| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| BillTyson |
Posted - 13/05/2016 : 01:05:13
51.96 KB
Yen Bai, May, 23 mm
 
Here are two more views. One shows the crests on the elytra. |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Francesco |
Posted - 09/07/2022 : 08:30:54
Indeed: Trachystohamus semigranulatus (Pic, 1925) after the revision published here. |
| MONO |
Posted - 09/10/2017 : 17:49:51
Xaurus's species is very similar to the holotype of Trachystohamus subelongatus |
| BillTyson |
Posted - 05/06/2016 : 00:38:05
Thanks to all. |
| Xavier |
Posted - 02/06/2016 : 07:56:54
This specimen fits Breuning's description of Monochamus semigranulatus (Pic, 1925) in " révision des Agniini" pages 436-437 , but as you said, we have to check holotype specimen. |
| Xaurus |
Posted - 26/05/2016 : 00:39:18
404.71 KB
at my spms from Vietnam the dark spot is variable in size, your spm is very similar, but I'm not quite sure with the ID, there is another similar species Monochamus semigranulatus Pic, 1925 described from Vietnam, maybe Xavier or Gerard can find the type spm in MNHN.
I found a spm from the FREY coll det. by Breuning but it could be wrong |
| BillTyson |
Posted - 14/05/2016 : 16:21:11
Mine is a lot fresher specimen than Pic type, that's for sure.
This one has a larger elytral spot and I think I see a difference in the length of the 3 and 4th antennal segments between the two. |
| Xaurus |
Posted - 14/05/2016 : 01:02:05
It is not M. bimaculatus, maybe look at Trachystohamus subelongatus, see type section, but your picture is a bit strange. |
| BillTyson |
Posted - 13/05/2016 : 23:22:05
It looks different from my short series of bimaculatus. That is why I listed it.
Thanks |
| Xavier |
Posted - 13/05/2016 : 17:52:38
Same species here ?
There are many pictures of M.bimaculatus on the forum, but with shorter lateral spines on pronotum, and less sharp; base of elytra are less granular. I am not sure that it's the same species. |
| Capitaine |
Posted - 13/05/2016 : 10:46:49
Lack of contrast, but yes: M. bimaculatus (Gahan,1888) |
