Megachile (Megachile) lapponica Thomson, 1872

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 : 34

Megachile (Megachile) lapponica Thomson, 1872

Megachile lapponica Thomson, 1872: 227 .

Megachile (Megachile) lapponica ; Sheffield et al. 2011: 47. Kuhlman and Burrows 2017: 13. Reese et al. 2018: 22 . Delphia et al. 2019a: 24 . Sheffield and Heron 2019: 70.

Megachile nivalis Friese, 1903: 246 .

Megachile (Anthemois) santiamensis Mitchell, 1934: 311 .

Megachile (Anthemois) nivalis ; Mitchell 1935b: 174; 1942: 115.

Megachile (Megachile) nivalis ; Mitchell 1962: 129. Hurd 1979: 2056. Ivanochko 1979: 170. Sheffield and Westby 2007: 178. Scott et al. 2011: 55.

Diagnosis. The females of M. lapponica can be identified by their5-toothed mandibles with evenly deep emarginations between teeth ( Fig. 7G ), brown to black scopal setae on S6, and scopal setae on S5 black apically and yellow to pale orange basally. The female of M. lapponica is most similar to M. relativa , which has golden scopal setae on S6, and M. centuncularis , which has black setae on T6. The males of M. lapponica cannot be reliably separated from males of M. relativa in Montana based on external morphology or by examining the genitalia (see Taxonomic Challenges; Sheffield & Westby 2007). Males of M. lapponica / M. relativa can be recognized by the absence of a procoxal spine, small median triangular tubercle on the clypeal margin, narrow brown to black probasitarsi, evenly spaced 3-dentate mandibles, and T6 with sparse setae, not tomentose. Megachile lapponica / M. relativa is most similar to M. centuncularis (see M. centuncularis above).

Notes. Megachile lapponica females have been found in scattered localities across the western half of Montana ( Fig. 1P ). Photographs, a full morphological description (but see Taxonomic Challenges), and notes on the biology of M. lapponica can be found in Sheffield et al. (2011).

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.