Megalopta (Megalopta) amoena ( Spinola, 1853 )

Santos, Leandro M. & Silveira, Fernando A., 2009, Taxonomic notes on Megalopta Smith, 1853 (Hymenoptera: Halictidae: Augochlorini) with a synopsis of the species in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil, Zootaxa 2194, pp. 1-20 : 5-9

Megalopta (Megalopta) amoena ( Spinola, 1853)

(Figs. 4, 9, 13)

Halictus amoenus Spinola, 1853: 85 . Holotype male, from the Brazilian state of Pará (MSNT; not examined).

Megalopta idalia Smith, 1853: 83 . Syntypes female and male, Brazil; banks of the Amazon and Para (BMNH; pictures examined).

Halictus argoides Vachal, 1904: 115 . Holotype male, Guiana (MNHP; not examined).

Halictus ochrias Vachal, 1904: 115 (new synonymy). Holotype male, Jataí, Goiás. (MNHP: examined). Jatay (Goyaz); Ochrias 3 Vach. (handwritten); Halictus ochrias 3, Vach; Holotype.

Megalopta ecuadoria Friese, 1926: 127 (new synonymy). Lectotype female, Guayaquil, Ecuador, 1922, Buchwald (ZMB: examined).

Diagnosis. ♀ /3: Body length 9.2–11.8 mm. Lateral surface of metapostnotum polished, its posterior margin, medially, almost parallel to anterior margin, bending abruptly laterally, towards metanotum; disc of scutellum flat, gently slanting to rear, its posterior margin on same level or below level of metanotum; dorsal surface of axilla and contiguous antero-lateral margin of scutellum on same plane as disc of scutellum; pubescence of metanotum relatively sparse, not hiding the integument in oblique view; metapostnotum ferruginous, without longitudinal rugae, as long as or longer than metanotum; pubescence of metepisternum dense. Ƥ. Metepisternal process normal, narrow and inconspicuous, without velvety pilosity. 3: Metepisternal process extremely wide, covered by velvety pilosity; disc of S3 entirely flat, without mid-longitudinal depression, discal lobes of S3 not defined but indicated by a fine line on the integument; marginal lobes of S3 short, close to each other; protruding process of S4 widely triangular with a row of relatively long hairs of similar length along its posterior margin.

Material examined. A total of 84 specimens (76 ƤƤ, 8 3) from the following localities: MINAS GERAIS. Belo Horizonte, Estação Ecológica da UFMG, 10/01/2005 [L.M. Santos] (6 ƤƤ) { UFMG}; Parque das Mangabeiras, 17/03/2005 [L.M. Santos] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 26/10/2005 [idem] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}. Berizal, Fazenda Veredão, 850 m, luz, 15°39’53”S 41° 39’56”W, 14/12/2007 [Grossi, Rafael & Parizotto] (4 Ƥ Ƥ) { DZUP}. Bocaiúva, Abelhas Cerrado Mannesmann, Fazenda Corredor, 05/11/1998 [Azevedo & Silveira] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}. Buritis, primeira cachoeira Rio Urucuia, 02-04/11/1964 [Exp.Dep.Zool] (1 3) { MZUSP}. Dionísio, 13-21/11/1989 [W. G. de Campos] (1 3) { MEUV}. Ipanema, Fazenda Montes Claros, 13 km NE de Ipanema, 400m, 29-30/01/2003 [Mielke & Casagrande] (1 Ƥ, 2 3) { DZUP}. Jaboticatubas, Serra do Cipó, 25/03/1998 [D.A.Yanega] (1 3) { UFMG}. Marliéria, Parque Estadual do Rio Doce, 13-18/01/1978 [D’Andretta & Pereira] (2 3) { UFMG}; 21/07/1996 [Silveira & Antonini] (1 3) { UFMG}; 12/09/1999 [A.Nemésio] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 01/11/01 MG3 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1Ƥ) { UFMG}; 08-15/11/2001, MG3 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 15-22/11/2001, MG3 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 24-31/10/2002, MG3 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 14/11/2002, MG3 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 19-26/10/ 2003, MT1 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 26/ 10-02/11/2003, MV1 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 03-10/11/2004, MG3 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 10-17/11/2004, MVD2 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 22-29/10/2005, Morro do Gavião 3 [Y.Antonini] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; Morro do Gavião 1 [Y.Antonini] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 29/ 10-05/11/2005, Morro do Gavião 3 [Y.Antonini] (2 ƤƤ) { UFMG}; 12-19/11/2005, MG 1 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; 05-12/11/2005, MG2 [J.C.R. Fontenelle] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}; Minas Novas, Fazenda Acauã, EPAMIG, Borda de Mata, Óleo de Cravo, 12/02/1988 [G.Melo & A.Soares] (20 ƤƤ) { MEUV}. Morada Nova de Minas, Represa de Três Marias, 07/09/1990 [J.T. Magalhães] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}. Paracatu, Licenciamento AHE Batalha, Faz. Jomar, 17/02/2008 [E.L. Siqueira] (7 ƤƤ) { UFMG}; Licenciamento AHE Batalha, Faz. Tiririca, 20/02/08 [E.L. Siqueira] (6 ƤƤ) { UFMG}; Licenciamento AHE Batalha, Faz. Ranchão, 19/02/08 [E.L. Siqueira] (2 ƤƤ) { UFMG}; São Gonçalo do Rio Abaixo, EPDA de PETI, 05-08/12/2002 [Mielke leg] (1 Ƥ) { DZUP}; 23/02/2005 [R. B.Martines] (2 ƤƤ) { UFMG}. Três Marias, Ilha de Três Marias, XX/10/2001 [M. Pompeu] (1 Ƥ) { UFMG}. Unaí, Licenciamento AHE Batalha, Faz. Laranja Lima, 24/02/08 [E.L. Siqueira] (2 Ƥ Ƥ) { UFMG}. Viçosa, Córrego do Paraíso, Mata da Prefeitura, unkown date [P.S.Fiuza F.] (1Ƥ) { MEUV}.

