Wonders of Wisconsin: A Study on Insect Macrophotography

This past year I have been honing my skills as an entomologist and as a photographer. My solo exhibition “Wonders of Wisconsin: A Study on Insect Macrophotography” not only presents my personal progress, but also represents an overarching theme of a liberal arts education: connectivity. Everything we see or learn on campus and throughout life is connected. This audience-engaging exhibition has provided a visual for the connections between the fields of science and studio art, the art movements of New Objectivity and Relational Aesthetics, and between human and insect life. The final exhibition opening on May 1st at 5:30pm in the Science Hall Atrium includes two insect display cases, 20 11x14’’ aluminum prints with corresponding postcards, a poster with information regarding all species presented in the display cases, and assorted food items relating to insects and other arthropods (including hand-made chocolate-covered crickets). A blog has been set up for this project, where I have posted some images and talk about my experiences and future plans. At the opening, viewers can take the postcards and discuss how they personally view insects at the provided seating areas. This all provides a context for conversation that can encompass many environmental issues and human-nature interactions

Nesting biology of the bee Caupolicana yarrowi.

20 pages : illustrations (some color), color maps ; 26 cm. Appendix: Use of nectar by the desert bee Caupolicana yarrowi (Colletidae) in cell construction / James H. Cane and Jerome G. Rozen, Jr.The first part of this publication, written by a group of participants in Bee Course 2018, results from the discovery of three nests of Caupolicana yarrowi (Cresson, 1875) at the base of the Chiricahua Mountains in southeastern Arizona. The nests are deep with branching laterals that usually connect to large vertical brood cells by an upward turn before curving downward and attaching to the top of the chambers. This loop of the lateral thus seems to serve as a "sink trap," excluding rainwater from reaching open cells during provisioning. Although mature larvae had not yet developed, an egg of C. yarrowi was discovered floating on the provisions allowing an SEM examination of its chorion, the first such study for any egg of the Diphaglossinae. Larval food for this species at this site came from Solanum elaeagnifolium Cav. (Solanaceae). Nests were parasitized by Triepeolus grandis (Friese, 1917) (Epeolini), which previously was known to attack only Ptiloglossa (Diphaglossinae: Caupolicanini). The subterranean nest cells of the desert bee Caupolicana yarrowi (Colletidae), which are enveloped by a casing of hardened soil that easily separates from the surrounding matrix, are discussed in a separate appendix. Chemical analysis revealed the casing to be rich in reducing sugars, indicating that the mother bee had regurgitated floral nectar onto the rough interior walls of the cell cavity before smoothing and waterproofing them. This novel use of nectar in nest construction is compared with that of other bee species that bring water to a nest site to soften soil for excavation

Effects of burn season on bee and floral community in tallgrass prairies, and the use of museum collections data

Prescribed fires (controlled burns) in tallgrass prairie systems are a common land management technique used across the United States to maintain species diversity. Burns are conducted either in the winter or early spring (dormant season) or in late summer and early fall (growing season). Prairies are rich in diverse bee taxa, including many solitary and social species. It is unknown if dormant season or growing season burns differentially affects the following year’s bee community and their resources. Chapter 1 addresses the question of how fires affect bees in prairie fragments in Illinois. Understanding the effects of the different burn seasons will aid future pollinator- and bee-friendly land management and restoration projects. In 2016 and 2017, bees were collected from seven prairie sites in south-central Illinois using active netting, pan traps, and vane traps. Overall, both burn seasons increased the amount of bare ground compared to unburned areas, but growing season burns contained greater total area of bare ground than dormant season burns. This resulted in an increase in abundance of below-ground nesting bee species after growing season burns. The decrease in nesting material for above-ground nesting bees in the burned treatments resulted in a lower proportional abundance of those species compared to areas that were not burned. However, comparing the dormant and growing seasons of burn, there was no effect on the overall bee community. Amount of semi-natural area in the landscape and the matrix surrounding each prairie fragment may play a larger role in maintaining stable bee communities in highly fragmented habitats. Land managers can burn during both seasons knowing that bee communities will not be adversely affected. Chapter 2 utilizes the museum specimens housed at the Illinois Natural History Survey (INHS), University of Illinois, to address several issues concerning the use of museum collections to detect species distribution shifts and declines. Many changes to species distributions often occur over long time scales, where museum records are the only source of information regarding the historical occurrences of species. Efforts to digitize museum collections aids in identifying areas and species for conservation, but sampling biases and differences in specimen deposition into museum collections by various collectors over time, data entry errors, and misidentification of specimens can limit the accuracy of date collected from museums. This chapter describes the activities of compiling an updated Illinois bee species checklist of 455 species, correcting errors found in the INHS online database, and identifying potential new county and one state records (Diadasia enavata Cresson, 1872) for Illinois from the collections conducted in Chapter 1. Continued support for natural history museums across the country will allow future research on the impacts to ecosystems caused by human and natural influences

