Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Giving Tuesday

Please consider a donation to BugGuide today!

More info


Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Calendar
Upcoming Events

National Moth Week photos of insects and people. Here's how to add your images.

Photos of insects and people from the 2019 BugGuide Gathering in Louisiana, July 25-27

Discussion, insects and people from the 2018 gathering in Virginia, July 27-29

Photos of insects and people from the 2015 gathering in Wisconsin, July 10-12

Photos of insects and people from the 2014 gathering in Virginia, June 4-7.

Photos of insects and people from the 2013 gathering in Arizona, July 25-28

Photos of insects and people from the 2012 gathering in Alabama

Photos of insects and people from the 2011 gathering in Iowa


TaxonomyBrowseInfoImagesLinksBooksData
Photo#393086
ID for Field Station Empidid #4? - Rhamphomyia - female

ID for Field Station Empidid #4? - Rhamphomyia - Female
Robert J. Bernard Biological Field Station, Claremont, Los Angeles County, California, USA
April 11, 2010
Photographed on Marah macrocarpus.

Please also see my other posts of empidids from this location as they are likely the same species:

Images of this individual: tag all
ID for Field Station Empidid #4? - Rhamphomyia - female ID for Field Station Empidid #4? - Rhamphomyia - female

Moved
Moved from Dance Flies.

Move to Rhamphomyia
Male of genus Rhamphomyia

 
Thanks again, Ken!
Are you sure this one is male? I thought it looked like a female...

 
Rhamphomyia male and femeale
I'm not an expert at all and am currently trying to get a different Rhamphomyia species identified, which appears difficult. But images of specimen '#2' (393081 & -82) are indeed clearly of a male (based alone on the eyes which meet in the middle of the head, so-called 'holoptic' condition). Assuming that the other 3 specimens #s 1, 3 & 4 are the same species which seems likely from their appearance and location, these are all clearly female (look again at the eyes -> clear gap in the middle, 'dichoptic'). The females are numbers 393079, -80, -83, -84, -86).

 
Thanks so much for your input, Steve!
I appreciate your taking a look at my images and I agree with your gender assessments -- I'll update the posts now. (I think it is quite likely that Ken Collins probably just accidentally cut-and-pasted his comment from this other post of mine and that's why it erroneously indicates that this is a male.)

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.