| | 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: 50,153
Threads: 82,340
Posts: 853,213
Top Poster: glsammy (15,069) | | Welcome to our newest member, Xalrahc | |  | 
08-07-2010, 07:16 AM
|  | Active Member | | Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: North Wiltshire
Posts: 41
| | | Bumble bee-possibly not B.lucorum? On Tuesday this bumble bee came into the house and I managed to capture a couple of shots-it was very agitated and didn't rest-sorry about the blurriness. I noticed the broken colour band on the abdomen-it is possibly a B. lucorum, but I was wondering if it might be something more unusual. say, B. soroeensis?
Judith, North Wiltshire. | 
08-07-2010, 09:43 PM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: S. Devon
Posts: 3,897
| | | Re: Bumble bee-possibly not B.lucorum? Well after looking through my book; B. soroeensis does appear possible. The rather triangular shape of the first abdominal band made me consider that species.
But this is really just a guess and I don't think we will get a confirmed identification from those photos; although one of our bee specialist may be more positive. | 
08-07-2010, 10:04 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Salisbury; Wilts
Posts: 2,308
| | | Re: Bumble bee-possibly not B.lucorum? It is quite a pale faded specimen... and with fading goes abrasion. It also looks pretty big to be a B. soroeensis worker (often very small). The only sure fire way of separating B. soroeensis workers from those of the B. terrestris/B. lucorum agg. is to look at the structure of the mandible!
Males, on the other hand, are quites easy... but B. soroeensis males are flying in September.
This one is just Bombus sp. I'm afraid | 
09-07-2010, 06:09 AM
|  | Active Member | | Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: North Wiltshire
Posts: 41
| | | Re: Bumble bee-possibly not B.lucorum? Thanks Stuart-just getting carried away I expect. Whoever thought these bees could be so absorbing? I have spent hours this summer watching them. And still have several unidentified! Thanks for your continued support.
Judith | 
09-07-2010, 06:13 AM
|  | Active Member | | Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: North Wiltshire
Posts: 41
| | | Re: Bumble bee-possibly not B.lucorum? Thanks Geoff-I am just hoping for something more exciting, I think! I know there are the 5 of the Big Six in the garden at present, so I expect it is one of those. |  | | | 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 | | | | | | 25 members and 455 guests | | Adam Cheeseman, alanc15, Antsinmypants, bumblebee, Chris Yeates, Closescapes, colincurry, earthdragon64, faz, Gill Catton, GTH, JB9302, JennyS, Jim Ford, johnnyfive, johnwray205, marvin, Matt Smith, MattPrince, monkeyrepublic, oxycera, shenk1, sweedie, Za | » New Wildlife Posts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | » New Environment Posts | | | | | | | | | » New Activity Posts | | | | | | | | | » New Community Posts | | | Spammers! Yesterday 08:00 AM 5 Replies, 115 Views | | | | | |