Attribution to follow.
Update: Identity now available here. Photo from here.
Field of Science
-
-
From Valley Forge to the Lab: Parallels between Washington's Maneuvers and Drug Development4 weeks ago in The Curious Wavefunction
-
Political pollsters are pretending they know what's happening. They don't.4 weeks ago in Genomics, Medicine, and Pseudoscience
-
-
Course Corrections5 months ago in Angry by Choice
8 comments:
Markup Key:
- <b>bold</b> = bold
- <i>italic</i> = italic
- <a href="http://www.fieldofscience.com/">FoS</a> = FoS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Tiger Beatle
ReplyDeleteIt's a carabid for sure but not a tiger. A relative of Bembidion?
ReplyDeleteI second the above comments of Carabidae. Though, knowing just how big that taxon is, I can't guess what the genus might be.
ReplyDelete~Kai
At a guess, given the micro size, it could be a Tachys or Perigona, but it looks a bit slender to be either...
ReplyDeleteI 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".
ReplyDeleteCome on folks, this is going to be a doddle.
Assuming of course that this IS a native....
Definitely Carabidae, genus Polystichus perhaps? . . . shortened elytra
ReplyDeleteSomebody 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.
ReplyDeleteI'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.
ReplyDelete