[steve covey]

Originally Posted by Surreybirder

This one is definitely a hoverfly.
I thought it might be Syrphus ribesii but am far from sure.
Ken

Hi Ken, #70 and#72 are the 'domestic' honey bee [you can see the 4 wings in one of the shots].
As Brian said, #73 is nigh impossible from the pic but I'd have a stab at S. vitripennis.
Cheers,
Steve.

[steve covey]

Hi all,
chuffed to bits that I found a 'new' species for me the other day - and a scarce species to boot; Epistrophe diaphana!
Cheers,
Steve.

[Roger Morris]

This looks to me to be Eristalis tenax - the hind femur and tibia are diagnostic (also front tarsi are dark)

Roger

Originally Posted by Tockman

Not many birds around yesterday, so turned my camera on anything that moved in the garden! is this one a Hoverfly?

[Roger Morris]

This is the hive bee Apis mellifera - you can tell it is a bee because it has two sets of wings (flies have one set and a pair of halteres)

In terms of determining whether a fly is a hoverfly - the one diagnostic character that is critical is the presence of a vena spuria - a kind of false vein that allows the wing to flex up and down (and creates the hovering motion).

Regards

Roger

Originally Posted by Surreybirder

Yes, it would be quite helpful for me to know how you tell if a fly is a hoverfly or not. I photoed something in the garden the other day (4/9) and then thought that it looked more bee-like.
Ken

[Roger Morris]

This I think is Eupeodes latifasciatus but I cannot be entirely certain (vague possibility of E. bucculatus).

Roger

Originally Posted by Surreybirder

This one is definitely a hoverfly.
I thought it might be Syrphus ribesii but am far from sure.
Ken

[Surreybirder]

Originally Posted by Roger Morris

This I think is Eupeodes latifasciatus but I cannot be entirely certain (vague possibility of E. bucculatus).

Roger

Thanks, Roger,
I'll have to try and get better photos! (Not easy with an autofocus camera)
Ken

[Surreybirder]

I finally managed to get a reasonable photo of a hoverfly in my garden.
Does anyone know what it is - at least to genus level?
Ken

[paul mabbott]

I'm glad to see the return of the 'hoverfly thread' - was beginning to think they had become extinct. I've seen very few hoverflies this year other than a *few* Eristalis last month. Is this a general thing in UK or just my neck of the woods?

Couldn't the thread be made a sticky?

[Mis]

I've seen several species recently but I'm still trying to get to grips with hoverflies so I'm not too sure what they were. I saw Rhingia campestris several days ago but most are unidentifieds for now!

It would be useful if this was a sticky. I hadn't realised there was a hoverfly thread and would have posted some of my photos here.

[Surreybirder]

I've not seen many hoverflies, Paul, although the marmalade fly has been around for a while. Also some really small ones that I think are virtually impossible to ID from photos (because the hide under their wings when they are stationary).
How does one go about making a thread into a sticky?
Ken

[paul mabbott]

We could ask that nice Andy Bright who provided the ladybird thread .. but I've forgotten how to do it .... does everyone shout, "Andy ...."?
It will all come back ....

Originally Posted by Surreybirder

How does one go about making a thread into a sticky?
Ken

[Surreybirder]

Coming back to my hoverfly I think it might be a male Syrphus ribesii which is said to be 'among the most familiar of hoverflies throughout Britain... often being found in gardens'.
Ken

[Imaginos]

Originally Posted by Surreybirder

Coming back to my hoverfly I think it might be a male Syrphus ribesii which is said to be 'among the most familiar of hoverflies throughout Britain... often being found in gardens'.
Ken

...or S. vitripennis the difference between the males is that vitripennis has black hairs on the hind femora and microtrichia (tiny hairs) on the basal cells of the wing. Can't see enough to be sure that either character is absent I'm afraid. Both species are rather common.

[Surreybirder]

Originally Posted by Imaginos

...or S. vitripennis the difference between the males is that vitripennis has black hairs on the hind femora and microtrichia (tiny hairs) on the basal cells of the wing. Can't see enough to be sure that either character is absent I'm afraid. Both species are rather common.

That neatly sums up why I don't do many hoverfly IDs!
But thanks for your input Imaginos. At least I know what genus it belongs to.
Ken

[Imaginos]

Alan Stubb's 'British Hoverflies' makes the identification as painless as possible-look out for it, the keys & plates are good & the descriptions take into account similar species so you needn't key them out if you don't want to & can go by the traditional method of looking at the pictures.

[Surreybirder]

Originally Posted by Imaginos

Alan Stubb's 'British Hoverflies' makes the identification as painless as possible-look out for it, the keys & plates are good & the descriptions take into account similar species so you needn't key them out if you don't want to & can go by the traditional method of looking at the pictures.

Believe it or not, I already have it... that's how I worked out that it was a Syrphus. (I looked at the pix )
Ken

[Surreybirder]

There seem to be lots of hoverflies in our garden now, mainly quite small ones. I don't seem to have much success at photographing them. The two I got are, I think, another Syrphus (probably not determinable) and one which I don't think is a hoverfly at all - I seem to remember that it's some sort of parasitic fly. Any ID help would be appreciated.
Ken

[Brian Stone]

Some good pics Ken. Most hovers are hard from photos and I think recent splits in the Syrphus genus makes them virtually impossible to assign to anything other than an agg.

Try to get lateral as well as dorsal shots and ensure the legs are clearly shown. Also get a shot head on as the face pattern can be important.

Mark van Veen has published several keys on the web and his book is worth a look too:
http://home.hccnet.nl/mp.van.veen/fe_ento.html

Look at the species lisings on the Hoverfly Recording Scheme's website to get a score to indicate how difficult each species is to ID:
http://www.hoverfly.org.uk/

I've seen plenty of hovers in favoured areas so far this year including R. campestris, L. lucorum, H. pendulus and trittivatus, E. luniger, Syrphus and Eristalis spp. as well as the difficult smaller species.

[Brian Stone]

Found a rich seam this lunchtime with many species flying around some flowering privet including these two beauties:
Xanthogramma pedisequum
Volucella bombylans (white-tailed form)

[paul mabbott]

Originally Posted by Surreybirder

.... although the marmalade fly has been around for a while.

Saw my first local E. balteatus yesterday - which is seriously late, still very few other species despite the spell of warm weather.

[Brian Stone]

I think my first this year were on 15 Apr but they have been generally rather thin on the ground so far. Good numbers of species were out on 30 Apr but on the whole it's been quite poor.

[Brian Stone]

A couple more recent shots. H. pendulus is very common and C. illustrata apparently common on umbels like Angelica but this was my first.

[Surreybirder]

any thoughts on this smallish one?

[Brian Stone]

It's a Sphaerophoria sp. and these are supposed to be really hard, especially as that's a female. Would be surprised if it wasn't scripta though.

[Surreybirder]

thanks, Brian. I hope to ID one to species level (apart from marmalade fly) one of these days!
Ken