Search

Within the genus Hylaeus subgenus Deranchylaeus, from sub-Saharan Africa, a distinctive new subgroup of species is established. The females of this subgroup share a striking character: the orange-coloured lower face, previously known only in H. xanthostoma. The inter-specific differences are cryptic in both sexes. Seven species are newly described: Hylaeus (Deranchylaeus) aurantiacus sp. nov. ♀♂, H. (D.) burundis sp. nov. ♂, H. (D.) lyriformis sp. nov. ♂, H. (D.) sambiensis sp. nov. ♂, H. (D.) portokalius sp. nov. ♂♀, H. (D.) diastictus sp. nov. ♂ and H. (D.) jemeniticus sp. nov. ♀. This subgroup also includes H. (D.) promontorii (Meade-Waldo, 1923) and H. (D.) venustus Dathe, 2014, whose females are described for the first time. From Cameroon, the male of a second species of the subgenus Pumilaeus is described as new: H. (Pumilaeus) soukontouai sp. nov. New records of species of the genus Hylaeus F. in sub-Saharan Africa are added and a revised identification key to the subgenus Deranchylaeus is presented, to include the new species.

Hylaeus (Prosopis) affinis (Smith, 1853) Counties:Aitkin, Anoka, Becker, Beltrami, Benton, Big Stone, Blue Earth, Brown, Carlton, Carver, Cass, Chippewa, Chisago, Clay, Clearwater, Cottonwood, Dodge, Douglas, Faribault, Fillmore, Freeborn, Goodhue, Grant, Hennepin, Houston, Hubbard, Isanti, Itasca, Jackson, Kandiyohi, Kittson, Lac qui Parle, Lake, Le Sueur, Lincoln, Lyon, Mahnomen, Marshall, Martin, McLeod, Meeker, Morrison, Mower, Murray, Nicollet, Nobles, Norman, Olmsted, Otter Tail, Pennington, Pipestone, Polk, Pope, Ramsey, Red Lake, Redwood, Renville, Rice, Rock, Roseau, Saint Louis, Scott, Sibley, Stearns, Steele, Stevens, Swift, Todd, Traverse, Wabasha, Waseca, Washington, Watonwan, Wilkin, Winona, Wright, Yellow Medicine., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 47, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569

Hylaeus (Metziella) sparsus (Cresson, 1869) Counties: Pine, Red Lake. Comments: Generally rare across its range and known in Minnesota from only two specimens. Material examined: Pine Co.: Chengwatana State Forest (45.8178, -92.7847),: 1 ♀ (MNDNR) 25 Jun 2020, N. Gerjets leg., net, Rubus sp., det. Z. Portman; Red Lake Co.: Plummer: 1 ♀, 19 Jun 1933, D.G. Denning leg., det. J. Gardner and confirmed by Z. Portman. Subgenus Paraprosopis Popov Taxonomy: Snelling (1970)., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on pages 46-47, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569, {"references":["Snelling, R. R. (1970) Studies on North American bees of the genus Hylaeus. 5. The subgenera Hylaeus, S. Str. and Paraprosopis (Hymenoptera: Colletidae). Los Angeles County Museum, Contributions in Science, 180, 1 - 59. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / p. 241167"]}

Hylaeus (Prosopis) illinoisensis (Robertson, 1896) Counties: Aitkin, Anoka, Brown, Clearwater, Faribault, Hennepin, Houston, Itasca, Kittson, Morrison, Norman, Pine, Polk, Ramsey, Red Lake, Todd, Traverse. Comments: This member of the modestus group requires additional taxonomic investigation to fully delineate the species boundaries. Most recent works have likely lumped this species under “ Hylaeus ‘ modestus group’” (e.g. Lane et al. 2020, 2022). Refer to comments for H. modestus., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 47, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569, {"references":["Lane, I. G., Herron-Sweet, C. R., Portman, Z. M. & Cariveau, D. P. (2020) Floral resource diversity drives bee community diversity in prairie restorations along an agricultural landscape gradient. Journal of Applied Ecology, 57, 2010 - 2018. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / 1365 - 2664.13694"]}

Hylaeus (Prosopis) modestus Say, 1837 Counties: Aitkin, Anoka, Becker, Big Stone, Blue Earth, Brown, Carlton, Carver, Chippewa, Chisago, Clay, Clearwater, Crow Wing, Dodge, Faribault, Goodhue, Hennepin, Houston, Isanti, Jackson, Kandiyohi, Kittson, Lake of the Woods, Mahnomen, Martin, McLeod, Meeker, Mille Lacs, Morrison, Mower, Nicollet, Norman, Olmsted, Otter Tail, Pennington, Pine, Polk, Pope, Ramsey, Red Lake, Redwood, Renville, Rock, Roseau, Saint Louis, Scott, Sherburne, Sibley, Stearns, Stevens, Swift, Wabasha, Waseca, Washington, Watonwan, Wilkin, Winona, Wright. Comments: Consistent with the findings of Oram (2018) in Canada, what is traditionally known as “ Hylaeus modestus ” is a species complex in Minnesota. As a result, recent collections are referred to as “ Hylaeus ‘ modestus group’” (e.g. Lane et al. 2020, 2022). What we refer to as the “ Hylaeus ‘ modestus group’” likely contains H. modestus, H. illinoisensis, and two unknown or undescribed taxa., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 47, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569, {"references":["Oram, R. J. (2018) Revision of the genus Hylaeus Fabricius (Hymenoptera: Colletidae) in Canada. MSc Thesis, University of Regina, Regina, 165 pp.","Lane, I. G., Herron-Sweet, C. R., Portman, Z. M. & Cariveau, D. P. (2020) Floral resource diversity drives bee community diversity in prairie restorations along an agricultural landscape gradient. Journal of Applied Ecology, 57, 2010 - 2018. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / 1365 - 2664.13694"]}

