Apolygus - simplified

 

Apolygus is a tricky genus, but the impact of a new paper (if widely accepted) on that British list is that Apolygus lucorum and Apolygus spinolae are genetically indistinguishable with A. spinolae as the valid name for the 'two' species. 

As a confirmed taxonomic lumper, I approve! 

Namyatova, A. A., Dzhelali, P. A., & Bolshakova, D. S. (2026) Integrative delimitation of Apolygus (Insecta: Heteroptera: Miridae: Mirinae) species known from Russia with the emphasis on Apolygus lucorum and Apolygus spinolae having trans-Palearctic distribution. Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny, 84, 47-93. https://doi.org/10.3897/asp.84.e161376

 

 

 

Oligometry

In Peritrechus, the structure of the antennae is an important diagnostic character. In Peritrechus geniculatus, ant3 is as thick or thicker than ant1, whereas in the other very similar species it is thinner. This recent specimen was missing the left ant4 but still identifiable as P. geniculatus. Then Jim Flanagan pointed out something odd to me. Maybe the left ant4 never got lost - it just didn't grow? The key is that the left ant2 is longer than the right - this is called oligometry and is frequent in Lygaeidae. Oligometry usually results in one of the antennae having three segments (it can also affect both antennae and then it is known as bilateral oligometry). It is thought to be caused during late development phase but precise reasons behind this deformation are not well known.

 

 

The Mysteries of the Metapleuron

I've always found Nysius to be a difficult genus to identify, apart from the obviously hairy N. huttoni. I turned up a few at the weekend but this time I used the key published by by Dolling, Het News, Issue 2, Autumn 2003. This turned out to be much easier than the other keys, and in the blink of an eye I had this one down to a species pair - N. graminicola vs. N. senecionis. The hind tarsi indicated which of these two it was, but to confirm I had to check the metapleuron, which confirmed that this was Nysius senecionis. 

Which raises the question - what the heck is a metapleuron? In Nysius the metapleuron is the lateral sclerite of the third thoracic segment and is the primary platform for the metathoracic scent gland (MTG) system. It consists of:

• The ostiole: an opening on the metapleuron through which the MTG reservoir empties its contents.
• The peritreme: a specialized cuticular structure (often shaped like an auricle or spout) that surrounds the ostiole. This directs the liquid secretion away from the body and onto the evaporatorium.
• The evaporatorium (or matt area): a distinct, non-glossy region of the metapleuron characterized by a highly micro-sculptured, "mushroom-like" or reticulated cuticle which increases the surface area significantly, allowing the defensive fluid to spread rapidly and evaporate (volatilize) almost instantly. This creates a "scent cloud" that deters predators before they can make physical contact.

The most important physiological role of the metapleuron is the dispersal of repellent defence chemicals. An additional role is in pheromone communication, acting as a broadcast structure for alarm, aggregation and sex pheromones. The specialized cuticle of the metapleuron evaporative area also prevents defensive secretions from being absorbed back into the insect's own underlying tissues.

I don't know about you, but it seems like a metapleuron might come in quite useful.

 

It's the pits

A new paper shows that the sensory pits on the cuticle of planthopper nymphs (Fulgoromorpha) do not respond to sound, ultrasound, mechanical stimulation, temperature changes, or magnetic fields. They do, however, respond to stimulation with very low intensity electric fields. This, together with the arrangement of these special sensory structures on the body surface of planthoppers, imply that these sensory organs perceive electric fields in the environment. The authors suggest that this sense may help the bugs to avoid predators or parasitoids. This finding also corresponds with recently published observations for treehoppers (Membracidae), where the horn-like extensions of the pronotum contain similar sensory pits. 

Electrosensitivity in planthoppers (Insecta: Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Fulgoromorpha). (2026) Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-025-01790-1

 

Leafhoppers vs AI - checking on progress

I'm currently writing a short article on Ribautiana species, so naturally rather than get on with it, I took the opportunity to be distracted by playing with AI. Recently Google released an update to its Gemini AI engine and this includes improvements to its (annoyingly named) image generator nano banana. Having spent a long time staring at photographs of Ribautiana and having zero artistic ability, I thought it would be useful to see if Gemini was capable of generating a labelled summary diagram of the differences between the UK species. You can see the result above. It didn't quite work but there is considerable promise.

First the easy part - the things it got wrong brackets (everybody loves to criticise AI):

• It didn't get the position of the dark dots on R. ulmi right, although it did get the idea that those dots are important for identification. 
• It made a mess of the apical dark marks on the wings of R. tenerrima.
• It made a complete mess of the aedeagi drawings. 

