796 research outputs found
Nella biblioteca di Praz: Montale e Pasolini
No full textThe study of the Praz library made it possible to find unpublished variants by Montale, the autograph draft of Arsenio’s translation, Montalian parodies against Fascism, and even an unpublished letter by Pasolini
Megachile (Pseudomegachile) saussurei Radoszkowski 1874
No full textMegachile (Pseudomegachile) saussurei Radoszkowski 1874 Megachile saussurei Radoszkowski 1874: 142, ♀, “ Saratow ” [Saratov, Russia]. Lectotype ♀, designated by Tkalců 1978: 177, ISZP. Megachile multispinosa Morawitz 1875: 118, ♂, “Taschkent, Warsaminor” [Uzbekistan and Tadjikistan, respectively]. Synonymy in Popov 1946: 108. Megachile inermis Radoszkowski 1893: 47, ♀ ♂, “Sérax” [Sarakhs, Iran]. Lectotype ♀, paralectotype ♂, by present designation (see below), ISZP. Preoccupied, not Megachile inermis Provancher 1888. New synonymy. Megachile mitis Cockerell 1899: 14. Nomen novum for Megachile inermis Radoszkowski 1893. Megachile (Pseudomegachile) albifasciata Rebmann 1970b: 157, ♀, “O-Afghanistan, Gulbahar, 1700m ” [Afghanistan]. Holotype ♀, SMNK, paratype ♀, SMNK and SMFD. New synonymy. Megachile (Xenomegachile) transgrediens Rebmann 1970b: 158, ♂, “O-Afghanistan, Gulbahar, 1700m ” [Afghanistan]. Holotype ♂, SMNK. New synonymy. Distribution: Turkey, Eastwards to Central Asia. Mentions from Spain (Tkalců 1978) are erroneous, see under M. syriaca sp. nov.. Pollen hosts: Possibly oligolectic on Fabaceae (Popov 1946; C. Praz, pers. observations). Nesting biology: unknown. Material examined: Type material: lectotype ♀ of M. inermis, designated here: a well-preserved female labelled as follows: 1. “[rounded, golden disc]”; 2. “TR-CAP Saraks” [=Transcaspian, Saraks; printed]; 3. “ inermis ” [handwritten, likely by Radoszkowski]; 4. “Typus” [printed on red label, likely added by J. D. Alfken]; 5. Lectotype M. inermis, des. C. Praz 2013. A ♂ labelled as follows is designated as a paralectotype: 1. “[rounded, golden disc]”; 2. Megachile inermis [handwritten, possibly by J. D. Alfken]; 3. “Saraks” [printed]; 4. Paralectotype M. inermis, des. C. Praz 2013. Both specimens are in ISZP. Lectotype ♀ of M. saussurei (ISZP). Holotype ♀ and paratypes ♀ of M. albifasciata (SMNK and SMFD). Holotype ♂ of M. transgrediens (SMNK). Additional material: IRAN: Esfahan Falavarjan, 31.5.2013, R. Khodarahmi leg.; Kerman Prov. Jupar 1900m N30°05 E57°12, 1.6.2010, Mi. Halada leg.; Persepolis Tourist area 29°56’08''N 52°53’05''E, 4.6.2009, Sedivy, Praz & Monfared leg. KAZAKHSTAN: Akkul, 23.7.1983, Tkalcu leg.; Dzambul, 25.6.1983, Tkalcu leg. KYRGYZSTAN: Burgandi 60 km W Jalabad, 14.6.1995, M. Múčka leg., J. Halada leg.; Chamaldi-Sai 71,8°-41,6°, 30.5.1995, M. Múčka leg., J. Halada leg.; Dzhalai-Abadskaya Obi. Kassan-Stausee SW Ala-Buka 41°23 N 71°24' 20 1250m, 12– 13.7.1998, H. & R. Rausch leg.; Jalal-Abad, Ala-Buka, Umg. Kara-Unkur u Sovet-Sai, 41°13'48''N / 71°23'38''E 980–1100m, 28– 30.5.2006, H. & R. Rausch leg. TURKEY: 30km O Igdir, 28.6.1987, T. Osten leg.; 52km W Aksaray, Esmekaya 38°16N 33°27E, 16.7.1998, C. Schmid-Egger leg.; Ahlat nr. Van Lake, 14.7.1996, Tyrner & Vorisek leg.; Ercig Van 1650m, 9.8.1982, K. Warncke leg.; Nemrut Dagi Karadut, 2.7.1993, K. Denes leg.; Nevschehirs Ürgüp, 21.7.1971, K. Warncke leg.; Tuzluca, 17.8.1972, K. Warncke leg. UZBEKISTAN: Bukara Prov. Bukara 39°45'64°28, 2.6.2008, C. Praz & A. Khamraev leg.; Bukara Prov. Bukara 39°45'N 64°28'E, 2.6.2008, C. Praz & A. Khamraev leg.; Korhezm 25km S Khiva 41°20' N 60°21', 26.5.2008, C. Praz & I. Abdullaev leg.; Samarcande Prov. Samarcande 39°29' N 67°00', 2.6.2008, C. Praz & A. Khamraev leg.Published as part of Dorchin, Achik & Praz, Christophe J., 2018, Taxonomic revision of the Western Palaearctic bees of the subgenus Pseudomegachile (Hymenoptera, Apiformes, Megachilidae, Megachile), pp. 251-307 in Zootaxa 4524 (3) on page 283, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4524.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/261052
Megachile (Pseudomegachile) blepharis Dorchin & Praz 2018, sp. nov.
