More winter insects!

[goosey]

I didn't find any more weevils today but I did see these!

A.There were two of these with in a meter of each other. About 1cm in length.

A.

B. This was a odd thing, looks like a mini scorpion and was less than 1cm long.
As I took the first photo it jumped and landed on the camera lens, which must have been a huge jump for something so tiny! I knocked it off andf or a minute or two while I was trying to clean the lens the insects pincers disappered from sight - I couldn't tell if they folded away or were drawn into the body. Then the pincers came out again and and it was on the move.

B.

Any ideas please?

[Pudding4brains]

Hi Goosey,

"Cool" images of Philoscia muscorum (Oniscidea: Philosciidae) in the snow I have not seen them wandering about like that myself yet - interesting

The other one is a Pseudoscorpion sp. (Arachnida: Pseudoscorpionida) - many of those are quite hardy and they're amongst the few invertebrates I found active at high altitude in the Alps in mid-winter.

I started collecting (online) data on those about a year ago, but didn't make much headway actually using/interpreting all I found so I'm not even going to attempt to stick a genus name on any yet.

Paul or others may well be capable of that though

Cheers, Arp

P.S. Ah yes: Neither are insects (sensu 2010) of course

P.P.S. I've just dumped this scratchpad online - unsorted and unchecked. It was sitting unused on my hard disk untouched for about a year now, waiting to get improved/completed before creating it online. Must be that much of what I already found is still missing in it, but maybe one or two links are useful yet ....

[paul m]

I thought that Arp would put you straight with the woodlice. I've looked at the pseudoscorpions and shall consult my British key later. Lovely things but I've never seen them in the snow - must go and have a look! I've also never seen them jumping - you should have got a movie!

[goosey]

Thanks Paul and Arp!
I have re-titled the images and added the key words you kindly provided Arp, and changed the Pseudoscorpion sp. to spiders - fancy that, thanks for the pointer, I would never have known even though it has eight legs!
If you get any further with the key Paul let me know.

These little finds made the trip worth it today .

[goosey]

Oh dear - what a fool I am - I have just been told (very nicely ) that Pseudoscorpion sp - Arachnida are not spiders, though to me it sounds like they should be

Ignore all my thoughts on the last post - just off to hibernate!

[Pudding4brains]

Hi Goosey,

I wouldn't worry about that. They're about as much a "spider" as all the Harvestmen in the spider category

Maybe the titel should be changed to "Spiders and other Arachnids" or so to make it fit, but I had an somewhat strange/unpleasant discussion about that on WAB once so I don't see much use in repeating that.

POV of the forces that be being something along the lines of: "We don't care. If anyone feels they should go into "spiders" than that's fine, if other people stick them in invertebrates that's cool too, we don't want the contributers to worry about silly stuff like that and we don't see a point in moving things to the appropriate place (forum) later. As far as we're concerned both are correct and our users should preferably not have to worry about (learning) things that are as 'complicated' as this."

So, you be a good user and stick'm anywhere you want and not worry

If however you have a personal urge to be (mostly) correct about things, I should probably point out that's me that should go hibernate as I typed the oldish "Pseudoscorpionida" as opposed to the more current name of the order "Pseudoscorpiones".

Sorry 'bout that
Arp

[paul m]

... and there's me having always used 'Peudoscorpiones' thinking that 'Pseudoscorpionida' was the newer terminology!

Originally Posted by Pudding4brains

...........
If however you have a personal urge to be (mostly) correct about things, I should probably point out that's me that should go hibernate as I typed the oldish "Pseudoscorpionida" as opposed to the more current name of the order "Pseudoscorpiones".

Sorry 'bout that
Arp

[Pudding4brains]

Hi Paul,

Originally Posted by paul m

... and there's me having always used 'Peudoscorpiones' thinking that 'Pseudoscorpionida' was the newer terminology!

Well, of course, I don't really know these things but just assumed that it would be this way as most serious sources use the Ps...des spelling (he said, disqualifying most wikimedia projects as a "serious" source in one blow ).

But what's "new" anyway? I just happen to find much books/publications that go on about Ps..da in the pré 1900 Public Domain category that I have access to. The Name Ps..des was pitched by De Geer it seems, so it can't be all that new It's just that I don't generally have access to the post 1920 stuff that seem to have carried the name Ps...da for a good part of last century, but the current sources seem to have rolled back to Ps...des - who knows what it'll be in afew years

Cheers, Arp

[goosey]

I was off on my toddles again today with my nose to the ground and came across this nice lttle selection.

1. Hairy insect - 5mm, there were several of these in this place and I saw them in other places.

1.

2. Beetle.

2.

3. Spider. the body was anout 1cm in length.

3.

4. Orange Ladybird - Halyzia sedecimguttata. This wasn't active but sheltering.

4.