What it got right:

• It picked up on the fact that only two species of Ribautiana are visually distinguishable, at least in some cases, while the other three species generally are not. 
• It got the idea that the dark dots on R. ulmi are important and that the pale lines on the forewings of R. tenerrima are also significant.
• Most importantly, it correctly confirmed that dissection is important for definite identification of these species.

I didn't spend any time refining the prompts and getting Gemini to redraw the image - I suspect that if I had, the result would have been pretty good. I was really interested to see how AI is progressing and it certainly shows promise. And now, if you're suffering from lack of reality, here's the real thing:

 

The Invisible Bug?

 An appreciation of Cardiastethus fasciiventris.

 

The subtle effects of the climate crisis

diapause: noun, a period of suspended development during unfavourable environmental conditions.

The usual vision of the climate crisis is apocalyptic - floods, flames and desertification. While that's true, most of the reality is a lot more subtle, but should be none the less worrying for that. A new paper looks at the cost of diapause in mirid bugs. In the paper, the cause of diapause is day length, but diapause is diapause and the costs are the same for climate-induced diapause, e.g. due to temperature or drought. Under diapause conditions, oviposition was delayed and 30% fewer eggs were produced, reflecting the cost of producing diapause eggs. This shows that producing diapause eggs to ensure long-term survival incurs costs. It's subtle but as the frequency of adverse events increases, it's bad news. 

The cost of diapause egg production in two mirid bugs, Trigonotylus caelestialium and Adelphocoris triannulatus (Hemiptera: Miridae). (2025) Journal of Insect Physiology, 104915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2025.104915

 

 

Fungal Defence

I'm not very good at rearing larval insects, and on the few occasions that I have I've wound up with parasitoid wasps rather than what I was hoping for. Parasitoid wasps are hugely important in shaping insect populations, to the extent that I have often wondered how any insects survive. A new research paper shows that a Japanese shieldbug, Megymenum gracilicorne, uses fungi to ward off attacks. The females have organs on their hind legs which harbour fungi that the females use to coat newly laid eggs. The fungal hyphae grow to envelop the eggs and this physically excludes parasitoid wasps until the eggs hatch. While we don't have any Dinidorid shieldbugs in the UK, it might still be worth checking the hind legs of female shieldbugs carefully for any signs of similar structure. 

Nishino, T., Moriyama, M., Mukai, H., Tanahashi, M., Hosokawa, T., Chang, H. Y., & Fukatsu, T. (2025) Defensive fungal symbiosis on insect hindlegs. Science, 390(6770), 279-283. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10996522/pdf/nihpp-2024.03.25.586038v1.pdf

 

This is either genius ... or incredibly stupid

We have hugely underestimated the importance of sound communication in Hemiptera (bugs). Part of the reason for this is that many bug sounds consist of low frequency infrasound, e.g. vibrating the abdomen against a plant stem, or high frequency ultrasound, and the equipment needed to work with these frequencies is not widely available. I've written previously about this in Kleidocerys, and my frustration at not owning a conveniently-sized laser Doppler vibrometer. So, what if I told you that I'd figured out (by which I mean accidentally stumbled upon), a way of recording Kleidocerys calls on my mobile phone?

Listen to the soundtrack on this short video - sorry, it's a bit quiet, you'll need to turn your volume up: 

Yesterday, confronted by Alders, I had another go at finding Kleidocerys privignus (no luck, all Kleidocerys resedae, Birch Catkin Bugs). To check the ID's I was photographing them using a floating frame (see: Floating frames for macro photography), where the bug is trapped, unharmed, between two layers of transparent flexible film. Unharmed, but in the case of one of the Birch Catkin Bugs I was working with, pretty annoyed. The film appears to transform the ultrasonic calls of the bug into a lower, hearable frequency. By holding my mobile phone near the floating frame I was able to record the bug's irritation (before releasing it completely unharmed). The question is, would I be able to tell the difference in calls between K. resedae and K. ericae (should I ever find a specimen of K. ericae)?

 

Kybos Confusion

For the first time ever I've managed to identify a Kybos leafhopper to species level. This is a very common but difficult genus where the male aedeagus is of limited help and needs to be supported by imaging the sternal apodemes and dorsal tergites. 

