Andrena (Melandrena) cineraria ( Linnaeus, 1758 )

Gautam, R. K., Uniyal, V. P. & Wood, Thomas J., 2024, A critical revision of the Andrena Fabricius, 1775 of India, with the description of two new species (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae) from Uttarakhand, European Journal of Taxonomy 948, pp. 1-59 : 28-29

13. Andrena (Melandrena) cineraria ( Linnaeus, 1758) sensu lato

Andrena cineraria Linnaeus, 1758: 575 , [Europe, type lost].

Lamprocolletes peregrinus Smith, 1878: 2 [ China, ZSI, examined by photograph].

Listed by

Nurse (1904); Meena & Dey (2019); Chandra et al. (2021); Ascher & Pickering (2023).

Type material

Syntypes

CHINA • 1 ♀; Yangihissár [=Yengisar]; ZSI; ZSI0000008643 • 1 ♀; Yarkand [= Yarkant ]; NHMUK .

Other material examined

INDIA • 5 ♀♀; West Himalaya , Khalatse [Khalsi], Kashmir, 4000–5000 m a.s.l.; 12–23 May 1933; ZMHB .

Remarks

It is difficult to find a primary listing for the presence of A. cineraria in India. Andrena cineraria has been treated as a broad taxon, but it represents a species complex including A. barbareae Panzer, 1805 and A. danuvia Stöckhert, 1950 . In Asia, “ A. cineraria ” has been reported to be bivoltine (e.g., Osytshnjuk et al. 2008; Xu & Tadauchi 2009a), and hence is suspected to be more closely related to A. barbareae rather than to A. cineraria ( Wood 2023a) . Further study is required, along with genetic analysis ( Gueuning et al. 2020).

Additionally, the name A. peregrina ( Smith, 1878) is available, and is currently listed as a synonym of A. cineraria ( Gusenleitner & Schwarz 2002) . Originally described as a Lamprocolletes Smith, 1853 ( Colletidae ), examination of a specimen in the NHMUK collection labelled as “Type” in the handwriting of Smith ( Fig. 12 ) shows that this taxon is an Andrena (although the head is missing, the remaining body is clearly a species of Andrena ), and is closely affiliated with A. cineraria . Indeed, Warncke (1967: 298) considered A. peregrina to be conspecific with A. cineraria , leading to the current listing of Gusenleitner & Schwarz. However, the published type locality is Yangihissár [Yengisar] in East Turkestan [= Xinjiang in western China], whereas the specimen is labelled as “Yarkand” [=Yarkant] which is approximately 100 km to the south-east of Yangihissár. Donald Baker (unpublished thesis: 273) suggested that additional type material of A. peregrina may be in the ZSI, and that this NMHUK specimen is presumably a syntype retained by Smith. Searching through the ZSI website produces a specimen of A. peregrina from Yangihissár (ZSI0000008643) which is clearly syntypic, but is not automatically considered to be the holotype since the NHMUK specimen is also considered to be a syntype. At the present time, neither specimen is designated as a lectotype.

Given the complexity of species delineation within this group of species ( Gueuning et al. 2020), no taxonomic action is taken here. The status of A. basifusca Cockerell, 1930 (described from Uzbekistan and currently listed as a valid species by Gusenleitner & Schwarz 2002) must also be resolved in future molecular revisions focusing on Asia. Since Nurse (1904) mentioned that A. cineraria was “fairly common in Kashmir”, the species is retained on the Indian list of Andrena in a broad sensu lato, pending further investigations.

Distribution

Unclear, possibly restricted to the West Palaearctic or perhaps more broadly across the Palaearctic.

Figures

Fig. 12. Lamprocolletes peregrinus Smith, 1878 (= Andrena peregrina (Smith, 1878)), syntype, ♀ (NHMUK). A. Label information. B. Body, dorsal view.