Troutnut Forum > Specimen Discussion > Finally my "Stenonema" section isn't empty
The Specimen
Stenonema femoratum (Cream Cahill) Mayfly Nymph
View 6 Pictures
View 6 PicturesRegion: Catskills
Collected May 6, 2007
Added May 18, 2007
The Discussion
| Troutnut | May 18th, 2007, 2:49 pm | |
| Fairbanks, AK Posts: 1147 | I've been looking for one of these for a while. After I realized that everything I was calling Stenonema had been renamed to Maccaffertium, the section for this once-popular genus was empty. Now with this one from a small stream in the Catskills I'm pretty sure I've got an actual Stenonema again. I would welcome a verification from those of you with more entomological training, but it looks right to me. | |
| Jason Neuswanger The Troutnut | ||
|
These advertisements will disappear if you register. | ||
| Quillgordon | May 20th, 2007, 9:09 pm | |
| Schuylkill County, PA. Posts: 102 | Is this insect in this genus solely based on its gill structure? It seems odd that there is only one species in this new classification. I think I have a specimen that was found on 5/18/07. | |
| Flyfishing is a state of mind! .............. Q.g. C/R........barbless | ||
| Troutnut | May 20th, 2007, 9:40 pm | |
| Fairbanks, AK Posts: 1147 | I don't know, but I doubt the gill structure is the entire reason for genus differentiation. It's probably just the most visible of many differences. | |
| Jason Neuswanger The Troutnut | ||
New features!
