Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Recurso digital |
| Lenguaje: | |
| Publicado: |
Zenodo
2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17727254 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866901339250884608 |
|---|---|
| author | Wood, Thomas J. |
| author_facet | Wood, Thomas J. |
| contents | <p><i>Pachymelus</i> (<i>Pachymelopsis</i>) <i>armatipes</i> (Friese, 1911) stat. rev.</p><p><i>Anthophora armatipes</i> Friese, 1911: 660, ♀ ♂ [“ Somaliland ”, ZMB, not examined]</p><p><b>Material examined.</b></p><p><b>Ethiopia</b> • 2 ♂; Jowaha N. of Debra Sina; 6,000 ft a. s. l.; 7 Aug. 1946; K. M. Guichard leg.; D. B. Baker det. 1979; NHMUK; <b>Kenya</b> • 1 ♂; Brit. E. Af., Mtito Andei; 2,500 ft a. s. l.; 26–28 Mar. 1911; S. A. Neave leg.; D. B. Baker det.; 1982; NHMUK; • 2 ♀; E of Mwingi; 14 May 2007; M. Halada leg.; T. J. Wood det.; OÖLM / TJWC • 1 ♀; Taita Hills, Voi river; 14 Apr. 2007; T. J. Wood det.; OÖLM.</p><p><b>Notes.</b></p><p>The situation surrounding three taxa, <i>P. conspicuus</i>, <i>Pachymelus bettoni</i> (Cockerell, 1910), and <i>P. armatipes</i>, has been confused. Brooks (1988) considered all three to be conspecific, but Eardley (1993) treated <i>P. conspicuus</i> (inclusive of <i>P. armatipes</i>) and <i>P. bettoni</i> as two distinct species. This case requires clarification, as <i>P. conspicuus</i> was described from a single female (Fig. 1), <i>P. bettoni</i> from a single male (Fig. 2), and <i>P. armatipes</i> in both sexes.</p><p>Friese (1911) provided a diagnosis for <i>P. armatipes</i> against <i>P. festivus</i> (Dours, 1869), citing the larger size, different female colouration, and long hair fringe on the male fore basitarsus. Eardley (1993: 220–221) argued that the female of <i>P. armatipes</i> was conspecific with <i>P. conspicuus</i>, and since the sexes of the type series were “ apparently ” correctly associated, the male of <i>P. armatipes</i> must therefore be the male of <i>P. conspicuus</i>, as “ no evidence was available for the association of the holotype of <i>P. bettoni</i> with that of <i>P. conspicuus</i> ”.</p><p>Eardley’s synonymy of <i>P. armatipes</i> was unjustified, as (1) there are morphological differences in pubescence between the females of <i>P. armatipes</i> and <i>P. conspicuus</i>, and (2) there was no effort to associate sexes across the observed ranges of the possible taxa to provide additional support for or against a particular association. While <i>P. conspicuus</i> females have dense and fine tergal pubescence (Fig. 1 D), <i>P. armatipes</i> females have thicker hairs on the terga, giving an almost scaly appearance (Fig. 3 D). The scutal pubescence of <i>P. conspicuus</i> is also finely intermixed greyish and dark brown hairs (Fig. 1 C), whereas in <i>P. armatipes</i> the pubescence is rich reddish-brown with only a few intermixed black hairs (Figs 3 A, 3 C). There are also slight differences in body size, with female <i>P. conspicuus</i> measuring around 15–16 mm and <i>P. armatipes</i> around 16–18 mm (see Friese 1911: 661), and in the colouration of the yellow facial markings, which are lemon yellow in <i>P. conspicuus</i> (Fig. 1 C) and ivory yellow in <i>P. armatipes</i> (Fig. 3 B).</p><p>Concerning males, examination of specimens has found <i>P. conspicuus</i> females with <i>P. bettoni</i> males flying together at the same site on the same day in four locations (Kenya = 3, Zambia = 1; full material examined listed below under <i>P. conspicuus</i>). In fact, the specimens from Zambia were critical to understanding the sex association, as males displaying the morphology of <i>P. armatipes</i> have only been examined from Ethiopia (Fig. 4) and Kenya, whereas “ <i>P. bettoni</i> ” males have been examined extending south through Tanzania to Zambia, covering the known range of <i>P. conspicuus</i> based on female specimens. <i>Pachymelus bettoni</i> must therefore represent the male of <i>P. conspicuus</i> based on local co-occurrence and overall distributional overlap. The species concepts presented here are consistent with the morphological concepts used by Donald Baker (see listed specimen determinations). <i>Pachymelus bettoni</i> is therefore formally synonymised with <i>P. conspicuus</i> below, and <i>P. armatipes</i> stat. rev. is restored to species status. The males are easily separable, as <i>P. conspicuus</i> has the hind basitarsus apically broadened and thus appearing triangular (Fig. 2 E), and the mid trochanters are ventrally rounded, whereas <i>P. armatipes</i> has the hind basitarsus parallel-sided (Fig. 4 D), and the mid trochanters are ventrally produced into long, ventrally projecting teeth (see identification key).</p><p><b>Distribution.</b></p><p>Ethiopia *, Somalia, Kenya * (Friese 1911; Eardley 1993, as <i>Pachymelus conspicuus</i> partim).