Hylaeus (Prosopis) nelumbonis (Robertson, 1890) Counties: Aitkin, Becker, Blue Earth, Clay, Faribault, Freeborn, Grant, Martin, McLeod, Meeker, Redwood, Sibley, Traverse, Watonwan, Wilkin. Comments: What we are calling Hylaeus nelumbonis in Minnesota may in fact be the closely-related species Hylaeus ornatus Mitchell. Additional taxonomic investigation is required., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 47, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569

Hylaeus (Hylaeus) saniculae (Robertson, 1896) Counties: Aitkin, Beltrami, Ramsey, Traverse, Washington, Wright., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 46, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569

Hylaeus (Hylaeus) rudbeckiae (Cockerell and Casad, 1895) Counties: Clearwater. Comments: This species is tentatively reported from a single male specimen. There is also a form in the “ mesillae group” that could potentially be H. rudbeckiae. More taxonomic work is needed to clarify this species., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 46, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569

Hylaeus (Hylaeus) fedorica (Cockerell, 1909) Counties: Clay, Hennepin, Houston, Norman, Polk, Ramsey, Washington., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 46, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569

Hylaeus (Hylaeus) verticalis (Cresson, 1869) Counties: Aitkin, Anoka, Becker, Clay, Clearwater, Cook, Hennepin, Hubbard, Itasca, Lake, Olmsted, Pine, Polk, Ramsey, Rice, Saint Louis, Todd. Subgenus Metziella Michener Taxonomy: Snelling (1968)., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 46, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569, {"references":["Snelling, R. R. (1968) Studies on North American bees of the genus Hylaeus. 4. The subgenera Cephalylaeus, Metziella and Hylaeana (Hymenoptera: Colletidae). Los Angeles County Museum, Contributions in Science, 144, 1 - 6. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / p. 241133"]}

Hylaeus (Hylaeus) annulatus (Linnaeus, 1758) Counties: Aitkin, Beltrami, Clay, Clearwater, Cook, Houston, Isanti, Itasca, Kittson, Lake, Marshall, Pine, Ramsey, Saint Louis, Washington., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 46, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569

Hylaeus (Paraprosopis) floridanus (Robertson, 1893) Counties: Becker, Clearwater, Hubbard. Comments: Minnesota represents the northwesternmost edge of the range for this species. Subgenus Prosopis Fabricius, Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 47, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569

Hylaeus (Hylaeus) mesillae (Cockerell, 1896) Counties: Aitkin, Anoka, Becker, Beltrami, Benton, Big Stone, Brown, Carver, Cass, Chippewa, Chisago, Clay, Clearwater, Cottonwood, Crow Wing, Dodge, Douglas, Faribault, Freeborn, Goodhue, Grant, Hennepin, Houston, Hubbard, Isanti, Itasca, Jackson, Kanabec, Kandiyohi, Kittson, Koochiching, Lac qui Parle, Lake, Lyon, Mahnomen, Marshall, Martin, McLeod, Meeker, Mille Lacs, Morrison, Murray, Nobles, Norman, Olmsted, Otter Tail, Pennington, Pine, Pipestone, Polk, Pope, Ramsey, Red Lake, Redwood, Renville, Rice, Rock, Roseau, Saint Louis, Scott, Sherburne, Stearns, Steele, Stevens, Swift, Traverse, Wabasha, Washington, Watonwan, Wilkin, Winona, Wright, Yellow Medicine. Comments: What has traditionally been called “ Hylaeus mesillae ” or “ Hylaeus mesillae cressoni ” is a species complex containing an estimated three taxa in Minnesota. This complex may include specimens of the similar species H. rudbeckiae, which has the females separated by size alone (Snelling 1970), but the complex does not include H. saniculae, which is morphologically distinct. That H. mesillae is a species complex is consistent with Oram (2018), who also found evidence that H. mesillae is a species complex in Canada containing six distinct DNA barcodes. As a result, most recent collections are referred to as “ Hylaeus ‘ mesillae group’” (e.g. Lane et al. 2020, 2022). These taxonomic issues must be solved by a revision of this species., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 46, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569, {"references":["Snelling, R. R. (1970) Studies on North American bees of the genus Hylaeus. 5. The subgenera Hylaeus, S. Str. and Paraprosopis (Hymenoptera: Colletidae). Los Angeles County Museum, Contributions in Science, 180, 1 - 59. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / p. 241167","Oram, R. J. (2018) Revision of the genus Hylaeus Fabricius (Hymenoptera: Colletidae) in Canada. MSc Thesis, University of Regina, Regina, 165 pp.","Lane, I. G., Herron-Sweet, C. R., Portman, Z. M. & Cariveau, D. P. (2020) Floral resource diversity drives bee community diversity in prairie restorations along an agricultural landscape gradient. Journal of Applied Ecology, 57, 2010 - 2018. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / 1365 - 2664.13694"]}