Dichragenia assimilis Decker & Pitts & Yuan & Rodriguez 2020, comb. nov.

Dichragenia assimilis (Smith, 1861), comb. nov. Pseudagenia (Minagenia) assimilis (Smith, 1861). Proc. Amer. Acad. Art Sci. v. 69, pg. 65–66. Agenia assimilis Smith, 1861. J. Proc. Linn. Soc. v. 4, pg. 80. Remarks. Minagenia assimilis (Smith, 1861) was first described as a species in the genus Agenia from Celebes, Philippines and moved to Pseudagenia by Kohl (1884). Banks (1934) then included it as Pseudagenia (Minagenia) along with his described species M. brevicornis. The holotype specimen is now located at the Hope Entomological Collections, Oxford University Museum of Natural History. An image was sent to us curtesy of the collections manager (Dr. James Hogan) in order to examine the specimen and the labels. Wahis (University of Liege, Gembloux, Belgium) examined this holotype in 1979, and identified it as a species of Dichragenia Haupt, 1950, specifically Dichragenia assimilis (Smith, 1861). Dichragenia is widespread throughout the Old World, but much work needs to be done on this genus. We agree with Wahis that the holotype specimen is a member of Dichragenia (Pepsinae: Ageniellini), and not a member of Minagenia, considering that the T1 is petiolate and the 2rs-m vein straight and angled basally. No publication has previously indicated this new identification; therefore, we create a new combination for this species.Published as part of Decker, Brenna L., Pitts, James P., Yuan, David & Rodriguez, Juanita, 2020, Re-examination of Australian and Oriental species of Minagenia Banks, 1934 (Hymenoptera: Pompilidae), with a new record for the genus in Australia and a new species description, pp. 383-394 in Zootaxa 4768 (3) on page 391, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4768.3.5, http://zenodo.org/record/378407