</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_17727254 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Pachymelus (Pachymelopsis) armatipes Wood 2025, stat. rev. Wood, Thomas J. Biodiversity Taxonomy Animalia Arthropoda Insecta Hymenoptera Apidae Pachymelus Pachymelus armatipes <p><i>Pachymelus</i> (<i>Pachymelopsis</i>) <i>armatipes</i> (Friese, 1911) stat. rev.</p><p><i>Anthophora armatipes</i> Friese, 1911: 660, ♀ ♂ [“ Somaliland ”, ZMB, not examined]</p><p><b>Material examined.</b></p><p><b>Ethiopia</b> • 2 ♂; Jowaha N. of Debra Sina; 6,000 ft a. s. l.; 7 Aug. 1946; K. M. Guichard leg.; D. B. Baker det. 1979; NHMUK; <b>Kenya</b> • 1 ♂; Brit. E. Af., Mtito Andei; 2,500 ft a. s. l.; 26–28 Mar. 1911; S. A. Neave leg.; D. B. Baker det.; 1982; NHMUK; • 2 ♀; E of Mwingi; 14 May 2007; M. Halada leg.; T. J. Wood det.; OÖLM / TJWC • 1 ♀; Taita Hills, Voi river; 14 Apr. 2007; T. J. Wood det.; OÖLM.</p><p><b>Notes.</b></p><p>The situation surrounding three taxa, <i>P. conspicuus</i>, <i>Pachymelus bettoni</i> (Cockerell, 1910), and <i>P. armatipes</i>, has been confused. Brooks (1988) considered all three to be conspecific, but Eardley (1993) treated <i>P. conspicuus</i> (inclusive of <i>P. armatipes</i>) and <i>P. bettoni</i> as two distinct species. This case requires clarification, as <i>P. conspicuus</i> was described from a single female (Fig. 1), <i>P. bettoni</i> from a single male (Fig. 2), and <i>P. armatipes</i> in both sexes.</p><p>Friese (1911) provided a diagnosis for <i>P. armatipes</i> against <i>P. festivus</i> (Dours, 1869), citing the larger size, different female colouration, and long hair fringe on the male fore basitarsus. Eardley (1993: 220–221) argued that the female of <i>P. armatipes</i> was conspecific with <i>P. conspicuus</i>, and since the sexes of the type series were “ apparently ” correctly associated, the male of <i>P. armatipes</i> must therefore be the male of <i>P. conspicuus</i>, as “ no evidence was available for the association of the holotype of <i>P. bettoni</i> with that of <i>P. conspicuus</i> ”.</p><p>Eardley’s synonymy of <i>P. armatipes</i> was unjustified, as (1) there are morphological differences in pubescence between the females of <i>P. armatipes</i> and <i>P. conspicuus</i>, and (2) there was no effort to associate sexes across the observed ranges of the possible taxa to provide additional support for or against a particular association. While <i>P. conspicuus</i> females have dense and fine tergal pubescence (Fig. 1 D), <i>P. armatipes</i> females have thicker hairs on the terga, giving an almost scaly appearance (Fig. 3 D). The scutal pubescence of <i>P. conspicuus</i> is also finely intermixed greyish and dark brown hairs (Fig. 1 C), whereas in <i>P. armatipes</i> the pubescence is rich reddish-brown with only a few intermixed black hairs (Figs 3 A, 3 C). There are also slight differences in body size, with female <i>P. conspicuus</i> measuring around 15–16 mm and <i>P. armatipes</i> around 16–18 mm (see Friese 1911: 661), and in the colouration of the yellow facial markings, which are lemon yellow in <i>P. conspicuus</i> (Fig. 1 C) and ivory yellow in <i>P. armatipes</i> (Fig. 3 B).</p><p>Concerning males, examination of specimens has found <i>P. conspicuus</i> females with <i>P. bettoni</i> males flying together at the same site on the same day in four locations (Kenya = 3, Zambia = 1; full material examined listed below under <i>P. conspicuus</i>). In fact, the specimens from Zambia were critical to understanding the sex association, as males displaying the morphology of <i>P. armatipes</i> have only been examined from Ethiopia (Fig. 4) and Kenya, whereas “ <i>P. bettoni</i> ” males have been examined extending south through Tanzania to Zambia, covering the known range of <i>P. conspicuus</i> based on female specimens. <i>Pachymelus bettoni</i> must therefore represent the male of <i>P. conspicuus</i> based on local co-occurrence and overall distributional overlap. The species concepts presented here are consistent with the morphological concepts used by Donald Baker (see listed specimen determinations). <i>Pachymelus bettoni</i> is therefore formally synonymised with <i>P. conspicuus</i> below, and <i>P. armatipes</i> stat. rev. is restored to species status. The males are easily separable, as <i>P. conspicuus</i> has the hind basitarsus apically broadened and thus appearing triangular (Fig. 2 E), and the mid trochanters are ventrally rounded, whereas <i>P. armatipes</i> has the hind basitarsus parallel-sided (Fig. 4 D), and the mid trochanters are ventrally produced into long, ventrally projecting teeth (see identification key).</p><p><b>Distribution.</b></p><p>Ethiopia *, Somalia, Kenya * (Friese 1911; Eardley 1993, as <i>Pachymelus conspicuus</i> partim).</p> |
| title | Pachymelus (Pachymelopsis) armatipes Wood 2025, stat. rev. |
| topic | Biodiversity Taxonomy Animalia Arthropoda Insecta Hymenoptera Apidae Pachymelus Pachymelus armatipes |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17727254 |