Hylaeus (Cephalylaeus) basalis (Smith, 1853) Counties: Becker, Clearwater, Cook, Hubbard, Lake, Red Lake, Sherburne. Subgenus Hylaeus Fabricius s. str. Taxonomy: Snelling (1970)., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 45, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569, {"references":["Snelling, R. R. (1970) Studies on North American bees of the genus Hylaeus. 5. The subgenera Hylaeus, S. Str. and Paraprosopis (Hymenoptera: Colletidae). Los Angeles County Museum, Contributions in Science, 180, 1 - 59. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / p. 241167"]}

Hylaeus (Hylaeus) leptocephalus (Morawitz, 1871) Counties:Anoka, Benton, Carver, Cass, Clay, Faribault, Freeborn, Hennepin, Jackson, Lyon, Norman, Polk, Ramsey, Rock, Sibley, Stearns. Comments: Non-native. Records of this species in Minnesota go back as far as 1913., Published as part of Portman, Zachary M., Gardner, Joel, Lane, Ian G., Gerjets, Nicole, Petersen, Jessica D., Ascher, John S., Arduser, Mike, Evans, Elaine C., Boyd, Crystal, Thomson, Robin & Cariveau, Daniel P., 2023, A checklist of the bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Minnesota, pp. 1-95 in Zootaxa 5304 (1) on page 46, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/8048569

From the Korean Peninsula, 13 species from 5 subgenera of the genus Hylaeus are recorded, of which 10 species, H. aborigensis, H. cardioscapus, H. oehlkei, H. macilentus, H. pfankuchi, H. globulus, H. matsumurai, H. pectoralis, H. nigrocuneatus and H. confusus are new to this area. Thus, a total of 15 Hylaeus species in 5 subgenera have now been documented from the Korean Peninsula. And from Jeju Island, two species, H. glubulus and H. transversalis, are recorded for the first time.

Masked or yellow-faced bees of the genus Hylaeus (Colletidae) differ in their mode of pollen transportation from most other bees in that they ingest the pollen directly on the flowers and carry it back to the nest inside the crop located in the anterior half of the metasoma. Due to this hidden mode of pollen transportation, the examination of pollen collected by Hylaeus females requires the dissection of the metasoma. Although this method has never been applied in Europe, the great majority of the Central European Hylaeus species were supposed to be pollen generalists based on observations of flower visits. The microscopical analysis of pollen removed from 30 crops each of 36 Central European Hylaeus species revealed that the proportion of species exhibiting an exclusive or strong preference for pollen from a single plant taxon is much higher than hitherto assumed and that the current assumption of the genus Hylaeus to largely consist of pollen generalists is wrong. Nineteen of the 36 species examined are strictly or largely dependent on a single plant taxon for collecting pollen, such as Apiaceae (n = 11 species), Rosaceae (n = 3), Reseda (Resedaceae) (n = 2), Allium (Amaryllidaceae) (n = 1), Asteraceae (n = 1) and Melilotus (Fabaceae) (n = 1). The 36 Hylaeus species examined collected pollen from the flowers of 31 plant families, of which the Apiaceae and Rosaceae (particularly Potentilla and Rubus) were by far the most important contributing almost 60% to the pollen host spectrum of the entire genus. The comparison between pollen host spectrum and flower visiting records showed that the pollen generalists use the flowers of the Asteraceae as nectar rather than pollen sources, corroborating earlier findings that the digestion of Asteraceae pollen requires physiological adaptations to cope with its unfavourable or protective properties. In summary, the patterns of pollen host use by bees of the genus Hylaeus do not substantially differ from those of other Palaearctic bee taxa despite the masked bees’ unusual habit to ingest the pollen directly on the flowers and to transport it inside their body back to the nest.

