Diario de asaph01

I write this so that hopefully other users will not be as confused as I was.

An ongoing debate for some time that has utterly confused me has been which of the two species, L. exlautum or L. punctatum, is present in Australia.

From what I have learned, the issue originated from when it was decided that Homalictus with all its species was no longer recognised as a Genus separate from Lasioglossum and became a Subgenus under the latter. This Genus Homalictus contained the species Homalictus punctatum of Australia which became Lasioglossum (Homalictus) punctatum.

However, Lasioglossum (Ctenonomia) already had a L. punctatum which occurred in Indonesia. This meant that as L. (Homalictus) punctatum was the younger addition to Lasioglossum having just moved, its name had to be changed. A secondary name was found as (originally) Homalictus exlautus. So, the new L. (Homalictus) punctatum became Lasioglossum (Homalictus) exlautum.

L. (Homalictus) exlautum is the species recognised in Australia, and L. (Ctenonomia) punctatum is not, being an Indonesian species.

Professor Ascher summed it up in the following quote:

"Lasioglossum (Ctenonomia) punctatum (Smith, 1858) is from Sulawesi in Indonesia

Lasioglossum (Homalictus) exlautum (Cockerell, 1905) of Australia is the valid name for Halictus punctatus Smith, 1879

The junior name is Australian."

I hope this helps as I have been infuriated for months now and I hope others have not felt the same!

Due to school related stressors I will be stepping away from my iNaturalist duties for a couple of weeks until I feel ready as at the moment I need some time to relax and focus only on schoolwork.

I will most likely be unable to get through the large numbers of observations I have missed so if you want something checked please "@" me or DM me.

Sincerely,
Asaph.

I am starting this journal to spread information concerning Australian native bees faster.

The debate concerning the identification of Megachile maculariformis versus Megachile chrysopyga has been an ongoing issue on this site for some time now, only recently corrected. Nevertheless, I feel it is important that the Australian native bee enthusiast is aware of the differences between the two.

Firstly, this is the most simple way to ID the two. If you are in Western Australia, only M. chrysopyga is present. If you are in the ACT, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, or Queensland, only M. maculariformis is present. If you are in South Australia both species are present, but as M. chrysopyga is only present in the far west of the state you are extremely unlikely to encounter it. If you do, here are some characteristics to tell between the two.

1) The female M. chrysopyga only has two complete white hair bands across the abdomen, positioned closest to the thorax, whereas M. maculariformis has four. *Note: Rule is only reliable for females (although generally works for males)!
2) Males both have expanded forelegs, however in M. maculariformis, there is a bulbous orange projection on it (https://michaelbatley.github.io/Bee-ID-SM/maculariformis.htm)
Attached are some males I've seen.

Now some quick notes on species I see frequently misidentified for these species:

Megachile aurifrons:
How to tell it apart:
Red eyes, tip of abdomen never orange, two or three complete white hair bands, abdomen not triangular.

Megachile erythropyga:
How to tell it apart:
Two incomplete white hair bands, abdomen not triangular.

Other Eutricharaea:
How to tell them apart:
No bright orange (I mean bright) tip to abdomen or face.

I hope this helps. I may edit later if I have missed anything.
Happy bee-hunting!
Asaph.