Megachile pusilla Perez , 1884

Praz, Christophe J. & Benon, Dimitri, 2023, Revision of the leachella group of Megachile subgenus Eutricharaea in the Western Palaearctic (Hymenoptera, Apoidea, Megachilidae): A renewed plea for DNA barcoding type material, Journal of Hymenoptera Research 95, pp. 143-198 : 143

Megachile pusilla Perez, 1884

Figs 61-66

Megachile pusilla Pérez, 1884: 263, ♀ ♂, “Portugal”. Lectotype ♀, by present designation (MNHN); paralectotypes ♀ (MNHN), by present designation.

Megachile variscopa Pérez, 1895: 24, ♀, “Bône” [Annaba, Algeria]. Lectotype ♀, by present designation. New synonymy.

Megachile timberlakei Cockerell, 1920: 119, ♂ ♀, "Kaimulai [sic]|, Oahu" [Kaimuki, Honolulu, Hawai, USA; introduced]. Holotype ♂ (USNM). New synonymy.

Megachile atratula Rebmann, 1968: 38, ♂ ♀, “Rapallo” [Italy]. Holotype ♂ (SMFD?), paratypes ♂ ♀ (SMFD). New synonymy.

Megachile striatella Rebmann, 1968: 41, ♂ ♀, "El Kantara" [Algeria]. Holotype ♂ (restricted to genitalia) (SMFD), paratypes ♂ ♀ (SMFD). New synonymy.

Megachile sudai Ikudome, 1999: 3, ♀, [Okinawa, Japan; introduced]. New synonymy.

Material examined.

Type material. Lectotype ♀ (MNHN) of M. pusilla , a well-preserved female, by present designation. The specimen is labeled as follows: 1. " Portug [handwritten, handwriting of Pérez; = Portugal]. 2. “Muséum 1915" [printed]. 3 . Lectotypus Megachile pusilla ♀ Pérez design. Malisheva 1989 [printed and handwritten on red paper]; 4. Museum Paris EY0000002295. Two additional females labelled as follows are designated as paralectotypes. 1. “Portug” [handwritten, handwriting of Pérez; = Portugal]; 2. “Muséum 1915" [printed]. 3 . Paralectotypus Megachile pusilla ♀ Pérez des. C. Praz 2022 [printed and handwritten on red paper]; 4. Museum Paris EY0000002296; and 1. “Portugal” [printed]; 2. “Muséum 1915" [printed]. 3 . Paralectotypus Megachile pusilla ♀ Pérez des. C. Praz 2022 [printed and handwritten on red paper]; 4. Museum Paris EY0000002297.

Lectotype ♀ (MNHN) of M. variscopa , a well-preserved female labeled as follows: 1. “Bône” [handwritten, possibly by Pérez]; 2. “Muséum Paris Coll. J. Pérez 1915" [printed on blue paper]; 3. " Lectotype M. variscopa Pérez des. van der Zanden 1989" [printed and handwritten on red paper]. 4. " Megachile albohirta det. van der Zanden 1994"; 5. " Megachile pusilla det. C. Praz 2022" [printed and handwritten]. Megachile albohirta ( Brullé, 1839) was considered to be conspecific with M. concinna by Tkalcu (1993), explaining van der Zanden’s identification as M. albohirta (see Praz 2017). One additional female from Bône is designated as a paralectotype. It is labeled as follows. 1. “Bône” [handwritten, possibly by Pérez]; 2. “Muséum Paris Coll. J. Pérez 1915" [printed on blue paper]; 3. " Paralectotype M. variscopa Pérez des. C. Praz 2022" [printed and handwritten on red paper]; 4. " Megachile pusilla det. C. Praz 2022" [printed and handwritten].

Paratypes ♂ ♀ (SMFD) of M. atratula. The holotype, indicated to be in Rebmann’s collection (SMFD) could not be located.

Holotype ♂ (SMFD) of M. striatella (see above). Paratypes ♀ ♂ of M. striatella (SMFD).

Notes: we did not examine the holotype of M. timberlakei , but pictures are available on the online catalogue of USNM (https://collections.nmnh.si.edu; catalogue entry number 536683). The simple gonostylus, typical of the Megachile concinna complex is visible. In addition, two DNA barcodes for specimens collected in Hawaii and identified as M. timberlakei are 100% identical with M. pusilla .

We did not examine the type material of M. sudai , but examined and sequenced specimens from Okinawa kindly sent by H. Nagase; these specimens perfectly agree with M. pusilla ; see Nagase (2016).

Other material.

54 specimens from the following countries: Argentina (introduced), France, Greece, Greece (Crete), Italy, Japan (introduced) Malta, Morocco, Spain, Tunisia, USA (introduced) (Suppl. material 1). Megachile timberlakei was mentioned from the Galapagos Islands ( Rasmussen et al. 2012); identity of these specimens should be checked using DNA barcodes given the challenging identifications in this group; they likely belong either to M. pusilla or to M. concinna .

Distribution.

See Soltani et al. 2017: fig. 3. Northwestern Africa (Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco), southern Europe (Portugal, Spain, France including Corsica, Italy including Sicily and Sardinia, Slovenia, Greece including Crete). Presumed introduced in Madeira ( Kratochwil et al. 2018). Introduced in southern America, northern America, Japan, Hawaii, and probably Australia (see note below).

Geographic variation.

Specimens from Algeria and Tunisia have the scopa often partly orange on S5; whether this condition results from introgression with M. leucostoma remains to be established.

Note.

A published barcode generated from a specimen collected near Perth, Western Australia (BOLD accession number MSAPB1368-19) is 100% identical to sequences of M. pusilla , suggesting that M. pusilla has also been introduced into Australia. This specimen is identified as M. obtusa Smith, 1853. We examined a picture of the holotype of M. obtusa (OUMNH); this species has modified front tarsi and does not belong to the same species group as M. pusilla.

Figures

Figures 61 - 66. Megachile pusilla 61 female metasoma 62 female metasomal tergum 4 63 female vertex 64 apex of female clypeus 65 dorsal view of male head 66 male genitalia.