1 A bee fly at Paddys River, ACT
Identification history
| Sisyromyia sp. (genus) | 8 Nov 2019 | MichaelMulvaney | ||
| Sisyromyia sp. (genus) | 7 Nov 2019 | jgl | ||
| Bombyliidae (family) | 7 Nov 2019 | DPRees125 |
Identify this sighting
Please Login or Register to identify this sighting.
5 comments
DPRees125
wrote:
8 Nov 2019
I think we can go further, had a look at what is on ALA and it seems to me that a good match for this specimen is a member of the genus Sisyromyia
jgl
wrote:
8 Nov 2019
I've asked Xuankun Li, one of the world experts on this group, and Sisyromyia happens to be correct (he thinks Sisyromyia thomsoni based on the location). However, I'd be disinclined to confirm this ID based on ALA alone as there's a lot of unreliable image ID's on there...
For example, search for 'Bombyliinae' on ALA. Look under the 'Classification' tab - you'll see the genus 'Bombylius Linnaeus, 1758'. Click on this genus and open the gallery - you'll see an image under 'Types', and 6 images under 'Images', the first (from the left) of which shows a Formosia (Euamphibolia) nr. speciosa (actually in family Tachinidae). The next 3 images show 3 different bombyliids, none of which are Bombylius (present day definition); in fact Bombylius is a European and North American genus which is not known to be present in Australia. The last two images were taken in Canada and I've no idea if they're correctly ID'd.
I'm just making a point that you have to be very careful when making genus ID's based on browsing ALA - sometimes its extremely helpful and can send you in the right direction (to find a more reliable source), but you should always be wary of non-type image ID's which have been aggregated from the Flickr (or similar sites) of private individuals.
Cheers
For example, search for 'Bombyliinae' on ALA. Look under the 'Classification' tab - you'll see the genus 'Bombylius Linnaeus, 1758'. Click on this genus and open the gallery - you'll see an image under 'Types', and 6 images under 'Images', the first (from the left) of which shows a Formosia (Euamphibolia) nr. speciosa (actually in family Tachinidae). The next 3 images show 3 different bombyliids, none of which are Bombylius (present day definition); in fact Bombylius is a European and North American genus which is not known to be present in Australia. The last two images were taken in Canada and I've no idea if they're correctly ID'd.
I'm just making a point that you have to be very careful when making genus ID's based on browsing ALA - sometimes its extremely helpful and can send you in the right direction (to find a more reliable source), but you should always be wary of non-type image ID's which have been aggregated from the Flickr (or similar sites) of private individuals.
Cheers
DPRees125
wrote:
8 Nov 2019
So you have asked an authority on these flies and he thinks that is a reasonable answer and then you say that ALA is unreliable (which it may well be) and somehow the view of that person, who may have extra info and experience available to them, is questionable, interesting logic....
jgl
wrote:
8 Nov 2019
My apologies, that was poorly phrased, what I meant is:
- I've asked Xuankun Li, one of the world experts on this group, what he thinks this specimen is.
- He asked the location of the sighting, and when I told him ACT, he said Sisyromyia thomsoni.
- Now, in the event that i had not been able to get in contact with Dr Li and ask his opinion, then I wouldn't have been confident enough to confirm that this observation was Sisyromyia, based solely on the images shown on the 'Sisyromyia' ALA galley, especially given that there are no 'Type' images available there.
- World experts can be hard to pin down every time something like this comes up, and I'm not saying we need to consult one each time, but I simply wanted to draw attention to the fact that ALA can be unreliable, and is risky to use as a sole authority, especially without 'Type' images.
Does this make more sense?
- I've asked Xuankun Li, one of the world experts on this group, what he thinks this specimen is.
- He asked the location of the sighting, and when I told him ACT, he said Sisyromyia thomsoni.
- Now, in the event that i had not been able to get in contact with Dr Li and ask his opinion, then I wouldn't have been confident enough to confirm that this observation was Sisyromyia, based solely on the images shown on the 'Sisyromyia' ALA galley, especially given that there are no 'Type' images available there.
- World experts can be hard to pin down every time something like this comes up, and I'm not saying we need to consult one each time, but I simply wanted to draw attention to the fact that ALA can be unreliable, and is risky to use as a sole authority, especially without 'Type' images.
Does this make more sense?
DPRees125
wrote:
8 Nov 2019
Yes, I am more than aware of the lack of experts in this space and that ALA contains questionable material. One does wonder what its host (CSIRO) does about cleaning it up? Thank you for your trouble to date.
Please Login or Register to comment.
Nearby sightings
Location information
- Coordinates 148.914275-35.518895
- Maps Gibraltar Pines
- Places Paddys River, ACT
Sighting information
- 1 - 3 Abundance
- 7 Nov 2019 12:53 PM Recorded on
- DPRees125 Recorded by
Additional information
- 5mm to 12mm Animal size
Species information
- Sisyromyia sp. (genus) Scientific name
- A bee fly Common name
- Not Sensitive
- Local native
- Non-Invasive
- Up to 937m Recorded at altitude
- Machine learning
- External link More information
Record quality
- Images or audio
- More than one media file
- Confirmed by an expert moderator
- Nearby sighting(s) of same species
- GPS evidence of location
- Description
- Additional attributes