No full text<i>Megachile</i> (<i>Pseudomegachile</i>) <i>blepharis</i> Dorchin & Praz, sp. nov. <p> <b>Distribution</b>: Israel.</p> <p> <b>Pollen hosts</b>: All specimens of the type series were collected on <i>Blepharis</i> (Acanthaceae) in Israel (Sedivy & Praz, per. obs.).</p> <p> <b>Nesting biology</b>: unknown.</p> <p> <b>Diagnosis:</b> This newly described species closely resembles <i>Megachile incana</i> and even more so <i>M. plumigera</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> from the Arabian Peninsula. The female can be differentiated from females of these species by the combination of uniform silvery-white vestiture (Figs 113, 114), robust 6-toothed mandible (Fig. 8), and facial comb of unbranched, apically curved golden hairs covering the clypeus, supraclypeal area, and frons (Fig. 116). <i>Megachile incana</i> is larger and darker, at least hairs on T6 and tarsi are dark brown and the scopa reddish-brown to dark brown; furthermore, the mandible of this species has 5 to 6 blunt teeth (Fig. 7); <i>M. plumigera</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> lacks a facial comb of unbranched hairs and its face is covered with ordinary, light, appressed or semi-erect branched hairs (Fig. 125); <i>Megachile incana</i> has unbranched golden-brown hairs on the clypeus, but the hairs vary in length and are not curved apically, and the clypeus is slightly shorter (Fig. 7). In addition, the supraclypeal area of females of the new species is not bulging, and the vertex shorter and more sparsely punctate than in <i>M. incana</i> females (ocelloccipital distance equals 2 compared to 2.33 lateral ocellus diameters in the latter species).</p> <p> The male can be separated from that of <i>M. incana</i> by the following combination of characteristics: uniform silvery-white vestiture (Figs 120, 121); preapical carina of T6 with 10–11 teeth conspicuously varying in size and median symmetrical emargination (Fig. 123); apicomedian spine of T7 about equal in length to distance from base of spine to anterior margin of external surface of T7 as seen in ventral view (cf. Fig. 129); preapical carina of S4 produced into a small submedial spine at each side (Fig. 162); S5 weakly emarginate and depressed medially (Fig. 163); S8 tapering apically to a point with weak posterior submedial depressions (Fig. 167); gonoforceps with short and broad basal dorsolateral projection (Fig. 168); penis valve with lateral angles not produced anteriorly (Fig. 168). It is slightly smaller and has lighter tarsal hairs compared to males of <i>M. incana</i>, in which teeth in the preapical carina of T6 and the apicomedian spine of T7 are longer (the latter apically truncate and longer than the described above as seen in ventral view), preapical carina of S4 stronger (Fig. 159), S5 deeply emarginate and strongly depressed (Fig. 160), S8 apically rounded (Fig. 165), gonoforceps with longer basal dorsolateral projection, and lateral angles of penis valves produced anterolaterally (Fig. 166). The male is very similar to that of <i>M. plumigera</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>, and differs only by the weaker posterior submedial depressions of S8 (compare Figs 167 and 169), and more rounded basomedial spine and basolateral angle of penis valve (compare Figs 168 and 170).</p> <p> <b>Description: Female:</b> body length 12–13 mm; forewing length 8.5–10 mm; head 1.1 times broader than long; inner margins of compound eye weakly converging below, slightly sloping mesad above (Fig. 117); interocellar distance 2.85 lateral ocellus diameters; ocellocular distance 2.1 lateral ocellus diameters; vertex relatively short, ocelloccipital distance 2 lateral ocellus diameters, about 0.7 times as long as interocellar distance (Fig. 115), concave in frontal view; compound eye about 2.5 times longer than wide in profile; mandible 6-toothed, short and broad, coarsely reticulate and shiny, with smooth, premarginal area along apical margin relatively long, at least half as long as minimum width of first flagellomere; all teeth comparably sharp, teeth 5 and 6 smallest, tooth 3 distinctly shorter than 4 (Fig. 8); clypeus about 1.5 times broader than long, weakly convex and elevated along midline with weakly elevated medial ridge seen in some angles, and small but conspicuous apicomedial protuberance obscuring truncate anterior margin (Fig. 8); clypeus weakly depressed near base, basally at same level as supraclypeal area; scape about three times longer than broad; first flagellomere 1.3 times as long as broad, slightly broader than pedicle; subsequent flagellomeres subequal in length, slightly shorter than first, terminal flagellomere longest, about 1.4 times longer than broad. Omaulus obtusely angular, weakly carinate only at uppermost margin; pronotal lobe sharply carinate and concealed by dense hairs; scutellum convex but without median protuberance; all femora and tibiae robust, broadly rounded on dorsal surface; hind femur with dorp-shaped fovea about half way along upper posterior margin, occupying about 1/5 of total length of femur; hind basitarsus oval, weakly convex, about 2.35 times as long as broad (cf. Fig. 133). Metasomal tergites 2–5 regularly rounded, sinuate in lateral view, depressed at base and elevated posteriorly.</p> <p>Integument color black on head, mesosoma and dorsal side of metasoma (Fig. 113), reddish-amber on underside of antennae and most parts of sternites and leg segments; marginal zones of both tergites and sternites changing from reddish amber to ocherous or fulvous; tegulae mostly ocherous; wings hyaline yellow, veins black to reddish amber, papillate distally beyond veins. Integument surface uniformly smooth and shiny at most with inconspicuous microreticulation, finely shagreened on propodeal triangle and medially on metanotum. Vertex irregularly punctate with moderately dense deep punctures, the largest punctures about twice as large as smallest punctures, with some interspaces more than one large puncture diameter wide (Fig. 115); clypeus densely punctate with irregular, confluent, deep punctures and few small interspaces on disc, with smooth, apical margin approximately two puncture diameters long; lower gena and hypostomal area sparsely punctate with very large, irregular, deep punctures forming interrupted ridges; mesonotum with confluent, irregular punctures forming interrupted ridges (Fig. 118); surface of metasomal tergites strongly irregularly punctured, concealed by hairs, comprising intermixed large and twice as small punctures separated by some large interspaces, more than one large puncture diameter wide.