Bombus sylvicola Kirby
sylvicola Kirby, 1837:272

TAXONOMIC STATUS: B. sylvicola is morphologically closely similar to B. lapponicus, and it has been suggested repeatedly that they are conspecific (e.g. Sladen, 1919; Skorikov, 1922a, 1937; Pittioni, 1942, 1943; Thorp, 1962; Thorp et al., 1983).

Evidence from comparisons of DNA sequences from the 16S gene is not strong but consistent with the two taxa being separate species (Cameron et al., 2007 [pdf]). Until more evidence to the contrary is available from critical studies of patterns of variation, I shall treat them as two separate species. See also the comments on B. monticola.

DISTRIBUTION: Arctic, W Nearctic Regions.

Bombus lapponicus (Fabricius)
lapponica (Fabricius, 1793:318 [Apis])
zhaosu Wang, 1985:162, examined

DISTRIBUTION: Palaearctic, Arctic Regions.

Bombus lemniscatus Skorikov
lemniscatus Skorikov, 1912:607, examined
flavopilosus Friese, 1918:84, examined
peralpinus Richards, 1930:646, examined

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental Region.

Bombus lepidus Skorikov
lepidus Skorikov, 1912:606, examined
genitalis Friese, 1913:85, examined
tetrachromus Friese, 1918:85, examined, not of Cockerell, 1909:397 (= B. kashmirensis Friese)
yuennanicola Bischoff, 1936:7, examined

TAXONOMIC STATUS: B. lepidus and B. yuennanicola have been considered both as separate species (Bischoff, 1936) and as conspecific (Williams, 1991 [pdf]). Evidence from comparisons of DNA sequences from five genes is consistent with the two taxa being conspecific (Cameron et al., 2007 [pdf]).

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental Region.

Bombus luteipes Richards
luteipes Richards, 1934:89, examined
signifer (Tkalcu, 1989:52 [Pyrobombus]), examined

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental Region.

Bombus melanopygus Nylander
melanopyge Nylander, 1848:236
Edwardsii Cresson, 1878:184
melampygus Handlirsch, 1888:231, unjustified emendation
[melanopygus Viereck, 1904:99, incorrect subsequent spelling]
melanopygus Franklin, 1913:334, justified emendation

TAXONOMIC STATUS: B. melanopygus and B. edwardsii were shown by Owen & Plowright (1980) to differ by a single pair of alleles at one locus controlling the colour of the pubescence on gastral terga II-III. There can be little doubt that they are conspecific (Owen et al., 2010).

DISTRIBUTION: W Nearctic Region.

Bombus mirus (Tkalcu)
mirus (Tkalcu, 1968a:37 [Pyrobombus]) examined
tibetanus Friese, 1913:86, examined, not of Morawitz, 1887:202 (= B. tibetanus (Morawitz))

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental Region.

Bombus mixtus Cresson
Praticola Kirby, 1837:274
mixtus Cresson, 1878:186, not of Kriechbaumer, 1870:160 (= B. maxillosus Klug)

NOMENCLATURE: B. praticola is probably the oldest available name for this species. Any remaining confusion could be resolved by the designation of an appropriate neotype (e.g. see the comments on B. subterraneus).

Although B. praticola is probably the oldest available name for this species, the name B. mixtus has been in common use for the species since 1950 (e.g. Stephen, 1957; Thorp, 1970; Plowright & Stephen, 1973; K. W. Richards, 1973; Macior, 1975; Sakagami, 1976; Hurd, 1979; Plowright & Owen, 1980; Thorp et al., 1983; Laverty & Harder, 1988; Macfarlane et al., 1994). It is suggested that, in the interests of stability, an application be made to ICZN to use its Plenary Power to suppress the senior homonym (ICZN, 1999: Article 78) (see the comments on B. muscorum) (in prep.). However, the consequence of this action would be that mixtus (Kriechbaumer) would no longer be available for a subspecies of B. maxillosus.

DISTRIBUTION: W Nearctic Region.

Bombus oceanicus Friese
oceanicus Friese, 1909:675, examined
oceanicus Friese & Wagner, 1910:52, redescribed

TAXONOMIC STATUS: B. oceanicus is known only from the Kurile Islands. A particularly close relationship with the otherwise broadly distributed B. cingulatus (absent from the Kuriles, but present in Kamchatka, Reinig, 1939; Ito & Sakagami, 1980) has been suggested by Ito & Sakagami (1980) and it is possible that they are conspecific. More evidence is awaited.

DISTRIBUTION: Japanese, Palaearctic Regions.

Bombus parthenius Richards
parthenius Richards, 1934[14 April, Williams & Cameron, 1993]:89, examined

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental Region.

Bombus picipes Richards
flavus Friese, 1905:517, examined, not of Pérez, 1884:265 (= B. campestris (Panzer))
picipes Richards, 1934:90, examined
klapperichi Pittioni, 1949:266, examined

NOMENCLATURE: With Psithyrus regarded as being a subgenus of the genus Bombus (Williams, 1991 [pdf], 1995 [pdf]), B. pratorum subsp. flavus Friese (1905) becomes a junior secondary homonym in Bombus of Psithyrus campestris var. flavus Pérez (1884) (deemed to be subspecific, see ICZN, 1999: Article 45.6), and therefore B. flavus Friese is invalid (ICZN, 1999: Article 57). For this species, the oldest available name of which I am aware is B. parthenius var. picipes Richards, 1934 (deemed to be subspecific, see ICZN, 1999: Article 45.6), which becomes the valid name, B. picipes. The only publications using the name B. flavus Friese since 1950 of which I am aware are by Sakagami (1972), Ito (1993) and Yao & Luo (1997), so this change of valid name is not a serious disruption of common usage.

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental, Palaearctic Regions.

Bombus pressus (Frison)
pressus (Frison, 1935:342 [Bremus])

TAXONOMIC STATUS: The peculiar B. pressus was first recognised to be a species of the subgenus Pyrobombus by Cameron et al. (2007 [pdf]).

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental Region.

Bombus rotundiceps Friese
rotundiceps Friese, 1916:108, examined
montivolanoides Sakagami & Yoshikawa, 1961:431
shillongensis (Tkalcu, 1974b:334 [Pyrobombus]) examined

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental Region.

Bombus sandersoni Franklin
sandersoni Franklin, 1913:353

DISTRIBUTION: W Nearctic, E Nearctic Regions.

Bombus sitkensis Nylander
Sitkensis Nylander, 1848:235

DISTRIBUTION: W Nearctic Region.

Bombus sonani (Frison)
sonani (Frison, 1934[30 April, Williams & Cameron, 1993]:175 [Bremus]) examined

DISTRIBUTION: Oriental Region.