An inordinate fondness for systematics
It's a carabid for sure but not a tiger. A relative of Bembidion?
I second the above comments of Carabidae. Though, knowing just how big that taxon is, I can't guess what the genus might be.~Kai
At a guess, given the micro size, it could be a Tachys or Perigona, but it looks a bit slender to be either...
I felt a bit lame after that one so I went to see what the Dept of Envt etc. has to offer for Australian taxa...: "The Australian fauna includes 276 of these genera [Carabidae] and about 2 250 described and valid species with at least some representatives of most of the major tribes".Come on folks, this is going to be a doddle. Assuming of course that this IS a native....
Definitely Carabidae, genus Polystichus perhaps? . . . shortened elytra
Somebody got it, but I don't know who to give the points to because they left their comment anonymous... Other than that, I'm giving two points to Reprobus and one to Kai.
I'm not sure I deserve them as I didn't give this one any kind of serious attention but at least I have recovered the points so scandalously, iniquitously, barbarously stolen from me by Adam Yates over the spine-tingling mystery of the 'Asymmetroconida'. The family-level suffix of which, I note with pleasure, is still a hapax googlomenon.
Markup Key:- <b>bold</b> = bold- <i>italic</i> = italic- <a href="http://www.fieldofscience.com/">FoS</a> = FoS