Minagenia Banks 1934

Minagenia Banks, 1934 Minagenia Banks, 1934, (as a subgenus of Pseudagenia Kohl, 1884): Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts. Sci., v. 69, pg. 40, 64. Type species: Pseudagenia (Minagenia) brevicornis Banks, 1934, by original designation. Nannochilus Banks, 1944: Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., v. 94, pg. 171. Type species: Pseudagenia externa Banks, 1910, by original designation. Synonymized by Townes, 1957: 226. Compsagenia Haupt, 1959: Nova Acta Leopoldina. v. 141, pg. 66. Type species: Compsagenia laevipes Haupt, 1959 (= Nannnochilus obscurus Banks, 1946), by monotypy. Synonymized by Evans 1973: 214. Diagnosis. Minagenia, a member of the subfamily Pepsinae, can be differentiated from other genera of the tribe Pepsini by the following combination of characters: the eyes are large, with the width of the eye in lateral view greater than 2 × the width of the gena; and the fore wing 2rs-m and 3rs-m veins similar in curvature, with some exceptions, including the 3rs-m either having a median outward pocket or the 3rs-m being straight and angled posteriorly (as in Minagenia taiwana Tsuneki, 1989). Other identifying characters for Minagenia include: the clypeus width being greater than 2 × its height, with the sides angling slightly inward before the truncate or gently concave apical margin; the pronotum with a distinct anterior face; the fore wing 3m-cu meeting the SMC3 at or beyond the middle, the M reaching the wing margin; the hind wing cu-a ending before the juncture of M with CuA; the hind wing anal lobe equal to or less than half the length of M+CuA; the hind wing basal set of hamuli ending at the separation of the costal vein from Sc, R and Rs veins (except in Minagenia taiwana); and the hind tibia smooth, without row of integument serrations. Additional characters specific for the males include: the fore tarsal claws being asymmetrical, and at least the mid-leg tarsal claws are bifid. Additional characters specific for the females include: the fore tarsal claws being symmetrical, and all tarsal claws being bifid; S6 being laterally compressed, usually with a ventral ridge present; and the stinger being straight. Remarks. The name was first used as a subgenus of Pseudagenia by Banks in 1934 to describe two Philippine species. The name was then raised to generic level by Townes (1957) and synonymized with the New World genus Nannochilus Banks, 1944; Minagenia was first used at the generic level by Dreisbach (1953). Minagenia can be found throughout the New World, Africa, and the Australasian region. In the New World, a revision is desperately needed, as there are many undescribed species throughout the region (unpub. data). A single species is described from Madagascar, first placed into the genus Micragenia Arnold, 1934 by Banks (1940) as Micragenia minima Banks, 1940; later, Townes (1957) created a new combination for Minagenia minima (Banks, 1940). No other Minagenia species are recorded in the literature for Africa, but there are several undescribed species from mainland Africa and Madagascar. Several other genera closely resemble Minagenia. Species of Minagenia can be distinguished from Epipompilus Kohl, 1884 by the following characteristics: the eyes are large and protuberant; the integumental puncture size is variable, but dense with the intervals dull; the hind wing cu-a is long and often curved, the angle at which it leaves the medial vein is broad and smooth, not sharp; the males have bifid claws on the middle leg, and the antennae is filamentous with appressed setae; females lack setae on eyes, have all claws bifid, and have the SGP laterally compressed. Males of Eopompilus Gussakovskij, 1932 look similar to Minagenia males, except that the antennae are highly serrated, the hind leg tibial groove along the brush is obvious and mostly devoid of setae, S6 has a deep median emargination fringed with long setae, and T1 is dorsally white. Upon further examination, one species that was previously labeled as Minagenia from Taiwan likely belongs in a new genus, perhaps, near Eopompilus, which will be discussed in a later paper. An additional two species from Taiwan are members of other genera, discussed here, further demonstrating that differences between these genera can be easily overlooked. Males of Minagenia are generally distinguished by genitalic features, while females lack such diagnostic characters. Female head and antennal measurement ratios and placement of sensory receptors on the antennae tend to greatly aid in identification, but there are several exceptions. In general, females have less morphological variation than males, and in some instances, it is difficult to identify morphological characters to separate species.Published as part of Decker, Brenna L., Pitts, James P., Yuan, David & Rodriguez, Juanita, 2020, Re-examination of Australian and Oriental species of Minagenia Banks, 1934 (Hymenoptera: Pompilidae), with a new record for the genus in Australia and a new species description, pp. 383-394 in Zootaxa 4768 (3) on pages 384-385, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4768.3.5, http://zenodo.org/record/378407

Priocnemis granulosa Decker & Pitts & Yuan & Rodriguez 2020, comb. nov.

Priocnemis granulosa (Tsuneki, 1989), comb. nov. Minagenia granulosa Tsuneki, 1989. Japan Hymenopterists Association, v. 35, pg. 168–170. Type examined. Holotype. ♂, Formosa, Chiayi-Hsien, Shihtzulu, 29.vii.1966, T. Tano, USNM. Remarks. Priocnemis granulosa belongs to the genus Priocnemis based on the following combination of characters for the male that separate it from Minagenia: the eye width is less than 2 × the genal width in lateral view; the pronotum with a short anterior face; the fore wing 3m-cu ends much closer to the basal third of the lower SMC3; and T1 is petiolate and elongated. The fore wing 3rs-m angles posteriorly instead of curving. This species keys to Priocnemis in Shimizu’s (1996) key to the genera of Japan. However, it does not match with any identified Priocnemis species known from Japan. The SGP of the holotype is broken on a point mount, but even in this condition the SGP appears wide and almost lobed like in other Priocnemis specimens.Published as part of Decker, Brenna L., Pitts, James P., Yuan, David & Rodriguez, Juanita, 2020, Re-examination of Australian and Oriental species of Minagenia Banks, 1934 (Hymenoptera: Pompilidae), with a new record for the genus in Australia and a new species description, pp. 383-394 in Zootaxa 4768 (3) on page 393, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4768.3.5, http://zenodo.org/record/378407

Nipponodipogon pempuchiensis Decker & Pitts & Yuan & Rodriguez 2020, comb. nov.

