Author: muelandr

New osmiine bee material from eastern Europe, which contained males of an Allosmia species with a peculiar morphology, and the re-examination of the female lectotype of Osmia nuda Friese, 1899 revealed that the recent synonymization of Osmia nuda with Osmia rufohirta Latreille, 1811 by A. Müller is erroneous (see “New synonymies 6” from 5.1.2011) . O. nuda is a species of its own. It is very similar to dwarfish females of O. rufohirta, but distinctly differs from that species in male sternal characters.

The male holotype of Heriades integra Benoist, 1934 could not be localized at the Musée d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris. The species is treated as a member of the genus Stenoheriades by Griswold (1994) and Ungricht et al. (2008). However, the original description lists several characters (spined axilla, rounded tergum 7, no transversal carina between vertical and horizontal part of tergum 1) that excludes its membership to Stenoheriades. Instead, these characters exclusively apply to Osmia (Hoplosmia) scutellaris Morawitz, 1868. Thus, Heriades integra is a junior synonym of Osmia scutellaris.

The comparison of the male holotype of Hoplitis (Micreriades) pisidiae Tkalcu, 2000 with a topotypical male paratype of Hoplitis (Micreriades) haemi Tkalcu, 2000 revealed a near identical morphology, in particular the shape of head, antennal scapus and genitalia is largely congruent. Differences pertain to the relative length of the first and second cubital cell and to the extent of the reddish-brown colouring along the tergal margins. Both characters, however, are variable among different individuals. Thus, Hoplitis haemi is considered conspecific with Hoplitis pisidiae syn. nov. based on the type material.

Based on the type material, Hoplitis (Hoplitis) latuspilosa Zanden, 1992 is a junior synonym of Hoplitis (Hoplitis) insularis (Schmiedeknecht, 1886).

Zanden (1991) classified Hoplitis bombiformis as a member of the subgenus Hoplitis. The recent examination of the type specimens revealed that this species does not belong to that subgenus. Based on the pilosity of the clypeus, the shape of the mandible, the occurrence of slightly upcurved and knobbed bristles on the foretarsi and the large size, H. bombiformis is most probably a member of the subgenus Megahoplitis. As the male of H. bombiformis is not yet known, however, this subgeneric placement is still tentative.

A recent study (Sedivy et al., 2013c) proposed to unite all Hoplitis species of the exclusively nearctic subgenera Acrosmia, Hoplitina, Penteriades and Proteriades (the “Proteriades group”) in a single subgenus Proteriades because i) neither Proteriades nor Hoplitina appear to be monophyletic taxa, ii) the distinction between the Hoplitis subgenera Penteriades and Acrosmia based on the presence or absence of hooked hairs on the female proboscis is not justified as two of the five Acrosmia species also possess such hooked hairs, and iii) the four subgenera closely resemble each other morphologically, especially in the female sex. Merging all four subgenera of the Proteriades group into a single large subgenus results in a morphologically and biologically well characterized taxon, whose monophyly is strongly supported by numerous morphological characters.

A recent study (Sedivy et al., 2013c) proposed to merge all Hoplitis species of the subgenera Alcidamea, Cyrtosmia, Dasyosmia, Megalosmia, Monumetha and Prionohoplitis (the “Alcidamea” group) into a single subgenus Alcidamea for the following reasons: i) Alcidamea is clearly polyphyletic in its current circumscription with all the other subgenera emerging from within this subgenus, and ii) the monophyly of Prionohoplitis is not supported. Uniting all six subgenera of the Alcidamea group results in a phylogenetically strongly supported clade, which, however, is characterized by only a few morphological characters such as the shape of the female clypus and the shapes of the male sterna 4-7.