dcsimg

Comprehensive Description

provided by Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology
Lasioglossum fuscipenne (Smith)

Halictus fuscipennis Smith, 1853:67 [female, male].—Dalla Torre, 1896:62 [World catalog].

Lasioglossum fuscipenne.—Robertson, 1902:34 [key].—Michener, 1951:1106 [Nearctic catalog].—Mitchell, 1960:343 [redescription, key],—Knerer and Atwood, 1962:163 [locality and flower records],—Hurd, 1979:1957 [Nearctic catalog].—Duffield et al., 1981:323 [Dufour's gland chemistry].

Halictus capitulatus Vachal, 1904:472 [female].—Cockerell, 1905a:90 [key].—Mitchell, 1960 [synonymy],

Curtisapis fuscipennis.—Robertson, 1918:91.—Reinhard, 1924:371 [predator, Philanthus gibbosus].—Robertson, 1929 [flower records].

TYPE MATERIAL.—In his original description of Halictus fuscipennis, Smith described the female and male but his only reference to the type series was “Hab. St. John's Bluff, East Florida. (Coll. E. Doubleday, Esq.).” The lectotype female, herein designated, is associated with the above data and is labeled “Type” (handwritten by Smith?). Its full label data are

Type H.T. [circular label with orange-red border]/B.M. TYPE HYM. 14.a.1005/B.M. TYPE HYM. Halictus fuscipennis Smith 1853/fuscipenne Sm.[ith] Type [handwritten by Smith?]/E. Doubleday. St. John's Bluff, E.[ast] Florida./ LECTOTYPE Halictus fuscipennis Smith des[ignated by] McGinley [red label].

The lectotype, in the British Museum (Natural History), is missing the left antenna and the hind left tarsus but is otherwise in fair condition.

The female holotype of Halictus capitulatus, in the Paris Museum (MNHNP), is labeled

Teness.[Tennessee]/Museum Paris, coll. O. Sichel 1867/Holotype [handwritten on red label]/capitulatus Vach.[al] [handwritten]/Halictus capitulatus Vach.[al] [handwritten].

During shipment in August 1983, the abdomen beyond the first metasomal segment broke off. This was apparently due to weakening of the area by old dermestid damage as evidenced by a small circular hole on the right side of the abdomen. The abdomen was reglued to the specimen with PVA by McGinley. The specimen is also missing the last two tarsomeres of the middle left leg but is otherwise in good condition. Moure and Hurd (1986) have correctly noted that the holotype is labeled only from “Teness. [Tennessee],” whereas in the original description Vachal recorded the type from “Teness., Mex.[ico]”; the Mexican reference evidently the result of an error in transcription.

DISTRIBUTION (Figure 443).—Lasioglossum fuscipenne is presently known to occur from Massachusetts through southern Florida and west to Michigan, eastern Kansas, and eastern Oklahoma. Hurd (1979) records this species from Nova Scotia to Ontario, south to Texas and Florida. Although I have not seen specimens from Texas and Ontario, their occurrence there is possible; the northern records to Nova Scotia are undoubtedly incorrect.

DIAGNOSIS.—The females of Lasioglossum fuscipenne can be distinguished from all other New World Lasioglossum by their distinctive dorsal propodeal surface (Figure 448), which is sharply truncated posteriorly; the lateral rims of the propodeal triangle are low but distinct and enclose a ruguloso-striate to irregularly striate area that sharply contrasts with the smooth propodeal surface outside the lateral rims. Additional helpful characters are the sharply pointed pronotal lateral angle, which forms a right angle (Figure 449), the relatively sparse mesoscutal punctation with most punctures separated by a distance greater than their width (Figure 449), and the lack of a first metasomal acarinarium.

Males of Lasioglossum fuscipenne are unique in having the posterior half of metasomal sterna II–IV densely covered by short, conspicuous hair patches (Figure 189). Unlike other Lasioglossum from the eastern United States except L. leucozonium and L. zonulum, the clypeus is rounded, not conspicuously flattened. The head is noticeably narrowed below with the eyes converging ventrally (Figure 445, similar to head of L. leucozonium, Figure 493). Both L. leucozonium and L. zonulum males differ greatly from those of L. fuscipenne in their sternal vestiture (compare Figures 189, 204, 205). As in the female, the pronotal lateral angle of the male L. fuscipenne is sharply produced.