Distribution. BELIZE; BRAZIL (AMAPÁ, AMAZONAS, BAHIA, CEARÁ, ESPÍRITO SANTO, MATO GROSSO, MINAS GERAIS, PARÁ, RIO DE JANEIRO, RORAIMA); COLOMBIA; COSTA RICA; ECUADOR; GUATEMALA; GUYANA; PANAMA.

Comments. This species was determined according to the redescription of its holotype by Moure (1958) and through the examination of a specimen compared with the holotype of M. idalia by him, as well as on photographs of the syntype female of M. idalia , provided by Dr. D. Notton (BMNH).

Megalopta idalia was described by Smith based on an undefined number of female and male syntypes from the Brazilian states of Amazonas and Para. According to Dr. David Notton (in litt.), curator of the Hymenoptera collection in the BMNH, there are four specimens of M. idalia in that museum, which were clearly seen by Smith. Two of them were labeled by Smith himself as “ types ”: a) A female with labels: “H.T.” [red edged BMNH holotype type disc]; “Santarem 53 60” [BMNH register number, lot 60 of year 1853]; “B.M. Type Hym. 17a.1276”; and “ Megalopta idalia f type ” [Smith’s label]; and b) a male with labels: “Cotype” [yellow edged BMNH type disc]; “Para”; “ idalia m type Sm.” [Smith’s label]; and “Smith coll. Pres. by Mrs Farren White 99-303”.

Besides these, there are two other specimens: a) A female with labels: “Amaz. Braz.”; “Smith coll. Pres. By Mrs Farren White 99-303”; and b) a female with labels: “Para”; “Smith coll. Pres. By Mrs Farren White 99-303”. Dr. Notton (in litt.), commented that these specimens were also “definitely seen by Smith but are not labelled as types by him and may have been added to his collection after 1853 and so are not certainly types.” He also mentioned that although the specimens labelled by Smith as types have, the female, a holotype label and, the male, a cotype label, “these may be unreliable, as in the past holotype labels were added to many specimens in our collection which are actually syntypes …” He concluded saying that “there is no lectotype label, and I am not aware of any lectotype designation”.

The fact that Smith clearly mentioned the Amazon, in Brazil, as the geographic origin of part of the series of specimens he described and the fact that the only specimen with that information on the label is one of the females not labeled by him as type, suggest that these two latter specimens are or, at least, the one from Amazon is part of the original syntype series. This species awaits designation of a lectotype. However, we decided not to do that here, without direct examination of the type series.

If the synonymization of M. centralis with M. ecuadoria by Engel (2006) is correct, M. centralis is also a synonym of M. amoena . However, since the type of M. centralis was not examined, we consider it premature to include it in the synonymy of M. amoena .

Individuals of this species greatly vary in size, as already observed by Sakagami and Moure (1965). The frons of one male from Buritis (Minas Gerais) is reddish instead of metallic green as in the other specimens. This may be due to excessive exposure to humidity (in a wet chamber, before pinning, for instance). Some of the examined specimens were atracted by the following aromatic substances: clove oil, eugenol, methyl cinnamate, methyl salicylate and vanilin. Moreover, bees of this species were attracted in the municipality of Bauru, state of São Paulo, by benzyl acetate, eucalyptol, eugenol, methyl salicilate and vanilin (F. Knoll, personal communication).