</p> <p>Vestiture uniform with white or light silvery hairs, comprising semi-erect, moderately dense, fine, branched hairs on sides of head, mesosoma, and T1, and appressed, short, scale-like hairs on following tergites (Figs 113, 114); clypeus, supraclypeal area and frons densely covered with modified, unbranched, apically curved golden hairs (Fig. 116); unbranched, golden hairs present on vertex, throughout mid-underside of thorax, coxae, trochanters, and posterior of T6, and appearing as thickened, long setae on clypeal edge, labrum, lower gena, underside of mandibles, and comprising two dense raws of hairs along grooves of inner side of mandible; tibiae and tarsi with ordinary, short, stiff golden setae; metasomal tergites 2–6 with comparable sparse, semi-erect, short setae; scopa made of long golden hairs (Fig. 114).</p> <p> <b>Male:</b> description as female except for the following. Body length about 12–14 mm; forewing length about 8 mm; inner margins of compound eyes converging below but not sloping mesad above (Fig. 124); interocellar distance 2.7 lateral ocellus diameters; ocellocular distance 1.9 lateral ocellus diameters; ocelloccipital distance 2.1 lateral ocellus diameters, 0.78 interocellar distance; compound eye 2.35 times longer than wide in profile; mandible weakly 5-toothed, third tooth small and sharp, basal tooth broad, divided in two (Fig. 124); mandible without basal inferior projection; clypeus roundly convex, completely hidden with hairs (Fig. 124); scape broaden apically, 2.3 times as long as broad apically; first flagellomere 1.2 times as long as broad, broader than pedicle, subsequent flagellomeres subequal in length, about as long as first, terminal flagellomere longer, about 1.9 times longer than broad; coxae without anterior spine; dorsal surface of front femur glabrous with tuft of long hairs originating on basal third (Fig. 121); front tarsi unmodified, front and middle basitarsi with long, snow-white posterior hair fringe, about 1.6 and 1.3 times as long as maximal width of basitarsus, respectively (Fig. 121); metasomal tergites 2–5 sinuate in lateral view, less conspicuously so than in female; hind femoral fovea larger than in female, occupying about 1/4 of total length of femur; hind basitarsus regularly slender. Preapical carina of T6 broad, more or less evenly dentate with 10–11 teeth largely varying in size, the longest teeth on both sides of wide median emargination; T7 produced into long, robust apicomedian spine, about equal in length to distance from base of spine to anterior margin of external surface of T7 as seen in ventral view, deeply emarginated below as seen in ventral or posterior view (Fig. 123); S1 weakly emarginate between short, rounded lateral lobes; S2 with elevated preapical carina on both sides forming comparable lateral lobes to S1; S3 with lower and longer preapical carina than on S2; S4 preapical carina absent laterally, weaker medially compared to <i>M. incana</i>, developed to submedial short spines (Fig. 162); S5 reminding that of <i>M. incana</i> but only weakly emarginate and depressed medially (Fig. 163); S6 reminding that of members of the <i>cyanipennis</i> species group: with lateral swollen lobes, the disc bare medially, with modified, sclerotized hairs along far lateral margins, growing in size apically (as also in <i>M. incana</i>) (Fig. 164); S8 broad and rounded, strongly tapering and pointed apically, with abundant, finely branched, long hairs apicomedially and along margins (Fig. 167); genitalia robust, gonoforceps with basal dorsolateral quadrate projection shorter than in <i>M. incana</i>, arms slender reminding those found in members of the <i>cyanipennis</i> species group: strongly angular in cross section, apically compressed in dorsal view with long branched hairs, especially on inner surface, the basal-most hairs thickened and sclerotized (Fig. 168); penis valve reminding <i>M. incana</i> but basomedial spine longer and closer to midline, and lateral angles blunt, less strongly produced (Fig. 168).</p> <p>Integument and wing color as in female, integument predominantly black, marginal zones of tergites reddish amber, marginal zones of sternites lighter ocherous or fulvous. Surface sculpture much as in female but vertex with smaller punctures and lower gena and hypostomal area with denser smaller punctures; metasomal tergites 3–5 highly irregularly sparsely punctured with some interspaces more than two large puncture diameters wide.</p> <p>Vestiture as in female but modified, unbranched or apically curved hairs absent except ordinary, stiff setae on inner side of tarsi; face completely covered with dense, long light hairs (Fig. 124); branched hairs slightly longer on base of tergites 2–5 and unbranched thickened setae longer on discs of tergites 4–6; T7 with long, unbranched golden hairs (Fig. 123); sternites 2–5 with abundant, finely branched hairs, longest apicolaterally (Figs 162, 163).</p> <p> <b>Etymology</b>: The new species is named after its known host plant. The name is based on a substantive and is thus invariable.</p> <p> <b>Holotype</b>: ♀, ISRAEL AND PALESTINE, 2km N ' En Yahav 30°40’39’’N 35°14’17’’E, 29.04.2010, C. Sedivy & C. Praz leg. (SMNH).</p> <p> <b>Paratypes</b>: 4♀ 6♂, ISRAEL AND PALESTINE, 2km N ' En Yahav 30°40’39’’N 35°14’17’’E, 29.04.2010, C. Sedivy & C. Praz leg. (SMNH, 1♀ 2♂; OLML, 1♀ 1♂; CPCN, 2♀ 3♂). 1♀, ISRAEL AND PALESTINE, ' En Yahav, 14.06.1986, J. Cna'ani leg (SMNH).</p>Published as part of <i>Dorchin, Achik & Praz, Christophe J., 2018, Taxonomic revision of the Western Palaearctic bees of the subgenus Pseudomegachile (Hymenoptera, Apiformes, Megachilidae, Megachile), pp. 251-307 in Zootaxa 4524 (3)</i> on pages 275-278, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4524.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/2610526">http://zenodo.org/record/2610526</a>
