T O P I C R E V I E W |
Vitali |
Posted - 02/02/2013 : 14:20:56 124.11 KB
China, Sichuan This is a source of confusion to me. I received this beetle as Chlorophorus notabilis cuneatus. If fact "notabilis cuneatus" should belong to Demonax. This beetle is obviously Chlorophorus, but there are too many species with a similar colour pattern. Can anyone help with it? |
6 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
Xavier |
Posted - 03/02/2013 : 13:04:09 I create a new topic to compare specimens from Laos and Japon. |
Vitali |
Posted - 03/02/2013 : 11:00:37 Well, it appears I had too little experience with Demonax. I did not expect these "spines" that small. If fact these were just small teeth visible under a microscope. Demonax then... |
Francesco |
Posted - 03/02/2013 : 09:23:12 Clytus notabilis Pascoe, 1862 really belongs to Demonax, not to Chlorophorus! In the linked topic, the spines on the antennae are well visible. Has this specimen got no spines? |
Vitali |
Posted - 02/02/2013 : 15:45:18 Thank you, Xavier. I'll work on it. |
Xavier |
Posted - 02/02/2013 : 15:16:40 Gressitt & Rondon, 1970 fig. 39j, p. 260 Here the picture of Demonax pseudonotabilis |
Xavier |
Posted - 02/02/2013 : 15:03:16 Species also unclear for me, and I don't know what thinking! Have a look to this topic. |