Megachile inimica - Cresson, 1872
Hostile Leaf-cutter Bee
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.882201
Element Code: IIHYMA9300
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Invertebrates - Insects - Leafcutter Bees
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Mandibulata Insecta Hymenoptera Megachilidae Megachile
Genus Size: D - Medium to large genus (21+ species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS). 2008. World Bee Checklist Project (version 03-Oct-2008). Integrated Taxonomic Information System: Biological Names. Online. Available: http://www.itis.gov.
Concept Reference Code: W08ITI01EHUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Megachile inimica
Taxonomic Comments: Subspecies sayi occurs in most of the U.S. range and into Sonora. M. inimica inimica occurs in southern Georgia, Florida and west to Arizona and in Mexico. These two are apparently widely sympatric in California and possibly elsewhere. M. i. jacumbensis occurs on Baja California and into California.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 28Sep2015
Global Status Last Changed: 28Sep2015
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by calculator
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: Subspecies sayi appears to be T5, but statuses of other subspecies are uncertain.
Nation: United States
National Status: NNR

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Alabama (SNR), Arizona (SNR), Arkansas (SNR), California (SNR), Colorado (SNR), Connecticut (SNR), Delaware (SNR), District of Columbia (SNR), Florida (SNR), Georgia (SNR), Idaho (SNR), Illinois (SNR), Indiana (SNR), Iowa (SNR), Kansas (SNR), Louisiana (SNR), Maryland (SNR), Massachusetts (SNR), Michigan (SNR), Mississippi (SNR), Montana (SNR), Nebraska (SNR), New Jersey (SNR), New Mexico (SNR), New York (SNR), North Carolina (SNR), Ohio (SNR), Pennsylvania (SNR), South Carolina (SNR), Tennessee (SNR), Texas (SNR), Utah (SNR), Virginia (SNR), West Virginia (SNR), Wisconsin (SNR), Wyoming (SNR)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: >2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: M. i. inimica ranges from Florida and southern Georgia to Arizona, through Mexico to Guatemala.  Subspecies sayi occurs from Massachusetts to Georgia, reportedly Florida, west to California, including much of Texas and Sonora, Mexico.  Specimens from California are identified as both M. i. sayi (e.g. Contra Costa to Riverside Counties, identified by Mitchell) and the typical one (as far north as Merced and Amador Counties).  If identifications are correct they are widely sympatric.  M. i. jacumbensis occurs in southern California and Baja California.

Number of Occurrences: > 300
Number of Occurrences Comments: This refers primarily to sayi.

Short-term Trend: Relatively Stable (<=10% change)

Long-term Trend: Decline of 10-50%
Long-term Trend Comments: Subspecies sayi has been collected since 2000 from Massachusetts to South Carolina, and numerous other states to California.   Status of the other subspecies in the US is uncertain.  Discover Life records of the typical subspecies from Florida and Georgia are pre-1950 as are many from other states, but it was still being found in Mexico in the 1990s. 

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Moderately vulnerable
Intrinsic Vulnerability Comments: Low fecundity

Environmental Specificity: Broad. Generalist or community with all key requirements common.
Environmental Specificity Comments: At least subspecies sayi occurs in an great variety of habitats including 2010s urban records (Taunton, MA, New York City).   Subspecies inimica is apparently strongly associated with mesquites.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) M. i. inimica ranges from Florida and southern Georgia to Arizona, through Mexico to Guatemala.  Subspecies sayi occurs from Massachusetts to Georgia, reportedly Florida, west to California, including much of Texas and Sonora, Mexico.  Specimens from California are identified as both M. i. sayi (e.g. Contra Costa to Riverside Counties, identified by Mitchell) and the typical one (as far north as Merced and Amador Counties).  If identifications are correct they are widely sympatric.  M. i. jacumbensis occurs in southern California and Baja California.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, LA, MA, MD, MI, MS, MT, NC, NE, NJ, NM, NY, OH, PA, SC, TN, TX, UT, VA, WI, WV, WY

Range Map
No map available.