Megachile (Pseudomegachile) tecta Radoszkowski 1888
No full textMegachile (Pseudomegachile) tecta Radoszkowski 1888 Megachile tecta Radoszkowski 1888: 339, ♀ nec ♂, “Askhabat” [Ashgabat, Turkmenistan; the male from Egypt is certainly not conspecific]. Megachile stolzmanni Radoszkowski 1893: 46, ♀ nec ♂, “Sérax” [Sarakhs, Iran]. Lectotype ♀, designation of Alfken 1936: 309, ISZP. New synonymy. Megachile flavidula Rebmann 1970b: 157, ♀, “O-Afghanistan, Gulbahar, 1700m ” [Afghanistan]. Holotype ♀, paratype ♀, SMNK, SMFD. New synonymy. Distribution: Iran, Central Asia. Note: 1. The lectotype female of M. stolzmanni is likely an atypical female of M. tecta; the clypeus has particularly coarse punctation (considerable variation is observed in this characteristics in M. tecta) and the integument of tergites 1 and 2 is ferruginous. For now, we consider M. stolzmanni as a synonym of M. tecta, but study of more specimens from Central Asia would be important to document the intraspecific variation within M. tecta. 2. One female collected in Turkey (5kmO Ürgüp/ Nevşehir 1100m, 24.08.1991, leg. Halada), is sculpturally similar to M. tecta, although the metasomal vestiture is grey and not fulvous, and the specimen is comparatively large. The identity of this specimen is uncertain and future work including more specimens and ideally DNA sequences is needed to confirm this record. 3. In the Radoszkowski collection (ISZP), only two females of M. tecta are preserved. These females are labeled “Tachkend” [Tashkent, Uzbekistan] and are thus likely not syntypes. We were not able to locate syntype specimens of M. tecta. Pollen hosts: Pollen-collecting females were caught on the plant genus Alhagi (Fabaceae) (C. Praz, unpublished). Nesting biology: Unknown. Material examined: Type material: Holotype ♀ of M. stolzmanni (ISZP) [see note above]; holotype ♀ (SMNK), paratypes ♀ (SMNK, SMFD) of M. flavidula. Additional material: IRAN: Kerman Prov. Jupar 1900m N30°05 E57°12, 1.6.2010, Mi Halada leg.; Mehdi Abad Bahadpran, 10.6.2012, L. Dehghan leg.; KAZAKHSTAN: Kosapan (Djambul) Moyunkum Desert, 18– 20.7.1991, S. Becvar leg.; KYRGYZSTAN: E-Terskei Mt. R. Arashan, 2000m 42°28N 78°32E, 24.8.1999, Makogonova leg.; UZBEKISTAN: Beruni, Sand Dunes 41°39N 60°59E, 25.5.2008, C. Praz & I. Abdullaev leg.; Bukara 39°45N 64°28E, 2.6.2008, C. Praz & A. Khamraev leg.; Bukara Prov. Bukara 39°45'64°28, 2.6.2008, C. Praz & A. Khamraev leg.; Czirczik 41,1N 69,1E, 28.5.1994, J. Halada leg.; Karakalpakstan Beruni. Sand dunes 41°39'60°59, 25.5.2008, C. Praz & I. Abdullaev leg.; Kashkadaria Region nr Shakhrisabz 39°03N 66°50E, 6.7.1999, S. L. Zonstein leg.; Khiva 41°22N 60°21E, 27.5.2008, C. Praz & I. Abdullaev leg.; Tashkent 41°22N 69°19E, 25.5.2000, S. L. Zonstein leg.; Tchatkal Mts Bashkyzylsai r. 41°11N 69°50E, 2.8.1999, Makogonova leg.Published as part of Dorchin, Achik & Praz, Christophe J., 2018, Taxonomic revision of the Western Palaearctic bees of the subgenus Pseudomegachile (Hymenoptera, Apiformes, Megachilidae, Megachile), pp. 251-307 in Zootaxa 4524 (3) on pages 303-304, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4524.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/261052
Megachile (Pseudomegachile) seraxensis Radoszkowski 1893
No full textMegachile (Pseudomegachile) seraxensis Radoszkowski 1893 Megachile seraxensis Radoszkowski 1893: 45, ♀ ♂, “Sérax” [Sarakhs, Iran]. Lectotype ♀, paralectotype ♂, by present designation (see below), ISZP. Megachile tuberculata Radoszkowski 1893: 45, ♀ ♂, “Sérax” [Sarakhs, Iran]. Lectotype ♀, by present designation (see below), ISZP. Preoccupied, not Megachile tuberculata Smith 1857, not Megachile tuberculata Smith 1879. New synonymy. Megachile tuberculosa Dalla Torre 1896: 451. Nomen novum for Megachile tuberculata Radoszkowski 1893. Distribution: Israel, Syria, Oman, Turkey, Iran; India according to Alqarni et al. (2012). Pollen hosts: One female was captured on Blepharis (Acanthaceae) in Israel. Nesting biology: unknown. Material examined: Type material: lectotype ♀ of M. seraxensis, designated here: a well-preserved female labelled as follows: 1. “[rounded, golden disc]”; 2. “Typus” [printed on red label, likely added by J. D. Alfken]; 3. “saraksi” [handwritten, likely by Radoszkowski]; 4. “Saraks” [printed]; 5. Lectotype M. seraxensis, des. C. Praz 2013. A male bearing the same golden disc with no locality data is selected as a paralectotype (des. C. Praz 2013). Both specimens are in ISZP. Lectotype ♀ M. tuberculata, designated here: a well-preserved female, labelled as follows: 1. “[rounded, golden disc]”; 2. “Saraks” [printed]; 3. tuberculata [handwritten, likely by Radoszkowski]; 4. seraxensis det Alfken 1932; 5. Lectotype M. tuberculata des. Zanden 1994. This designation has not been published and is accepted here. The lectotype is in ISZP. Additional material: IRAN: Kerman Prov. 10km W Damghan N36°06 E54°17 1200m, 10.6.2010, Mi Halada leg.; ISRAEL AND PALESTINE: Negev, 10km S Dead Sea, ' En Tamar, 10.5.2000, T. Osten leg.; Southern D., 2km N ' En Yahav 30°40'39''N 35°14'17''E, 29.4.2010, C. Sedivy & C. Praz leg.; OMAN: Al Batinah pr., Al Lajal 170m 23°30N 57°56E, 18.4.2013, J. Halada leg.; Al Wusta, Wadi Rawnab 110m 18°48N 56°21E, 14.4.2013, J. Halada leg.; SYRIA: ar-Raqqa, ar-Rasafa env., 5.6.2000, K. Denes leg.; Homs Palmyra env., 6.6.2000, K. Denes leg.Published as part of Dorchin, Achik & Praz, Christophe J., 2018, Taxonomic revision of the Western Palaearctic bees of the subgenus Pseudomegachile (Hymenoptera, Apiformes, Megachilidae, Megachile), pp. 251-307 in Zootaxa 4524 (3) on page 284, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4524.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/261052
Megachile (Pseudomegachile) yezidica Dorchin & Praz 2018, sp. nov.
