Sphecodes pinguiculus Pérez, 1903
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.281041 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6181227 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/EF03B66B-B040-FFD4-0EBE-FA28A41EFDE7 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Sphecodes pinguiculus Pérez, 1903 |
status |
|
Sphecodes pinguiculus Pérez, 1903 View in CoL
Described as: Sphecodes pinguiculus Pérez, 1903 : CCXX.
Synonyms: Sphecodes sareptensis Meyer, 1922: 170 –171.
Sphecodes excellens Meyer, 1922: 170 .
Sphecodes punctatissimus Meyer, 1922: 172 .
Sphecodes hungaricus Blüthgen, 1923a: 498 –499.
Sphecodes coelebs Blüthgen, 1923a: 505 –506.
Sphecodes consobrinus Blüthgen, 1923a: 507 –508.
Sphecodes persicus Blüthgen, 1925: 509 –511.
Sphecodes capverdensis Pesenko & La Roche, 2002: 72 View in CoL , 203 in Pauly et al. (2002), syn. nov.
Taxonomy. We studied material of this species from Mongolia, Hungary, the Mediterranean region and Cape Verde islands. Variablity of this species is not large and for this reason we propose synonymization of S. capverdensis View in CoL with S. pinguiculus View in CoL .
Distribution. Spain, Hungary, Slovakia, Italy (Sicilia), Russia, North Africa, Turkey, Mongolia ( Warncke 1992), Cape Verde.
Biology. Species of warm, usually sandy habitats. This species is widely distributed in desert and semidesert regions, where it can be quite abundant. This species is almost surely a parasite of Halictus lucidipennis Smith of Cape Verde Islands. It is the only available common bee at the sites with occurence of S. pinguiculus and of course, close association of both species has been observed in Cape Verde. Possibly, H. lucidipennis is main host in most areas of its occurrence, because this Halictus is common species in desert and semidesert areas from Mongolia, through Mediterranean region to Cape Verde. We suggest H. smaragdulus Vachal to be possible host for central European region, where similar H. lucidipennis does not occur. Nobile & Turrisi (2004) described seven new species related to S. pinguiculus . However, the characters are poor and probably relate to the way of preservation or collecting rather than true structural differences. Recently, the type material was studied ( Schwarz & Gusenleitner 2012) and the described species are not related to S. pinguiculus but S. miniatus group.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Sphecodes pinguiculus Pérez, 1903
Bogusch, Petr & Straka, Jakub 2012 |
Sphecodes capverdensis
Pesenko 2002: 72 |
Sphecodes hungaricus Blüthgen, 1923a : 498
Bluthgen 1923: 498 |
Sphecodes coelebs Blüthgen, 1923a : 505
Bluthgen 1923: 505 |
Sphecodes consobrinus Blüthgen, 1923a : 507
Bluthgen 1923: 507 |
Sphecodes excellens
Meyer 1922: 170 |
Sphecodes punctatissimus
Meyer 1922: 172 |