Troutnut.com Fly Fishing for Trout Home
User Password
or register.
Scientific name search:

> > maccafertium?



Dryfly has attached this picture to aid in identification. The message is below.
Shown Full Size
Post Reply
DryflyMay 28th, 2007, 6:46 pm
rochester mn

Posts: 133		found this lone mayfly amidst a hatch of light hendricksons
(e. invaria) it had 2 tails found may 27in the afternoon
KonchuMay 28th, 2007, 6:47 pm
Site Editor
Indiana

Posts: 505		where?
DryflyMay 28th, 2007, 6:49 pm
rochester mn

Posts: 133		southeast minnesota
KonchuMay 28th, 2007, 6:54 pm
Site Editor
Indiana

Posts: 505		hmmm...i don't have my spectacles, but it could be Maccaffertium/Stenonema or perhaps Leucrocuta. what's the size of this beast?
DryflyMay 28th, 2007, 7:05 pm
rochester mn

Posts: 133		between 14 and 16 mm or probably a size 14 hook
KonchuMay 29th, 2007, 4:06 am
Site Editor
Indiana

Posts: 505		WITH my glasses (and the size info), you probably do have a Maccaffertium species here. The mostly dark, crowded crossveins of the wings are typical of this genus group. Anyone out there wanna venture a guess about the species ID? Check out the coloration of the abdomen and hind wing.

You know you want to!
TaxonMay 29th, 2007, 2:28 pm
Site Editor
Royse City, TX

Posts: 1350		Okay Konchu, I'll come out and play. I would like to use the clues you provided, but am unable. It is my understanding that (7) Maccaffertium species are present in Minnesota, M. exiguum, M. mediopunctatum mediopunctatum, M. mexicanum integrum, M. modestum, M. pulchellum, M. terminatum terminatum, and M. vicarium. Three or four of them can probably be eliminated based on inadeqate body length. Of those remaining, based largely on emergence date, my guess would be Maccaffertium vicarium.
Best regards,
Roger Rohrbeck
www.FlyfishingEntomology.com
QuillgordonMay 29th, 2007, 3:49 pm
Schuylkill County, PA.

Posts: 109		Taxon,
'Dryfly' stated it seemed to be a size 14/16. Isn't E. vicarium about a size 10.
The photo of the insect looks like it has an olive tint to me.
If so, doesn't that rule out E. vicarium?
Perhaps it could be M.modestum, M.mexicanum, or M.luteum.
John
Flyfishing is a state of mind! .............. Q.g.

C/R........barbless
DryflyMay 29th, 2007, 4:30 pm
rochester mn

Posts: 133		quillgordon

I mislead you when I said it was a 14 or 16, size 12 probably would have been more appropriate

thanks for your replies I was thinking vicarium also just wanted to know what you experts thought
TaxonMay 29th, 2007, 7:39 pm
Site Editor
Royse City, TX

Posts: 1350		John-

Isn't E. vicarium about a size 10.


The Biology Of Mayflies lists adult body lengths as follows:

Stenonema fuscum (Maccafertium vicarium) - 10 mm
S. rivulicolum (M. vicarium) - 10 mm
S. vicarium (M. vicarium) - 12-14 mm

So, it would appear the adult body length range for M. vicarium would be (at least) 10-14 mm, which in standard dry fly hook size, would be #13 (half way between #14 and #12) to perhaps #8.

Best regards,
Roger Rohrbeck
www.FlyfishingEntomology.com
KonchuJune 1st, 2007, 8:40 pm
Site Editor
Indiana

Posts: 505		The abdomen looked like terminatum to me, but with a little book work, the size more or less rules it out (too big). Vicarium may be as close as we can get without other views of the beast. Who wants to argue? I'm game...
TaxonJune 2nd, 2007, 12:16 am
Site Editor
Royse City, TX

Posts: 1350		Dryfly-

I mislead you when I said it was a 14 or 16, size 12 probably would have been more appropriate


I'd like a clarification concerning specimen length. I assume the above quote means you now believe the body length, from front of head to end of abdomen (excluding tails), to be ~12 mm, rather than between 14 and 16 mm, as you originally stated. Is that correct?

