Frieseomelitta meadewaldoi (Cockerell, 1915)

Oliveira, Favizia Freitas de, Urban, Danuncia & Engel, Michael S., 2011, The identity of the Neotropical stingless bee Frieseomelitta meadewaldoi (Cockerell, 1915) (Hymenoptera, Apidae), ZooKeys 111, pp. 19-31 : 23-27

Frieseomelitta meadewaldoi (Cockerell, 1915) Figs 1-5, 7-12, 14

Trigona dorsalis Smith; Smith 1863: 504, 510 [misidentification, non Trigona dorsalis Smith, 1854].

Trigona meadewaldoi Cockerell 1915: 32. Nomen novum pro Trigona dorsalis Smith, 1863 non Trigona dorsalis Smith, 1854.

Tetragona francoi Moure 1946: 437-438. Moure 1963: 39. Syn. n.

Trigona (Tetragona) francoi (Moure); Moure 1951: 44.

Trigona(Frieseomelitta) francoi (Moure); Wille 1962: 179.

Trigona(Frieseomelitta) meadewaldoi Cockerell; Wille 1962: 179.

Trigona(Frieseomelitta) freiremaiai Moure 1963: 39-43. Wille 1962: 179; Cruz-Landim 1963: 2-4 (as Friseomelitta [sic]); Sakagami et al. 1963: 116, 119-121, 124, 126 -128; Kerr and Esch 1965: 532, 536; Kerr et al. 1967: 279, 282; Cruz-Landim 1967: 194, 254, 266, 267, 270; Akahira and Beig 1967: 166, 169, 172, 173, 180-181, 184 (Figs 15, 16); Michener 1990: 103. Syn. n.

Frieseomelitta freiremaiai (Moure); Nogueira-Neto 1963: 115; Abdalla 2002: 135.

Trigona(Tetragona) freiremaiai (Moure); Wille and Michener 1973, pp. 14, 24, 48, 59, 70.

Trigona freiremaiai (Moure); Costa 2002: 94.

Frieseomelitta francoi (Moure); Silveira et al. 2002: 87.

Frieseomelitta doederleini (Friese, 1900); Camargo and Pedro 2007: 291 [misidentification].

Lectotype (here designated).

Worker (NHML, Figs 1-3, 14): labeled " Trigona dorsalis Sm" in Smith’s hand on a blue label. Locality given solely as “Brazil” by Smith (1863; vide etiam Comments, infra) in his redescription of Trigona dorsalis Smith, 1854 (in 1854 he provided "Brasil ( Pará)” as the type locality for Tetragona dorsalis ).

Lectotype (here designated).

Worker holotype (DZUP, Figs 4, 5, 7) of Tetragona francoi Moure, 1946; labeled "Riachuelo, Sergipe, Brasil, R. Franco col.". Holotype worker (DZUP, Figs 8, 10, 12) of Trigona ( Frieseomelitta ) freiremaiai Moure, 1963; labeled "Guarapari, ES, Brasil, II.1961"; and 21 paratypes, workers of the same species, labeled "Guarapari, Espírito Santo, Brasil: II.1961" [n=7], "IX.1960, M. Alvarenga col." [n=2]; “Maracás, Bahia, Brasil: 970m, VI.1961, F.M. Oliveira col." [n=5], and “VI.1961” [n=7]. Lectotype worker (AMNH 25290, Figs 6, 13) of Trigona doederleini Friese, 1900; labeled "Chiriqui, Trigona doederleini Friese, 1910" and with a typical orange Friese “Typus” label.

Diagnosis.

Worker : Integument predominantly pale yellow to amber-yellow except dark brown to black on frons (rectangular area), dark brown to black on mesoscutum (margined by yellow lines), dark brown to black on apical two-thirds of metatibia and metabasitarsus; metasoma largely brown except first tergum, basal half of second tergum, and entirety of apicalmost tergum yellow to amber-yellow. Wing membrane faintly infumate, darker on marginal cell and with apical 6% somewhat white. Plumose setae of dorsal surface of mesotibia with long rachis and setal branches restricted to apical one-third of rachis; plumose setae of dorsal surface of mesobasitarsus forming a broad band. Metasoma elongate; metatibia taciform, with inflated aspect (Fig. 14); forewing marginal cell scarcely open at apex; typically six hamuli on leading edge of hind wing.

Descriptive notes.

Coloration:

Head pale yellow to amber-yellow except for dark brown to black transverse rectangle on upper face extending from above upper alveolar tangent (at a distance of approximately 1 DA) to occiput, bounded laterally by paraocular yellow lines, such paraocular marks even evident on lower yellow portion of face as paler yellow markings, slightly wider below, with greatest width close to tentorial foveae (1.6 DE); genal and paraocular yellow marks join at upper border of compound eye, thereby entirely surrounding orbits; genal marks rather narrow, almost imperceptible, more clearly defined along upper border of compound eye; gena pale yellow to testaceous; clypeus, supraclypeal area, and paraocular area pale yellow; epistomal sulcus brown to dark brown; scape pale amber-yellow to testaceous, with a brownish spot dorsoapically occupying one-third apical length; pedicel and first flagellomere yellowish ventrally; mandibles yellow to amber-yellow, with brown apex; labrum yellow to amber-yellow. Mesosoma yellow to amber-yellow or testaceous except mesoscutum dark brown to black and bordered laterally by large yellow to amber-yellow streaks, such lines a little wider at corners before forming shape of an inverted “J”; tegula yellowish translucent. Wing membranes lightly infumate, darker in marginal cell, apex whitish (apical 6%); veination amber-yellow except R and Rs bordering marginal cell light brown to brown. Legs yellow to amber-yellow or testaceous except dark brown to black on apical two-thirds of metatibia and entirety of metabasitarsus, remaining tarsomeres yellow to amber-yellow. Metasoma largely reddish brown to dark brown; first tergum and basal half of second tergum yellow to testaceous; remaining terga dusky, with apical tergum yellow to testaceous.