Many studies have documented the negative impact of invasive species on populations, communities, and ecosystems, although most have focused solely on antagonistic rather than mutualistic interactions. For mutualistic interactions, such as pollination, a key to understanding their impacts is how invasive species interact with native species and alter interaction networks. Chapter 1 explores the impacts of invasive species on islands, particularly in regard to plants, pollinators, and how these exotic species attach to existing pollination interaction networks. Island pollination networks differ from mainland counterparts in several important characteristics, including fewer species, more connectance, and increased vulnerability to both invasion and extinction. A progression of invasion has been previously proposed, through which supergeneralist native species facilitate the entry of new exotic species, then are eventually replaced by a few supergeneralist invader species that ultimately dominate the interaction networks. As a result, highly-linked exotic supergeneralists become central nodes in the networks, thus altering network topology and community structure and functioning. Here, I evaluate the evidence for (1) native supergeneralists that provide attachment points for exotic species, (2) exotic supergeneralists that are potentially replacing the function of native species, and (3) the consequences for the replacement of native species with exotics. Both native and exotic supergeneralist species are found on islands, which may therefore represent different points along the invasion trajectory, with consequent concerns for future conservation. Chapter 2 utilizes a long-term series of observed floral visitations to break apart the potential differences between plants and pollinators as invaders of a community. When plants are introduced into a new environment, their reproductive success can be limited by the lack of a suitable pollinator. If there is no suitable native pollinator, the success of exotic plants may depend on the presence of exotic pollinators, a situation mirrored for exotic plant visitors. Yet, rarely are the distinct roles for native and non-native species of both plants and pollinators examined in the same community. This study examines the role of exotic plants and insects in floral visitation networks in Hawaii, in simple ecological communities with a depauperate native pollinator fauna. On the island of Hawaii, in sites that differed with respect to the presence of exotic plants, floral visitors were observed and quantified across multiple years and seasons. Where exotic plants were present, exotic insects were observed to visit both native and exotic plant species, while native insects rarely utilized exotic plant resources. Additionally, the majority of floral visitors comprised exotic bees and syrphid flies. In contrast, where the vegetation was dominated by native plants, native bees were major visitors. Thus, the impact of exotic plants and insect visitors on visitation networks was non-symmetrical. Exotic plants relied upon exotic insect taxa, while exotic insect taxa were able to utilize both native and exotic plants. This study demonstrates that the role of mutualistic interactions on the success and impact of invasive species cannot be predicted by looking at isolated interactions, but must also consider the context of the interactions.Chapter 3 evaluates how these floral visitation networks vary over time. Pollination systems provide important ecosystem services in both natural and managed ecosystems, but their future ecological stability is uncertain as a result of global change, including the impacts of invasive species, habitat loss, and a changing climate. Understanding how these systems vary naturally through time, including intra-annually, can provide critical context for evaluating future change, as well as elucidating the complexity of interspecific interactions in the community. This study examines temporal variation in floral visitation networks in a tropical system in Hawaii characterized by both native and non-native pollinators and plants, and less seasonal variation than in temperate regions. The three most common floral visitors exhibited unique seasonal visitation patterns. In the presence of only native plant species, both the exotic honeybee Apis mellifera and the endemic Hylaeus bees had similar seasonal variation in floral foraging. However, when the vegetation was a mix of native and exotic species, Apis visitation tracked the peak blooming of exotic plants while Hylaeus only visited native plants, leading to seasonal variation in resource partitioning. In contrast, visitation by the invasive yellowjacket Vespula pensylvanica consistently peaked during the fall, unrelated to plant blooming cycles. Thus, even in a system with minimal seasonal climate variation, there were marked differences in the patterns of pollination interactions between seasons, suggesting that intra-annual variation must be considered in predictions for stability of pollination networks in a changing world.Finally, Chapter 4 reviews and assesses the range of conservation threats to these Hawaiian pollination systems. Pollination interactions worldwide are facing a wide variety of threats, including habitat loss/change, agricultural intensification, pesticide/herbicide use, invasive species, parasites/disease, and global climate change. Pollination networks in Hawaii are of special concern, because of the unique nature of Hawaii’s terrestrial biota, including both plants and pollinators. As the sites from this study were located within a protected national park, the most likely sources for their endangerment are exotic/invasive species, the introduction and spread of parasites/disease, and the slow but potentially devastating effects of climate change. Hawaiian ecosystems, and these sites in particular, are additionally subject to the changes and hazards associated with a zone of active geologic activity. In this chapter, I address specifically both the rising global threats of parasites/disease and climate change and the unique local dangers of active volcanoes for Hawaiian pollination interactions. The variety and magnitude of potential effects provide a wealth of opportunities for future research utilizing existing network data to evaluate how these factors operate both independently and interactively to create change.

Hylaeus punctulatissimus SMITH, 1842, Lauch-Maskenbiene N a c h w e i s e: 19. Bez., Sievering, Sieveringer Steinbruch, N 48°15,4 –15,5′, E 16°18,55 –18,65′, 300–340 m SH, F&B-H08, 14. VI.2017, 1♁, ldcHZ; 21. Bez., Stammersdorf, Alte Schanze XI, N 48°19,25′, E 16°25,22′, 221 m SH, F&B-A15, 13.VII.2010, 1♀, ldcHZ; 22. Bez., Lobau, Ölhafen, N 48°10′, E 16°31′, 150 m SH, F&B-S21, 17. VI.2012, 1♀, leg., det. & coll. H. Wiesbauer; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Fuchshäufel, Halbtrockenrasen, N 48°11.75′, E 16°28.97′, 156 m SH, F&B-P19, 10.VII.2020, 1♁, ldcEO., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on page 371, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600

Hylaeus cornutus CURTIS, 1831, Gehörnte Maskenbiene N a c h w e i s e: 2. Bez., Nordbahnhofgelände, N 48°13,4 –13,6′, E 16°23,4′, 160 m SH, F&B-M13, 27.VII.2016, 3♀♀, ldcHZ & cTLM; 24.VIII.2016, 1♀, 1♁, ldcSS; N 48°13,7′, E 16°23,6′, 165 m SH, F&B-L13, 27.VII.2016, 1♀, ldcHZ, 24.VIII.2016, 1♀, 1♁, 1. IX.2016, 1♀, ldcSS; N 48°13,8′, E 16°23,35′, 164 m SH, F&B-L13, 8.VII.2017, 1♀, ldcSS; N 48°13,7 –13,8′, E 16°23,35 –23,55′, 165 m SH, F&B-L13, 18.V.2017, 3♁♁, 30.V.2017, 1♁, 8.VII.2017, 1♁, 21.VI.2018, 1♁, 7.VI. 2020, 1♁, ldcSS; 12. Bez., ehemaliges Fabriksgelände, N 48°11,03′, E 16°19,53′, 180 m SH, F&B-Q09, 8.VIII.2016, 1♀, lSS, dHZ, cNHMW; 14. Bez., Steinhofgründe, N 48°12,7 –12,9′, E 16°16,3 – 16,7′, 330–340 m SH, F&B-N06, 7.VI.2008, 1♀, ldcHZ; 20. Bez., Bahngelände bei Nordbrücke, N 48°15,2′, E 16°22,5′, 163 m SH, F&B-H05, 25.VI.2020, 1♀, ldcHZ; 21. Bez., Stammersdorf, Brache, N 48°18,86′, E 16°25,03′, 219 m SH, F&B-B15, 26.V.2007, 1♀, 1♁, ldcHZ;22. Bez., Obere Lobau, nahe Vorwerkstrasse, N 48°11,6′, E 16°29,2′, 156 m SH, F&B-P19, 18.VIII.2019, 2♀♀, ldcHZ, 2♀♀, ldcSS, 2.V.2020, 1♀, ldcSS; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Franzosenfriedhof, N 48°11,3′, E 16°32,0′, 154 m SH, F&B-Q21, 10.VII.2020, 1♀, ldcHZ; 22. Bez., Süssenbrunn, Umgebung Schöpfleuthner Kapelle, N 48°16,2 –16,4′, E 16°30,3′, 160 m SH, F&B-F20, 1.VIII.2020, 2♀♀, 2♁♁, ldcHZ., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on page 369, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600

