Megachile anatolica Rebmann, 1968
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jhr.95.96796 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0AD4F90A-9A41-492D-84C3-C0AA1B8C275B |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8D9A22E5-DFEB-53D3-B24C-D3AC272AF1B0 |
treatment provided by |
|
scientific name |
Megachile anatolica Rebmann, 1968 |
status |
|
Megachile anatolica Rebmann, 1968 View in CoL View at ENA
Figs 7-14 View Figures 7–14
Megachile anatolica Rebmann, 1968: 37, ♂ nec ♀, "Mut [Turkey, approx. 36.64°N, 33.44°E]". Holotype ♂ (SMFD).
Material examined.
Type material. Holotype ♂ (SMFD) of M. anatolica (Fig. 11 View Figures 7–14 ); one paratype ♀ (SMFD) examined is probably a female of M. inexspectata .
Other material.
104 specimens from the following countries: Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey (Suppl. material 1) .
Distribution.
From Italy eastwards through the Levant including Lebanon, Turkey, Israel northwest of the Dead Sea, Iran; distribution in Central Asia remains to be established due to unclear relationship with M. viridicollis .
Geographic variation.
The species varies in the colour of the vestiture as well as in body size and in the length of the OOD. In Italy, Greece, Cyprus and western Turkey, the scopa is white (black on S6) and the OOD is large (Fig. 9 View Figures 7–14 ). In the Levant the species presumably intergrades with M. leucostoma ; populations in northern Israel and northern Jordan have the scopa nearly entirely orange, as observed in eastern populations of M. leucostoma (see Praz et al. 2021). Moreover, the length of the OOD shows clinal variation from northern Israel (condition as in typical M. anatolica ) to Southern Israel (condition as in typical M. leucostoma ); specimens from Central Israel are intermediate ( Soltani et al. 2017: Fig. 6 View Figure 6 ). In Iran, the scopa is white (black on S6), but specimens are smaller and the OOD short, as in M. leachella or M. pusilla . While in some Iranian populations the clypeus margin is denticulate, as in typical M. anatolica (Fig. 10 View Figures 7–14 ), in other populations (e.g., in the region of Teheran), the clypeus is as in M. pusilla (cf. Fig. 64 View Figures 61–66 ), making these populations superficially identical to M. pusilla , albeit genetically closer to M. anatolica. Whether the variation observed in Iran is the result of introgression with M. leucostoma , which has not been reported in Iran but is present on the Arabian Peninsula, e.g., in the United Arab Emirates, remains to be established.
Note.
The relationship between M. anatolica and the Central Asian species M. viridicollis is not clear; these two taxa may eventually be treated as conspecific, in which case M. anatolica would be placed in synonymy with M. viridicollis ; see under M. viridicollis .
Megachile argentata (Fabricius, 1793)
Figs 1 View Figure 1 - 3 View Figures 2, 3 , 15-24 View Figures 15–24
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Megachile anatolica Rebmann, 1968
Praz, Christophe J. & Benon, Dimitri 2023 |
Megachile anatolica
Rebmann 1968 |