Geodiscelis nazcalinea Packer and Dumesh

Packer, Laurence & Dumesh, Sheila, 2014, Two new species of Geodiscelis Michener & Rozen (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Colletidae) with a phylogenetic analysis and subgeneric classification of the genus, Zootaxa 3857 (2), pp. 275-291 : 276-279

Geodiscelis nazcalinea Packer and Dumesh new species

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:5D1DA5CC-7696-4178-8257-DDE3BFCF38DB ( Figures 1−9 and 18 )

Diagnosis. The combination of maxillary palpus unmodified ( Fig. 3 ), pale subapical integumental bands and basal bands of appressed broad, almost squamose, hairs on the metasomal terga ( Fig. 9 ), and malar space almost as long as the compound eye ( Figs. 1−3 ) separates this species from all other bees except for G. phisquiri sp. nov. described below. Some other Xeromelissinae have unmodified maxillary palpi and pale integumental bands on the metasomal terga, but they either have the malar space considerably shorter than the compound eye and also lack the basal metasomal bands of appressed hairs ( Xenochilicola diminuta Toro & Moldenke, 1979 ), or have a malar space that is considerably longer ( Geodiscelis longiceps ). Geodiscelis nazcalinea sp. nov. can be differentiated from G. phisquiri sp. nov. through its darker wing veins, broader metasomal hair bands and details of the terminalia, especially the obtuse subapical medial margin to the gonocoxa ( Fig. 8 ) (right angular in G. phisquiri Fig. 15 ) and in the orientation of the inner lobe to the gonostylus, which is predominantly vertical ( Fig. 8 ) (primarily horizontal in G. phisquiri Fig. 15 ). Geodiscelis nazcalinea is also unique among xeromelissine bees in having a medioapical spine to S 6 in the male ( Fig. 5 ); although both G. longiceps and G. phisquiri have an angulation or slight thickening in the same location ( Fig. 12 ), it is not developed into a distinct spine.

Description.: Male: Dimensions: Body length: 5.0mm, fore wing length: 2.3mm head width: 1.0mm.

Colouration: Black with following parts pale yellow: labrum; mandible (apex dark amber); malar space; clypeus (except for extreme sides); hypostomal area apicad of compound eye; scape, pedicel, F1 (except most of anterior surface brownish); anterior surface of F2-F4; spot on pronotal lobe; mesal 1/3 of tegula; entire foreleg (except for orange smudges on femur dorsobasally and tibia posteroventrally and protarsus white); apical ring on mesocoxa, entire mesotrochanter, mesofemur (except dark brown for basal half of dorsal surface), mesotibia (except for dark brown posteromedial mark), mesotarsomeres 3–5 (basal two white); apical 2/3 of metacoxa; apical 1/3, basal ring and narrow ventral stripe on metafemur; metatibia (except for posteromedial dark brown spot and anteromedial orange mark); apical ~1/2 of metasomal terga (except for narrow translucent marginal zones), margined anteriorly with orange; T2-T4 with small, dark brown, subcircular sublateral maculae; apex of S1, all of S2 and S3-S6 (except for brown marking on disc). Metabasitarsus white, metatarsomeres 2-5 dusky brown. Wing veins brown, paler towards base. Anterior surface of F5-F11 pale orange-brown with more apical flagellomeres increasingly darker; posterior surface of flagellum reddish brown.

Pubescence: White, thickened, dense on lower paraocular area, between antennal socket and compound eye, genal area, pronotum, anterior portion of mesoscutum, posterior margin of scutellum, mesopleuron, metanotum, dorsolateral area of propodeum, declivitous surface of T1, anterior 1/3 of T2-T7.

Sculpture: Microsculpture imbricate, strong on clypeus, weaker on paraocular and frontal areas and weakest on mesoscutum and metasomal terga. Punctures small and shallow; i=2–5d on clypeus, i=1–3d on supraclypeal area; irregularly spaced on malar area, i=0.5–4d apically, i=0.5–1d basally; difficult to discern on frontal area; irregularly shaped on mesoscutum, i=1–2d; i=2–4d on scutellum and metanotum; i~d on setose portions of metasomal terga. Horizontal surface of propodeum weakly rugulose for basal 1/3, otherwise granulose.

Structure: Head: Longer than mesosoma (90:75) and 1.5X as long as wide (90:57). Labrum broader than long (16:12), apex rounded. Mandible with subapical tooth small. Malar space more than three times as long as basal depth of mandible (32:9) and 4/5 as long as compound eye (32:40), malar line absent. Clypeus much longer than greatest breadth ignoring portion laterad of epistomal lobe (30:19); epistomal lobe and anterior tentorial pit strongly protruding into clypeus almost attaining apex. Compound eye broad, length to breadth 40:27, in profile its margin coincident with that of genal area ventrally; inner margin weakly concave; eyes converging below, UOD;LOD 32:27; lower ocular tangent near middle of supraclypeal area; upper ocular tangent just below lower margin of median ocellus. Genal and vertexal areas somewhat expanded, genal area half as wide as breadth of compound eye (16:32), ocelloccipital distance greater than diameter of lateral ocellus (~5:4); OOD:IOD 7:13. Scape less than three times as long as greatest width (12:5); pedicel slightly wider than long (6:5); Flagellomeres wider than long (6.5:5) except F11 with width and length subequal.