Hylaeus intermedius FÖRSTER, 1871, Mittlere Maskenbiene N a c h w e i s e: 2. Bez., Nordbahnhofgelände, N 48°13,6 –13,7′, E 16°23,4 –23,6′, 160 m SH, F&B-L13, 3.VIII.2016, 3♁♁, ldcHZ, 4.VIII.2016, 1♀, 9.VIII.2016, 1♀, 24.VIII.2016, 1♀, ldcSS; N 48°13,8′, E 16°23,5′, 163 m SH, F&B-L13, 18.V.2017, 1♁, lSS, dHZ, cSS, 7.VI.2020, 1♁, ldcSS; 2. Bez., Prater, Praterspitz, Wegränder, N 48°10,15′, E 16°29,18′, 155 m SH, F&B-S19, 15.VII.2018, 1♀, ldcSS; 12. Bez., ehemaliges Fabriksgelände, N 48°11,03′, E 16°19,53′, 180 m SH, F&B-Q09, 8.VIII.2016, 2♁♁, lSS, dHZ, cNHMW; 21. Bez., Stammersdorf, Brache E Alte Schanze X, N 48°19,22′, E 16°25,03′, 218 m SH, F&B-A15, 16.VIII.2009, 1♁, lFS & lHZ, dcHZ; 22. Bez., Breitenlee, Schafflerhof, Sandgrube, N 48°14,4′, E 16°32,3′, 155 m SH, F&B-J22, 14.VI.2001, 1♁, ldcHZ; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Forstmeistermaiss, N 48°10,9′, E 16°29,6′, 156 m SH, F&B-Q19, 18.VIII.2019, 1♀, ldcHZ; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, nahe Vorwerkstrasse, N 48°11,6′, E 16°29,2′, 156 m SH, F&B-P19, 18.VIII.2019, 1♀, ldcHZ. 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, E Tischwasser, N 48°11,6′, E 16°29,1′, 154 m SH, F&B-P19, 18.VIII.2019, 1♁, ldcSS., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on page 370, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600

Hylaeus duckei (ALFKEN, 1904), Duckes Maskenbiene N a c h w e i s e: 19. Bez., Sievering, Sieveringer Steinbruch, N 48°15,4 –15,5′, E 16°18,55 –18,75′, 300–340 m SH, F&B-H08, 3.VII.1999, 2♀♀, ldcHZ; 22.VI.2001, 1♁, ldcHZ; 26.VI.2001, 1♀, ldcHZ; 14.VI.2017, 1♁, ldcHZ, 4.VII.2020, 4♁♁, 1♀, ldcSS; 17.VI.2022, 1♁, ldcHZ; 23. Bez., Mauer, ohne nähere Angaben, 11.VII.1998, 1♀, ldcHZ., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on page 370, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600