And the winner is ... Kybos betulicola. Except that ... there is taxonomic disagreement over the name (aka Kybos lindbergi / Kybos ludus, see: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/18234077.pdf), but the UK Checklist currently recognizes K. betulicola, so that's what it is for now.

One small step for (a) man, one giant leap for leafhoppers.

 

Lumps, Bumps and Spines

Everyone loves a treehopper, but what are all those lumps, bumps and spines for? A new study suggest that not only are treehoppers capable of detecting the electric fields emitted by their predators but that the morphology of the pronotum increases their sensitivity to electrical stimuli. 

Electroreception in treehoppers: How extreme morphologies can increase electrical sensitivity. (2025) PNAS 122(30):e2505253122 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2505253122

"The link between form and function of an organism’s morphology is usually apparent or intuitive. However, some clades of organisms show remarkable diversity in their form, often exhibiting extreme morphologies, but with no obvious functional explanation. Treehoppers (Membracidae) are a family of insects that exemplify this, displaying an astounding morphological diversity, resulting in a plethora of extreme forms. The function of these morphological extremities and the reasons for their evolution have thus far remained largely enigmatic. However, this mystery can be considered in light of the capacity of many animals to detect electric fields in air via electrostatic actuation of mechanosensory structures on their body. Importantly, the strength of the electric field experienced by these mechanosensory structures is expected by physics to depend on the animal’s geometry, with sharp and elongated features producing the highest electric fields. Therefore, we hypothesize that the extreme morphologies of treehoppers increase their electrical sensitivity. Here, we show that treehoppers, along with their predators and mutualists, produce electric fields and that the treehopper Poppea capricornis can detect electric fields, responding behaviorally. We also demonstrate that predatory wasps and mutualist bees differ significantly in their electrostatic profiles, pointing to the sophistication of electrical information potentially available to treehoppers. Biophysical, computational, and mathematical techniques are then utilized to provide evidence that the pronotum of treehoppers is the site of electroreception and that its extreme shapes may enhance its sensitivity to electricity."

 

A walk in the park

With much needed rain on the way I took an early morning walk in my local park. I had a target species in mind but didn't find it, so abandoning the Acers, I went off piste. Walking past a large Salix alba, a quick rummage brought up a specimen of Blepharidopterus diaphanus (only a few previous VC55 records).

Before turning for home, I investigated a group of Wellingtonia, and found a few rather indistinctive bugs I took home for further investigation. Closer inspection revealed that one seemed to be Orthotylus caprai. This is a Mediterranean species which has spread across Europe and only has a handful of British records. However, with only a female specimen I couldn't be sure and it was a couple of days before I could go back and look for more. On my second visit I found a male and managed to confirm the first VC55 record for this species.

It's well worth looking out for O. caprai on scaly conifers (Cupressaceae), although you'll need sharp eyes - they're on the small side! 

 

Finishing with a bang

After what has been a tricky month, the very last night proved to be the highlight. A tropical night (according to the Met Office), and the max-min thermometer I place in my moth trap recorded a minimum temperature of 20C. And the moths responded - 247 moths of 27 species, three new for the garden - the best result I have had in years. But the moths weren't the best bit! When I turned the trap off at 3am there was a swirling cloud of life surrounding it. The by-catch comprises over 20 species of Hemiptera (which I haven't had time to sort through yet), and I didn't even attempt the Diptera or the beetles (some of which looked interesting). The absolute highlight was a species I've been waiting to see for quite a few years, the Eared Leafhopper, Ledra aurita. 

Apart from sleeping, I'd almost welcome more tropical nights.

  

Got the stomach for it?

Year by year we see changes in the VC55 bug fauna with new species arriving. In nearly every case this is because of adaptation to new food plants rather than climate as a primary cause (although climate warming probably also contributes). The question is, how do the bugs adapt? Is it due to genetic changes? A new paper describes the adaptation of the Mirid bug Apolygus lucorum to Cotton through changes in the gut microbes (microbiota) rather than waiting for the slow process of genetic change. This could go a long way to explaining how bug distribution is changing so rapidly. 

