These photos were loaded onto iNaturalist and the name was corrected from Netelia to Enicospilus. How do you distinguish between the two from the photos?
See the notes on the page for Enicospilus sp.: https://canberra.naturemapr.org/Community/Species/Sightings/34056 "Superficially similar to Netelia, but the sclerotized (hardened) flecks in the forewing separate it."
I don't know what to look for with the sclerotized flecks (I can only see wing mirror reflection from the flash) but Netelia has a small petiolate cell in forewing, ophionines don't.
I've edited the first photo, and added it back to the sighting, with an arrow pointing to what I thought might be the sclerotized flecks, which seem to be absent from Netelia sp. What do you think?
I just had a look at a few on iNaturalist and most seem to have that mark so it looks good. Here's one that doesn't though: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/4084501 (haven't looked at Natelia yet to see if any of them have it).
E. skeltonii, E. amlipennis and E. samoanus all have very similar fenestras with no central sclerite. E samoanus has an AI index r/p of 0.9 - 1.1 within the range of this specimen and the correct bulge in the throat of the horsehead cell and so is the best fit. See fig 134, Ophioninae of Australia, Gauld 1977. The name Enicospilus samoanus does not exist in any current classification system. It appears to be E. dolosus. Also, Gauld states that it is only in Qld.
Describe how you intend to use these images and/or audio files and your request will be sent to the author for consideration.
Your request has been successfully submitted to the author for consideration.
2,205,379 sightings of 20,941 species in 9,229 locations from 12,784 contributors
CCA 3.0 | privacy
We acknowledge the Traditional Owners of this land and acknowledge their continuing connection to their culture. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present.