1. Troutnut Forum
›
2. Site Update Comments
›
3. Site updates from June 30, 2021

For details about the tentative identification of this male dun, see the page for associated male spinner, captured from a mating swarm in the same location and at the same time as this dun was emerging.

I collected numerous spinners from a thick dusk mating swarm and spinner fall over the Cedar River on a cloudy evening at the end of June. Duns were emerging at the same time, so I was able to collect several male spinners as well as a female spinner, a male dun, and a female dun of the same species, whatever it is. The microscope pictures here come from a mix of those different males, but all the macro DSLR photos are of the same individual. This one is difficult to identify, though I went into a lot of detail since I caught so many and their fall really got the fish rising for a while at dusk. The penes have a single set of lateral subapical spines, and the wings of the male spinner appear to be untinted, although there may be a barely-perceptible uniform yellow tint. The two claws at the end of each tarsus are similar to each other in shape. The wing is 7.5 mm long and the body is 7 mm long. I think these are the possibilities: 1. The best guess is Cinygmula tarda, which is the only species matching the size of this specimen in Needham et al (1935). The rest of the description seems to fit pretty well. However, the picture of the genitalia in that source and the one Slater & Kondratieff (2004) differ somewhat from each other and from this specimen, which more closely fits the drawing for Cinygmula mimus. 2. My next guess would be Cinygmula tioga. The original description in Mayo (1952) fits remarkably well, and it's only reported to be 1 mm longer than this specimen (within the likely range of natural variation). It hasn't been reported yet from Washington, only California and Oregon, but the sites in north-central Oregon aren't implausibly far from west-central Washington. However, the drawing of the penes suggests that the lateral spine should be longer or located closer to the tip than in this specimen, and that species is also supposed to have yellow-tinged wings. There may be a very faint tinge to this specimen, but it's hard to tell. 3. It could be either a species not yet described or an undescribed variant of a current species. And here's a quick list of why other local species were ruled out: mimus — This species is the best match for the genitalia, but it's supposed to be much larger with a wing length of 10-11.5 mm, and it should have clearer tinting to the wings in a particular pattern. However, Mayo (1952) notes that mimus should not have tracheations on the tergites, as this one clearly does, which would make it fit tioga. I'm not sure where tarda falls on that characteristic. Also, Slater & Kondratieff (2004) describe the compound eyes of mimus as contiguous, which doesn't fit this specimen. This specimen also has dark mid-ventral markings on the sternites, which mimus should lack. uniformis — wing length 10 mm, small ventral subapical spine on penes not present in this specimen, reticulata — wing length 9 mm, has distinctive wing patterning definitely not present on this specimen. par — wing length 9-10 mm, penes lack prominent lateral spines, generally shaped wrong, tarsal claws would be dissimilar in par ramaleyi — wing length 10 mm, penes shape way off gartrelli — wing length 10 mm, crossveins in costal half of forewing margined with brown (unlike this specimen), penes shape similar being in same group with mimus, but has an extra small spine not present in this specimen

I found a couple small (one or two dozen flies) clouds of these male spinners dancing low over the riffly parts of a pool in this fast river draining out of the Cascades.

For details about the tentative identification of this female spinner, see the page for associated male spinner, captured from the same mating swarm.

These duns were emerging sporadically throughout a cloudy evening at the end of June. Had I looked more closely when I caught this one and realized it represented my first collection of this genus, or just noticed the really striking coloration, I would have set my fly rod on shore and spent more time lurking mid-river with my net trying to catch more of them emerging (and at least one in better shape). It's always a bit difficult to identify a female dun, but in this case the three longitudinal stripes on the sternites are very distinctive and narrow the choices to Caudatella heterocaudata and Caudatella columbiella. However, the length of the fore wing measured with a caliper is 7.25 mm, whereas columbiella should be no more than 6 mm, so heterocaudata appears to be the correct ID.

For details about the tentative identification of this female dun, see the page for associated male spinner, captured from a mating swarm in the same location and at the same time as this dun was emerging.