| | S | M | T | W | T | F | S | | 29 | 30 |
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
| |
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
| |
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
| |
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
| |
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
| 1 | 2 | » Stats |
Members: 50,148
Threads: 82,325
Posts: 853,122
Top Poster: glsammy (15,069) | | Welcome to our newest member, pywacket4u | |  | 
27-04-2010, 09:35 PM
| | Member of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Surrey
Posts: 282
| | | No Spot Ladybird for ID | 
27-04-2010, 09:41 PM
|  | Knight Grand Cross of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: London
Posts: 11,830
| | | Re: No Spot Ladybird for ID Evening Malcolm,
I'd suggest the Ten-spotted Ladybird in a newly-hatched stage - but wait for other opinions
Take care, Jason | 
28-04-2010, 12:28 AM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Lincoln
Posts: 4,826
| | | Re: No Spot Ladybird for ID If this was found about a week ago surely it would not be newly hatched?
It's not easy to see the details, but it looks to me like the elytra near the tail end have those little bumps which the Harlequin LB, Harmonia axyridis has.
Janet
__________________ http://cubits.org/buglife/ | 
28-04-2010, 09:48 AM
| | Member of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Surrey
Posts: 282
| | | Re: No Spot Ladybird for ID Thanks Jason and Janet for your responses  . The ladybird could have been newly emerged since I photographed it as soon as I saw it. I did a bit more digging and came to the conclusion that perhaps it was newly emerged but also that both the 10 spot and Harlequin had no-spot variants and moreover, the pronotum markings were most similar to variants of these two ladybirds.
The termiinal bumps is an interesting suggestion - I think I may have some other shots and will go back and see if these are any more revealing in this context. I suppose if it was the Harlequin I should have killed it and reported it to the Halrlequin LB survey people?
M | 
28-04-2010, 10:24 AM
|  | Knight Grand Cross of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: London
Posts: 11,830
| | | Re: No Spot Ladybird for ID Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcolm Banks I suppose if it was the Harlequin I should have killed it and reported it to the Halrlequin LB survey people? | It wouldn't be worth your time killing it, really - but still report it if records are still of interest. They are present in good numbers and seem established though there is anecdotal evidence to suggest they aren't as prevalent as they had been. Still, we'll see how they do this year... | 
28-04-2010, 11:42 AM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Lincoln
Posts: 4,826
| | | Re: No Spot Ladybird for ID Harlequins here are not doing very well, in fact I have never seen so many 7-spots. Perhaps the native one is better adapted, and maybe the larvae eat the Harlequin.
With reference to being newly emerged, I haven't known them to emerge this early in the year as most have overwintered and are mating now.
__________________ http://cubits.org/buglife/ | 
28-04-2010, 12:25 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: SW London
Posts: 2,099
| | | Re: No Spot Ladybird for ID I've seen one of these. http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...706#post500132
I also had one that emerged from a pupa I collected with no markings, & that looked like a ten spot. |  | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | | » New Wildlife Posts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | » New Environment Posts | | | | | | | | | » New Activity Posts | | | | | | | | | » New Community Posts | | | Spammers! Yesterday 08:00 AM 5 Replies, 108 Views | | | | | |