Pubescence:

Pubescence pale yellow, relatively thin and short. Face with short plumose setae (longest approximately 0.5 DE), such setae with minute rachis and compactly plumose, branches long, such setae semi-decumbent on lower face and semi-erect on frons and vertex (more distinctly evident in this area); thin erect, long, feathery setae intermingled (2 DE), those in paraocular area slightly shorter, those posterior to ocelli longer and more curved; thin, long (2 DE), erect setae between plumose setae, shorter medially in paraocular area and longer and curved posterior to ocelli; setae of scape short and sparse, the longest approximately 0.5 DE, denser along inner margin near base; pubescence of gena simple, very thin, short, and decumbent by comparison with that of face and body, erect setae posterior to ocelli somewhat more dense and with relatively long rachis (about half length) and sparse apical branches. Simpler setae of mesoscutum slightly longer than twice length of plumose setae (2.5 DE), plumose setae with relatively long rachis and poorly branched apically, slightly shorter on disc (1 DE); anterior and lateral borders with setae with shorter rachis and more abundantly branched; setae of mesoscutellum longer (2 and 3 DE for simple and plumose setae, respectively), with long rachis and relatively few branches; mesepisternum with plumose setae and simpler setae relatively thin and long (1.0-2.5 DE and 3 DE, respectively), setae with short rachis (about half length) and relatively sparse apical branching, some with a longer apical filament. Legs with pubescence yellow to pale yellow except corbicular setae, those on internal surface of metatibia dark brown, on inner surface of metabasitarsus yellowish-brown; dorsal surface of mesotibia with erect setae, some plumose, relatively long (1.5 and 1 DE, respectively), plumose setae with very long rachis and branches scarce, restricted to apical third of rachis; mesobasitarsus with a broad band of erect setae and plumose setae, relatively long (1.5 and 1 DE, respectively) and thin setae forming a prominent band in posterior half; plumose setae of posterior edge of metatibia light brown (3 DE), interspersed with longer, thicker, and fuscous setae (4 DE). First metasomal tergum glabrous; TII with very narrow band of tiny bristles along posterior edge, such bristles increasing in length and thickness on succeeding terga, as well as in density and width of band; T5 with longer setae and wider band range, especially medially, but without plumose setae (band of T3 = one-half that of T4; T4 = one-half that of T5); setae of T6 longer and denser (2 DE), intermingled with very thin plumose setae.

Metrics.

Total length 4.75; forewing length 5.54; head width 1.99; clypeal width 1.0; clypeal length 0.46; malar length 0.07; compound eye length 1.21; compound eye width 0.55; upper interorbital distance 1.21; maximum interorbital distance 1.26; lower interorbital distance 0.99; alveolorbital distance 0.34; interalveolar distance 0.12; ocellorbital distance 0.30; interocellar distance 0.12; scape length 0.82; scape diameter 0.12; mesofemoral length 1.46; mesofemoral width 0.29; mesotibial length 1.51; mesotibial width 0.34; mesobasitarsal length 0.84; mesobasitarsal width 0.24; metafemoral length 1.88; metafemoral width 0.27; metatibial length 2.76; metatibial width 0.76; metabasitarsal length 0.82; metabasitarsal width 0.37; maximum width of metasomal tergum II 1.34.

Distribution.

BRAZIL: States of Ceará ( Choró, Maranguape), Rio Grande do Norte (Martins, Mossoró, Natal, Ipanguaçu), Paraíba (Juazeirinho, Santa Luzia), Pernambuco (Cabo de Santo Agostinho, Igarassu), Bahia (Camamu, Catu, Iaçu, Igrapiúna, Itabuna, Itaparica, Lençóis, Maracás, Milagres, Mucugê), and Espírito Santo ( Fundão, Guarapari, Jacaraípe, Nova Almeida, Santa Teresa, São Roque).

Comments.

There are specimens of Frieseomelitta meadewaldoi from Maracás (Bahia, Brazil) labeled by Moure as " Frieseomelitta luteola sp. n." (MS name, nomen nudum) in DZUP and it is probable that there are specimens similarly labeled in other collections.

It is of historical interest to note the influence of Brazilian Emperor D. Pedro II who worked tirelessly to bring Brazil to international attention, particularly his endorsement of participation in the Third Universal Exposition of London in 1862 which brought the material studied by Smith (1863). It was at this exposition that various products of Brazil were exhibited, including coffee, mate, rubber, wood, precious stones, machinery, and, of course, bees and their wax and honey, selected from different provinces of Brazil ( Almeida 2000). The bees had only vernacular names associated with them and so Smith (1863) was unable to give more precise locality information, simply citing them all as “Brazil”, but he did list these vernacular names (most of Tupi origin) and attempted, where possible, to use them as specific epithets ( Smith 1863). According to Camargo and Moure (1996: 110) it is possible that the material was collected in southeastern Brazil, perhaps even the eastern region of the State of Minas Gerais, as evidenced by the etymology of the vernacular names employed.