Andrena (Melanapis) fuscosa Erichson, 1835

Figs 6–7

Andrena (Melanapis) fuscosa Erichson, 1835: 103, ♂ (Spain: ZMHB).

Andrena (Melanapis) rutila Spinola, 1838: 510, ♀ (Egypt: MRSN, lectotype by present designation; Fig. 6A–D).

Andrena (Melanapis) ephippium Spinola, 1838: 511, ♀ (Egypt: MRSN, lectotype by present designation; Fig. 7A–D).

Remarks

Wood (2023) presented genetic data for A. fuscosa from Spain, the locus typicus. Whilst this showed that material from Spain was closely related to sequences from Israel and northern India, specimens from Morocco were separated by around 5%. Further study is required to establish whether or not North African material represents a distinct species or simply genetic drift and separation by distance. No morphological differences are immediately apparent. In any case, recognising the next available names is important, these being Spinola’s names from Egypt (Spinola 1838). For both taxa, a single female specimen is conserved in the MRSN collection. Both conform to the concept of A. fuscosa, though A. rutila is extensively red-marked (Fig. 6A–D), and A. ephippium is predominantly dark (Fig. 7A–D); this colour variation can be found across the range of A. fuscosa without clear geographic gradients or patterns other than that red colouration is both more frequent and covers a greater proportion of the body in hotter and drier environments. The A. ephippium specimen is damaged and is missing its head, but structurally can clearly be identified as A. fuscosa . The two specimens may automatically be holotypes, but since this is not clear from Spinola’s original descriptions, they are here designated as lectotypes.

Distribution

Palaearctic, from the Canary Islands to Central Asia and northern India (Gusenleitner & Schwarz 2002).