When it came time to identify this beetle, I didn’t have much hope.  After all, there are thousands of “shiny green beetles” out there and I didn’t have too much hope of figuring out what this is.

To my surprise, I think I do know what this is.  It looks a lot like a flea beetle (family chrysomelidae, subfamily alticinae).  I am not 100% sure, but it does look awfully like a flea from the front – doesn’t it?

As with all types of beetles, there are a wide variety of flea beetles out there.  They are characterized by strong jumping legs in the back – which makes me slightly unsure about this one.  They also have the ability to jump – though I didn’t see this one jump and I certainly annoyed it quite a bit.

You can probably tell here that I am working on my profile shots.  Unfortunately this one didn’t get close enough to the edge of the leaf so this is the best I got.

Some flea beetles are pests, while others are beneficial.  It depends on the species.  However, they can be pests for seedlings and therefore there does exist a good deal of info on the web about controlling them.

Still, it was nice seeing a new type of insect and even nicer if I happened to identify it correctly!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

One of the interesting things about keeping a blog is it has caused me to ask questions that I normally would not ask.  The following came up with another similar specimen that I found over the weekend.

After looking at these pictures, I had the following questions.

1. Why did I find this beetle just now?  They are not common during other parts of the year.  Are they common during just a small part of the year?
2. This specimen looks a bit different than the other one.  It is slightly reddish while the other one is more pitch black.
3. It also did not raise its tail as a threat, but instead ran away quickly.  There were also several of them instead of just a single one as I found before.  It certainly seemed more docile than the other one.

I’m not sure if I have a perfect answer for these questions, but I did a little bit of research and have some ideas.

My suspicions are that this is a different species of rove beetle from the one I found earlier.  The characteristics of it just seem a bit too different.

In some respects, I am a bit upset at myself for not getting some more shots of it.  They were very determined to get away from me and there were so many interesting things to shoot that day that I just let it have its way and moved on to other subjects.  Now that I suspect that it is a different beetle it would have been nice to have some better shots.

I looked in my books and found an interesting beetle called Nodobius cephalus.  My book (Insects their Natural History and Diversity) calles them “flexible hunters that seek bark beetle prey under bark and in their galleries”.

As I found these beetles under a bag of gravel, it certainly is a possibility.  Of course, this book only covers eastern insects so I’m not sure if it is common on the west coast.  More likely, it is a different species as one can see from this page full of different rove beetles.  Interestingly, I went through the slide show and noticed that they are all from New England, so it is likely that this one isn’t in the list.

Still, I learned something today and find it interesting how this blog has caused me to ask questions I would have otherwise never thought about.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

I found a number of these scurrying after I picked up a bag of gravel.  They clearly did not like to be in the open as they tried to hide under whatever they could find.  Although not evident from the shot, the back reflected a greenish color.

According to modern estimates, there are about 350,000 beetle species identified so far.  Scientists believe that the total amount of beetle species on the planet is somewhere from around three to eight million.  The end result, the chances I’ll be able to identify this beetle are not great.

Still, I couldn’t resist getting a number of shots off.

Here’s a closeup shot.

From looking at these shots, I wonder if the beetle is a predator or feeds on decayed matter.  The picture above should give the necessary clue, but unfortunately I still have a lot to learn.  I am guessing when I say that it is not a predator due to two observations.

1) The mouth above does not appear to be the mouth of a predator.  It sort of looks like it may have pincers, but it appears that the mouth is more geared towards eating plants.

2) They were in groups when I lifted the bag.  Predators seem to be more solitary.

One of these days I need to take a good entomology course to learn a bit more about our many neighbors.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

This image is part of a ‘geometry in nature’ series that I am working on, though I doubt it will end up in the final collection.  It came out as I expected, but I haven’t been able to make the yellow stronger and I think the shot is missing some ‘oomph’ in general.

Soon after that my patience was rewarded with a small beetle.

After spending some time going through my insect books, I can with confidence say that I have no idea what type of beetle this is.  The large eyes and markings on its back should make it conspicuous, but I didn’t find anything that looked like it in my books.  As there are a tremendous number of beetle species, it’s possible I will need a specialist book to identify it.

A short time after the beetle I got my first fly of the year (as Tom would say “CHECK”).  Obviously I have seen other flies this year, but this is the first one that was still enough to let me get a good shot.  I hope to have some better shots as things get warmer and I have more opportunities to shoot flies.

