Evidence found
276 records across 9 countries and territories, 1931–1987.
Chaetorellia conjuncta · GBIF taxon key 1622163
Where has the Chaetorellia conjuncta been recorded?
Chaetorellia conjuncta occurrence evidence comes from 276 records in 9 countries and territories, from 1931 to 1987. Most records come from Israel.
- 276 records
- 9 places
- 7 years recorded
- Insecta class
Observation evidence passport
Source coverage
CC0 GBIF Animalia occurrence facets, including country, month and year summaries.
Refreshed 2026-09-22. Inspect the taxon on GBIF.
What this means
The species has been recorded in the listed places in the stated source universe. Peak month: April.
3 months reach at least 10% of the peak facet count.
What this does not mean
historical describes the record pattern, not a formal range, residency, abundance or conservation assessment.
A single record remains evidence of a recording, not proof that a population lives there.
Compare this animal’s observation pattern
When it is recorded
JFMAMJJASOND
Peak month: April. Records cluster in the months an animal is present and being looked for, so a summer peak can reflect observer effort as much as the animal.
Records over time
19311987
Recording effort has risen steeply almost everywhere since the 1990s, so a rising line usually shows more observers rather than more animals.
Where Chaetorellia conjuncta has been recorded
The countries below show where occurrence evidence exists for Chaetorellia conjuncta. They do not define a complete habitat range: survey effort differs by place, and historical or one-off records can appear alongside repeated presence.
Related animals
Others in the family Tephritidae.
Record pattern: historical
Historical records with no recent record in the covered source. This is inferred from how many years and months the animal appears in, not from a range map — treat it as evidence, not a formal assessment.
Historical records with no recent record in the covered source. This is inferred from how many years and months the animal appears in, not from a range map — treat it as evidence, not a formal assessment.