: i agree with you wholeheartedly. I saw a photo of a female Misumena vatia with a male on her back recently. I believe it was here at insektenfotos forum. I thought to myself, "wow! what an amazing photo! I wish that were my photo." I've seen some amazing photos from hobbyists and i really think that photographers get cheated out of fame and fortune. Some people are just amazing with a camera.
The story about the two doctors is very interesting! And it makes Dr. Rognes' death even sadder. With him, a lot of knowledge and certainly a good friend is lost. Maybe you can continue to work with Dr. Szpila and together with him or with his help, publish one or more papers? What is the address of your website?
I have looked at your picture of T. nobilitata and from the general impression it already looks quite different than T. handlirschi. I can't see details at the moment, I am missing the experience, but there certainly is a difference.
I just discovered that i also have a photo of Thereva bipunctata female. Unglaublich! so now i have 5 Thereva species documented from Berlin. I need to keep going so that i can master this family...