Interestingly some of my coworkers found this shot interesting for the drab colors – almost like a black and white image.  I may play with this image a bit in the future to see what I can do with it.  I haven’t spent much time figuring out what type of fly this is, but given the number of families and species I suspect it won’t be easy to figure it out.

Finally I found this interesting bug.

This is the leaf that I found it on originally.  I then tried to use it with my flower experiment but it didn’t want a part of that.  I’m still not exactly sure what this is, but given the antennas, back, and eyes I suspect it is a type of fly.  From my insect book it looks similar to a xylophagid fly, but there are a number of differences in the pictures I have seen.

So in terms of photography it was a successful day, but in terms of figuring out what I photographed I have some work remaining.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Contrast this to identifying anthropods.  I’m not exactly sure how many anthropod species have been identified.  However, there are currently 900,000 known species of insects, which are a subset of anthropods.  Just in Washington State, over 700 species of spiders have been identified.  Even today new species are occasionally found here.  Therefore, it can be very tricky identifying whatever I find.  This specimen currently perplexes me.

I took this picture by the ponds near my office.  Several days before I took some other shots of it.

When I blogged about it, Myrmecos mentioned that it might be the larva of a rove beetle.  Based on some research on the web, I think this is the closest match.  Here’s the closest shot I could find.  Notice that the double tails are very similar – with very similar spikes.  While this larva is obviously not the same one in the picture, it appears that his is some type of rove beetle larva.  Perhaps this species only exists in this part of the country and therefore there is little literature on it.

I hope in the near future to make contact with some local entomologists who may have a better idea, but for now I am happy that I have a general idea what this may be.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

I looked through my Audobon field guide to no avail.  The bug just didn’t appear to be there.  So I got out my huge hardcover book on insects and slowly went through the hundreds of shots, hoping for a match.  After some time, I may have found a match.  This appears to be a spider beetle – family Anobiidae, subfamily Ptininae.  Here’s another shot of it.

Unfortunately the shots I found in the book and those on the web have so far not provided an exact match.  I suspect this may be because my book covers only insects in eastern North America.  For some reason, I have noticed that many books seem to discount the western half of the United States.  Perhaps this may be because they don’t want to dedicate large portions of a book to insects that only exist in one geographic area.  I remember as a young child being dismayed after seeing an interesting animal in a guide book only to find that it only lives in the West.  Still, this makes it even more difficult for us in the Puget Sound.  Though we share many insects with the East, we also have a number of our own which don’t seem to be covered in many guide books.  Even the Audobon guide, which supposedly covers the entire country, tends not to cover insects particular to this region.

Therefore my current theory is that this is indeed a spider beetle, but is either a less common species or a species isolated to this part of the country.

Even still, though this remains a bit of a mystery it is always exciting finding and learning about new creatures in my backyard.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

At first I thought it was a type of earwig as they look somewhat similar.

This dead earwig was found in our house and was the first insect I ever shot with my then new MP-E 65.

However, all earwigs that I had seen had the typical red head and longer pincers on the end. I was a bit puzzled what this bug was. Even more peculiar was how it raised its tail as if it were a scorpion. Initially, I really thought it meant to sting me, though I doubted that it had the capacity. Here’s a closer look at it.

So I posted the pictures on a forum where there are people more knowledgeable about insects than I, and I found out that this is a type of rove beetle called the “Devils’ Coach Horse Beetle”. I felt that was a rather odd name for a beetle, so I decided to do some research. Wikipedia actually had an article about it and I found out some fascinating information.

1. The beetle originates from the British Isles, where it is the largest beetle found. It has migrated and become more common in North America but it is not native to our continent.
2. It received its name because it eats carrion and in medieval times people believed the devil would take the form of this bug to eat sinners.
3. As I thought, it does not have the capacity to sting you. However, it supposedly can bite you and inflict pain. Generally I do not pick up bugs with my bare hands though, so there was little worry of that happening. Supposedly carpenter ants can bite too, and I have photographed tons of them from mere millimeters and never have I been bitten.
4. They are natural predators of slugs and snails, so it is not too bad to have them around. Unfortunately they also eat earthworms, which I would much rather they leave alone.

This final photo was the closest I got. Knowing that I had some decent photos, I then let the beetle get back to its business.

Certainly since beginning insect photography I have learned quite a bit. There are a number of others species out there that I have no clue about, but with each new critter I unearth I learn a little bit more.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.