Hylaeus styriacus FÖRSTER, 1871, Steirische Maskenbiene N a c h w e i s e: 2. Bez., Nordbahnhofgelände, N 48°13,6 –13,7′, E 16°23,4′, 165 m SH, F&B-L13, 2.VII.2016, 1♁, ldcHZ; N 48°13,55′, E 16°23,6′, 163 m SH, F&B-L13, 2.VII.2016, 1♁, ldSS, cNHMW; N 48°13,8′, E 16°23,5′, 163 m SH, F&B-L13, 15.VI.2017, 1♁, ldcSS; N 48°13,8′, E 16°23,35′, 164 m SH, F&B-L13, 25.VI.2017, 1♀, ldcSS; 2. Bez., Prater, Wiesen bei Bogenschiessplatz, N 48°10,9′, E 016°27,4′, 160 m SH, F&B-Q17, 15.VII.2018, 4♀♀, 1♁, ldcSS; 3. Bez., Botanischer Garten, N 48°11,57′, E 16°23,05′, 185 m SH, F&B-P13, 20.VI.2017, 3♁♁, ldcSS; 13. Bez., Lainzer Tiergarten, Umgebung Hermesvilla, N 48°10,3′, E 16°14,6′, 315 m SH, F&B-R04, 30.VI.2015, 2♁♁, lcdHZ; N 48°10,2′, E 16°14,8′, 300 m SH, F&B-R04, 30.VI.2015, 1♁, lFS, dHZ, cBZL; 13. Bez., Lainzer Tiergarten, Johannser Kogel und Wiese, N 48°11,1′, E 16°13,3′, 300 m SH, F&B-Q03, 15.VI.2017, 1♀, ldcHZ; 16. Bez., Jubiläumswarte, Ruderalfläche W der Warte, N 48°13,3′, E 16°15,9′, 450 m SH, F&B-M05, 22.VII.2007, 1♀, ldcHZ; 19. Bez., zwischen Kahlenberg und Leopoldsberg, N 48°16,8′, E 16°20,4′, 410 m SH, F&B-E10, 9. VI.2014, 1♁, ldcHZ; 19. Bez., Sievering, Sieveringer Steinbruch, N 48°15,4 –15,5′, E 16°18,55 –18,75′, 300– 340 m SH, F&B-H08, 16.VI.2012, 1♁, lFS & lHZ, dcHZ; 21. Bez., Stammersdorf, Alte Schanze X und Umgebung, N 48°19,2′, E 16°25,0′, 223 m SH, F&B-A15, 24.VI.2016, 1♁, lFS & lHZ, dcHZ; 22. Bez., Blumengärten Hirschstetten, N 48°14′, E 16°28′, 159 m SH, F&B-K18, 28.VI.2016, 1♀, 1♁, lFS, dcHZ & cBZL; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Plattenmaiss, Randstruktur, N 48°11,43′, E 16°30,4′, 154 m SH, &B-Q21, 9.VII.2020, 11♀♀, 4♁♁, ldcEO, ZF1, Magerwiese, N 48°11,27′, E 16°30,07′, 155 m SH, F&B-Q21, 10.VII.2020, 1♀, ldcEO; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Wolfsboden 2B, Randstruktur, N 48°11,25′, E16°31,0′, 153 m SH, F&B-Q20, 8.VII.2020, 5♀♀, 8♁♁, ldcEO, auf Koriander, N 48°11,25′, E16°31,0′, 153 m SH, F&B-Q20, 12.VIII.2020, 1♀, ldcEO; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Lager 2, Randstruktur, N 48°11,05′, E 16°31,0′, 153 m SH, F&B-Q21, 9.VII.2020, 2♀♀, 2♁♁, ldcEO; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Franzosenfriedhof, auf Koriander, N 48°11,3′, E16°31,9′, 153 m SH, F&B-Q21, 9.VII.2020, 1♀, 1♁, ldcEO; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Müllergraben, Brache, N 48°11,5′, E 16°30,73′, 155 m SH, F&B-P20, 8.VII.2020, 1♀, 1♁, ldcEO; 22. Bez., Lobau, Lehnerin S Steinbühelau, N 48°09,8′, E 16°33,1′, 151 m SH, F&B-S21, 22.VI.2013, 2♁♁, lcEO, dHZ; 22. Bez., Untere Lobau, Kreuzgrund, Heisslände, N 48°09,7′, E 16°32,5′, 152 m SH, F& B-T22, 22. VI.2013, 2♁♁, lFS & lHZ, dcHZ; 23. Bez., Mauer, ohne nähere Angaben, 11.VII.1998, 1♁, lcdHZ., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on page 372, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600

Hylaeus sinuatus (SCHENCK, 1853), Gebuchtete Maskenbiene N a c h w e i s e: 2. Bez., Nordbahnhofgelände, N 48°13,7 –13,8′, E 16°23,35 –23,55′, 165 m SH, F&B-L13, 15.VI.2017, 3♁♁, ldcSS, 25.VI.2017, 4♁♁, ldcSS, 8.VII.2017, 1♁, ldcSS, 21.VI.2018, 1♁, ldcSS; N 48°13,8′, E 16°23,35′, 164 m SH, F&B-L13, 8.VII.2017, 2♀♀, 1♁, ldcSS; 2. Bez., Prater, Wiesen bei Bogenschiessplatz, N 48°10,9′, E 016°27,4′, 160 m SH, F&B-Q17, 15.VII.2018, 1♁, ldcSS; 13. Bez., Lainzer Tiergarten, Johannser Kogel und Wiese, N 48°11,1′, E 16°13,15 –13,3′, 300 m SH, F&B-Q03, 20.VII.2017, 1♀, ldcHZ; 14. Bez., Hinterhainbach, N 48°14,8′, E 016°13,2′, 380 m SH, F&B-J03, 18.VII.2014, 1♁, lHZ & lFS, dcHZ; 14. Bez., Wolfersberg, N 48°12,6′, E 016°14,8′, 320 m SH, F&B-N04, 23.VII.2016, 2♁♁, lFS, dHZ, cBZL; 16. Bez., Jubiläumswarte, Ruderalfläche W der Warte, N 48°13,3′, E 16°15,9′, 450 m SH, F&B-M05, 22.VII.2007, 1♀, 1♁, ldcHZ; 21. Bez., Jedlesee, Schwarze Lacke, N 48°16,15 –16,5′, E 016°23,1′, 163 m SH, F&B-F13, 24.VI.2016, 2♁♁, lHZ & lFS, dHZ, cHZ & cBZL; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Müllergraben, Brache, N 48°11,5′, E 16°30,7′, 155 m SH, F&B-P20, 12.VIII.2020, 1♁, ldcEO; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Plattenmaiss, Randstruktur, N 48°11,43′, E 16°30,4′, 154 m SH, F&B-Q21, 9.VII.2020, 1♁, ldcEO; 22. Bez., Obere Lobau, Lager 2, Randstruktur, N 48°11,05′, E 16°31,0′, 153 m SH, F&B-Q21, 9.VII.2020, 1♁, ldcEO., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on page 371, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600