[paul m]

How large was the beetle (#2)? I should think its a ground beetle (Carabidae) but I'm in ladybird mode at the moment .... I'll need to give this more thought later!
I'm thinking of Dromius quadrimaculatus - an arboreal carabid - however, I'd expect that the body would protrude a little behind the elytra .... but perhaps it was too cold?
Do you have any others shots - perhaps one showing the tips of the palpi (the shorter protrusions between the antennae)?
Interesting to see it out in the snow, though ....

[goosey]

Originally Posted by paul m

I'm in ladybird mode at the moment

- I could say something saucy in reply, but will abstain!

Originally Posted by paul m

How large was the beetle (#2)? I should think its a ground beetle (Carabidae) I'll need to give this more thought later!

It was approx 1cm.

[paul m]

Our messages are overlapping! D. quadrimaculatus is 5-6.5 mms ...
Which is app 10 mms.

Dromius quadrimaculatus: Photo by Photographer Krister Hall - photo.net shows the slight protrusion of the abdomen.

[goosey]

Originally Posted by paul m

Do you have any others shots - perhaps one showing the tips of the palpi (the shorter protrusions between the antennae)?

No sorry - the only other image shows the other end - but the angle makes that quite interesting.



Dromius quadrimaculatus looks good for an ID though!

[paul m]

Yes, that's great for a Dromius and in UK that could only be D. quadrimaculatus - presumably we can check on whether there are other patterned Dromius spp in Holland?
Just as soon as I've finished the next 3000 ladybirds ....

Originally Posted by goosey

No sorry - the only other image shows the other end - but the angle makes that quite interesting.



Dromius quadrimaculatus looks good for an ID though!

[goosey]

Originally Posted by paul m

Yes, that's great for a Dromius and in UK that could only be D. quadrimaculatus - presumably we can check on whether there are other patterned Dromius spp in Holland?

I have just had a quick look to see if there are more types of Dromius here in The Netherlands and from what I can tell is that there "aren't".
There are references which include Dromius schneideri, but D.schneideri has since been removed from lists being believed it was incorrectly identified along with other Carabidae species .
As a result, the number of Carabidae species occurring in The Netherlands is 372 including just the one Dromius sp.

Originally Posted by paul m

Just as soon as I've finished the next 3000 ladybirds ....

Now then pray tell, what on earth are you doing with all those ladybirds? Do we need a post?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Does anyone know what the interesting little thing is in image 1?

1.

[paul m]

It's a springtail (Collembola) and I would think a member of the Entomobryidae of which Orchesella species looking like this (to my eye) are commonly found in NW Europe.
Checklist of the Collembola of the World is a good starting point ....

Originally Posted by goosey

Does anyone know what the interesting little thing is in image 1?

1.

[goosey]

Originally Posted by paul m

It's a springtail (Collembola) and I would think a member of the Entomobryidae of which Orchesella species looking like this (to my eye) are commonly found in NW Europe.
Checklist of the Collembola of the World is a good starting point ....

I don't think I have come across these before, though I have heard of springtails didn't know what they were.
Orchesella villosa looks good to me for my little find.
Thanks Paul

[paul m]

Originally Posted by goosey

I don't think I have come across these before, though I have heard of springtails didn't know what they were.
Orchesella villosa looks good to me for my little find.
Thanks Paul

Don't take my word for this - there are people who know a lot more about them than I do.

Collembola are fascinating and extremely important, especially in woodland where they make major contributions to decomposing leaf litter and are the basis of most food webs.
Incidentally, there are those who say that they are not insects since they do not have wings and never have had during their evolution. They would thus be a separate taxon in the Hexapoda. That could keep you awake at night ....

[Pudding4brains]

Hi Goosey/Paul

Originally Posted by goosey

I have just had a quick look to see if there are more types of Dromius here in The Netherlands and from what I can tell is that there "aren't".'

That's not quite accurate I'm afraid - what source did you use? I find the good people at Nederlands Soortenregister are very conscientious about getting things right. Allas, they're still lacking images for many species, so for that waarneming.nl is often a good resource, but please be aware that it's a community site and for certain groups they are understaffed with experts that check all the records, so for some species there may very well be more wrong IDs in the database than correct ones Overall, the site is okay though and they're always working to improve things. Also note that they may not always have all the species of a group in the database - those often don't get added until actual records are entered.

Please be aware that there are some more fairly similar looking Groundbeetles in other genera such as Calodromius, Philorhizus or even Demetrias as well - and total nincompoops like myself should probably even watch out as to not mix them up with the numerous 4-spotted-ishy Bembidion or so

A neat site to get a first general idea of options is kerbtier.de (or in this case the Carabidae-page) and/or the thumbnail lists on koleopterologie.de - next check with nederlandsesoorten.nl what species are actually present in NL

That said, I would second (or "third") the ID, but it's just not quite as simple as "there are no lookalikes"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for the springtail, I would agree that Orchesella villosa is a very probable option, but I still need to start actually reading the sections on those in the "Thysanura" books that I've acquired mostly for any info on Bristletails.