DESCRIPTION.—FEMALE: (1) Length 8.2–10.1 mm (x = 9.2, n = 15); (2) wing length 2.7–3.1 mm (x = 2.9, n = 15); (3) abdominal width 2.7–3.2 mm (x = 3.0, n = 15).

Structure: (4) Head moderately elongate (Figure 444; length/width ratio 0.88–0.96, x = 0.92, n = 15). (7) Supraclypeal area evenly rounded, (8) moderately protuberant. (9) Clypeus projecting approximately 0.70 of its length below lower margin of eyes; (11) surface without median longitudinal sulcation. (14) Distance between lateral ocelli slightly exceeding distance between lateral ocellus and eye. (23) Flagellomere 1 subequal in length to 2 along dorsal surface. Labrum as in Figure 446; (27) distal keel narrow in frontal view, lateral edges slightly bowed; (28) distal lateral projections absent; (29) fimbrial setae acutely pointed.

(32) Pronotal lateral angle forming well-produced right angle; (33) pronotal lateral ridge incomplete, broadly interrupted by oblique lateral sulcus; (34) lower portion of lateral ridge narrowly rounded. (35) Mesoscutal lip moderately bilobed, (36) strongly elevated from pronotum. (40) Dorsal surface of propodeum about 0.88 the length of scutellum and about 1.5 times the length of metanotum, (41) not depressed centrally, (42) posterior margin sharply truncated; (43) propodeal triangle weakly to moderately well defined, evident medially as a low V-shaped elevation with low but distinct lateral rims extending towards metanotum; (44) lateral carinae encircling posterior surface of propodeum, interrupted medially by V-shaped elevation. (45) Tibial spur as in Figure 33.

(46) Lateral edge of metasomal tergum II very weakly sinuate, nearly straight posteriorly.

Sculpture: (47) Face moderately shiny, (48) densely punctate below ocelli, punctures contiguous, becoming larger and less dense near antennae. (51) Supraclypeal area extremely granulate, (51) uniformly punctate, punctures separated by 1–3 times their width. (53) Clypeus granulate; (54) punctation nearly uniform, punctures separated by their width, becoming larger apically. (56) Mesoscutum moderately shiny, noticeably but finely patterned; (57) punctation nearly uniform throughout (Figure 449), punctures usually 2 times their width apart. (58) Scutellum nearly uniformly punctate, punctures less dense than those of mesoscutum, 1–4 times their width apart. (63) Dorsal surface of propodeum (Figure 448) ruguloso-striate, striae becoming more irregular medially, not reaching posterior margin; (64) surface alveolated. (65) Metasomal tergum I moderately dull, obscurely granulate; (66) punctation very fine, obscure, punctures separated by 1–3 times their width.

Coloration: (71) Wing membrane with clinal variation in pigmenation, correlated with leg color: southern forms with pale yellowish orange legs have conspicuously infuscated wings, especially anteriorly in marginal cell to apex; northern forms with dark legs have lightly infuscated wings (see “Remarks” section). (72) Unlike most species, legs show apparent clinal variation in pigmentation: southern and western forms with tibiae and tarsi of middle and hindlegs pale yellowish orange (see “Remarks” section).

Vestiture: (74) Pubescence of head pale yellowish brown to white. (75) Pubescence of thorax white to yellowish white; (76) mesoscutal hairs sparse, obscurely plumose. (77) Hind tibial hairs concolorous, yellowish brown. (78) Anterior hairs of metasomal tergum I and (79) basal hair bands of terga II–IV white. (80) Acarinarium absent, elongate hairs scattered over anterior surface of tergum I.