Nipponodipogon pempuchiensis (Tsuneki, 1989), comb. nov. Minagenia pempuchiensis Tsuneki, 1989. Japan Hymenopterists Association, v. 35, pg. 171. Type examined. Holotype. ♂, Penpuchi Nantou Pref. 19.viii.1979, T. Murota, USNM. Other material. 1♂, Tai- wan. Wushe, 1150m. 22.v.1983, H. Townes, EMUS _800. Remarks. In the original publication, Tsuneki (1989) posited that the holotype was a gynandromorph, stating that the antennae appear male, yet the specimen possessed a stinger, ultimately describing the specimen as female. However, upon examination of the holotype, the specimen is clearly completely male, and the apparent stinger is a long SGP (Fig. 3d). A male specimen housed at EMUS is identical to the holotype of Minagenia pempuchiensis. Both specimens’ genitalia do not match other Minagenia genitalia, in that the digiti are long, thin, and straight (Fig. 3c), while in Minagenia all digiti are curved and bulbous at the apical third. Minagenia pempuchiensis belongs to Nipponodipogon Ishikawa, 1965, which was originally proposed as a subgenus of Dipogon Fox, 1897, raised to genus level by Lelej & Loktionov (2012) and remained so in a revision by Shimizu et al. (2015). Continued use of this genus name is ongoing (Loktionov et al. 2017), but there are some suggestions that it is indeed a subgenus of Dipogon, or all of the subgenera of Dipogon need to be elevated to the generic level (unpub. data). This species belongs with Nipponodipogon based on the following combination of male characters: fore wing CuA vein reaches wing margin; SGP long, narrow, extending past last tergite; LA3 about 2 × its width; forewing SMC2 width less than 2.5 × its height; hind wing anal lobe of normal length, not noticeably small. This is a new combination for the genus Nipponodipogon. In the Shimizu et al. (2015) key, the species will key out to either N. nagasei (Ishikawa, 1965) or N. rossicus (Lelej, 1986) based on T1 being not petiolate, and tibial spurs (to some extent) being stramineous. However, both of these species have wide and flat parameres, with a basal shelf and long (N. nagasei) or short (N. rossicus) setae on the margins. Nipponodipogon pempuchiensis has thin, flat parameres with longer setae at the rounded tip, and some setae along the ventral face and margins (Fig. 3c). In addition, the SGP of both N. nagasei and N. rossicus have lateral projections at the base, while N. pempuchiensis does not. Species of this genus were known from Russia and the Japanese Archipelago (Shimizu et al. 2015). More recently, the distribution of Nipponodipogon had been extended to include the Oriental region by Loktionov et al. (2017) with the description of two new species (N. orientalis Loktionov, Lelej & Xu, 2017 and N. shimizui Loktionov, Lelej, & Xu, 2017) from China based on male and female specimens. Two other species, N. gusenleitnerorum Loktionov & Lelej, 2018 and N. indica Loktionov, 2020, were described from Laos and India, respectively, based on females only (Loktionov & Lelej 2018; Loktionov 2020). There are five species of Nipponodipogon that have unknown males (N. gusenleitnerorum, N. hayachinensis (Ishikawa, 1968), N. kurilensis (Lelej, 1986), N. mandibularis (Ishikawa, 1965), and N. indicus Loktionov, 2020), and it is possible that N. pempuchiensis may actually be the male for one of these species. Both specimens of N. pempuchiensis examined here were collected in Taiwan. Females of N. gusenleitnerorum occur in Laos (Loktionov & Lelej 2018), while females of N. mandibularis and N. hayachinensis occur in Japan (Shimizu et al. 2015), and it is possible the N. pempuchiensis male could be associated with one of those species. Genetic analysis has not been done on this group, but would help determine sex associations. The female of this species, thus, remains unknown.Published as part of Decker, Brenna L., Pitts, James P., Yuan, David & Rodriguez, Juanita, 2020, Re-examination of Australian and Oriental species of Minagenia Banks, 1934 (Hymenoptera: Pompilidae), with a new record for the genus in Australia and a new species description, pp. 383-394 in Zootaxa 4768 (3) on pages 392-393, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4768.3.5, http://zenodo.org/record/378407

Early nesting biology of the bee Caupolicana yarrowi (Cresson) (Colletidae, Diphaglossinae) and its cleptoparasite Triepeolus grandis (Friese) (Apidae, Nomadinae) /

no. 393