Help identifying insects for ID please

[laetoli]

All insects were in suburban north London. The bee was feeding on Lamium maculatum - sorry about the poor image quality of the sawfly. Thanks in advance.
Take care Paul

[Jason Green]

Afternoon Paul,

The first is Osmia rufa. Next are hoverflies Eupeodes corollae and a Xylota species - could be X. segnis, closer views would be needed for species.

Take care,

Jason

[JRsbugs]

Last one Anthomyiidae, Hydrophoria linogrisea is most likely.

[laetoli]

Thanks Jason, JRsbugs.

Did you id these bugs from memory or did you have to look them up. I'm just starting out here and the number and variety in each category seems bewilderingly vast. I used to know wasps, bees, bumble bees, flies, ladybirds etc. but now it seems like those words are immensely vague.

I've got "Collins Guide to the Insects of Western Europe" - is that a good guide? I'd like a guide just to solitary bees but can't seem to find one. What would you recommend? Perhaps I need to go on some kind of course.

Thanks again & take care,
Paul

[JRsbugs]

I have had the fly myself, as well as the other insects you have posted. I have spent a few years taking photos and researching.

I posted my fly not so long agon on diptera.info where an expert identified it. Yours matches mine in all the bristles in the right places etc. which are specific to this fly. I do a lot of research on diptera.info in previous posts, it is not unnecessary puffed up pointers as some might think.

Look at my fly on the diptera site, and if you wish to search the site that is a good way to find out more.

Mine is the first and second one.. 'blowave', I have many fly pics there.

Diptera.info - Search: Search Results

Guides are usually too general, you need to look on good sites which can be relied on and maybe join some.

[Jason Green]

In answer to your question, I recommend collecting voucher specimens, getting them under a low-power microscope, identifying them from the relevant British identification key to the group and hoping to eventually become pretty-much self-sufficient in determining them.

You'll soon come across ones where your camera is no help to you - take the insect in your third photograph for example. It's a Xylota species - but to get it fully resolved to species-level you need to examine the spinal arrangement under the hind femora. Other insects may require examination of mandibular-dentition, pubescence, punctation and even genitalia. These are easy-enough to get into with practice. There are, of course, many field/photo-identifiable ones!

It just depends on your aspirations. If you mainly plan on identifying the insects in your garden then the camera approach may be a good one (barr those difficult ones). However, if like me you wish to gain real intuition with them and really explore the diversity out there then you need to collect. It just depends on how serious you are, or wish to be.

Joining forums is good, there are a lot of experts on here, and on DI. A point worth bearing in mind is that they all got that way through having a personal reference collection. Also contact your local area recorders, they may have suggestions in getting started. The AES is a good organisation to belong to, as would be your local natural-history society.

The sort of literature you'll need will depend on your approach - general, or specialist. Researchng on the internet is also a good way of getting to grips with the basics, so long as the source is reliable. With books they're usually peer-reviewed and from reputable sources and contain more than the 'Net does.

Finally, ask questions!! Have fun

[oxycera]

I agree with the last post, in fact it could be taken as the model answer to this question that arises again and again. I would only add that joining a local natural history society is often a good idea - although not all bodies of this type still boast specialist entomologists. They're dying off and younger ones may well be too internet-based to ever acquire proper knowledge.

[laetoli]

Thank you. People on this forum are very helpful.

Originally Posted by Jason Green

It's a Xylota species - but to get it fully resolved to species-level you need to examine the spinal arrangement under the hind femora. Other insects may require examination of mandibular-dentition, pubescence, punctation and even genitalia.

But members of the opposite sex of any insect need to be able to instantly id potential mates and aren't going to checking out mandibular dentition or equivalent, are they? Do they use scent, u.v. cues, mating dances or other signals that we can't detect? How is it known that two extremely similar insects are, in fact, different species?

Thanks again & take care,
Paul

[JRsbugs]

Originally Posted by laetoli

How is it known that two extremely similar insects are, in fact, different species?

There are people who have made keys giving details you need to separate similar species. These details can often be seen in photos of a variety of different angles of the insect, other times not and that is when genital or other examination is required.

As far as collecting insects goes, that depends on how you view it, whether or not you can kill an insect and then justify having done so. There are people whose job it is to do this, well I am not the one to say they should not but you have to be able to do it. Justification is another thing, there are discussions on here about the many thousands of insects left on shelves which will never get a look at. Some of those who collect will of course have to justify doing so and will use any argument they can. Yes, I agree there is a case in some instances but to collect for any reason other than a very necessary one is not in my view acceptable.

