![]() |
Вурфлена шмель (Шмель горного леса) - Bombus wurfleini (Radoszkowski, 1860) Краткое описание взрослой стадии. Длина тела у самцов 13-18 мм, у самок 20-26 мм. По внешнему виду весьма схож с плодовым шмелем (B. pomorum), но в отличие от него длина щек в 2 раза меньше ширины оснований жвал. Распространение. Пиренеи, Альпы, Карпаты, горы Скандинавии, Балканский п-ов, Кавказ, Закавказье, Южный Урал. В Челябинской области известен по единственной находке в Ильменском заповеднике 24 июля 1987 г. Есть также сведения об обитании вида на востоке Республики Башкортостан. Численность. Редкий вид. Фактическая численность неизвестна. Меры охраны. Охраняется в Ильменском заповеднике. Источники информации: 1. Елин, 1987; 2. Красная книга СССР, 1984. Составители: А. В. Лагунов, П. Ю. Горбунов.
Bombus portchinsky Radoszkowski NOMENCLATURE: Radoszkowski (1883) published four different spellings of B. portchinsky, repeating this third form twice (page numbers 207 and 208 are repeated twice for different pages). Williams (1998) was the first author who cited all names (there are many incorrect subsequent spellings, e.g. Dalla Torre, 1896) and, following the Principle of First Reviser (ICZN, 1999: Article 24), chose B. portchinsky as the name for the species. This form is a simple noun in apposition and so retains the same ending whatever the gender of the generic name with which it is combined (ICZN, 1999: Article 31). DISTRIBUTION: Palaearctic Region. Bombus tricornis Radoszkowski tricornis Radoszkowski, 1888:319, examined 3 names MORPHOLOGY: photos of male genitalia. DISTRIBUTION: Palaearctic Region, Oriental border. Bombus amurensis Radoszkowski Bombus wurflenii Radoszkowski Bombus ussurensis Radoszkowski DISTRIBUTION: Oriental, Japanese, Palaearctic Regions. Bombus vosnesenskii Radoszkowski, 1862 Шмель Bombus vosnesenskii является важным опылителем урожая. Он собирает пыльцу и нектар с подсолнечника. Although this western North American species has a modest range, it is often by far the most common bumble bee where it occurs, particularly in urban and agricultural settings (McFrederick and Lebuhn 2006, Rao and Stephen 2010). Like several others in its subgenus, this species seems to be increasing in at least some parts of its range (NatureServe 2014), and also expanding in range (Fraser et al. 2012). According to our analysis (Hatfield et al. 2014), this species has increased in relative abundance in recent years, and has not declined significantly in range or persistence. The average decline of 0% (based on relative abundance, persistence, and range) suggests that this species qualifies for the Least Concern Red List category. Based on the above calculations and trends, along with published reports of bumble bee decline and the assessors` best professional judgement, we recommend this species for the Least Concern Red List category at this time. |