Talk:Flesh fly

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Insects Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Diptera Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Diptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of flies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DipteraWikipedia:WikiProject DipteraTemplate:WikiProject DipteraDiptera articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Where (geographically) are Flesh flies found? robo 16:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Often hard to tell as everyone's handbooks cover their own region. They certainly are very common in Europe, but I'd be surprised if they would not occur on every continent.Jens Nielsen 22:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This subject (Flesh-fly) should redirect to Sarcophagidae. The common name should always be subordinate to the taxonomic family. Also, flesh fly is not hyphenated. Can someone see to that? (Anonymous)

Actually, according to my Collins Field guide to insects of Britain and Northern Europe, the genus Sarcophaga is the flesh-fly genus, whereas another genus in same family is called satellite flies. Also Flesh-fly is ok with a hyphen. Often entomologists uses hyphen when the species is a true flie (order diptera), and unhyphenated as e.g. Saw fly which is not a true fly. I'll modify it later this month unless you are quicker.Jens Nielsen 22:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually "saw fly" is written as "sawfly" because it is not a true fly. Even the WP article on sawfly has it that way. Flesh flies is written as two words because it is a true fly. I've been looking at some of the articles on true flies here and can't understand how people can be making this mistake. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 02:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The catalogue of T Pape (1996) [Catalogue of the Sarcophagidae of the world (Insecta: Diptera). Memoirs of Entomology International 8: 1-558] is the worst bibliotheconomic catalogue of all times on Sarcophagidae, because its author is not a true specialist on this family in dipters. Its catalogue-index is not a work with which one can identify the species or genera. First of all, Pape does not know anything about the significance of the genus in taxonomy, it does not use the binary nomenclature and it adds of an unreasoned manner, more than 1200 species in only one erroneous genus Sarcophaga sensu Pape, 1996. In addition, Pape does not know anything about the species-type of the genus Sarcophaga Meigen, because it confuses with obstinacy Musca carnaria Linnaeus, 1758, which is a nomen nudum, with the species Sarcophaga carnaria well established by Boettcher in 1912 and with the well specified species Sarcophaga dolosa Lehrer, 1967.

Reference

LEHRER, A.Z., 2000, Le système taxonomique des Sarcophaginae afrotropicales (Diptera, Sarcophagidae). Entomologica, Bari, 34:41-63.

LEHRER, A.Z., 2003, Sarcophaginae de l'Afrique (Insecta, Diptera, Sarcophagidae). Entomologica, Bari, 37:5-528.

LEHRER, A.Z., 2006, La "stratégie taxonomique" de Pape et ses conséquences sur la taxonomie de la famille Sarcophagidae (Diptera). Fragmenta Dipterologica, 1:7-15.

LEHRER, A.Z., 2006, Lectotypomanie ou l'obsession de l'inutilité destructive dans la taxonomie des Sarcophagides (Diptera, Sarcophagidae). Fragmenta Dipterologica, 2:1-10.

Prof Dr. Andy Z Lehrer

Pape, T. & Carlberg, U. (2001 onwards), A pictorial guide to the Sarcophagidae of the world (Insecta: Diptera).

This guide constituted the single expression of an rape without equal in the world of the men of science, because Pape & Carlberg (2001) stole - without any approval of the authors - the illustrations on the genitalia of the species, while transposing them in an absurd and erroneous system. They stole my illustrations of a life AZL[1] and, only after one fight two years with these impostors and thanks to the Minister for the culture of Suede, they were obliged to eliminate my illustrations from their not scientist website and the natural history museum of Stockholm eliminated this site from their actions. (For much of information, you can write to me directly with adresee: azlmadan@013.net. Thank you.) However, Pape transcribed his nonsense in " Flesh Fly Generic Navigator " of the same quality and which does not contain anything, because Pape does not know anything about Sarcophagidae.

Moreover, the photographs on Bellieria sp. of this article are simple imaginations. Because, nobody can be sure that they represent this genus and especially a species of Bellieria. Only the delirious of interpretation of Pape can materialize in this not justified form. All the species of Sarcophagidae are identified only by their genitalia male. These photographs are the specific nonsense of Pape.

In addition, Pape and his followers ignoramuses do not recognize the " genus " Bellieria. They think that Bellieria is a sub-genus, therefore, taxonomic without valor, who was introduced into his monstrous " Sarcophaga genus " sensu Pape. Thus, these photographs do not represent any of the 1200 species of Sarcophaga: Pape, 1996.

Prof Dr. Andy Z Lehrer

The "lists of species" of Sarcophagidae represent incomparable taxonomic ineptitudes of Pape, who vitiated in an antiquated way the system of this family. In particular the palearctic species were deformed by its "mnemotechnical strategy", specific to the amnesic authors, and could eliminate and to fly much of let us taxa with the authors of world prestige, by a false revision homonymic and synonymic with the names and not of let us taxa (in conformity of article 52.1, 53.3 of the ICZN). While setting up in the posture of large "taxonomic specialist" in Fauna Europaea, it shows the smallness of its psycho-intellectual structure.

Pandur —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.1.143.82 (talk) 07:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only the " catalogue"-index of Pape is a taxonomic catalogue sans valor. In this category between also the catalogues of:

- Downes, W. L., Jr. Family Sarcophagidae in Stone, A. et al. A catalog of the Diptera of America north of Mexico United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 1965.

- Verves, Yu.G., 1986. Family Sarcophagidae. In: Soós Á. & Papp L. (eds.), Catalogue of Palaearctic Diptera, 12. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest - Elsevier, Amsterdam: 58-193

The publications of Lehrer are scientific research tasks.

Pandur —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.1.142.53 (talk) 06:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I must make the observation that the name of Sarcophagidae or Sarcophaga does not result in the words of this article. Sarcophaga comes from the words: sarcos = flesh (not corpse) and phagein = to devour.

Anlirian

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.1.223.121 (talk) 12:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply] 

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Sarcophaga ruficornis fleshfly mating.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on January 2, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-01-02. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 22:31, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

Two flesh-flies (Sarcophaga ruficornis species pictured) mating. The life cycle of the saprophagic flesh-fly larvae has been well researched and is very predictable. Different species prefer bodies in different states of decomposition, which allows forensic entomologists to extrapolate the time of death.Photo: Muhammad Mahdi Karim

Archive – More featured pictures...

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flesh fly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041214062028/http://www2.nrm.se/en/sarcophagidae/welcome.html to http://www2.nrm.se/en/sarcophagidae/welcome.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:18, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]