The fact that those have been kicked out of the "Insecta" (which is not by definition the same as the vernacular "insects"!) has less to do with them being wingless, but is mostly based on the construction of the mouthparts ("Entognatha"). Of the wingless beasts (former Apterygota) the Jumping Bristletails (Microcoryphia, or if you wish Argaeognatha) and Silverfishythingies (Zygentoma) are for the moment kept inside Insecta, but some argue that the the Microcoryphia should be kicked out (also based on mouth parts), which in my opinion would be bizarre as the two are obviously very closely related

Cheers, Arp

[goosey]

Originally Posted by Pudding4brains

That's not quite accurate I'm afraid - what source did you use?

Sorry Arp - it has taken me while to retrace my steps and and find the source.
Reading it again make me think I used it in conjunction with something else but I can't remember what.

I used page 128 of this link in the summary section.

http://www.nev.nl/eb/EB-2004/EB-64(4...8-Muilwijk.pdf

[paul m]

Yes, ARp, there are at least ten more Dromius spp in UK most of which are not patterned except for D. quadrinotatus [and I am aware that a lot of our 'Dromius' have been split and a lot of them renamed] but the pattern differs from that of D. quadrimaculatus
http://claude.schott.free.fr/Carabid...Drominae_2.jpg

The pattern (pale patches touching the elytral tips), amongst other things, also sets it apart from the patterned Bembidion. Goosey, as Arp says, there are several similar genera but Demetrias can be ruled out by the tarsi as well as elytral patterns. When encountering small ground beetles one must always consider Bembidion simply because there are so many of them. With a hand lens or a good photograph it is possible to differentiate them from most other species by their palpi - just about recognisable on this picture.


Look at the appropriate pages here ICONOGRAPHIE DES COLÉOPTÈRES CARABIDAE D'ALSACE to see how many Bembidion species there are!

More when I return to carabid mode (end of March) ....

Originally Posted by Pudding4brains

...... That's not quite accurate I'm afraid - what source did you use? I find the good people at Nederlands Soortenregister are very conscientious about getting things right. Allas, they're still lacking images for many species, so for that waarneming.nl is often a good resource, but please be aware that it's a community site and for certain groups they are understaffed with experts that check all the records, so for some species there may very well be more wrong IDs in the database than correct ones Overall, the site is okay though and they're always working to improve things. Also note that they may not always have all the species of a group in the database - those often don't get added until actual records are entered.

Please be aware that there are some more fairly similar looking Groundbeetles in other genera such as Calodromius, Philorhizus or even Demetrias as well - and total nincompoops like myself should probably even watch out as to not mix them up with the numerous 4-spotted-ishy Bembidion or so
...........
That said, I would second (or "third") the ID, but it's just not quite as simple as "there are no lookalikes"
................Cheers, Arp

[paul m]

[quote=Pudding4brains;10652...............
The fact that those have been kicked out of the "Insecta" (which is not by definition the same as the vernacular "insects"!) has less to do with them being wingless, but is mostly based on the construction of the mouthparts ("Entognatha"). Of the wingless beasts (former Apterygota) the Jumping Bristletails (Microcoryphia, or if you wish Argaeognatha) and Silverfishythingies (Zygentoma) are for the moment kept inside Insecta, but some argue that the the Microcoryphia should be kicked out (also based on mouth parts), which in my opinion would be bizarre as the two are obviously very closely related

Cheers, Arp[/QUOTE]

Thanks Arp, you've brought it all back to me .... I'm not sure that I wanted it back really! Certainly not an area I shall argue about! Cheers, Paul

[paul m]

Originally Posted by goosey

.............
Now then pray tell, what on earth are you doing with all those ladybirds? Do we need a post?
................

Sorry, nothing mysterious or remotely interesting: I just happen to be co-ordinating (at least) three ladybird surveys and this is the time of year when all of the records should be in and I can start collating, analysing and writing up the results. It's mainly very tedious keyboard work ... but easy to make mistakes if your mind wanders ... to ground beetles and the like ...
Made a bit more hectic this year by the compiling (by Helen Roy and others at CEH) of a national atlas of Coccinellidae with the deadline 28 days ago!

[Pudding4brains]

Hi all,

@Paul: Thanks for the feedback and strength and perseverance with your work on the coccinellids. Is the "atlas" going to be useful for ID too (like, say the Belgian one) or "just" maps?

@Goosey: Thanks for the link tot the PDF questioning the occurrence of schneideri in NL. One of the authors is responsible for the content (of this group) on nlsrt and indeed the species is listed there as questionable too, although it takes some alertness to spot it

Cheers, Arp

[goosey]

And another! Sorry if I am becoming boring .
Apart from a couple more weevils I didn't see any insects today except this fly. No better pictures sorry, it was rather active.

5.