Ecology & Life History Not yet assessed
Help
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Biological Research Needs: Determine taxonomic and conservation status of the subspecies, which except for sayi might be rare or declining.
Population/Occurrence Delineation Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 25Sep2015
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Schweitzer, D.F.

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Ascher J.S. and J. Pickering. 2014. Discover Life bee species guide and world checklist (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila). Available online: http://www.discoverlife.org/mp/20q?guide=Apoidea_species&flags=HAS:

  • Ascher, J. S., S. Kornbluth, and R. G. Goelet. 2014. Bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila) of Gardiners Island, Suffolk County, New York. Northeastern Naturalist 21(1):47-71.

  • Bartholomew, C. S., D. Prowell, and T. Griswold. 2006. An annotated checklist of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) in longleaf pine savannas of southern Louisiana and Mississippi. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 79(2):184-198.

  • Donovall, L. R., and D. vanEngelsdorp. 2010. A Checklist of the Bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Pennsylvania. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 83(1):7-24.

  • Fetridge, E.D, J.S. Ascher, and G. A. Langellotto. 2008. The bee fauna of residential gardens in a suburb of New York City (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 101(6):1067-1077.

  • Grundel, R., R.P. Jean, K.J. Frohnapple, J. Gibbs, G.A. Glowacki, and N.B. Pavlovic. 2011. A Survey of Bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of the Indiana Dunes and Northwest Indiana, USA. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 84(2):105-138.

  • Hannon, L.E., and T.D. Sisk. 2009. Hedgerows in an agri-natural landscape: Potential habitat value for native bees. Biological Conservation 142(10):2140-2154.

  • Hurd, P.D., W.E. LaBerge, and  E.G. Linsley. 1980. Principal Sunflower Bees of North America with Emphasis on the Southwestern United States (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). Smithsonian Contributions To Zoology Number 310. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington. 158 pp. [http://www.sil.si.edu/smithsoniancontributions/zoology/pdf_hi/sctz-0310.pdf]

  • Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS). 2008. World Bee Checklist Project (version 03-Oct-2008). Integrated Taxonomic Information System: Biological Names. Online. Available: http://www.itis.gov.

  • Jean, R. P. 2010. Studies of bee diversity in Indiana: the influence of collection methods on species capture, and a state checklist. Ph.D. dissertation. Indiana State University, Terre Haute, Indiana. 252 pp.

  • Lavigne, R.J. and V.J. Tepedino. 1976. Checklist of the insects of Wyoming. I. Hymenoptera. Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming. 61 pp.

  • Leavengood, J. M. Jr., and D. Serrano. 2005. A distributional checklist of the leaf-cutting bees (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) of Florida. Insecta Mundi 19(3):173-176.

  • Love, B. 2010. The bees of the American and Cosumnes rivers in Sacramento County, California: effects of land use on native bee diversity. M.S. thesis submitted to California State University, Sacramento, California. 84 pp.

  • Pascarella, J. B., K.D. Waddington and P.R. Neal. 1999. The bee fauna (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) of Everglades National Park, Florida and adjacent areas: distribution, phenology, and biogeography. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 72(1): 32-45.

  • Scott, V. L., J. S. Ascher, T. L. Griswold, and C. R. Nufio. 2011. The bees of Colorado (Hymenoptra: Apoidea: Anthophila). In: Natural History Inventory of Colorado. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Museum of Natural History. Chapter 23. pp. 1-100. Online at: http://cumuseum.colorado.edu/research/entomology/ColoBees/the_Bees_of_Colorado.pdf

  • Spring M.R., K.S. Lustofin, C.H. Lin, M.M. Gardiner, and D.A. McShaffrey. 2017. Quantifying bee diversity and resource use in the Appalachian foothills near Marietta, Ohio. Ohio Biological Notes Series 7:1-3.

  • Wojcik, V.A., G.W. Frankie, R.W. Thorp, and J.L. Hernandez. 2008. Seasonality in Bees and Their Floral Resource Plants at a Constructed Urban Bee Habitat in Berkeley, California. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 81(1):15-28.

  • Wolf, A.T. and J.S. Ascher. 2009. Bees of Wisconsin (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila). Great Lakes Entomologist 41(3/4):129-168.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2018.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2018 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2018. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.