No full text<i>Megachile</i> (<i>Pseudomegachile</i>) <i>yezidica</i> Dorchin & Praz, sp. nov. <p> <b>Distribution</b>: Iran, Turkey.</p> <p> <b>Pollen hosts</b>: unknown.</p> <p> <b>Nesting biology</b>: unknown.</p> <p> <b>Diagnosis:</b> This is a second Mediterranean species closely related to <i>M. saussurei</i>; it is larger in size and shares some morphological characteristics with <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> described above, most evidently the presence of a facial comb in the female, comprising modified, unbranched, apically curved hairs, and no branched hairs on the clypeus (Fig. 151). It can be distinguished from <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> by the slightly larger body, 13–15 mm long, and forewing, 9–9.5 mm long, and by the following characteristics: the female metasomal tergites 2–5 clothed with basal as well as apical bands of pale, appressed scale-like hairs (Fig. 149), and similar hairs are abundant basally on T6 as normally in the <i>cyanipennis</i> species group; in <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>, the basal band of hairs is lacking, and light hairs are absent basally on T6; surface sculpture irregular with larger and sparser punctures on both gena and clypeus: gena with puncture interspaces up to 2–3 puncture diameters wide (Fig. 140), and clypeus basally with smooth shiny areas, 1–2 large puncture diameters wide (Fig. 151); vertex coarsely, irregularly punctate, the largest punctures up to three times larger than the smallest punctures (Fig. 152); T2 uniformly punctate with dense, small punctures that contrast with the irregular, larger and sparser punctures on following tergites. The male is characterized by the modified front basitarsus, lighter fulvous to light brown, with relatively short posterior hair fringe, half as long as the basitarsus maximal width (Fig. 155); unlike <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> the front basitarsus abruptly broadens near its base, the basal width being less than half the maximal width (Fig. 155), compared to more than half as wide in that species (Fig. 144); the middle basitarsus with short posterior fringe of pale yellowwhite hairs, much shorter than in <i>M. saussurei</i> and <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>, about as long as the basitarsus maximal width (Fig. 157); small lateral spine absent on T6, compared to present although inconspicuous in <i>M. saussurei</i> and <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>.</p> <p> <b>Description: Female:</b> as described for <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> (above) except as mentioned. Body length 13–14.5 mm; forewing length about 9.75 mm; head 1.1 times broader than long; inner margins of compound eye weakly converging below, slightly sloping mesad above (Fig. 150); interocellar distance 2.9 lateral ocellus diameters; ocellocular distance 2 lateral ocellus diameters; ocelloccipital distance 2.85 lateral ocellus diameters, about as long as interocellar distance; compound eye about 3 times longer than wide in profile; first flagellomere about as long as broad, slightly broader than pedicle.</p> <p> Integument and wings as described for <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>, except: vertex irregularly punctate with dense punctures up to three times larger posteriorly than anteriorly, absent along preoccipital ridge half way before middle of vertex, leaving a large, puncture-free area, 2–3 puncture diameters long and 8–12 puncture diameters wide (Fig. 152); clypeus irregularly punctate, posteriorly with large punctures and large puncture interspaces, 1–2 large punctures wide, punctures decreasing in size anteriorly, and fading before margin, leaving wide puncture-free belt, about 2 large punctures wide (Fig. 151); gena with larger, shallower punctures than on clypeus and some particularly large, smooth surfaces, up to 3 punctures wide (Fig. 140); tergite 2 uniformly punctate with dense, small punctures clearly contrasted with the irregular, larger and sparser punctation of following tergites; tergites 3 and 4 intermediate in puncture density relative to related species: sparser than in <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>, denser than in <i>M. saussurei</i>, with most interspaces smaller than one puncture diameter.</p> <p> Vestiture color and form much as described for <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>: metasomal tergites 2–5 with complete apical bands of pale, short appressed scale-like hairs, completely covering the underlying integument; apical bands expanded anteriorly along tergite midline and lateral extremities and forming less dense basal hair bands (Figs 148, 149); middle of discs with fine dark hairs, intermixed with sparse, semi-erect, short thickened setae; T6 covered with comparable dark hairs and short setae, basomedially intermixed with some pale appressed, scale-like hairs.