Megachile (Litomegachile) texana Cresson, 1878

Pritchard, Zoe A., Ivie, Michael A., O’Neill, Kevin M. & Delphia, Casey M., 2025, A faunal treatment of the Megachile (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) of Montana with a key for their identification, Zootaxa 5683 (1), pp. 1-51 : 41

Megachile (Litomegachile) texana Cresson, 1878

Megachile texana Cresson, 1878: 125 . Drons 2012: 59. Megachile (Litomegachile) texana ; Mitchell 1935a: 32; 1962: 118. Butler 1965: 4. Hurd 1979: 2054. Ivanochko 1979: 103.

Scott et al. 2011: 55. Sheffield et al. 2011: 42. Bzdyk 2012: 56. Reese et al. 2018: 22. Sheffield and Heron 2019: 70. Engel

2020: 10. Megachile texana var. cleomis ; Mitchell 1935a: 32.

Diagnosis. The female of M. texana can be identified by its 4-toothed mandibles, which have an even semicircular emargination between the 3 rd and 4 th tooth ( Fig. 7B ), and the lateral, erect, black setae on T2–6 (viewed dorsally). The male of M. texana can be identified by the apical margin of T6 (ventrad the transverse carina), which has submedian teeth that are closer to the lateral teeth than to each other ( Fig. 9E ), greater than 50% black pubescence on the scutum, tergites with significant bands of black pubescence, and vertex of head with greater than 50% black pubescence. This species is most similar to M. lippiae (see M. lippiae above and Taxonomic Challenges).

Notes. Megachile texana has been recorded mainly east of the divide in Montana ( Fig. 1 AH). Photographs, illustrations, full morphological descriptions, and notes on the biology of this soil-nesting species can be found in Sheffield et al. (2011) and Bzdyk (2012). Sheffield and Genaro (2013) briefly made a claim of dividing M. texana from Megachile cleomis Cockerell. See Taxonomic Challenges above for a more complete discussion.

Figures

FIGURE 1. County-level distribution of each Megachile species in Montana. Females identified as Megachile latimanus/ Megachile perihirta (and data without recorded specimen sexes) are counted here as M. perihirta as they are not distinguishable from one another in Montana. Males identified as Megachile lapponica/Megachile relativa (and data without recorded specimen sexes) are counted here as M. relativa as they are not distinguishable from one another in Montana. Mitchell county records are included on maps but not in specimen counts. Two specimens did not have county-level localities and are not included in maps but are included in specimen counts.

FIGURE 7. Female Megachile characters. (A–H) Anterolateral view of mandible, (I–N) Lateral view of metasoma, tergites 4–6, (O) Lateral view of tergites on M. dakotensis, and (P) Lateral view of head with pronounced tooth on the posterior genal margin on M. pugnata.

FIGURE 9. Male Megachile T6 characters. (A–B) Transverse carina, (C) Apical margin with two pairs of prominent teeth on M. parallela, (D) Apical margin with two pairs of small teeth, (E) Apical margin (ventrad the transverse carina) with submedian teeth closer to each other than to lateral teeth, and (F) Apical margin (ventrad to the transverse carina) with submedian teeth closer to lateral teeth than to each other.