Megachile (Litomegachile) mendica 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 : 36

Megachile (Litomegachile) mendica Cresson, 1878

Megachile mendica Cresson, 1878: 126 . Drons 2012: 58.

Megachile (Litomegachile) mendica ; Mitchell 1935a: 26; 1962: 117. Butler 1965: 3. Hurd 1979: 2053. Ivanochko 1979: 96. Scott et al. 2011: 55. Sheffield et al. 2011: 39. Bzdyk 2012: 47 . Sheffield and Heron 2019: 70. Engel 2020: 10.

Diagnosis. The female of M. mendica is distinguished by its mostly yellow to orange scopal setae on S5 and S6, with only a few black scopal setae, T6 straight (viewed laterally) ( Fig. 7J ) with brown appressed setae, and 4-toothed mandibles with an angulate basal tooth, appearing as a weak additional tooth (i.e., 5-toothed) ( Fig. 7D ). Females of M. mendica are most similar to M. gentilis (see M. gentilis above), and M. snowi , which has white appressed setae on T6 ( M. snowi is a prior subspecies of M. mendica ; Byzdk 2012). The male of M. mendica is distinguished by its narrow probasitarsus, which is not excavated ventrally ( Fig. 8A ), T5 without a white apical setal band, and T4–5 polished and shiny with punctures 2–4 diameters apart. The male of M. mendica is most similar to M. gentilis (see M. gentilis above) and M. snowi , which differs in having a complete T5 white apical setal band.

Notes. This species is a new state record for Montana and has only been collected from two localities in eastern Montana ( Fig. 1V ). 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).

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 8. Male Megachile characters. (A) Probasitarsus not expanded or excavated ventrally, (B) Probasitarsus widely expanded and excavated ventrally, (C–E) Anterior view of mesobasitarsus and mesotibia, (F) Lateral view of triangular metatarsomeres on M. manifesta, (G) Lateral view of quadrate metatarsomeres on M. wheeleri, (H) Ventral view of procoxal spine, longer than wide, (I) Ventral view of procoxal spine, wide and spatulate, (J–L) Dorsal view of vertex of head: (J) Ocelloccipital distance longer than ocellocular distance, (K) Ocelloccipital distance equal to ocellocular distance, and (L) Ocelloccipital distance shorter than ocellocular distance.