Mesosoma: Pronotum with collar poorly defined, anterior surface gradually curving to posterodorsal margin; ratio of lengths of scutellum:metanotum:horizontal surface of metapostnotum 13:9:13. Legs unmodified; hind tibial spurs long and narrow, inner spur half as long as metabasitarsus (16:32). Stigma with margin basal to vein R divergent, portion in marginal cell weakly concave.

Metasoma: Flattened, broadest at T3. S6 with apex angulate, bearing a short spine. Terminalia: As in figures 6–8. Proctiger well sclerotised but only narrowly so medially. S7 with weakly sclerotised, long, apical lobes, gradually widening towards rounded apex, with a few short, erect setae near apex; basal lobes absent. S8 narrow, more than twice as long as wide (30:12); apical lobe with narrow, almost cylindrical, slightly downturned apical process; lateral lobe posterolaterally directed, spiculum long, gradually narrowing. Gonobase lacking apicoventral process. Gonocoxa with dorsomedial margin forming a right angle at midlength and with obtuse angulation medially at base of gonostylus, concave between these two angulations; with short, broadly based medioventral lobe. Gonostylus weakly differentiated from gonocoxa; membranous subapical gonocoxal lobe elongate, surpassing posterior extremity of gonocoxa, outer margin convex, inner margin concave towards base, vertically oriented.

Female: As in male except for usual secondary sexual characteristics and as follows:

Colouration: Labrum suffused with brown; malar area with yellow reduced, brown attaining hypostomal area at margin of compound eye; legs with dark markings slightly more extensive; wing veins pale yellow-brown; metasomal terga with orange more extensive, covering over half of midlength of T2 and T3; metasomal sterna suffused with orange, lacking brown markings.

Pubescence: Mesotarsal rake of robust setae up to 4MOD in length. Tibial scopa with hairs <2MOD, a few apical setae robust and up to 3MOD in length. S2 with sparse scopa, hairs <2MOD.

Structure: Prementum 15X longer than greatest width (45:3). Maxillary palpus with 6 palpomeres of approximately equal length and width; labial palpus with 4 palpomeres approximately equal in length. Subapical mandibular tooth small but distinct.

Material Studied. Holotype male and one male paratype: PERU: Departamento Arequipa; Caravelli, Bella Union, Quebrada Jahuay, 15°24’54”S 74°52’21”W, 198m, 22-24.x.2012, C. Carranza; one paratype female and one paratype male: PERU: Departamento Ica; Pampas de Nazca, South of Nazca Lines World Heritage Site; 14.78875°S 75.02109°W, 564m; pan traps, 12-19.vii.2009, L. Packer and J. Rivera.

The holotype and the male paratype from the same locality are deposited in MUSM where the female paratype will also be deposited pending further study. The second male paratype is at PCYU. The holotype is in good condition.

Etymology. This species is named after the locality where the first specimens were collected, just south of the Nazca Lines in Ica Department, Peru. The specific epithet is somewhat of a double entendre in that the long, narrow body form of the bee could be considered “linear”.

Floral hosts. Unknown, but the pans where the Nazca specimens were collected were set among Tiquilia sp. ( Boraginaceae ) which was almost the only plant in bloom at the locality at the time. This genus is the known host for G. longiceps ( Packer, 2005) . The floral host of the type species of the genus is Heliotropium also a member of the Boraginaceae ( Michener & Rozen, 1999) .

Comment. The two known localities for this species are approximately 80km from one another.

Figures

FIGURES 1 − 9. Geodiscelis nazcalinea sp. nov. 1 − 8. Male, 9. Female. 1. Habitus, side view, 2. head, frontal view, 3. head, side view, 4. proctiger, 5. S 6, 6. S 7, 7. S 8, 8. genital capsule, 9 habitus, dorsal view. Scale bar = 1 mm for Figs. 1 − 3 and 9. Scale bar = 0.5 mm for Figs. 4 − 8. Figs. 1 – 3 are of the holotype, 4 – 9 are from paratypes.

FIGURES 16 − 20. Head, side view of males of Geodiscelis megacephala, G. thaumaskelos, G. nazcalinea sp. nov., G. phisquiri sp. nov. and G. longiceps respectively. Scale bar = 1 mm.

FIGURES 10 − 15. Geodiscelis phisquiri sp. nov., male holotype. 10. Habitus, side view, 11. head, frontal view, 12. S 6, 13. S 7, 14. S 8, 15. genital capsule. Scale bar = 1 mm for Figs. 10, 11 and 15. Scale bar = 0.5 mm for Figs. 12 − 14.