Perhaps you could measure the diameter (in mm) of the clear vial behind the specimen, and then divide by 2, as container's diameter appears to be approximately twice the body length of the specimen.
Best regards,
Roger Rohrbeck
www.FlyfishingEntomology.com
DryflyJune 2nd, 2007, 8:05 am
rochester mn

Posts: 133		I meant a size 12 hook, so 14mm to 16mm would still be correct
TaxonJune 2nd, 2007, 9:03 am
Site Editor
Royse City, TX

Posts: 1350		Dryfly-

A standard size #12 dry fly hook would be used to imitate a specimen with a body length of 9-10 mm, not one with a body length of 14-16 mm.

Is it possible for you to measure the diameter of the clear vial that appeared behind your specimen? I believe that would result in a more accurate measure, than would estimating hook size, and then attempting to convert to mm of body length.
Best regards,
Roger Rohrbeck
www.FlyfishingEntomology.com
TaxonJune 2nd, 2007, 9:16 am
Site Editor
Royse City, TX

Posts: 1350		Konchu-

Although I am unable to resist your offer, before engaging in more fun (but probably fruitless) discussion concerning species, I'd really like to firm up the specimen body length issue with Dryfly.

Incidentally, would you agree that the specimen is (most likely) a female imago?
Best regards,
Roger Rohrbeck
www.FlyfishingEntomology.com
DryflyJune 2nd, 2007, 1:21 pm
rochester mn

Posts: 133		I measured the container and it was 46 mm wide so it would be 23 mm but probably a little less than 23. It was a male. Sorry I couldn't get any better pictures.
TaxonJune 2nd, 2007, 2:26 pm
Site Editor
Royse City, TX

Posts: 1350		Dryfly-

Thanks for trying. I was thinking the container might be close enough to the specimen to not have been seriously reduced in perspective by being further away, but I am obviously mistaken.

So, reverting to the previous method of length determination, if you are convinced that it would be a hook size #12, then let's go with a body length of 9-10 mm.

I assume you concluded it was a male because it had claspers, which I was unable to see from your photo. If so, then I must also be wrong about the lifestage, as the forelegs appear way too short for it to a male imago (spinner), so it must have been a male subimago (dun).
Best regards,
Roger Rohrbeck
www.FlyfishingEntomology.com
DryflyJune 2nd, 2007, 3:20 pm
rochester mn

Posts: 133		taxon
Thanks for your tries at indentifying this mayfly. It molted into a spinner after i took the pictures. It had claspers. My informaton is probably too vague to narrow it down too species. oh well

Quick Reply

You have to be logged in to post on the forum. It's this easy:
Username:          Email:

Password:    Confirm Password:

I am at least 13 years old and agree to the rules.

Related Discussions

TitleRepliesLast Reply
Re: M. ithaca in M. mediopunctatum section?
In the Mayfly Species Maccaffertium mediopunctatum by GONZO		3Sep 4, 2012
by Entoman
Re: Not sure what this is...
In the Photography Board by Freepow		3Jun 6, 2008
by Freepow
Re: Size Variation in March Browns
In the Identify This! Board by Fishskicano		5May 20, 2009
by GONZO
Re: Insect photos on CatskillFlies website
In the Mayfly Genus Ephemerella by Jpsully		4May 24, 2008
by Softhackle
Re: Yakima River Light Cahill
In the Identify This! Board by Drywaters		5Nov 29, 2016
by Drywaters
Re: Lots of new specimens today (June 4th) from PA
In General Discussion by Troutnut		8Jun 5, 2007
by Dinerobyn
Re: Not Stenacron
In Male Maccaffertium modestum Mayfly Dun by GONZO		2Feb 6, 2012
by Brookyman
Re: Need help with mayfly nymph ID
In the Identify This! Board by RustySpinnr		8Mar 30, 2012
by Brookyman
Re: Another Anthopotamus
In the Photography Board by Crepuscular		4Jun 16, 2012
by Entoman
Re: Stumped
In the Identify This! Board by Bfdfisher		3May 27, 2011
by PaulRoberts