Andrena (Micrandrena) alfkenella Perkins 1914
Creators: name: WOOD, T. J.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2024
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hymenoptera
Andrenidae
Andrena
Andrena alfkenella

description: Andrena (Micrandrena) alfkenella Perkins, 1914
Andrena alfkenella Perkins, 1914: 112, ♀ ♂ [England, OUMNH, not examined]
Andrena caneibia Strand, 1915a: 153, ♀ [Greece: Crete, DEI, examined] syn. nov. (Figures 36A–F)
Remarks. The identity of A. caneibia has long remained a mystery. Described from a single specimen from Crete (Figure 36A), Warncke (1965; 1967) did not treat the species further other than listing it as valid. Gusenleitner & Schwarz (2002) uncertainly placed the species in the subgenus Micrandrena Ashmead, 1899, commenting that its taxonomic status was unclear. Examination of the holotype, along with a long series of new material from Crete and new genetic analysis has allowed a confident link with the widespread West Palaearctic species A. alfkenella to be made. The holotype female closely resembles A. alfkenella, but the punctation of the tergal discs (one of the key characters allowing separation of A. alfkenella females from those of A. minutula (Kirby, 1802)) is slightly weaker than in typical A. alfkenella (Figure 36F). Strand’s description is unhelpful, as he only compares A. caneibia to A. nanana Strand, 1915 (described from Crete, but a synonym of A. colletiformis Morawitz, 1873), this latter species falling in a completely different subgenus (Brachyandrena Pittioni, 1948), and consequently there are numerous morphological differences. Given the weak difference from A. alfkenella and the shortage of material, previous authors have not drawn strong conclusions as to the status of A. caneibia, as opposed to many of Strand’s other Andrena taxa described from Crete which have been synonymised with other species (Warncke 1967).
New collections have produced long series of A. caneibia suitable for genetic analysis. Two sequences of A. caneibia were generated from specimens from Crete, and they were compared to A. alfkenella specimens from Spain, Portugal, Germany, and Romania (Figure 37; not including A. pillichi Noskiewicz, 1939 which is currently lumped under A. alfkenella). The sequences from Crete were separated from continental European sequences by an average genetic distance of 1.77% (range 0.79–2.29%). The greatest distance was seen between specimens from north-western Spain and Crete, but the Cretan specimens were separated from the Romanian specimen by only 0.79–1.07%. Collectively, all sequences formed a clade with bootstrap support of 91, and were consistently separated from a clade formed by A. pillichi that had bootstrap support of 83. Andrena alfkenella + A. caneibia sequences were separated from A. alfkenella pillichi sequences by an average genetic distance of 4.08% (range 3.65–4.56%). In this context, it is best to consider A. caneibia as a junior synonym of A. alfkenella syn. nov. as the morphological and genetic differences are slight, especially when compared to those observed for A. alfkenella pillichi which is formally raised to species status below.
Material examined. GREECE: Canea [Chania] (Creta), 1.iii–30.vi.1914, 1♀, leg. Paganetti, DEI (holotype of A. caneibia); Crete, Foinikilas [E of Agios Ioannis], 450 m, 6.vi.2023, 1♂, 15♀, leg. R. Le Divelec, RLDC; Crete, Mesavlia, 500 m, 10.vi.2023, 6♀, leg. R. Le Divelec, RLDC/ TJWC; Crete, Skafidaras [1 km W Ag. Dimitrios], 8.vi.2023, 3♀, leg. R. Le Divelec, RLDC; Crete, Vamos Chania [E of Vryses], 8.vi.2023, 5♀, leg. R. Le Divelec, RLDC.
Distribution. West Palaearctic, from Morocco (Atlas Mountains) across Europe to Turkey, Lebanon, and the Caucasus (Gusenleitner & Schwarz 2002; Wood et al. 2020a). Not found in the remaining parts of North Africa or the Middle East. See notes below on the status of A. pillichi which has previously been lumped into a broad A. alfkenella concept.
description: Published as part of WOOD, T. J., 2024, Further revisions to the Palaearctic Andrena fauna (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae), pp. 1-150 in Zootaxa 5483 (1) on pages 56-59, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5483.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/13209307