</p> <p> <b>Male:</b> As described for <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> (above) (Figs 153, 154) except for the following. Body length 14– 15 mm; forewing length 9.0– 9.5 mm; ocelloccipital distance 2.6 lateral ocellus diameters, about as long as interocellar distance; compound eye about 2.4 times longer than wide in profile; scape 2.6 times longer than broad; terminal flagellomere longest, about 1.9 times longer than broad. Front and middle tibiae with sharp premarginal carina extending along posterior margin for 2/3 of apical portion of tibia (carina less well discerned in <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>); front tarsi modified, lighter fulvous to light brown; front basitarsus abruptly broaden near base, its basal width less than half its maximal width (Fig. 155), with black spot on ventral side surrounded by hairs, occupying about 1/6 of total ventral length of basitarsus (Fig. 156); front and middle basitarsus with short posterior hair fringe, that of front basitarsus snow-white, hardly extending beyond posterior margin, inconspicuous apically (Fig. 155), that of middle basitarsus with pale yellow-white hairs, about as long as maximal width of basitarsus (Fig. 157). T6 without small lateral tooth; T7 as in <i>M. syriaca</i>, produced into short, often blunt apicomedian spine. Gonoforceps and penis valve as described for <i>M. syriaca</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>: gonoforceps slender, strongly angular in cross section, preapically laterally compressed in dorsal view, but with apical portion short.</p> <p>Vestiture of T2–5 comprising complete apical bands of appressed light hairs as in female (Fig. 153) but discs without short, semi-erect, thickened setae, disc of T5 and sometimes also T4 with longer unbranched semi-erect light hairs; T6 covered with unbranched hairs intermixed with very finely branched hairs of the same color (Fig. 158), also abundant on T7.</p> <p> <b>Etymology</b>: The new species name is an adjective and is proposed in honor of the Yezidi people and their tradition, maintained for generations in the region of the type species, and who have recently suffered brutal persecution.</p> <p>Holotype: ♂, TURKEY: Muradiye, 3.7.2000, M. Halada leg. (MSCA).</p> <p>Paratypes: IRAN: 3♀, Fars Daria Namak, Steppe presso lago salato 27km E Shiraz, 7.7.1965, G. Soika- Mavromoustakis leg. (MSCA, OLML, CPCN); TURKEY: 4♀, 2♂, 15km N Yüksekova Hakkari, 11.8.1979, K. Warncke leg. (OLML, 2♀ 1♂; SMNH, 1♀ 1♂; CPCN, 1♀); 1♂, 5kmE Oramar / Hakkari, 11.8.1979, K. Warncke leg. (CPCN); 1♂, Hakkari, Esendere, 21.7.1988, C. Schmid-Egger leg. (OLML); 2♂, Hakkari, Stadtrand, 24.7.1988, C. Schmid-Egger leg. (OLML, CPCN); 1♀, Kokarsu, 27.7.1978, H. Özbek leg. (collection B. Tkalců, OLML); 3♂, Muradiye, 3.7.2000, M. Halada leg. (MSCA, CPCN, SMNH); 1♀, östl. Ercis / Van 1650m, 9.8.1982, K. Warncke leg. (OLML); 1♀, 2♂, Patnos, 28.7.1978, H. Özbek leg. (OLML); 4♂, Urfa 500m 20kmSO Harran, 19.6.1981, K. Warncke leg. (OLML, 2♂; CPCN, 2♂).</p>Published as part of <i>Dorchin, Achik & Praz, Christophe J., 2018, Taxonomic revision of the Western Palaearctic bees of the subgenus Pseudomegachile (Hymenoptera, Apiformes, Megachilidae, Megachile), pp. 251-307 in Zootaxa 4524 (3)</i> on pages 289-291, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4524.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/2610526">http://zenodo.org/record/2610526</a>
AMČR - projekt C-202005420
No full textStav: 6Podnět: ČOV pro rekreační středisko Městského soudu v Praz
Megachile (Pseudomegachile) flavipes Spinola 1838
No full textMegachile (Pseudomegachile) flavipes Spinola 1838 Megachile flavipes Spinola 1838: 527, ♀ ♂, [Egypt]. See Casolari & Casolari-Moreno 1980 for a list of possible syntypes. Megachile conficita Walker 1871: 48, ♂, “ Cairo ” [Egypt]. Synonymy in Alfken 1933: 56. Megachile despecta Walker 1871: 48, ♀ ♂, “Wâdy Gennèh; Wâdy Ferran” [?; Wadi Feiran, Sinai, Egypt]. Synonymy in Alfken 1933: 56. Megachile inficita Walker 1871: 48, ♂, “Wâdy Ferran” [Wadi Feiran, Sinai, Egypt]. Synonymy in Alfken 1933: 56. Megachile rubripes Morawitz 1875: 107, ♀, “prope Samarkand” [Uzbekistan]. New Synonymy. ? Megachile squamigera Mocsáry 1879: 10, ♀ ♂, “ Syria ” [Syria or Lebanon]. Synonymy in Friese 1899: 143. See note below. ? Megachile flavipes var. turcestanica Friese 1898: 200, ♀, “Asia centr. Nia 1350m ” [?]