Gut microbiota facilitates the adaptation of Apolygus lucorum (Hemiptera: Miridae) to its host plant. (2025) Journal of Economic Entomology, toaf142.

https://academic.oup.com/jee/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/jee/toaf142/8169253

 

Kleidocerys privignus

Kleidocerys resedae, the Birch Catkin Bug, is a familiar and very common species of Lygaeid. Two closely related species are more problematic. Kleidocerys ericae was differentiated from K. resedae based on pigmentation and the fact that it feeds on heathers (Erica spp but not Calluna so I'm told). Kleidocerys privignus also has a different pigmentation pattern and feeds on Alder (Alnus). My natural inclination is to be a taxonomic lumper so I'm inclined to disregard the pigmentation differences (intermediate forms occur) and the food plant preferences (which laboratory rearing experiments have shown are not absolute) and regard all three as a single species. My ultimate authority on Hemiptera, Pericart, wasn't sure about these three, and without the benefit of DNA analysis hedged his bets, so no clear answer there. I was able to live with that until recently when I did some DNA analysis which implies that all three are indeed distinct species, see: https://ajcarthropoda.blogspot.com/2025/02/the-kleidocerys-conundrum-resolved.html

Which brings us to the question at the heart of this - what is a species? These days, the answer depends a lot on who you ask, but everyone agrees that it's now a lot more complicated now than when the species concept was developed. I'm afraid I have the old-fashioned opinion (which is bound to upset some) that a species is a group of organisms which are reproductively isolated. There are lots of ways to be reproductively isolated, e.g. pioneers trapped on an island, but it is also possible to be reproductively isolated behaviourally. A good example of this is the wolf spider Pardosa lugubris. This was split into two species based on observations of the male courtship dance (Cryptic species and behavioural isolation in the Pardosa lugubris group (Araneae, Lycosidae), with description of two new species. (2000) Bulletin British Arachnological Society, 11(7), 257-274). Being eaten by the female if she rejects your dance moves is pretty strong selection leading to reproductive isolation. Which brings us to Kleidocerys again. Like many Hemiptera, Kleidocerys communicate by stridulation. In this genus, sound production may not to be associated with mating but occurs when they are disturbed, perhaps as a territorial statement. K. ericae stridulates at a frequency of 16 Hz while K. resedae uses a lower frequency of 8 Hz (Stridulation and its analysis in certain Geocorisae (Hemiptera Heteroptera). (1957) Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 129 (3): 351-358). This is equivalent to the Pardosa mating dance and is likely to cause reproductive isolation, which is borne out by the DNA analysis of the two species. I don't know about stridulation frequency in K. privignus but the DNA analysis means that if we accept K. ericae as a distinct species from K. resedae, we have to do the same for K. privignus. 

Recently I sampled 20 Kleidocerys specimens from Alder here in Leicestershire. My overall impression is that they are quite variable in pigmentation, but in my sample, 1 out of 20 specimens has the pigmentation described for Kleidocerys privignus, the others appearing to be variants of the extremely common Kleidocerys resedae. 

The upshot of all of this is that while it's not clear if K. ericae occurs in VC55 (we have limited heather here), I think it's clear that K. privignus does. Now we need boots on the ground to get out there and figure out the field ecology. 

Many thanks to Jim Flanagan for helpful discussions, and for sharing this interesting paper: 

Davranoglou, L.R., Taylor, G.K., & Mortimer, B. (2023) Sexual selection and predation drive the repeated evolution of stridulation in Heteroptera and other arthropods. Biological Reviews, 98(3), 942-981.

 

The Kleidocerys Conundrum - Resolved?

I've been bothered about Kleidocerys for a while - specifically, is Kleidocerys ericae a separate species from the familiar Birch Catkin Bug, Kleidocerys resedae? See: The Kleidocerys Conundrum. When I cogitated about this two years ago it was obvious that DNA was the way out of the mess. A recent paper spurred me into action - time to find an answer. 

In a nutshell, DNA barcoding is a method of identifying species by sequencing a short, conserved region of DNA. The ideal DNA barcode gene needs to have enough variation between species to tell them apart, but be conserved enough within a species so it can be easily identified. The 5' portion of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI-5P) has become the standard Arthropod barcoding marker. A vast amount of DNA barcode data has now accumulated. At the time of writing, the International Barcode of Life (iBOL) initiative - www.boldsystems.org - has examined 26 million specimens, 21 million of them from Arthropods. Helpfully, the BOLD website makes it (relatively) easy to examine them, so I plunged into looking at the Kleidocerys data. 

CAVEAT: It's been a while since I did this professionally, and even then, it wasn't really my specialism. What follows is my interpretation. Others reading this may well know far more about it than I do, in which case, please let me know. 

