• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

Distinctive Wasp ID? (Cambs. UK) (1 Viewer)

DoghouseRiley

Well-known member
Hi All
I sort of thought that this would be one of those frustrating wasps that would be very difficult to get any sort of identification but...............................
On close examination the eyes seem to have this pale halo and the lower part of the rear legs are very pale, almost white.
This is shown in the second photo.
Hopefully these two characteristics could help some kind sole to ID this, because I have searched far and wide and I am struggling.
Thanks, Gareth
 

Attachments

  • image001.jpg
    image001.jpg
    544.1 KB · Views: 19
  • image002.jpg
    image002.jpg
    518 KB · Views: 19

Ficedula

velico ergo sum
Hi All
I sort of thought that this would be one of those frustrating wasps that would be very difficult to get any sort of identification but...............................
On close examination the eyes seem to have this pale halo and the lower part of the rear legs are very pale, almost white.
This is shown in the second photo.
Hopefully these two characteristics could help some kind sole to ID this, because I have searched far and wide and I am struggling.
Thanks, Gareth
Don't know what you mean by "pale halo" the white area between coxae and trochanter is just intersegmental membrane (present on all insects), the white middle tarsal segments is a useful feature, but many Ichneumons have it. I think this is a male Buathra - Cryptinae.
 

DoghouseRiley

Well-known member
Don't know what you mean by "pale halo" the white area between coxae and trochanter is just intersegmental membrane (present on all insects), the white middle tarsal segments is a useful feature, but many Ichneumons have it. I think this is a male Buathra - Cryptinae.
There seemed to me to be a pale circle around the eye, I hadn't seen this before, so thought it might be of consequence. Thanks for the Buarthra suggestion, I'll follow it up. Thnx Gareth
 

DoghouseRiley

Well-known member
Don't know what you mean by "pale halo" the white area between coxae and trochanter is just intersegmental membrane (present on all insects), the white middle tarsal segments is a useful feature, but many Ichneumons have it. I think this is a male Buathra - Cryptinae.
Following up on your suggestion there appear to be only one Bauthra species found in the UK - B. labrador. A second species (B. tarsoleuca) appears to have one UK record but information is neglible.
B. labrador would seem the likely candidate. There are a number of pictures available, showing the males with white or pale lower hind legs. Length of antenae, colour of legs and abdomen seem to be matching my photograph.
I appreciate the heads-up on the Genus.
Yours, Gareth
 

Ficedula

velico ergo sum
Following up on your suggestion there appear to be only one Bauthra species found in the UK - B. labrador. A second species (B. tarsoleuca) appears to have one UK record but information is neglible.
B. labrador would seem the likely candidate. There are a number of pictures available, showing the males with white or pale lower hind legs. Length of antenae, colour of legs and abdomen seem to be matching my photograph.
I appreciate the heads-up on the Genus.
Yours, Gareth
Don't know where you get this from Buathra tarsoleuca is known from England and Scotland so that must be at least two records. The fact that there are few records is not a reason to rule out such poorly recorded insects. Having said that I've only found Buathra laborator so it is clearly the commoner species. Incidentally only females are readily identifiable males require careful comparison with reference material and then might not be doable..
 

DoghouseRiley

Well-known member
Don't know where you get this from Buathra tarsoleuca is known from England and Scotland so that must be at least two records. The fact that there are few records is not a reason to rule out such poorly recorded insects. Having said that I've only found Buathra laborator so it is clearly the commoner species. Incidentally only females are readily identifiable males require careful comparison with reference material and then might not be doable..
Hi Ficedula, sorry struggling with this. if the wasp is a Buathra and there are only two known species in the UK. One that looks exactly like my photo and one that had six sightings in Britain, the only confirmed one appears to be in West Yorkshire in 1953 (Biodiversity Heritage Library).
There are no colour photos of the latter in google images, this is pretty unusual to say the least. When the two are compared in "Tijdschrift voor Entomologie (1971)", it is stated that there is no reliable way to distinguish the males but the B. tarsoleuca material collected comes from Europe not the UK, material for B. laborator comes from Europe and the UK. The last and latest confirmed English record appears to be in 1953. Does B. tarsoleuca actually even reside in England? I am not being funny with you, I just don't understand?
 

Ficedula

velico ergo sum
Hi Ficedula, sorry struggling with this. if the wasp is a Buathra and there are only two known species in the UK. One that looks exactly like my photo and one that had six sightings in Britain, the only confirmed one appears to be in West Yorkshire in 1953 (Biodiversity Heritage Library).
There are no colour photos of the latter in google images, this is pretty unusual to say the least. When the two are compared in "Tijdschrift voor Entomologie (1971)", it is stated that there is no reliable way to distinguish the males but the B. tarsoleuca material collected comes from Europe not the UK, material for B. laborator comes from Europe and the UK. The last and latest confirmed English record appears to be in 1953. Does B. tarsoleuca actually even reside in England? I am not being funny with you, I just don't understand?
You seem to be putting your desire for a tick above the requisite caution any naturalist should foster. Your image cannot be named beyond Genus.
 

DoghouseRiley

Well-known member
You seem to be putting your desire for a tick above the requisite caution any naturalist should foster. Your image cannot be named beyond Genus.
With all due respect, I don't tick, I don't keep lists. My trainspotting days finished when I was 13. I keep my photos and I have a health interest in a lot of nature. I am simply struggling with the logic. You are saying that we cannot confirm the species because it might be one of two. One of which hasn't been seen for nearly 60 years in England. But because it was once seen here......... It makes no logical sense.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 2 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top