. See note below. ? Megachile flavipes var. fasciata Friese 1898: 200, ♀, “Turcestania”. Preoccupied, not Megachile fasciata Smith, 1844. See note below. Chalicodoma flavipes meridoniale [as meridionalis] Pasteels 1970: 220, [sex not indicated but both males and females listed in material examined], “ Mauritanie, Aleg” [Mauritania]. Types in BMNH. See note below. Megachile (Pseudomegachile) persica Rebmann 1972: 1, ♀ ♂, “O. Afghanistan, Prov. Nengrahar, Povolny & Tenora, (65), Jalabad, 17.iv. 66, 580m” [Afghanistan]. Holotype ♂, MZMB, paratypes ♀ ♂ (MZMB, SMNK, SMFD, SMNS). New Synonymy. Distribution: Northern Africa (Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt incl. Sinai Peninsula), Middle East (Israel, Syria, Turkey), Crete (Greece), possibly Cyprus, Arabian Peninsula, Iran, Central Asia, Northern India. Note: 1. The populations from Northern Africa (Algeria to Egypt excluding the Sinai Peninsula) have fulvous metasomal vestiture (flavipes), those from Iran and Central Asia whitish-grey metasomal vestiture (rubripes). We do not recognize distinct subspecies as no structural character appears to differ between these two populations, and because some intergradation appears to occur between them across the Sinai Peninsula and southern Israel. Vestiture colour is similarly variable in other species of the flavipes species group such as M. cinnamomea. 2. The list of synonyms listed above is tentative and taken from other sources (Friese 1899, Alfken 1933); those listed with a question mark appear particularly doubtful and we were not able to locate or examine the relevant type material. In particular, the original description of M. squamigera points to M. farinosa, that of M. flavipes var. turcestanica to M. tecta and that of M. flavipes var. fasciata to M. sanguinipes. For the latter two taxa described by Friese, specimens preserved in ZMHB and labelled as “type” are probably not syntypes based on the locality indicated on the label. The status of M. flavipes meridionalis requires further investigation. Pollen hosts: All our observations (Tunisia, Israel, Iran) of pollen-collecting females were made on Fabaceae; this species is possibly oligolectic on Fabaceae. Nesting biology: Nests of this species were found in various cavities (mud walls, stems); nests in stems included two cells arranged linearly and made of mud “moistened with water, apparently without using secretions” (Alfken 1934, Ponomareva 1958). Material examined: Type material: Paratype ♀ and ♂ of M. persica (SMFD, SMNK) Additional material: ALGERIA: Hoggar, Tamanrasset 1400m 20km E, 30.3.1989, M. Schwarz leg.; CYPRUS: Limassol [several specimens in OLML, possibly doubtful since no date or collector information are given]; EGYPT: 10km N Suez 30°03N 32°34E, 22.4.2000, C. Schmid-Egger leg.; Al-Minufiyah, El-Shohada, Kafr Hegazi 30°35N 30°49E 10m, 21.5.2011, M. Shebl leg.; Aswan, Nilufer, 20.9.1992, C. Schmid-Egger leg.; Cairo, 9– 20.5.1978, K. M. Guichard leg.; Ismailia, 16.6.1941, K. U. Clarke leg.; Ismailia, El Qantara, Gharb, Al Masaid 30°49N 32°18E, 18.5.2011, M. Shebl & S. Kamel leg.; Kafr el Zaiyat 30°49’N 30°49’E 16m, 21.5.2011, M. Shebl leg.; Kairo und Umgebung, 3.1935, A. Nadig leg.; Kom Oshime, 2.4.1983, K. M. Guichard leg.; Luxor, A.3.1988, W. Schlaefle leg.; Luxor, 4.1914, leg.; Sharkia, Houssania, Bahr Elbaker 30°55N 32°07E 2m from Nest, 3.5.2011, M. Shebl & S. Kamel leg.; Sinai, W Hibran, 19.5.1978, Kugler leg.; South Sinai Ras Sudar 29°36’N 32°47’E 136m, 28.6.2011, M. Shebl & S. Kamel leg.; Suez Ahmed Hamdy Tunnel 30°02’N 32°34’E 4m, 11.5.2011, M. Shebl & S. Kamel leg.; Suez, Shalloufa 30°06N 32°31E 4m, 11.5.2011, M. Shebl & S. Kamel leg.; Tel el Kebir, 20, 29.5.2005, J. G. Rozen & S. M. Kamel leg.; Tel el Kebir 30°32'02 N 31°49' 48E, 18.5.2004, J. G. Rozen leg.; GREECE: Kreta, Heraklion, Malia 100m, 17.6.1976, K. Warncke leg.; Kreta, Malia Sumpf Heraklion, 18.6.1976, K. Warncke leg.; INDIA: Hissar, 4.3.1984, F. D. Parker leg.; IRAN: 15km W Esfahan, 18.7.1966; Kalameh, Road Busher-Shiraz 28°55'38 N 51°26' 44E, 3.6.2009, Sedivy, Praz & Monfared leg.; Teheran Prov. Highway Teheran- Qom 60 km S Teheran, 26.5.2009, Sedivy, Praz & Talebi leg.; Teheran, T. Modares Univ., Agricult. Campus 35°44'33 N 51°09' 49E, 28.5.2009, Sedivy, Praz & Talebi leg.; Zein Abad, 30.5.2012, L. Dehghan leg.; ISRAEL AND PALESTINE: 2km N ' En Yahav 30°40'39 N 35°14' 17E, 29.4.2010, Sedivy & Praz leg.; 3km E Ashalim 30°58'25 N 34°40' 33E, 27.4.2010, Sedivy & Praz leg.; 5 km S Jericho, 16.6.1970, Bytinski-Salz leg.; Basalt Canyon park 1.7km NE Bet She'an 32°30’32’’N / 35°31’11’’E - 208m, 9.6.2011, A. Dorchin leg.; Beer Sheva, 1.6.1965, W. Schlaefle leg.; Eilat, 9.6.1965, W. Schlaefle leg.;`En Harod Meuhad 32°33'32 N 35°23' 19E, 9.6.2011, A. Dorchin leg.;`En Qelet Nahal Perat NR 2.2km NW Mizpe Yeriho 31°50'07 N 35°22' 41E - 22m, 1.5.2013, A. Dorchin leg.; Hazeva, 5.6.2007, Y. Hollander leg.; Hazeva, 9.5.2007, Y. Mandelik leg.; Iddan, 8.5.2007, I. Lalzar leg.; Jericho, 19.7.1976, A. Freidberg leg.; Jericho, 26.5.1943, Bytinski-Salz leg.; Nahal Hazezon 900m S Mizpe Shalem 31°33’32’’N / 35°23’52’’E - 364m, 5.5.2012, A. Dorchin leg.; Nahal Zin, 8.5.2007, M. Turki leg.; Peza'el NR 3.2km W Peza'el 32°03'04 N 35°24' 11E - 15m, 4.8.2013, A. Dorchin leg.; Revivim, 6.6.1965, W. Schlaefle leg.; Sappir, 5.7.2007, I. Lalzar leg.; Sede Boker, 