perhaps a jumping spider. Family Salticidae.

Misinformation is certainly easier to come by with the internet, we used to have to get it in actual print. I don't think I've seen any
of our local Bald Eagles take off from water, but I've seen them catch fish, so I'd surmise they can probably get out the water, I have seen
a Monarch butterfly pull itself out of the Pacific when we were whale watching in Monterey, I figured "that thing is finished" until it flew off.
Freezes are few around here, but the bog of pitcher plants is benefiting from the influx of flies.

kevinkk wrote: ↑Fri Aug 30, 2024 4:21 pm I see, like the time I had read that you could grab a bumblebee by the wings, and it wouldn't be able to sting you. I must have read it wrong.

Yes, I learned that at about 4 YO; I'd heard that too. Someone was wrong.

Cicadas may not bite, but they can pierce skin. Ditto Ichneumons. AMHIK.

Conventional wisdom is a dangerous thing, particularly now with the internet. Some years ago National Geographic had a webpage stating that Bald Eagles cannot take off from the water. Rubbish. I lambasted them, and shortly after I could no longer find that page...but still, there are plenty of claims on the innerweb that still claim they cannot lift off from the water.

Despite all of this though, there is still a dead body under your deck. Hey, wait until it gets cold and you should be able to grab it, throw it in with Dermestids, and have a skeleton puzzle to assemble this winter.

I see, like the time I had read that you could grab a bumblebee by the wings, and it wouldn't be able to sting you. I must have read it wrong.

I think even at 12 YO you'd not crawled under a deck. Beyond flies and a body, you'd know under decks is prone to be called home by skunks and wasps.

Though the fact remains that age tends to bring a level of comfort via both avoiding discomfort and knowing how to do so while losing little. I've been stung over 4,000 times. In my younger years, I'd reach into the net and pull the wasp out. We'd get all stung up going through fields of flowers. I still go through fields of flowers, but the details of how I do it, so minute, avoids stings.

The nice thing is that while you don't know the taxon of what's under the deck, you know where it's headed. It's not scary or voodoo. You'll get through it.

What spider is it? lenght: about 5-7 mm
thank you!

In the last couple days, I have realized there must be a decomposing animal under my decking. There are fly species I don't normally see,
and of course, the olfactory issue.
Now, when I was a kid, I'd have sought out that critter for the beetles, I turned over more than one former furry critter looking for
the clean-up crew. No way am I now going to even looking under the deck to see what it is, I don't care how many Sexton beetles
there might be, or the carrion beetles, etc.
What changed? I'm not sure, but something happened when I aged to the present 60yrs. I'm just hoping it's not anything bigger than
a chipmunk.

Great photos Mike, thanks for taking the time to post them.

Aneflus paracalvatus from Pima co. Arizona


Aneflus protensus from Pima co. Arizona


Phymatodes sp. from Baker co. Oregon

Methia sp. from Cochise co. Arizona


Methia sp. from Pima Co. Arizona


Poliaenus nuevoleonis from Cochise co. Arizona

You didn't mention where you are, but I assume Portugal, if the flag is correct.

I know very little about identifying cockroaches and it may be very difficult to identify a small nymph from photos, whereas an adult would be much easier. Perhaps someone here can help, but it is likely only a cockroach expert could give a definitive answer.

Adam.

I mean, german, oriental, or? I don't understand what it could be, thank you

27aug24: One observed at Cup Plant patch. 85F/23C. The Tiger was very light, meaning old and worn. Following horribly cold (highs 63F/17C) and stormy days early last week the weather has slowly improved. Surely, there was sufficient time now to eclose a new batch of Tigers; but this is not the case. We do know, thanks to @eurytides, that MST can dipause two winters.

So it looks like the MST in Finger Lakes region of NY have hung it up. With that, I hang up my NY field work and have tossed the well-seasoned field clothing into the washer.

