Affiliated to the British Entomological and Natural History Society (BENHS)
You are not logged in.
A couple of days ago I took a male Egle on the edge of coastal woodland in Fife. The only Egle I knew was ciliata, but it didn't look right for that. Gen det seems to say it's E.parva (image inline now). There are willows nearby but this was actually taken in a small group of alders.
Yesterday I saw my first E.ciliata directly beside the willows. No doubt when the sun returns there will be many more. However once again I took another putative E.parva in the same location amongst the alders. My understanding, such as it is, is that Egle are all associated with Salix but is there a possible connection of E.parva with Alnus?
(of course it goes without saying ... is it E.parva at all!)
Cheers
Ali
transfer-d50 by Ali Kartal, on Flickr
Last edited by AliCullaloe (2018-03-27 12:07:11)
Offline
Egle are known as larvae in willow and aspen catkins, but I can't see any reason why the adults shouldn't take pollen from other available sources. (And I'd call this parva too)
Offline
Thanks Tony. I'm not sure there's any pollen available yet. I'll keep an eye out aruond there though. Either parva or minuta, which I first thought it was, seem to also be new to Scotland though enquiries are ongoing.
Offline
I find that it is rather difficult to differentiate between E. parva and E. minuta on the surstyli and cercal plate alone. Michael Ackland's key asks whether the epandrium has setulae on the lateral parts, but I have not been able to check this for myself - it's too late when you've already dissected the genitalia. There is also a difference in the extent of setulae along the hind marginal incision of sternite V - but the hairs are not visible in your photo. Another difference is the setulae on the genae - a single row in minuta, and double in parva, as illustrated in Michael's article in DD Vol 20 No 1 p77. (The difference in head and eye shape does not seem so marked in the specimens that Michael has given me, though.)
Offline
Can I ask why it's too late, Phil? I suppose if you've discarded it, but it's entirely possible I have the epandrium also in permanent mount, though I can easily check the genae. I certainly have sternite 5 if there's anything to check that I haven't destroyed by hamfisted surgery. Not that I could judge relative differences without anything to compare, mind you. Sounds like the genae are the best hope. As an aside, thanks for your efforts in iRecord. Much appreciated.
Offline
Here's a photo of the epandrium I already had. I'm just putting it here for the record, really. I'll check the genae tonight
Egle-parva-DBY-IMG_20180326_204556836
Last edited by AliCullaloe (2018-03-27 19:26:54)
Offline
Yes, I just meant that the epandrium might not easy to check after dissection. This is certainly the case with my reference specimens. Your picture of the epandrium seems similar to what I think is parva, but I am hoping minuta will turn up soon for comparison.
Offline
Based on the shape of the apical part of the cercal plate and the surstyli I would call this Egle parva.
These Egle species need good photos or drawings as some of the species are quite difficult to separate.
Offline
Thanks all. The genae didn't exactly give me the "aha" moment I was hoping for - I couldn't discern either one or two rows - more of an even spread. Photography not ideal but I will try with better microscope/lighting tomorrow when I'm in NMS. Happy to send voucher if it can help, though I think everybody's more or less coming down on parva. The side view of the surstylus absolutely matches that in the gen figures, but then I accept that may give an artificial confidence. If NMS has both species I may have the chance to pull them and compare that too. to be continued ...
IMG_20180327_191434546 by Ali Kartal, on Flickr
Offline
Whole album of photos, but maybe not much more enlightening is here:
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmf1WVEM
Cheers
Ali
Offline