Hylaeus sp. " intermedius 2" (sensu SCHODER 2018) N a c h w e i s e: 2. Bez., Nordbahnhofgelände, N 48°13,8′, E 16°23,35′, 164 m SH, F&B-L13, 9.VIII.2016, 2♁♁, lFS, dcHZ, 15.VI.2017, 1♁, ldcSS; 3. Bez., Botanischer Garten, N 48°11,57′, E 16°23,05′, 185 m SH, F&B-P13, 20.VI.2017, 1♁, ldcSS; 20. Bez., Handelskai, N 48°13,8′, E 16°24,05′, 161 m SH, F&B-L14, 18.VII.2016, 1♁, lFS, dcHZ. A n m e r k u n g: Diese vermutlich noch unbenannte Form unterscheidet sich genetisch (SCHODER 2018) und auch im männlichen Geschlecht deutlich von H. intermedius, wie dieser durch den Holotypus repräsentiert ist. Der stark entwickelte Skapus des Männchens deutet auf eine nahe Verwandtschaft mit H. kahri hin., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on pages 370-371, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600, {"references":["SCHODER S. (2018): The Hylaeus brevicornis group revisited - an integrative approach to delimit four closely related species of masked bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae). - Master's Thesis, Universitat Wien, 43 pp."]}

Hylaeus nigritus (FABRICIUS, 1798), Rainfarn-Maskenbiene N a c h w e i s e: 2. Bez., Nordbahnhofgelände, N 48°13,6 –13,7′, E 16°23,4′, 165 m SH, F&B-L13, 2.VII.2016, 2♁♁, ldcHZ; 2. Bez., Prater, Wiesen bei Bogenschiessplatz, N 48°10,9′, E 016°27,4′, 160 m SH, F&B-Q17, 15.VII.2018, 1♀, ldcSS; 2. Bez., Prater, Praterspitz, Wegränder, N 48°10,15′, E 16°29,18′, 155 m SH, F&B-S19, 15.VII.2018, 1♀, ldcSS; 11. Bez., Zentralfriedhof, Evangelischer Friedhof, N 48°09,0′, E 16°26,9′, 171 m SH, F&B-U16, 20.VI.2019, 3♀♀, 1♁, lFS & lHZ, dcHZ & cBZL; 19. Bez., Sievering, Hackenberg, N 48°15′, E 16°19′, 270–300 m SH, F&B-J08, 7.VIII.1999, 2♀♀, ldcHZ; 21. Bez., Jedlesee, Schwarze Lacke, N 48°16,15 –16,5′, E 16°23,1′, 163 m SH, F&B-F13, 24.VI.2016, 2♁♁, lSF & lHZ, dcHZ; 23. Bez., Rodaun, Endstelle Strassenbahnlinie 60, N 48°07,9′, E 16°15,75′, 245 m SH, F&B-W05, 29.VI.2001, 2♁♁, ldcHZ., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on page 371, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600

Hylaeus moricei (FRIESE, 1898), Röhricht-Maskenbiene N a c h w e i s e: 2. Bez., Nordbahnhofgelände, N 48°13,75′, E 16°23,4′, 163 m SH, F&B-L13, 24.VIII.2016, 1♀, ldcSS; 2. Bez., Prater, Au bei Lusthauswasser, N 48°11,5′, E 016°26,57′, 157 m SH, F&B-P16, 22.VII.2017, 3♀♀, 2♁♁, 11. VI.2018, 2♁♁, 15.VII.2018, 3♁♁, 2♀♀, ldcSS; 9. Bez., Sensengasse, N 48°13,05′, E 16°21,12′, 173 m SH, F&B-M11, 21.VII.2016, 1♀, leg. & coll. J. Lanner,dHZ; 9. Bez., Zoologisches Institut Althanstrasse, N 48°13,8′, E 16°21,5′, 170 m SH, F&B-L11, 9. VI.2017, 1♀, ldcSS, 5.VII.2017, 1♁, ldcSS; 20. Bez., Bahngelände bei Nordbrücke, N 48°15,2′, E 16°22,5′, 163 m SH, F&B-H05, 25. VI.2020, 1♀, ldcHZ; 22. Bez., Breitenlee, Verschiebebahnhof, N 48°15,7′, E 16°29,5′, 150 m SH, F&B-G19, 18. VI.2013, 2♀♀, 1♁, ldcHZ; N 48°15′, E 16°29′, 150 m SH, F&B-H19, 18.VI.2013, 4♀♀, 1♁, ldcHZ., Published as part of Zettel, Herbert, Ockermüller, Esther, Schoder, Sabine & Seyfert, Franz, 2022, Zur Verbreitung der Wildbien en (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Wien, Österreich, pp. 351-396 in Linzer biologische Beiträge 54 (1) on page 371, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7507600