A DNA dendrogram - tree diagram (if it was good enough for Darwin to sketch in his notebook, it's good enough for me) - is a visual representation of the genetic relationships between different organisms, or in this case, DNA sequences. Here's the tree for the Kleidocerys COI-5P barcodes:

(click for larger image)

In summary:

• Kleidocerys resedae and K. ericae each form sequence clusters with similar levels of relatedness. This supports the idea that they are indeed separate species.
• Kleidocerys privignus, very similar in appearance to K. resedae but which is said to occur on Alder, also appears to to be a separate species. (NB: one privignus sequence clusters within the resedae sequences (blue arrow) - presumably a misidentified specimen). 

So what does it mean for me? That I probably need to keep looking for K. ericae, although it is possible that it may not occur in VC55. I've been told that K. resedae can occur anywhere, but K. ericae is only found on Erica species (and not on Calluna), that that may help to target the search. It also means that I should probably look for K. privignus - time to target the Alders this year. 

Has this made my life simpler? Nope. When did technology ever do that?

 

Parasitic Mites on Corixids

I ventured out recently, broke the centimetre-thick ice on a local pool and underneath, found abundant Corixids happily over wintering and unbothered by the cold. Among the species I found was this specimen of Callicorixa praeusta: 

You may notice the small red object protruding from the rear end. Looking closely, this was a mite attached to the bug rather than part of the Corixid: 

Phoretic (hitchhiker) mites are not uncommon on Arachnids but a little research told me that this was in fact the larva of a Hydrachna water mite.

These larvae are actually parasitic rather than phoretic, feeding on the haemolymph of the Corixid. There is some interesting information here: http://coo.fieldofscience.com/2014/12/hunter-balls-hydracha-water-mites.html  They are not as common on Corixids as on some other Arachnids and I have no idea how much harm they inflict on the host. 

Great fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,

And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum.

Augustus De Morgan 

 

 

Entomology Journal - October 2024

A month of variable weather and troublesome Hymenoptera...

VC55 Terrestrial Heteroptera Recording and Checklist

After a great deal of work - mostly by my colleagues with a shamingly small contribution from me - we were finally able to publish the first two parts of our documentation of VC55 Bug Recording: 

LESOPS 63: VC55 Terrestrial Heteroptera VC55 Terrestrial Heteroptera Part 1: Recorders and Recording. Sue Timms, Kate Nightingale & Alan Cann. Leicestershire & Rutland Entomological Society Occasional Publications Series 63, October 2024. ISSN 095–1019. Available at: https://www.naturespot.org.uk/sites/default/files/2024-10/LESOPS63TerrestrialHeteroptera.pdf

LESOPS 64: VC55 Terrestrial Heteroptera Part 2: Provisional Checklist. Sue Timms, Kate Nightingale & Alan Cann. Leicestershire & Rutland Entomological Society Occasional Publications Series 64, October 2024. ISSN 095–1019 Available at: https://www.naturespot.org.uk/sites/default/files/2024-10/LESOPS64TerrestrialHeteropteraChecklist.pdf 

The plan is for more to follow in future, covering the other major groups. 

My Journal, October 2024

03.x.2024 

Worked on a range of Lygus specimens. I finally feel confident about these tricky bugs (as long as I can find a male!). 

04.x.2024

After the rain of the past week it was good to spend a day out at Melton Country Park. I was surprised to realise that I hadn't actually been there for nine years. I found a very good range of insects the highlights of which were Micronecta scholtzi, lots of Anthocoris limbatus and my favourite ladybird, Hippodamia variegata, the Adonis Ladybird.

05.x.2024

A friend dropped some specimens off for me to identify. The highlight was a male Anyphena numida. This is the first record of this spider for Leicestershire and Rutland. It was first identified in the UK in 2017 and is spreading rapidly from the southeast. 

10.x.2024

After much prevarication I finally cleaned the sensors on the microscope cameras. I don't like doing this because of the risk of damage but it seems to have worked well - far fewer annoying spots in the images now. 

11.x.2024

Quite a good frost, giving me hope for good autumn colour in the days to come took a trip to Cossington Meadows mostly targeting the pools with the dipnet. This produced some good records, including Corixia dentipes.

13.x.2024

Lots of fungi around but I'm very rusty on my ID skills. I'm aware that AI identification divides opinion, but it you think it's going to go away, you've lost the plot. The latest AI incarnation I've become aware of is the beta version of automated picture recognition on the Danish Fungal Atlas website. Seems pretty good to me, with the obvious limitations - https://ajcarthropoda.blogspot.com/2024/10/more-on-unstoppable-rise-of-ai.html

15.x.2024

Took a trip down to Blaby and Countesthorpe. Pond dipping produced a good range of species. 