That marks 112 days (elapsed) for Tiger Swallowtail field work in 2024. That's 101 days from first to last Tiger Swallowtail in the Finger Lakes region, during which there was not a week without some Tiger (or another?) being present; this is notable because some areas, or maybe most, with multiple taxa have a period between the different flights, making it easier to differentiate between taxa.

Here is a different approach that we used for the Butterflies and Skippers of Ohio. We stretched clear acetate over a metal picture frame and then photographed a bunch of bugs at once. This works because when you flip a bug over, there is less pin above versus below. So sticky tac on the surface of the acetate for ventral shots, while you pin though the acetate for dorsal bugs - so you can control height. Also note that there was no cleaning up the background with this technique - as we clamped the frame a few feet above an illuminated background. This was probably faster than dealing with individual photos, but it was not easy. And if you want dorsal and ventral of the same specimens - then you have to re-pin the entire plate.

The entire book is here - https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... rs_of_Ohio

John

I used very thin fishing line as I didn't want it to show up in the photos. The biggest problem I had was getting the line taut, then getting it to stay taut.

bobw wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 2:15 pm I do like the fishing line method that Tom came up with. I tried it once but found it tricky to balance the specimens on the lines, especially when dealing with specimens of very diffent sizes. I tried to make a permanent box with the lines in, but this proved way beyond my skill or patience set.

Thanks for the insights Bob. My thought was to use unit pinning trays with three different width lines. I currently use pinning trays with white plastazote, which gives me a rough guide to get the specimen under the camera, and also a nice white background that doesn't reflect like white paper does.

It should be easy enough to run two parallel fishing lines over the pinning tray and secure the ends with staples or some sort of tape.

My quandary is how small can I go with the fishing line, and whether it shows up in photos. I could try it, after I secure some thin monofilament. I suppose (fear) that no matter what the line will show up, so I'd have to manipulate every photo.

I do like the fishing line method that Tom came up with. I tried it once but found it tricky to balance the specimens on the lines, especially when dealing with specimens of very diffent sizes. I tried to make a permanent box with the lines in, but this proved way beyond my skill or patience set.

adamcotton wrote: ↑Mon Aug 26, 2024 5:21 pm I use white plasticine to pin a specimen in my light box for both sides. The same blob has been in the light box for years, and I just squeeze it to remove the holes. It grips pins for ventral (not verso!) side photos really well.

Adam.

Good to see you championing the correct terms Adam - "dorsal" and "ventral". I hate those ridiculous "recto" and "verso" terms, which I believe were a D'Abrera invention, and are correctly used just for the pages of a book.

Thanks Tom & John.

I have experienced challenges ensuring the specimen is completely level; and there's nothing more frustrating than thinking I have a publication-grade photo and realizing that the wings are not to scale because the darned specimen was two degrees tilted. The two lines would indeed take care of that.

My concern is time- if every photo takes five minutes to polish, and every specimen needs two photos, then 500 specimens would take 5000 minutes- 82 hours. Yikes. I wonder if using a very small- say, 2lb or even 1lb, monofilament would not show up and I can use the photo as-is. What size do you guys use?

ps Tom, it's great to see you back here! I've been wondering what you're up to and miss your updates.

What Tom said!

I used to use sticky Tac but gave it up because I ended up with dorsal and ventral photos that were at different distances from the camera lens. This creates dorsal/ventral photos that are at slightly different scales (at least using my set up, where the camera doesn't move between exposures). If this is important to you, then I suggest creating a "photo tray" that has two nylon lines that you simply lay the specimen on.

Here is an example I pulled together from old photos, pasted together and then cleaned up - total time was about 10 minutes this morning. Plus the added beauty is that the nylon lines are at 1cm spacing - so every raw photo has a scale line. All I did was paste two photos together, and then use a magic wand tool to strip out the background. It's a little rough because I used a low resolution this morning - if I had used the original photos at 100% resolution, the wing fringes would have come out a lot better. (this is Atalopedes flaveola from Columbia)

John