Some S. Devon bees for checking please

[Geoff F]

I have been putting some partially identified bees to one side - but they are beginning to mount up so I would appreciate a second opinion on these, to start with.

This one was from 17/03/11 and I was considering Nomada fabriciana but the images aren't very good.






And this one from yesterday, I was thinking about Nomada flava/panzeri.



Then from today, I was suggesting Osmia rufa.



A few others have inspired a bit more confidence (which means they are very easy!)

But I would appreciate any more informed opinions on these trickier specimens.

[Matt Smith]

First 2 seem reasonable possible ID's from the photos, though the Nomada with the folded wings is a bit more tricky. Last one is an Andrena, not an Osmia. Possibly A.carantonica.

[JRsbugs]

Your last bee does look a lot like Andrena carantonica, have you got any other angles which shows the tail hairs more clearly? They should be black.

Janet

[Geoff F]

Thanks for the replies.

I don't have an ideal rear end photo, Janet, but another unprocessed image does appear to show some black hair towards the extreme tail end.

The 3 rd bee photos had been put to one side until I had time to check out the wing veins, which were quite clear on another image, but I thought I might as well include it here for an expert opinion.

On reflection, those 3 sub marginal cells should have made a lot more impact upon my thinking.

But surprisingly, A. carantonica illustrations aren't displayed on my Andrena identification literature; although that is somewhat sparse at the moment. I mostly rely on the Bees of Surrey book for illustrations and ID Keys.

[eucera]

You may find authors still calling A. carantonica by its former name of A. scotica

[Geoff F]

So many species have been renamed recently, and quite a few relatively simple families of a wide range of insects have been sub divided into new species which require microscopic examination.

If the plan was to confuse people - it has worked on me!

Actually, the Bees of Surrey book uses the newer name; it just surprised me that a few reasonably common species aren't illustrated while some uncommon ones have excellent photos.