I have identified a great many insects and invertebrates by taking photos using a good macro lens. I have also helped many others to know the name of theirs. If I cannot identify the occasional one then I am not going to worry about it, I am pleased to let it live, even some who have to collect will echo the sentiment that unnecessary collecting is obscene and at times by simply capturing the insect you can often identify it then let it go. We all have the right to the life given to us even if we or the insect may get mown down one day by means other than targeted collection.

I would say that the number of insects I have identified through taking photos would far exceed what I might have been able to catch if I were so inclined to do that. If I did catch them, and if I was not first aware of what I was looking at, as many are not, then I would be killing an awful lot of insects for the sake of my learning process 'just in case'.

I have contributed a great many photos of flies to diptera.info which were not already in the galleries, and often better images of some of those which were so it gives others a better chance of identifying theirs. I very much doubt I would have contributed any if I had caught these flies, and dead flies really do not show the true features or colours of a fly, they are very difficult to take good photos of.

I really think it's time some who keep spouting about the benefits of collecting stood back a little and realised the benefits of people such as myself who not only provide good named images, but are able to help others, perhaps even more than some who collect. Collecting has been done in the days of old, keys have been done a long time ago and more recently using both museum specimens as well as current collections. The specialist entomologists certainly have a case for collecting in order to help identify, and many of these specialists are on sites such as diptera.info and also the HYMIS forum for Hymenoptera. They usually specialise in one field of entomology, there is far too many insects to generalise in collectiing, it would be far too time consuming for anyone to do properly.

Some amateur collectors might be inclined to try to collect anything they can get their hands on, and in the end they will not necessarily know as much as a person who takes good detailed photos.

Beware of those who borrow all the terminolgy they have ever encountered from the specialists but who really know very little, you will find out who knows their stuff in time.

[tristanba]

Originally Posted by JRsbugs

There are people who have made keys giving details you need to separate similar species. These details can often be seen in photos of a variety of different angles of the insect, other times not and that is when genital or other examination is required.

As far as collecting insects goes, that depends on how you view it, whether or not you can kill an insect and then justify having done so. There are people whose job it is to do this, well I am not the one to say they should not but you have to be able to do it. Justification is another thing, there are discussions on here about the many thousands of insects left on shelves which will never get a look at. Some of those who collect will of course have to justify doing so and will use any argument they can. Yes, I agree there is a case in some instances but to collect for any reason other than a very necessary one is not in my view acceptable.

I have identified a great many insects and invertebrates by taking photos using a good macro lens. I have also helped many others to know the name of theirs. If I cannot identify the occasional one then I am not going to worry about it, I am pleased to let it live, even some who have to collect will echo the sentiment that unnecessary collecting is obscene and at times by simply capturing the insect you can often identify it then let it go. We all have the right to the life given to us even if we or the insect may get mown down one day by means other than targeted collection.

I would say that the number of insects I have identified through taking photos would far exceed what I might have been able to catch if I were so inclined to do that. If I did catch them, and if I was not first aware of what I was looking at, as many are not, then I would be killing an awful lot of insects for the sake of my learning process 'just in case'.

I have contributed a great many photos of flies to diptera.info which were not already in the galleries, and often better images of some of those which were so it gives others a better chance of identifying theirs. I very much doubt I would have contributed any if I had caught these flies, and dead flies really do not show the true features or colours of a fly, they are very difficult to take good photos of.

I really think it's time some who keep spouting about the benefits of collecting stood back a little and realised the benefits of people such as myself who not only provide good named images, but are able to help others, perhaps even more than some who collect. Collecting has been done in the days of old, keys have been done a long time ago and more recently using both museum specimens as well as current collections. The specialist entomologists certainly have a case for collecting in order to help identify, and many of these specialists are on sites such as diptera.info and also the HYMIS forum for Hymenoptera. They usually specialise in one field of entomology, there is far too many insects to generalise in collectiing, it would be far too time consuming for anyone to do properly.

Some amateur collectors might be inclined to try to collect anything they can get their hands on, and in the end they will not necessarily know as much as a person who takes good detailed photos.

Beware of those who borrow all the terminolgy they have ever encountered from the specialists but who really know very little, you will find out who knows their stuff in time.

I agree that a great many species can be identified from good photos - many more than most traditionalists will tell you. However, at the risk of diving into yet another futile debate on this subject, it must be stresed that a photo can never take the place of a specimen and that trying to key out many inverts from photos will only lead to frustration