HOME | DD

Published: 2010-06-15 23:11:54 +0000 UTC; Views: 4693; Favourites: 70; Downloads: 215
Redirect to original
Description
This is, as the title states, the pupal stage of a phantom midge. Their larvae and pupae are aquatic; both normally hang motionless in the water but can, like larval mosquitoes, flex their bodies to spring forward in the blink of an eye. This pupa would flip out in that manner nearly every time I snapped a picture. The flash must have startled it.This animal was less than a centimeter long, so I used a high-magnification macro lens for the photo.
Personally, I think its head makes it look a bit like an angry bunny. The rabbit-like "ears" in this case are actually air-filled breathing tubes.
Related content
Comments: 39
revereche [2011-09-29 22:39:03 +0000 UTC]
I came across this on a Google Image search, and I'm already watching you. What are the odds?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to revereche [2011-10-09 08:14:03 +0000 UTC]
Actually, I've seen my own dA submissions in google image searches as well. The odds seem quite high when one draws/photographs obscure animals, simply due to the utter dearth of competing media showcasing those organisms.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
revereche In reply to Scutigera [2011-10-09 20:51:32 +0000 UTC]
Yeah .___. I try to live in denial.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
SineSquared [2010-07-17 10:36:09 +0000 UTC]
Awww he looks like a mini owl-snake thing.
I wish I could breath like that, looks like fun. I could go snorkling without equipment.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
FellowPhotographer [2010-06-21 21:34:05 +0000 UTC]
No, it's cool. I take it this was from a film camera?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
FellowPhotographer In reply to FellowPhotographer [2010-06-21 21:34:42 +0000 UTC]
Whoops, sorry bout that, I didn't link this to the conversation we were having.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to FellowPhotographer [2010-06-22 22:07:22 +0000 UTC]
I've made that mistake with replying too.
The photo was actually taken with a recent digital camera; the lens was mounted on it somehow. Today I looked at the lens to see what it was, and found this engraved on it: Wollensak 1 inch f/1.9 (w) Cine Raptar. I'm not sure how helpful that is, but it was the only identifying label I could see.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
FellowPhotographer In reply to Scutigera [2010-06-22 22:35:08 +0000 UTC]
Well thank you for the information!
Once fine lens, that's for sure.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to FellowPhotographer [2010-06-23 19:54:06 +0000 UTC]
You're welcome. I googled the label and found a few results for that type of lens... My initial impression is that this lens is a collectible antique that is highly valuable in mint condition.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
FellowPhotographer In reply to Scutigera [2010-06-23 22:58:08 +0000 UTC]
My thoughts exactly!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
EarlNoir [2010-06-17 19:11:31 +0000 UTC]
coool O__O
I've never seen something like this before D:
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to EarlNoir [2010-06-17 22:15:59 +0000 UTC]
Have you looked at samples of freshwater invertebrates before? I realize people who haven't taken a lot of biology classes might not have collected aquatic invertebrates before. Aquatic fly larvae tend to be very common and are easily collected by the dozen with a dipping net. To be fair, though, without higher magnification, these larvae and pupae look like rather uninteresting transparent worm things. I had no idea phantom midge larvae and pupae looked so interesting until I started photographing them up close.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to EarlNoir [2010-06-21 21:26:44 +0000 UTC]
The pupae are about a centimeter long. The larvae might be closer to 1.5 centimeters.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
doctorwhoandK-9 [2010-06-17 03:21:29 +0000 UTC]
Aww! It's adorable! I want one! Awesome picture!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to doctorwhoandK-9 [2010-06-17 22:06:47 +0000 UTC]
Why settle for one, when you could easily catch dozens and keep them in the same aquarium? They were quite abundant in the ponds where my photography class gathered aquatic invertebrates to photograph.