In this study, our aim was to assess several traits of cavity‐nesting Hymenopteran taxa in a low‐intensity agricultural landscape in Transylvania. The study took place between May and August 2018 at eight study sites in the hilly mountainous central part of Romania, where the majority of the landscape is used for extensive farming or forestry. During the processing of the trap nest material, we recorded several traits regarding the nests of different cavity‐nesting Hymenopteran taxa and the spider prey found inside the nests of the spider‐hunting representatives of these taxa. We also evaluated the relationship between the edge density and proportion of low‐intensity agricultural areas surrounding the study sites and some of these traits. The majority of nests were built by the solitary wasp genus Trypoxylon, followed by the solitary wasp taxa Dipogon and Eumeninae. Solitary bees were much less common, with Hylaeus being the most abundant genus. In the nests of Trypoxylon, we mostly found spider prey from the family of Araneidae, followed by specimens from the families of Linyphiidae and Theridiidae. In the nests of Dipogon, we predominantly encountered spider prey from the family of Thomisidae. We found significant effects of low‐intensity agricultural areas for the genera of Auplopus, Megachile, Osmia, and the Thomisid prey of Dipogon. We also found that the spider prey of Trypoxylon was significantly more diverse at study sites with higher proportions of low‐intensity agricultural areas. Our results indicate that solitary bees seem to be more abundant in areas, where the influence of human activities is stronger, while solitary wasps seem to rather avoid these areas. Therefore, we suggest that future studies not only should put more effort into sampling in low‐intensity agricultural landscapes but also focus more on solitary wasp taxa, when sampling such an area., Nowadays, most regions of the European Union face an increasing agricultural intensification and urbanization, which partially caused a dramatic decline of insect diversity in the last few decades. However, even in the European Union, there are still a few regions and areas remaining, which are not under such a strong human influence and still harbor a considerably high insect diversity, like our study area, located in the central part of Romania. In our study, we found several new aspects concerning the diversity and distribution of solitary bees, wasps, and the spider‐hunting wasps' prey and also the effects of landscape context on these groups.

A new species Hylaeus (Paraprospis) guptai Saini & Chandra sp. nov., is described from Jang (Arunachal Pradesh), India. Specimens were collected from flowers of Coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.) du...

Hawaii has a single group of native bees belonging to the genus Hylaeus (Hymenoptera: Colletidae) and known collectively as Hawaiian yellow-faced bees. The majority of the 63 species have experienced significant declines in range and population. In 2016, seven species received federal protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Competitors and predators, such as invasive bees, wasps and ants, are thought to be important drivers of range reductions and population declines, especially at lower elevations where more non-native species occur. We evaluated the effects of invasive ants on nesting Hylaeus anthracinus using artificial nest blocks that allowed us to track nest construction and development. The blocks were placed in pairs at 22 points encompassing three sites on the north and east sides of Oahu. One block in each pair was treated with a sticky barrier to prevent access by ants, while the other block remained untreated. From December 2015 to December 2016, we monitored 961 individual nests in the blocks. Seventy percent of nests in control blocks were invaded by ants. Nests in treated blocks were more likely to produce at least one adult than nests in untreated blocks (38% vs. 14%, respectively). In untreated blocks, ants were the most common cause of nest mortality followed by lack of development, displacement (primarily by the competitor Pachodynerus nasidens) and presumed pathogens. The invasive ant, Ochetellus glaber was the only observed nest predator, although the big-headed ant, Pheidole megacephala was also present. Hylaeus anthracinus inhabits coastal strand habitat which occurs in a narrow band just above the high tide line. Nests at one site were destroyed due to a high wave event, highlighting this species’ vulnerability to sea level rise. Additionally, no adult bees or nests were observed at the points where yellow crazy ants, Anoplolepis gracilipes were established. An increased understanding of the factors limiting Hawaii’s yellow-faced bees will provide information for future conservation efforts that may include landscape-scale ant control, habitat restoration and translocations.

Hylaeus anthracinus is an endemic Hawaiian yellow-faced bee (Colletidae) that is federally protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. On O‘ahu, H. anthracinus populations are restricted to a few isolated areas of intact coastal strand habitat. A detailed understanding of H. anthracinus nesting ecology is required to protect and expand the remaining fragmented and isolated populations. Here, we explore how nest parameters such as tunnel inside diameter, cell length, cell partition material, and plant species utilization compare among H. anthracinus and three non-native coastal bee species. Solitary bee nests from coastal habitats on O‘ahu, Hawai‘i were dissected and nest parameters were measured, compared, and described. We found overlap in most nest parameters among H. anthracinus and the introduced species: Hylaeus strenuus, Ceratina smaragdula, and Ceratina dentipes. No significant differences for inside diameter of nest entrance, length of tunnel nest, or # of cells/nest were found among the four bee species that were utilizing cavity nests. Thus, competition for nesting resources could be occurring. This increased understanding of H. anthracinus nest ecology will inform future conservation actions that could include the development of captive rearing programs, translocations, use of artificial nest sites, and the enhancement of natural habitat to increase nesting resources to support the existing populations.

A new species of colletid bee, Hylaeus (Hylaeana) dominicalis Gibbs, new species, is described and figured from the Commonwealth of Dominica. The new species can be distinguished from consubgeneric species in the Caribbean Islands based on the integumental coloration, facial fovea, and pubescence. A list of all known Hylaeus from the Caribbean Islands is provided.

A 2009 field survey at Cerro San Cristobal, Santiago, Chile, revealed the presence of Hylaeus (Gnathoprosopis) euxanthus (Cockerell, 1910). Since then, numerous individuals have been observed visiting several plant species around Santiago and Valparaíso. This is the first record of this Australian-native bee in South America.