MALE: Similar to female except as follows: (1) length 7.3–9.6 mm (x = 8.1, n = 15); (2) wing length 2.2–2.5 mm (x = 2.3, n = 15); (3) abdominal width 1.8–2.5 mm (x = 2.0, n = 15). (4) Head as in Figure 445 (length/width ratio 0.80–1.0, x = 0.93, n = 15). (5) Gena conspicuously narrower than eye; (6) rounded, not produced posteriorly. (10) Clypeal surface broadly rounded, not flattened or depressed. Labrum as in Figure 447; (24) distal process virtually absent; (25) basal area rounded medially, not depressed; (26) basal lateral depressions absent. (30) Mandible short, just reaching opposing clypeal angle. (53) Clypeus granulate; (54) punctures well formed throughout, less dense on apical half, approximately 1–2 times their width apart. (68) Clypeal maculation present (Figure 445). (69) Flagellum brown ventrally, contrasting with dark dorsum. (72) Tarsi dark, concolorous with tibiae or tarsi yellowish orange, contrasting with dark tibiae (pale leg coloration occurs in the southern and western portions of the species distribution; see “Remarks” section).

Vestiture: Sternal vestiture as in Figure 189; (82) sternum IV (as well as sterna II–III) with conspicuous patches of dense, adpressed hairs; (83) sternum V with less conspicuous, median rosette of adpressed hairs, posterior edge of sternum with moderately elongate lateral hair fringes.

Terminalia: Sterna VII–VIII as in Figure 454; (85) sternum VIII without median process. Genitalia as in Figures 450–453; (86) gonobase moderately elongate; (87) gonostylus moderately elongate and broad, parallel-sided, apex broadly rounded; (89) retrorse membranous lobe moderately broad; (90) volsella with prominent lateral lobe.

FLIGHT RECORDS (Figure 455).—Label data indicate that L. fuscipenne is possibly bivoltine in the southern portion of its range. In Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina males have been collected in March and April and then again from October through early December. Females in this area have only been collected from March to July but undoubtedly occur later in the season along with the males. Northern records suggest a univoltine pattern, with females most commonly collected in May and early June. Males in the mid-Atlantic region have been most commonly taken in early October.

FLOWER RECORDS.—95% of the floral records for Lasioglossum fuscipenne males were from the Compositae. This is probably a result of the many late season records for this species during the abundance of Aster and Solidago blooms rather than due to any specificity on the part of the bees. Little can be said about female floral associations other than that they are most likely polylectic.

Summary: Females (74): Anacardiaceae 24%; Fagaceae 11%; Compositae 11%; Hydrophyllaceae 10%. Males (118): Compositae 95%. Total: 192 in 22 families, 34 genera as follows:

Alliaria 2; Apocynum 3; Aquilegia 1; Aruncus 1; Asclepias 1; Aster 36; Barbarea 3; Batodendron 1; Bidens 13; Carya 1; Castanea 8; Ceanothus 5; Chrysanthemum 3, 2; Erigeron 1; Euphorbia 1; Geranium 1; Hydrophyllum 7; Ilex 2; Krigia 1; *Ligustrum 1(1); Linaria 1; Lobelia 1; Lyonia 1; Prunus 2; Pyrus 1; Rhus 17; Salix 3; 2; Senecio 3, 2; Solidago 58; Tephrosia 2; Vaccinium 1, 1; Viburnum 1; Vitis 1; Waldsteinia 1.
license
cc-by-nc-sa-3.0
bibliographic citation
McGinley, R. J. 1986. "Studies of Halictinae (Apoidea: Halictidae), I: Revision of New World Lasioglossum Curtis." Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology. 1-294. https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00810282.429

Lasioglossum fuscipenne

provided by wikipedia EN

Lasioglossum fuscipenne is a species of sweat bee in the family Halictidae.[1][2][3]

References

  1. ^ "Lasioglossum fuscipenne Report". Integrated Taxonomic Information System. Retrieved 2019-09-24.
  2. ^ "Lasioglossum fuscipenne". GBIF. Retrieved 2019-09-24.
  3. ^ "Lasioglossum fuscipenne species Information". BugGuide.net. Retrieved 2019-09-24.
license
cc-by-sa-3.0
copyright
Wikipedia authors and editors
original
visit source
partner site
wikipedia EN

Lasioglossum fuscipenne: Brief Summary

provided by wikipedia EN

Lasioglossum fuscipenne is a species of sweat bee in the family Halictidae.

license
cc-by-sa-3.0
copyright
Wikipedia authors and editors
original
visit source
partner site
wikipedia EN