17.x.2024

Enjoyed a very good LRES meeting at which Ray Morris discussed gall midges, even though galls and Diptera are not my area! Good to have face to face discussions. 

18.x.2024

After a misty start, took a trip to Shady Lane Arboretum on a sunny but windy afternoon before Storm Ashley hits over the weekend. 

21.x.2024

Visited a private estate at Osbaston to do some recording. In the walled garden we found the best growth of Mistletoe that I have ever seen on one of the old apple trees. Even better was the fact that it was only a few feet off the ground. Gently beating this produced a possible single specimen of Anthocoris visci, a Mistletoe-dependent species I have been looking for for two years. Unfortunately this turned out to be a female so we have been unable to confirm the species by dissection. However, a nearby Box hedge also produced Anthocoris butleri, also a good record.  Unfortunately I didn't spot a wasp nest I was standing next to (while trying not to fall in a stream) and managed to get stung on the hand by a wasp, but carried on recording after making a very swift exit, pursued by wasps. 

22.x.2024

Very pleased to have a flying visit from Jon Daws, dropping off some old record material. 

The hand which was stung by the wasp yesterday is now very swollen and painful making it difficult to do anything. I'm becoming increasingly annoyed that I didn't identify the wasp that stung me so that I could record it, and I regard an arm covered in very angry wasps as a rather poor excuse (even though running away as fast as possible was the smart thing to do under the circumstances). 

27.x.2024

Took Jon Daw's tuning fork (in D) to the Botanical Gardens to bother a few spiders in their webs. Moderately successful although there doesn't seem to be that much around at present. 

30.x.2024

A return visit to Osbaston to try to confirm the Anthocoris visci record from a week ago. Sadly we were unsuccessful. 

Read previous Journal entries

  

Lygus Identification for Dummies (like me)

For some time I have been unhappy about my ability to determine the species of certain Lygus specimens. A typical Lygus pratensis is easy - based on "shinyness" (pubescence) of the elytra and markings on the scutellum. (Having said which, the extent of seasonal colour variation in L. pratensis has only just dawned on me - not quite as extreme as Palomena prasina but not far off.) Likewise, a typical Lygus rugulipennis is easy - dull (pubescent) appearance. However, not all specimens are typical. A short time ago I found an atypical Lygus - quite shiny with Lygus wagneri-like markings on the scutellum: 

Such specimens are a problem. I find Nau's illustrations of the pubescence of the corium unhelpful (and he acknowledges the difficulty in distinguishing between certain specimens of L. pratensis and L. wagneri - Nau, B. (2004) Identification of plantbugs of the genus Lygus in Britain. Het News Issue 3, p11). 

Namyatova et al (2022) published a study of Lygus species including both habitus characters and male reproductive anatomy (Namyatova, A.A. Tyts, V.D. & Bolshakova, D.S. (2022) Identification and delimitation of the trans-Palearctic Lygus species (Insecta: Heteroptera: Miridae) using integrative approach. Insect Systematics & Evolution, 54(2), 146-192). According to Namyatova et al the overlap between L. pratensis and L. wagneri is explained by the fact that they are synonymous based on DNA homology, something which fits with observations of habitus. Leaving taxonomy issues to one side, the drawings of the spicule and the presence or absence of teeth on the right side of the small lobe of the vesica make distinguishing Lygus species (backed up by habitus) relatively straightforward. Although only males can be determined and dissection is required, this is at least a definite way of identifying atypical specimens with certainty. 

The issue now is that I have yet to encounter L. wagneri! Although we do have one record of this species in VC55 I am not convinced that it occurs here. However I am confident that if I do ever find a male L. wagneri I will be able to identify it with certainty! 

 

 

 

Green Shieldbug development

On 07.06.2024 (Day0) I spotted a Green Shieldbug, Palomena prasina, laying eggs outside my kitchen window:

By Day2 post-laying, the little perforated lids out of which the nymphs would eventually pop were already visible:

And then, not much happened. The weather was cold and the eggs developed a little more slowly than they might have done otherwise. Then, on Day16 after laying, tiny red eyes were visible through the shells:

Day18 - great excitement, the eggs hatched and the nymphs emerged:

24 hours after hatching the first instar nymphs had hardly moved, possibly waiting for their first moult to disperse?

At this point I moved ther nymphs to a less exposed spot where they will have a better chance of survival. Bon chance, mes petites.