Any ideas? This was taken in July on the beach of Bandon, OR, in the USA.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
0
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
Your picture most likely shows Lichnanthe rathvoni of the family Glaphyridae.
The older answer is almost certainly not correct in any of its guesses; all of the possibilities listed are Palaearctic (see the sites https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicometis_hirta, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropinota_squalida, and http://www.coleo-net.de/coleo/texte/oxythyrea.htm for confirmation; the first and third will need translating for those not fluent in French and German, respectively).
Referring to Part V of M. H. Hatch, The Beetles of the Pacific Northwest (1971) (which covers the states of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, and the province of British Columbia, in their entirety, and the western part of the state of Montana), and assuming the subfamily Cetoniinae is correct, I had thought this was Trichiotinus assimilis Kirby; there are inconsistencies between this photo and those provided by bugguide.net (see http://bugguide.net/node/view/22486); specifically, the elytra here are well-separated apically, and the coloration is quite different. A review of Volume 2 of American Beetles showed me my error: the insect is a member of the family Glaphyridae (formerly a subfamily of Scarabaeidae), and the genus Lichnanthe; returning to Hatch, 1971 shows only L. rathvoni LeConte from the covered area; photos of that species in bugguide.net (see http://bugguide.net/node/view/115846) show some variation in markings from the photo here (which is to be expected), but are structurally fairly close.
The genus Lichnanthe was most recently revised in the following paper:
Carlson, David C.. 1980. Taxonomic revision of Lichnanthe Burmeister (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Coleopterists Bulletin, 34(2):177-208.
which is available through JSTOR (a subscription, one-time payment, or access through a university will be needed).
-
1$\begingroup$ This question already has an accepted answer. Given that your answer suggests the question refers to a different species than the one in the accepted answer, you should provide further evidence to why you think your answer is the correct one (at least a picture and a contrasting discussion what features match your ID but not the suggested one), otherwise your answer will probably be down-voted. Thanks! $\endgroup$ Commented May 17, 2017 at 8:48
-
2$\begingroup$ In addition to my comment under the previous answer, see figure 103.34 (page 69) in the reference I cite there (the elytral markings differ from those in the photograph, but those can vary from one individual to another). Figures 101.34 and 104.34 illustrate two of the other three Pacific Northwest genera (and the genus that is missing is most frequently encountered with ants). $\endgroup$ Commented May 17, 2017 at 18:17
-
1$\begingroup$ After considerable delay I finally obtained a copy of Carlson 1980; that work reinforces the identification given above (the new species named by Carlson were not found in Oregon at the time of description). $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 5, 2018 at 0:51
-
$\begingroup$ Awesome, I already up-voted after your last edits, so my +1 still holds. :-) $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 12, 2018 at 16:02
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
I'm pretty sure it is in the Cetoniinae (flower beetle) family. Off-hand I would put it in the genus, Tropinota. It may be a subspecies or relative of Tropinota squalida or Tropinosa hirta. But it could also be closer to the genus Oxythrea.
-
$\begingroup$ The two (three? I'm assuming that either "Tropinota" or "Tropinosa" is a misspelling) genera given here do not appear in Arnett, et al., 2002, American Beetles volume 2 (pages 67 to 71). $\endgroup$ Commented May 17, 2017 at 18:05