Reestudo de alguns tipos de abelhas Neotropicais descritos por Friese e conservados no Museu de Berlim (Apoidea, Colletidae, Anthophoridae)

Abstract

ABSTRACT. RUSrllllY 01 SO~tI TYI'I SI'I{' I~II : NS 01' NI'IHROPIC,\I BI!.S. DI ." ·RIBLIl IlY FRILSI ' AND PRLSI ·R\·LIl lN rlll BI'RIIN MI I SI : t l~l (ApOIDh\. COI LI . rlllAI ·. ANTIIO PIIORIDAI I. Amollg the specimclls 01' Neotropical Bees ckscribcu h} Friese allu prcserveu ill the Berlim MlIsellm the followillg ones were stlldied. Dr sy nollym izcd.

Taxonomic note on the type species of <i>Centris</i> (<i>Melanocentris</i>) (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

“…Contrary to Moure's (1995) interpretation, the specimen identified as C. atra collected in Blumenau housed at NMW is not a melanic form of C. dorsata. Rather, it is a (Fig.…”

“…This author concluded that this name should be applied to a species of Ptilotopus due to the pair of humps on the mesoscutellum mentioned in the original description and present in the female he received from ZMB identified as such, despite recognizing that the specimen was not one of the syntypes. Additionally, Moure (1995) indicated that the specimen from Blumenau (Brazil) identified by Friese as C. atra deposited at NMW corresponded to a melanic form of C. dorsata, not agreeing with the description of the species.…”

“…The designation of this species as type meant that the traditional interpretation of the subgenus was maintained, avoiding additional taxonomic confusion. Both of the supraspecific modifications proposed by Moure (1995) and the interpretation of the identity of C. atra were widely accepted and followed by all authors who worked with species of this group (see Michener, 2007;Moure et al, 2007, and references therein). Moure (1995) also mentioned Friese's difficulty in identifying C. atra, evidenced in the diagnosis and in the key published in 1901 (Friese, 1901).…”

“…Both of the supraspecific modifications proposed by Moure (1995) and the interpretation of the identity of C. atra were widely accepted and followed by all authors who worked with species of this group (see Michener, 2007;Moure et al, 2007, and references therein). Moure (1995) also mentioned Friese's difficulty in identifying C. atra, evidenced in the diagnosis and in the key published in 1901 (Friese, 1901). This author concluded that this name should be applied to a species of Ptilotopus due to the pair of humps on the mesoscutellum mentioned in the original description and present in the female he received from ZMB identified as such, despite recognizing that the specimen was not one of the syntypes.…”

“…On the one hand, it transformed Melanocentris into a junior synonym of Ptilotopus and, on the other, made necessary the creation of a new subgenus to group the numerous species that were up to then recognized as Melanocentris but which did not belong to Ptilotopus. For this, Moure (1995) described Melacentris, designating C. dorsata as its type species, the same taxon that he used years earlier for the diagnosis of Melanocentris (Moure, 1950). The designation of this species as type meant that the traditional interpretation of the subgenus was maintained, avoiding additional taxonomic confusion.…”