Megachile concinna Smith, 1879

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 concinna Smith, 1879

Megachile concinna Smith, 1879: 79, ♀, "St. Domingo [Dominican Republic; introduced]". Syntype (or holotype) ♀ (BMNH).

Megachile multidens Fox, 1891: 345, ♀ ♂, "Kingston [Jamaica; introduced]".

Material examined.

Type material. Syntype (or holotype) ♀ of M. concinna (BMNH). The original description does not indicate the number of specimens, it is therefore not clear whether this specimen is the holotype (by monotypy) or a syntype. This female specimen agrees with the original description; it is slightly larger than other members of the Megachile concinna complex, as indicated by F. Smith, who gave its length as 4 lines (=approx. 8.4 mm), while the length given for M. venusta is 3 ¼ lines (7.8 mm); also as indicated in the original description, there are two spots of white hairs on the disc of T6, unlike in M. venusta .

Note: It is likely that M. derelictula Cockerell, 1937, described from Barbados, is also a synonym of M. concinna .

Other material.

13 specimens from the following countries: Benin, Cape Verde, Dominican Republic (introduced), French Guyana (introduced), Kenya, Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (introduced) (Suppl. material 1) .

Note.

This species is difficult to separate from other members of the Megachile concinna complex. The genetic analyses of Soltani et al. (2017) suggested that M. concinna and M. venusta are distinct and both widely distributed in Africa, although only few specimens have been analyzed; these authors also reported specimens of both species in sympatry in one site in Kenya (Suppl. material 1). For these reasons, these two species are treated as distinct. Compared to most other members of the Megachile concinna complex, M. concinna is on average slightly larger. The female has the scopa white (dark on S6), contrary to M. venusta which mostly has the scopa orange; the punctation on the terga appears to be slightly denser in M. concinna compared to other members of the complex; and the disc of T6 has two distinct spots of hairs, unlike in M. venusta ( Soltani et al. 2017: table S3). Based on the few specimens examined, the male of M. concinna can not be separated from the other species of the Megachile concinna complex. The identity of this species is based on DNA barcoded specimens from the Dominican Republic (the type locality of M. concinna ), assuming that only one species of the Megachile concinna complex is present there.