7.9.1972, Kaplan leg.; Tiberias, 12.7.1945, Bytinski-Salz leg.; OMAN: Ad Dakhiliyah Pr. Al Hamra env. 23°05N 57°19E 670m, 5.4.2013, J. Halada leg.; Al Batinah pr. Al Lajal 170m 23°30N 57°56E, 3.4.2013, J. Halada leg.; Al Batinah pr. Wadi Awf env 630m 23°14N 57°26E, 4.4.2013, J. Halada leg.; Al Hamra 23°06'37 N 57°17' 35E, 5.3.2008, D. Michez & S. Patiny leg.; Al Kharma 22°48'46 N 57°59' 53E, 1.3.2008, D. Michez & S. Patiny leg.; Ar Rustaq 23°25'23 N 57°26' 01E, 8.3.2008, D. Michez & S. Patiny leg.; Ash Sharqiyah Jaalan Bani Bu Ali 21°17N 59°24E 65m, 15.4.2013, J. Halada leg.; Birkat al Mauwz 22°55'02 N 57°40' 33E, 1.3.2008, D. Michez & S. Patiny leg.; Nakhl, Hubrah 23°23'11 N 57°47' 26E, 8.3.2008, D. Michez & S. Patiny leg.; Sur 22°30’39'' N 59°25’19'' E 47m, 1.3.2008, D. Michez & S. Patiny leg.; SAUDI ARABIA: Riyadh, W Hanifa, 21.3.1980, K. M. Guichard leg.; TUNISIA: 10km SE Foum Tataouine 32°51N 10°30E, 25.3.2001, C. Schmid-Egger leg.; Tataouine, Yekhzer SE Tataouine, 23.4.2012, C. Praz leg.; TURKEY: 48km NW Silifke Köselerli W bank Göksu River, 19.7.1998, C. Schmid-Egger leg.; UZBEKISTAN: Bukara 39°45'N 64°28'E, 2.6.2008, C. Praz & A. Khamraev leg.; Korhezm 25km S Khiva, 26.5.2008, C. Praz & I. Abdullaev leg.; Korhezm Khiva 41°22’60°21’, 27.5.2008, C. Praz & I. Abdullaev leg.Published as part of Dorchin, Achik & Praz, Christophe J., 2018, Taxonomic revision of the Western Palaearctic bees of the subgenus Pseudomegachile (Hymenoptera, Apiformes, Megachilidae, Megachile), pp. 251-307 in Zootaxa 4524 (3) on page 297, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4524.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/261052
Characterization of malolactic bacteria isolated from Aosta Valley wines and evidence of psychrotrophy in some strains
No full textAim: A survey on indigenous malolactic bacteria populations isolated from wines produced in 13 different wineries of Aosta Valley, the highest vine-growing area in Europe, was carried out in order to characterize the dominant strains in spontaneous malolactic fermentation (MLF) and to reveal the appearance of psychrotrophic ones. Methods and Results: Fifty-four isolates were identify by ITS rDNA region analysis and partial sequencing of 16S rDNA gene: 80% were ascribed to Oenococcus oeni while the remaining 20% were attributed to Pediococcus damnosus species. The genetic diversity of 43 O. oeni isolates was investigated through PFGE analysis after ApaI and SfiI restriction: 28 different pulso-types were discriminated at a level of similarity of 90%. In general, the MLF was led by more than one strain simultaneously. No connection between genotype and grape variety or vine-training system or geographical site of isolation was observed. The histidine decarboxylase gene was not found in any isolate. Pediococci proved to be more resistant than oenococci to lysozyme. Three O. oeni strains (2A1, 6A2 and 11A4) were able to develop at 10°C in Petit Rouge wine. Conclusions: Psychrotrophy is a phenotypic trait present in O. oeni species and it may be possible to select strains for the management of MLF in cold climate territories where this biologic transformation is very difficult to control. Significance and Impact of the Study: The natural emergence of strains able to perform the MLF at 10°C in wine is a new finding, interesting because it confirms the ecological ability of O. oeni species to adapt itself to environmental conditions by strain phenotype variations. It can be also a starting point for more sustainable oenological practices, since it would be alternative to the conditioning systems of the tanks or of the wineries where they are costly in terms of investment and energy consumption
Marius the Epicurean, Walter the Medusean : Praz’s Paterian (Self-)Fashioning
No full textMario Praz not only introduced the study of Walter Pater to Italian culture and developed an early but lifelong interest in him, but also saw in the English author an in-absentia mentor for his own literary education and fashioning of himself as an artist and culture maven. Throughout Praz’s career, Pater represented a model for the discriminating critic, the aesthete and art lover, always susceptible to the unexpected element in beauty. It was possibly Pater, more than any other artist, philosopher or thinker, who provided Praz with the principles of his criticism and aesthetics. The essay explores the distinctive traits of Praz’s work that may reveal appropriations from Pater, while also considering more personal aspects of his figure that entail Paterian influence. It also illustrates how Praz’s emulation of the master was a long and intricate process, which involved at times misunderstandings and prejudices not so dissimilar from the misreadings of the previous Italian scholars of English literature Praz was so anxious to refute in order to claim the role of founder of English studies in Italy for himself
- …