Of course, the fact that they are aquatic as larvae and terrestrial/flying as adults could make them tricky to keep in captivity, as you'd need both water and branches or something for them to climb and perch on, and space for them to fly.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
doctorwhoandK-9 In reply to Scutigera [2010-06-29 06:52:53 +0000 UTC]
Oh, I wish I could have one, but the dog would lick them to death, or, if he mistakes them forflies, he'd eat them. Too bad we wouldn't be able to accomadate them here. They're adorable! And you're wonderful at getting good photos! ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Giant-Blue-Anteater [2010-06-17 00:56:45 +0000 UTC]
Nematoceran pupae remind me of creepy shrimp.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to Giant-Blue-Anteater [2010-06-17 22:18:37 +0000 UTC]
I suppose they do bear some resemblance to small crustaceans. In particular, the pupa's abdomen looks like a shrimp's tail.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
lord-creeper [2010-06-16 17:11:04 +0000 UTC]
Excellent capture, what was the magnification ratio on this shot?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to lord-creeper [2010-06-17 21:50:54 +0000 UTC]
Thanks. I think the lens I used had 7x magnification.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
ComicDissector [2010-06-16 10:03:27 +0000 UTC]
Now that's just fucking cute :-D!
This is a great reference picture, those are otherwise too tiny to see so taking a picture of them is the only choise, and you need a good photographer and a camera.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to ComicDissector [2010-06-17 21:55:52 +0000 UTC]
A good reference picture? I'm flattered. I'm lucky that this individual posed long enough for me to get this shot with a high-magnification lens.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
TheElle [2010-06-16 02:39:01 +0000 UTC]
It does indeed look like an angry bunny.
If their adult stages weren't so darn annoying, I'd really like these guys.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to TheElle [2010-06-16 03:07:48 +0000 UTC]
Annoying? Really? To me, at least, adult phantom midges can't be annoying because they are extremely elusive. I see only one or two every four years or so, and to this day I have never been able to catch or touch one. In fact, so frustrating is their scarcity and inclination to fly higher than I can reach, that I'm determined to handle one somehow, some day. It is a strange and arbitrary goal, but we want the things we cannot have.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
TheElle In reply to Scutigera [2010-06-16 03:24:31 +0000 UTC]
Oh! derp. I'm thinking of something else, then. Sorry.
Best of luck catching one!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to TheElle [2010-06-17 21:49:33 +0000 UTC]
Crane flies, maybe? They're harmless, but quite common, and quite fragile and clumsy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
TheElle In reply to Scutigera [2010-06-18 03:57:16 +0000 UTC]
Nah, those are way too big. I was thinking of the guys who form tall columns that my friend and I always bumble through while out walking.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to TheElle [2010-06-19 22:14:38 +0000 UTC]
Ah, midge mating swarms...
Actually, I checked and it seems that I'm the one who was mistaken. The elusive flies I was thinking of are phantom crane flies, and I somehow thought that phantom midge was another common name for them. I know that phantom crane flies aren't midges, but common names are often misleading or inaccurate. Phantom midges are indeed small midges that aren't particularly rare or remarkable in appearance.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
TheElle In reply to Scutigera [2010-06-20 01:26:39 +0000 UTC]
Pfleh. There's so many of them, augh.
Oh! We're just a big pile of confusion, then, haha. Glad you figured out what's what. @.@
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
scythemantis [2010-06-16 00:53:59 +0000 UTC]
One of my favorite insects for its larval stage. I wish they were gigantic
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Scutigera In reply to scythemantis [2010-06-17 21:53:38 +0000 UTC]
I wish there was a gigantic version of every teensy invertebrate. Horseshoe crab-sized triops, panther-sized rove beetles, pig-sized rotifers, python-sized flatworms, elephant-sized tardigrades...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DreamPainterZ In reply to Scutigera [2011-03-24 17:23:40 +0000 UTC]
Elephant-sized tardigrades: the biggest, chubbiest, cutest thing EVER.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Scutigera In reply to FellowPhotographer [2010-06-21 21:29:19 +0000 UTC]
The lens is one I borrowed from my instructor. He says it's a lens that was probably made in the 1940s, and that he traded for it at a photographer convention or some such gathering. The lens has 7x magnification, but I don't recall its brand or model offhand. I could check.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0